Another sad article on our ocean's health...

Status
Not open for further replies.
A simple first post.

And this quickly turned into...

The. Worst. Thread. EVER.

Please lock & delete this thread. Politics have no place on this board.
 
greenbean36191- What were some of the causes of the most prominent historical mass bleachings? Wasn't it a combination of factors that were relatively intangible- and oftentimes unexplainable?

I know the Maldives got hit hard about 4 years ago. In your research did you find that tide changes are also a significant culprit in the decline of a reef?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12898924#post12898924 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by phenom5
A simple first post.

And this quickly turned into...

The. Worst. Thread. EVER.

Please lock & delete this thread. Politics have no place on this board.

+1, get rid of this mess
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12898574#post12898574 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mrkalel
So I guess you also believe that you are also destroying our reefs?...
No...I don't. Mother nature is doing just fine on her own destroying the reefs and the rest of the world without our help.
I was just pointing out the absurdity of these "let's all feel guilty" threads started by people who waste large amounts of energy on a hobby that serves no purpose other than our own amusement.
Soon we'll get the "it's for the education" or "we do what we can" or "every little bit helps" BS that helps the true believers sleep at night.
Oh...by the way, just because someones opinion differs from yours doesn't make it ignorant.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12898726#post12898726 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
Also, you really shouldn't modify an adjective with an adverb. (Although, I suppose it's a bit poetic to present incorrect information by using incorrect grammar
:lol: He's got you there aslavatortin. What are you some sort of Neanderthal? :rolleye1:
Edit: For those without a sense of humor...I'm not really calling him a Neanderthal. This is called sarcasm
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12898987#post12898987 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
+1, get rid of this mess
I agree. And I apologize for my part in it. :(
aslavatortin: I think we're done here. I look forward to reading your future opinions on the science of reefkeeping.
 
There are no toxin-producing factories, industrializing China, industrializing India, nuclear reactors, and non-biodegradable trash "eons and eons ago" either. So to think that we don't need to be stewarts of the planet we live in because the planet heals itself is so wrong a mentality. Sorry. There are so much ecological damage happening because of China and India right now and they are not vetting on any renewable source.

Sorry for being political but our hobby is in the center of the environmental cause. Whatever happens to the coral reef (negatively) will impact the rest of inhabitants in this planet (negatively).
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12899756#post12899756 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by archie1709
There are no toxin-producing factories, industrializing China, industrializing India, nuclear reactors, and non-biodegradable trash "eons and eons ago" either. So to think that we don't need to be stewarts of the planet we live in because the planet heals itself is so wrong a mentality. Sorry. There are so much ecological damage happening because of China and India right now and they are not vetting on any renewable source.

Sorry for being political but our hobby is in the center of the environmental cause. Whatever happens to the coral reef (negatively) will impact the rest of inhabitants in this planet (negatively).

Whooaaa, wait a minute, dude! Just because we don't think global warming is man-made doesn't mean we think we should abuse the planet! That is the fallacy of the anti-anti-global warming argument! Those of us who argue against global warming are NOT arguing against taking care of our planet. We just believe that the solutions to the problems our world is facing will be found through the free-market, not through some socialist movement that has congress mandating what kind of lightbulbs we will use! In all likelihood, the solution to this mess is going to be something simple; I guarantee you it is NOT going to be some technology like compact flourescent lightbulbs that create a whole new arena of problems on their own (ie, mercury vapor) that a bunch of politicians (no naming names ;) ) are wholly vested in and will profit untold amounts of money from... The solution to finding a solution is good old American Capitalism; that's right, this country is "the shining city on the hill", we WILL save the world, as we have already brought it almost all that is good (discovered electricity, airplanes, penicillin, computers, THE INTERNET). We The People are the answer, not legislation, not G-8 Summits and Kyoto treaties, and certainly NOT MORE GOVERNMENT!! Do you really trust gov to take more of your money and then fix the planet with it? Look at how well gov has handled Medicare and Social Security! If our government continues to participate in this, then YOU AND I are going to be footing the bill for India and China's "carbon footprint", meanwhile rogue nations like Zimbabwe will be profiting from selling "carbon credits". Legislation and more government is NEVER the answer.

Let's have an open-minded discussion about this, I've already let my emotions get too high and now I have reeled them back in (thanks Tang Salad). I (and I'm sure everyone else is) am open to friendly debate. I agree that steps need to be taken to minimize man's impact on the environment but you have to admit, the "nature nazis" have made it very difficult for people like myself to buy into the green movement because they are so radically polarizing. The planet can be preserved through many means, none of which require our tax dollars to subsidize somebody else's problems. Speaking of green and subsidies, look at what the ethanol program has caused; world food crises, riots, sky-high prices. There is a happy medium between a polar bear's rights (ANWR) and $4.00 a gallon and I think it's high-time we found it!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12900194#post12900194 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by MinnFish
This is better than all the presidential debates :).

Yeah, at least on here it's somewhat safe to assume you are talking to somewhat honest people, when you watch debates you are virtually ensured the opposite. :D
 
I know that global warming (whatever the cause) is the hot topic, but I don't think it's the main reason behind the declining condition of corals. The article mentioned ocean acidification, and article in this month's "Discover" magazine further discribes that for more than 600,000 years the oceans ph has been 8.2. Since the industrial revolution in 1800, the ph of the ocean has become 30% more acidic due to the absorption of man-made CO2 (at a rate of 22 million tons a day and rising) By the end of the century it's predicted the ocean's PH could drop as low as to 7.8, and all the way down to 7.3 sometime next century. These finding are relatively new, and haven't really attracted the publics attention yet, but i think that this is the most significant danger to corals, as well as many other forms of oceanic life.
 
Climate change is a natural cycle but right now the cycle has sped up at a alarming rate many of the life forms on earth will not be able to evolve at a sufficient rate to survive. Also pollution caused by man is causing numerous amounts of damage to both land and water. A large amount of this of this is our doing and it is about time we take responsibility or our action. BTW America is the number one producer of CO2...i think its about time we stop being so hypocritical...

-Mac
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12899962#post12899962 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Speaking of green and subsidies, look at what the ethanol program has caused; world food crises, riots, sky-high prices. There is a happy medium between a polar bear's rights (ANWR) and $4.00 a gallon and I think it's high-time we found it!

just wanted to add, ever since the production of ethanol went up these past few years the demand for corn has gone up also. and corn being a crop requiring large amounts of fertalizer has contributed to "dead zones" along the gulf of mexico. these dead zones are formed when the fertalizer used for the corn runs down the mississippi into the ocean causing a temporary algae bloom that later dies and sinks to the bottom where bacteria then go to work decomposing the algae's remains stripping the water of its oxygen. things that cant get away fast enough die of sufforcation thus creating a dead zone....thought it was funny and ironic.
 
greenbean36191- What were some of the causes of the most prominent historical mass bleachings? Wasn't it a combination of factors that were relatively intangible- and oftentimes unexplainable?
Yes, the bleaching events are due to a combination of factors that we don't fully understand and can't always predict. However, what we do know is that the major events have gone from a once-a-decade occurrence to almost every other year. Regardless of the causes, just within the past 3 decades, the frequency has rapidly accelerated to the point that corals are almost at their limits of recovery. That's very alarming since as far as we know, this isn't something that's happened before, but it's come on hard and fast in recent years.

I know the Maldives got hit hard about 4 years ago. In your research did you find that tide changes are also a significant culprit in the decline of a reef?
I'm not sure what you mean by changes in the tide. During periods of elevated temp, variations in water motion such as extremely high or low tidal ranges definitely influence whether a reef will experience stress. Over historical periods though I don't know of any significant alteration of tides. As of yet, measured changes in sea level have been too small to see any measurable damage to reefs, but if the predicted rate of rise occurs, many reefs will certainly drown.

I know that global warming (whatever the cause) is the hot topic, but I don't think it's the main reason behind the declining condition of corals. The article mentioned ocean acidification, and article in this month's "Discover" magazine further discribes that for more than 600,000 years the oceans ph has been 8.2. Since the industrial revolution in 1800, the ph of the ocean has become 30% more acidic due to the absorption of man-made CO2 (at a rate of 22 million tons a day and rising) By the end of the century it's predicted the ocean's PH could drop as low as to 7.8, and all the way down to 7.3 sometime next century. These finding are relatively new, and haven't really attracted the publics attention yet, but i think that this is the most significant danger to corals, as well as many other forms of oceanic life.
I think most reef biologists would agree with you. On its own, warming is probably a survivable event for corals. They have significant ability to adapt to increased temperatures and provided they can still rapidly calcify and recruit to open space they would likely be able to keep up with rising sea level. The problem is that that's not the future we're looking at. We're looking at one where growth is slowed due to disease, bleaching, and conditions unfavorable for calcification. Combined with the removal of the dominant herbivores and nutrification, algae are creating and dominating space. This isn't just some hypothetical situation either. It's something that's been going on for at least a few decades now. It's just a question of how bad is it going to get.
 
Last edited:
agree with not buying in completely to the ''It will all be dead tomorrow'' propaganda of the environmental movement, but I also agree that **** sapiens are the only species destroying the earth and eliminating the balance of life and death and give and take, that makes and relationship (ecosystem) stable.
Natural extinctions and catastrophic die offs have occurred due to completely natural causes as well, but we are obligated by are touted level of intelligence to minimize our environmental footprint. That doesn't mean trusting politicians to take your money and do good things with it, it means empowering communities and people to make good decisions and stand up for things. There should be recycling programs everywhere, there should be laws that regulate the amount of waste we contribute, there should be voters willing to take the bigger picture into account and not vote based on short-term and empty promises.
There are lots of couch environmentalist, that hem and haw, but do little else, then you have the picket baring, maniacal rebels, that thwart the move towards a greener way of living from being taken seriously.
Money is the root of all evil. No one wants to spend it, people hate change, and we like to wait for problems to be upon us, before we do anything about it. We have known that petroleum was nonrenewable for years, but we continued to build our lives around it and elect politicians that had major investments in oil, and now we cry that is $4.00 a gallon.Now some want to drill up sensitive ecosystems for another band-aid to the problem....could have gotten off of our butts along time ago on this one.
It is hard to point fingers though.We keep our reefs going with lights that consume large amounts of energy....energy that comes from coal,nuclear technology,oil,gas,damming up rivers, but we justify it, b/c it is as relative as the person who says they have no money, but smokes a 2 $5 packs of cigarettes a day.We have to change our priorities and be willing to recycle, drive an economy car when practical, instead of the escalade, boycott things that cause harm to ecosystems of species populations, like dried seahorses and seafans at the boardwalk, no one should be aloud to not recycle basics, like bottles and cans, stop having huge expanses of lawn to water and fertilize,mow, and maintain, an acre or two around your water front mansion is enough.Bottom line is no one wants to be told they can't do something or have to do something, no one wants to do without, and no one wants to pay, and very few want to take responsibility.
I have really rambled on here and wandered around quite a bit, but to sum it up, neither the denial approach, or the dramatic idealism of a bleeding heart environmentalist is the right approach.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12901638#post12901638 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Uhhh, no we aren't...It took me three seconds on a yahoo search to find this: China number one CO2 producer

The U.S. is the highest CO2 contributer per capita. China has a lot more people than the U.S., which is why they are leading the national CO2 usage, but it takes almost for 4 people in china to equate the usage of a single American.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12898853#post12898853 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
Corals just haven't been the dominant reef builders and within the near future they're likely to lose that title to algae.

They are likely to loose the title of not being the dominant reef builders? I thought calcerous algae is already the primary reef builder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top