On Jun 21, 5:56*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:45:46 -0700 (PDT), John H









wrote:
On Jun 21, 2:09 pm, jps wrote:
Certainly not the right... scientists are a bunch of blowhard
lefties. God will create more species if we need 'em. Monsanto is
working on a cow fish.

PARIS (AFP) Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's
oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for
tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned Monday.

Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding
open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of
big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report
compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top
ocean experts.

Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean
(IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has
declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.

These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions
in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that
scientists now call the Earth system.

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who
heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences
for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and
all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming,
acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as
hypoxia.

Up to now, these and other impacts have been studied mainly in
isolation. Only recently have scientists began to understand how these
forces interact.

"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of
marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said.
"That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."

Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case
scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.

The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans
begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.

Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the
CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.

But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the
delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately
all life on Earth -- depends.

"The rate at which carbon is being absorbed is already far greater now
than during the last globally significant extinction of marine species
55 million years ago," when some 50 percent of deep-sea life was wiped
out, the report said.

That event, called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, may
be an ancient dress rehearsal for future climate change that could be
even more abrupt and more damaging, some scientists fear.

Pollution has also taken a heavy toll, rendering the oceans less
resilient to climate change.

Runoff from nitrogen-rich fertiliser, killer microbes, and
hormone-disrupting chemicals, for example, have all contributed to the
mass die-off of corals, crucial not just for marine ecosystems but a
lifeline for hundreds of millions of people too.

The harvesting up to 90 percent of some species of big fish and
sharks, meanwhile, has hugely disrupted food chains throughout the
ocean, leading to explosive and imbalanced growth of algae, jellyfish
and other "opportunistic" flora and fauna.

"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such
as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley,
head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN)
World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report.

"And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to
deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

"All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said. "

All these caused by human activity?

Heard anything about solar activity lately?

Tell you what...Send lots of money to Al Gore. He'll fix it.

Do you not understand the word "conditions"? Do you believe that
conditions can only be caused by solar activity? Did they say the
other situations were caused by human activity?

Feel free to deny what's in your face. Feel free to blame Al Gore for
your problems.

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then.
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

In article 18cf7a1b-7f94-4e0b-a042-
, says...

On Jun 21, 2:09*pm, jps wrote:
Certainly not the right... *scientists are a bunch of blowhard
lefties. God will create more species if we need 'em. *Monsanto is
working on a cow fish.

PARIS (AFP) ? Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's
oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for
tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned Monday.

Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding
open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of
big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report
compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top
ocean experts.

Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean
(IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has
declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.

These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions
in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that
scientists now call the Earth system.

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who
heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences
for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and
all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming,
acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as
hypoxia.

Up to now, these and other impacts have been studied mainly in
isolation. Only recently have scientists began to understand how these
forces interact.

"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of
marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said.
"That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."

Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case
scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.

The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans
begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.

Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the
CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.

But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the
delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately
all life on Earth -- depends.

"The rate at which carbon is being absorbed is already far greater now
than during the last globally significant extinction of marine species
55 million years ago," when some 50 percent of deep-sea life was wiped
out, the report said.

That event, called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, may
be an ancient dress rehearsal for future climate change that could be
even more abrupt and more damaging, some scientists fear.

Pollution has also taken a heavy toll, rendering the oceans less
resilient to climate change.

Runoff from nitrogen-rich fertiliser, killer microbes, and
hormone-disrupting chemicals, for example, have all contributed to the
mass die-off of corals, crucial not just for marine ecosystems but a
lifeline for hundreds of millions of people too.

The harvesting up to 90 percent of some species of big fish and
sharks, meanwhile, has hugely disrupted food chains throughout the
ocean, leading to explosive and imbalanced growth of algae, jellyfish
and other "opportunistic" flora and fauna.

"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such
as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley,
head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN)
World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report.

"And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to
deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

"All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said. "

All these caused by human activity?

Lucy is only about 1.2 million years old.

Heard anything about solar activity lately?

You mean the comming ice age.

Tell you what...Send lots of money to Al Gore. He'll fix it.

That 100 foot house boat needs a new interior.

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:28:53 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

On Jun 21, 5:56*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:45:46 -0700 (PDT), John H









wrote:
On Jun 21, 2:09 pm, jps wrote:
Certainly not the right... scientists are a bunch of blowhard
lefties. God will create more species if we need 'em. Monsanto is
working on a cow fish.

PARIS (AFP) Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's
oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for
tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned Monday.

Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding
open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of
big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report
compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top
ocean experts.

Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean
(IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has
declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.

These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions
in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that
scientists now call the Earth system.

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who
heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences
for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and
all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming,
acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as
hypoxia.

Up to now, these and other impacts have been studied mainly in
isolation. Only recently have scientists began to understand how these
forces interact.

"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of
marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said.
"That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."

Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case
scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.

The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans
begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.

Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the
CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.

But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the
delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately
all life on Earth -- depends.

"The rate at which carbon is being absorbed is already far greater now
than during the last globally significant extinction of marine species
55 million years ago," when some 50 percent of deep-sea life was wiped
out, the report said.

That event, called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, may
be an ancient dress rehearsal for future climate change that could be
even more abrupt and more damaging, some scientists fear.

Pollution has also taken a heavy toll, rendering the oceans less
resilient to climate change.

Runoff from nitrogen-rich fertiliser, killer microbes, and
hormone-disrupting chemicals, for example, have all contributed to the
mass die-off of corals, crucial not just for marine ecosystems but a
lifeline for hundreds of millions of people too.

The harvesting up to 90 percent of some species of big fish and
sharks, meanwhile, has hugely disrupted food chains throughout the
ocean, leading to explosive and imbalanced growth of algae, jellyfish
and other "opportunistic" flora and fauna.

"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such
as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley,
head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN)
World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report.

"And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to
deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

"All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said. "

All these caused by human activity?

Heard anything about solar activity lately?

Tell you what...Send lots of money to Al Gore. He'll fix it.

Do you not understand the word "conditions"? Do you believe that
conditions can only be caused by solar activity? Did they say the
other situations were caused by human activity?

Feel free to deny what's in your face. Feel free to blame Al Gore for
your problems.

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then.
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Verb: Have a significant influence on or determine (the manner or
outcome of something).
Noun: The state of something, esp. with regard to its appearance,
quality, or working

Jeez, I'm happy to continue to call you what you are if that's what
you want. You asked people to refrain, yet you can't it seems or don't
really want that.

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:36:20 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then.
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Truth is that no one really knows for sure what caused mass
instinctions or ice ages in the past. There has been a lot of
research and informed speculation but nothing that I'd describe as
conclusive. The one thing we know for sure is that past actions of
mankind had nothing to do with it. The other thing we know for sure
is that large numbers of people in and out of academia are competing
for research funding and they are not above releasing a dramatic press
release every now and then. Anyone who takes all of these dire
pronouncements as gospel needs to get a life.

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:11:18 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

On Jun 21, 5:35*pm, "Califbill" wrote:
"Wayne B" *wrote in message

...

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:45:46 -0700 (PDT), John H









wrote:
On Jun 21, 2:09 pm, jps wrote:
Certainly not the right... *scientists are a bunch of blowhard
lefties. God will create more species if we need 'em. *Monsanto is
working on a cow fish.

PARIS (AFP) – Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's
oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for
tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned Monday.

Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding
open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of
big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report
compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top
ocean experts.

Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean
(IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has
declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.

These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions
in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that
scientists now call the Earth system.

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who
heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences
for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and
all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming,
acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as
hypoxia.

Up to now, these and other impacts have been studied mainly in
isolation. Only recently have scientists began to understand how these
forces interact.

"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of
marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said.
"That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."

Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case
scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.

The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans
begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.

Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the
CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.

But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the
delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately
all life on Earth -- depends.

"The rate at which carbon is being absorbed is already far greater now
than during the last globally significant extinction of marine species
55 million years ago," when some 50 percent of deep-sea life was wiped
out, the report said.

That event, called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, may
be an ancient dress rehearsal for future climate change that could be
even more abrupt and more damaging, some scientists fear.

Pollution has also taken a heavy toll, rendering the oceans less
resilient to climate change.

Runoff from nitrogen-rich fertiliser, killer microbes, and
hormone-disrupting chemicals, for example, have all contributed to the
mass die-off of corals, crucial not just for marine ecosystems but a
lifeline for hundreds of millions of people too.

The harvesting up to 90 percent of some species of big fish and
sharks, meanwhile, has hugely disrupted food chains throughout the
ocean, leading to explosive and imbalanced growth of algae, jellyfish
and other "opportunistic" flora and fauna.

"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such
as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley,
head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN)
World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report.

"And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to
deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

"All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said. "

All these caused by human activity?

Heard anything about solar activity lately?

Tell you what...Send lots of money to Al Gore. He'll fix it.

Ohh absolutely, *Al Gore will call out Superman to move the killer
asteroid into a safe orbit.

Reply:
Why is it the rights doings? *France is overfishing Bluefin, Japanese are
overfishing everything. *These all right wing countries?

The right is causing the sun to heat up.

No. The right is inflaming poorly educated people with nonsense
science.

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:28:12 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:36:20 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then.
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Truth is that no one really knows for sure what caused mass
instinctions or ice ages in the past. There has been a lot of
research and informed speculation but nothing that I'd describe as
conclusive. The one thing we know for sure is that past actions of
mankind had nothing to do with it. The other thing we know for sure
is that large numbers of people in and out of academia are competing
for research funding and they are not above releasing a dramatic press
release every now and then. Anyone who takes all of these dire
pronouncements as gospel needs to get a life.

Actually, you're almost right. It's not possible to know with absolute
certainty what caused extinctions. There are some good theories (that
would be scientific theories, which include forming and testing
hypothesis).

You can not make a serious claim that the small dollars being spent on
climate research in any way influences the overwhelming data on how
mankind has affected the environment, esp. when compared to the
enormous amount of money big oil and heavy industries are spending to
try and debunk or undercut the science with their own dramatic press
nonsense and commercials.

The vast consensus is that mankind has been negatively influencing the
environment since the Industrial Revolution began, and it's generally
getting worse not better. Something needs to be done, and we need to
start now.

Science is not about taking pronouncements as "gospel." In fact,
skepticism is the basis for the scientific method. Those not well
educated believe that because there is some overblown and ginned up
controversy that means the whole notion of adverse, mankind created
climate change is in doubt. It isn't. Those not well educated look at
a cold winter or a violent storm or whatever and proclaim that there
is no such thing as global warming or that it's a fact. It's much more
nuance than that.

On 6/21/11 8:40 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:28:12 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:36:20 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then.
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Truth is that no one really knows for sure what caused mass
instinctions or ice ages in the past. There has been a lot of
research and informed speculation but nothing that I'd describe as
conclusive. The one thing we know for sure is that past actions of
mankind had nothing to do with it. The other thing we know for sure
is that large numbers of people in and out of academia are competing
for research funding and they are not above releasing a dramatic press
release every now and then. Anyone who takes all of these dire
pronouncements as gospel needs to get a life.

Actually, you're almost right. It's not possible to know with absolute
certainty what caused extinctions. There are some good theories (that
would be scientific theories, which include forming and testing
hypothesis).

You can not make a serious claim that the small dollars being spent on
climate research in any way influences the overwhelming data on how
mankind has affected the environment, esp. when compared to the
enormous amount of money big oil and heavy industries are spending to
try and debunk or undercut the science with their own dramatic press
nonsense and commercials.

The vast consensus is that mankind has been negatively influencing the
environment since the Industrial Revolution began, and it's generally
getting worse not better. Something needs to be done, and we need to
start now.

Science is not about taking pronouncements as "gospel." In fact,
skepticism is the basis for the scientific method. Those not well
educated believe that because there is some overblown and ginned up
controversy that means the whole notion of adverse, mankind created
climate change is in doubt. It isn't. Those not well educated look at
a cold winter or a violent storm or whatever and proclaim that there
is no such thing as global warming or that it's a fact. It's much more
nuance than that.


Anything w'hine posts on this subject matter is colored by the fact that
he is a corporate apologist and an investor in oil companies.
Obfuscation is part of his apologist's game.

On Jun 22, 5:32*am, Harryk wrote:
On 6/21/11 8:40 PM, wrote:









On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:28:12 -0400, Wayne B
*wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:36:20 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then..
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Truth is that no one really knows for sure what caused mass
instinctions or ice ages in the past. *There has been a lot of
research and informed speculation but nothing that I'd describe as
conclusive. * The one thing we know for sure is that past actions of
mankind had nothing to do with it. * The other thing we know for sure
is that large numbers of people in and out of academia are competing
for research funding and they are not above releasing a dramatic press
release every now and then. *Anyone who takes all of these dire
pronouncements as gospel needs to get a life.

Actually, you're almost right. It's not possible to know with absolute
certainty what caused extinctions. There are some good theories (that
would be scientific theories, which include forming and testing
hypothesis).

You can not make a serious claim that the small dollars being spent on
climate research in any way influences the overwhelming data on how
mankind has affected the environment, esp. when compared to the
enormous amount of money big oil and heavy industries are spending to
try and debunk or undercut the science with their own dramatic press
nonsense and commercials.

The vast consensus is that mankind has been negatively influencing the
environment since the Industrial Revolution began, and it's generally
getting worse not better. Something needs to be done, and we need to
start now.

Science is not about taking pronouncements as "gospel." In fact,
skepticism is the basis for the scientific method. Those not well
educated believe that because there is some overblown and ginned up
controversy that means the whole notion of adverse, mankind created
climate change is in doubt. It isn't. Those not well educated look at
a cold winter or a violent storm or whatever and proclaim that there
is no such thing as global warming or that it's a fact. It's much more
nuance than that.

Anything w'hine posts on this subject matter is colored by the fact that
he is a corporate apologist and an investor in oil companies.
Obfuscation is part of his apologist's game.

Your jealousy of Wayne is showing, Herr Krause. He enjoys life,whilst
you stay miserable. You really should do something about that before
you turn green like a frog. This is, unless you like it that way. And
come to think of it, I'm sure you do.

In article 18cf7a1b-7f94-4e0b-a042-
, says...

On Jun 21, 2:09*pm, jps wrote:
Certainly not the right... *scientists are a bunch of blowhard
lefties. God will create more species if we need 'em. *Monsanto is
working on a cow fish.

PARIS (AFP) ? Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's
oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for
tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned Monday.

Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding
open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of
big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report
compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top
ocean experts.

Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean
(IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has
declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.

These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions
in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that
scientists now call the Earth system.

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who
heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences
for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and
all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming,
acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as
hypoxia.

Up to now, these and other impacts have been studied mainly in
isolation. Only recently have scientists began to understand how these
forces interact.

"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of
marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said.
"That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."

Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case
scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.

The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans
begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.

Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the
CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.

But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the
delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately
all life on Earth -- depends.

"The rate at which carbon is being absorbed is already far greater now
than during the last globally significant extinction of marine species
55 million years ago," when some 50 percent of deep-sea life was wiped
out, the report said.

That event, called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, may
be an ancient dress rehearsal for future climate change that could be
even more abrupt and more damaging, some scientists fear.

Pollution has also taken a heavy toll, rendering the oceans less
resilient to climate change.

Runoff from nitrogen-rich fertiliser, killer microbes, and
hormone-disrupting chemicals, for example, have all contributed to the
mass die-off of corals, crucial not just for marine ecosystems but a
lifeline for hundreds of millions of people too.

The harvesting up to 90 percent of some species of big fish and
sharks, meanwhile, has hugely disrupted food chains throughout the
ocean, leading to explosive and imbalanced growth of algae, jellyfish
and other "opportunistic" flora and fauna.

"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such
as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley,
head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN)
World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report.

"And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to
deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

"All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more
than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions
now afflicted the ocean environment, they said. "

All these caused by human activity?

Heard anything about solar activity lately?

Tell you what...Send lots of money to Al Gore. He'll fix it.

Do you really think that because some "mass extinctions" weren't because
of man, that that means man can't be a cause of this one?

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:40:57 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:28:12 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:36:20 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then.
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Truth is that no one really knows for sure what caused mass
instinctions or ice ages in the past. There has been a lot of
research and informed speculation but nothing that I'd describe as
conclusive. The one thing we know for sure is that past actions of
mankind had nothing to do with it. The other thing we know for sure
is that large numbers of people in and out of academia are competing
for research funding and they are not above releasing a dramatic press
release every now and then. Anyone who takes all of these dire
pronouncements as gospel needs to get a life.

Actually, you're almost right. It's not possible to know with absolute
certainty what caused extinctions. There are some good theories (that
would be scientific theories, which include forming and testing
hypothesis).

You can not make a serious claim that the small dollars being spent on
climate research in any way influences the overwhelming data on how
mankind has affected the environment, esp. when compared to the
enormous amount of money big oil and heavy industries are spending to
try and debunk or undercut the science with their own dramatic press
nonsense and commercials.

The vast consensus is that mankind has been negatively influencing the
environment since the Industrial Revolution began, and it's generally
getting worse not better. Something needs to be done, and we need to
start now.

Science is not about taking pronouncements as "gospel." In fact,
skepticism is the basis for the scientific method. Those not well
educated believe that because there is some overblown and ginned up
controversy that means the whole notion of adverse, mankind created
climate change is in doubt. It isn't. Those not well educated look at
a cold winter or a violent storm or whatever and proclaim that there
is no such thing as global warming or that it's a fact. It's much more
nuance than that.

In typical fashion you have missed the point and changed the subject.

For the record:

1. No one knows for sure what caused mass extinctions and ice ages.

2. With the exception of the last ice age, mankind as we know it did
not yet exist, ergo, no involvement.

Those facts are indsputable.

Point #2:

A lot of dramatic press releases regarding some new gloom and doom
scenario are designed to capture media attention and help gain funding
for some narrowly targeted research effort. In the world of science
that's called preserving your job.

Over and out.