I Was Wrong

[jabberwock]

That's not how you compare number / growth.

You almost got to the right answer but are missing one crucial step. Yes the difference is 0.014%, but that has to be relative to the starting percentage which is 0.028%.

0.014% is 50 percent of 0.028%.

I think what is tripping you up is that there are too many percentage symbols.

Let me give you another analogy.

Think of a nice cheeseburger.

You start off with a 100g patty. The whole burger is 1000g (a lot of bacon and veggies). 10% of burger is patty

You upgrade to a double patty. Now you have 200g of patty. Now around 20% (not exactly 20 but still) of burger is patty.

Would you say that is a 100% increase of patty? Or would you say that is a 10% increase of patty? (which is what you are suggesting with you math.)


It is a 100% increase of patty because it doubled

I think you are confused by how it is reported (wonder if that is part of the program). Reported in concentrations, not totality.

 

[jabberwock]

you ever see the chunky, smelly, floating blue/green stuff?

Nope, but I have been to Biloxi. It pours out of holes in the beach.

 

[bluemon]

If the patty is CO2, and the rest of the burger is the rest of the atmosphere, then yes I agree, the patty increased 100%, but relative to the totality of the burger, it is an infinitesimal increase.

But that's the thing, we are not talking relative to the whole ocean.

You keep a reef aquarium. You know how even things that are small on the scale of the water can have drastic effects on coral.

Let's talk salinity. 35ppt.

Lets say that increases by 50% to 53ppt.

Everything dead.

Do you see what we are saying?

 

[Reefering1]

Shhh, keep your voices down :beaming-face-with-smiling-eyes:
All this climate change/coal burning discussion will be moot once the military industrial complex finally break out those Alpha Centauri warp drives they been hiding from congress all these years… :face-with-rolling-eyes:
…. ( been watching those UAP hearings LOL)
…. of course thats assuming those “greys” did actually run out of gas, crash and get thier motors stolen/reverse engineered by Lockheed (after traveling 20 billion light years), :beaming-face-with-smiling-eyes::face-with-rolling-eyes:

…free energy is just around the corner…:cool:

I take it that you noticed how they declassified all that UFO stuff while everyone was worried about the flu? Tried to just slip in in while nobody was paying attention. Almost nobody anyways...

 

[vetteguy53081]

Are you referring to pics of Hawaii??? :cool:

hawaii - Key West- Miami Beach

 

[Reefering1]

hawaii - Key West- Miami Beach

Jealous

 

[jabberwock]

But that's the thing, we are not talking relative to the whole ocean.

You keep a reef aquarium. You know how even things that are small on the scale of the water can have drastic effects on coral.

Let's talk salinity. 35ppt.

Lets say that increases by 50% to 53ppt.

Everything dead.

Do you see what we are saying?

Well, I was talking about the atmosphere, but if you like the ocean angle...

What is the difference between 1 drop of pooh and 2 drops of pooh in the ocean?

100% increase. You have to normalize by the totality.

 

[jabberwock]

hawaii - Key West- Miami Beach

OOh yeah, Key West...

 

[bluemon]

Well, I was talking about the atmosphere, but if you like the ocean angle...

What is the difference between 1 drop of pooh and 2 drops of pooh in the ocean?

Again with the false equivalency.

"pooh" is not a vital part of the ocean or atmospheric chemistry. It's just a fat yellow bear.

But CO2 absolutely is. Both the atmosphere and the ocean when dissolved. Sure we might not feel it's immediate effects now, but in a 100 years, if we keep this up, say good bye to corals

 

[jabberwock]

Again with the false equivalency.

"pooh" is not a vital part of the ocean or atmospheric chemistry. It's just a fat yellow bear.

But CO2 absolutely is. Both the atmosphere and the ocean when dissolved. Sure we might not feel it's immediate effects now, but in a 100 years, if we keep this up, say good bye to corals

"pooh" was a general name for something undesirable. And I still pose the question. One drop or two in the ocean. What is the difference?

 

[Reefering1]

Nope, but I have been to Biloxi. It pours out of holes in the beach.

Its disgusting/ horrible. Lake O is like a trashcan for runoff/ sewage, they release the water down the caloosahatchee river to maintain water levels wrecking havoc on the west coast. They do this every year to spare the sugar fields clewiston from flooding. Point is that pollution is the problem

 

[jabberwock]

Its disgusting/ horrible. Lake O is like a trashcan for runoff/ sewage, they release the water down the caloosahatchee river to maintain water levels wrecking havoc on the west coast. They do this every year to spare the sugar fields clewiston from flooding. Point is that pollution is the problem

I agree, I work everyday to clean it up. Environmental remediation is my work. Depressing, but also fulfilling.

 

[bluemon]

"pooh" was a general name for something undesirable. And I still pose the question. One drop or two in the ocean. What is the difference?

The difference is dead corals.

If something undesirable DOUBLED in quantity in the ocean, there will be dire consequences.

And dissolved CO2 is one of the worst, since it can directly affect the pH which can directly affect coral skeletons.

 

[jabberwock]

The difference is dead corals.

If something undesirable DOUBLED in quantity in the ocean, there will be dire consequences.

And dissolved CO2 is one of the worst, since it can directly affect the pH which can directly affect coral skeletons.

I respectfully disagree. Doubling a contaminant concentration without taking into account the totality of the domain is meaningless.

 

[katonge]

Thats weird as we were in keys Tuesday about 8 miles out and saw very little bleaching except for 3 large rock structures and from the looks of coral, they were bleached but not dead and if water temps cool, may be able to bounce back. Team research group in Key Largo have been pulling some of the bleached specimens to bring back to their lab to see if they can promote recovery according to one of the students on our catamaran.

Yes, it’s been on the news a lot here showing them harvesting coral as a rescue mission hoping to save enough to rebuild the reefs.

 

[Court_Appointed_Hypeman]

Yep, the ocean is part of the cycle. The ocean is HUGE.

This is all a big nothing burger.

The amount of co2 has increased, we added to what was there, the fact that it was by .9% is not small, and has a clear impact.

We are actively tipping the scales as to what form the carbon exists in, it has an affect. You can pretend all you want it doesn't matter.

 

[Hermie]

Someone in this thread has a vested interest in the public to keep polluting or they will be out a job. Makes total sense that they are denying the effects of climate change.

 

[bluemon]

I respectfully disagree. Doubling a contaminant concentration without taking into account the totality of the domain is meaningless.

Are you listening to yourself??

You have a reef tank.

You have salt water in there.

The water is 3.5% salt.

It gets doubled to 7.0%. At 70ppt!! Everything dies.

What does the "totality of the domain" have to do with this? What does that even mean?

 

[jabberwock]

Are you listening to yourself??

You have a reef tank.

You have salt water in there.

The water is 3.5% salt.

It gets doubled to 7.0%. At 70ppt!! Everything dies.

What does the "totality of the domain" have to do with this? What does that even mean?

1 drop of bleach in a shot glass of water.
1 drop of bleach in a 55 gallon drum of water.
Which is worse?

 

[bluemon]

1 drop of bleach in a shot glass of water.
1 drop of bleach in a 55 gallon drum of water.
Which is worse?

You are avoiding the question at hand.

Stop playing mental gymnastics to get the world to fit your viewpoint.