Hotcold Take: Coral Reefs Could Maybe Possibly Stop Growing In 10 Years From Carbon Pollution

See, it doesn’t matter that so many coral reefs started under much warmer sea temperatures and much higher sea levels, nor that corals rather like warm water. They are mostly not cold water sea life. This is all probably your fault, though

Coral reefs could stop growing in 10 years unless greenhouse gases are significantly reduced, new study says

The fate of coral reefs around the world remains grim should global warming continue at its current rate, according to new research.

Coral reefs will stop growing in the next decade or so unless a significant reduction in greenhouse gases is achieved, a new study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests.

A team of researchers led by Christopher Cornwall, a marine botanist at the Victoria University of Wellington in Australia, analyzed data from 183 reefs worldwide to estimate the effects of ocean warming and acidification, which are posing increasing threats to underwater ecosystems.

The calcifying coral reef taxa that constructs the calcium carbonate framework of the reef and cements it together are “highly sensitive” to ocean warming and acidification, the scientists said. Climate change affects both the abundance and the calcification rates, while ocean acidification, which is mainly caused by the burning of fossil fuels, also reduces the calcification rates.

Of course, the acidification is not actually happening. It couldn’t possibly be due to actual ocean pollution, including from all the boats taking tourists, and researchers, out to view the reefs, right? Perhaps we should be looking more at reducing pollution. Rather than fearfully running a study that simply “suggests.”

Under the worst case scenario presented by the researchers, 94% of all reefs could erode by 2050. Under other scenarios, declines are projected to be so severe that reef production will cease by 2100, the researchers said.

So, what happens if this doesn’t actually happen? What if the reefs are fine in 10 years? Fine in 2050. Who’ll be held responsible for positing a scaremongering study, and those that gleefully publish it in the news?

“Rapid reduction” of carbon dioxide emissions is necessary to protect coral reefs, according to the study’s authors.

The findings highlight “the low likelihood that the world’s coral reefs will maintain their functional roles without near-term stabilization of atmospheric CO2 emissions,” the study states.

“The only hope for coral reef ecosystems to remain as close as possible to what they are now is to quickly and drastically reduce our CO2 emissions,” Cornwall said. “If not, they will be dramatically altered and cease their ecological benefits as hotspots of biodiversity, sources of food and tourism, and their provision of shoreline protection.”

So, not science, but activism. Have the authors given up their own carbon footprints? Let’s go a step further: what if we implement all the authoritarian measures recommended by the Cult of Climastrology and little changes? What then? Are we allowed to get rid of all the taxation and Big Government control of our lives?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

38 Responses to “Hotcold Take: Coral Reefs Could Maybe Possibly Stop Growing In 10 Years From Carbon Pollution”

  1. Est1950 says:

    Once again this type of bullsheet was being spread by the AGW Terrorist organization who have decided to join forces with ISIS.

    They proclaimed the great barrier reef was DYING from AGW.

    The Chief Scientist of Australia in charge of the GREAT BARRIER REEF said about 3 years ago that not only was the REEF N O T DYING but in fact was GROWING and THRIVING despite the AGW AGENDA to the Contrary.

    Well of course under the previous administration of far left WHACKOS he was immediately fired and replaced with someone who would cry wolf. A year later the Austrailian people replaced the Crazed AGW WHACKOS with Conservatives and have since INCREASED conservative margins in both of their houses of representations.

    The reason Elwoods of the world are becoming more frantic is because they know they are in a race against TIME. They have a very short window of two years to destroy America.

    • Est1950 says:

      Another one of the the RIGHTS great conspiracies that I am accused by the Elwoods and the hairys of the world of espousing.

      The democrats are socialists/Communists.

      “If we’re going to take this House back in 2022, it’s,” Babin said, “an absolute must, especially in the face of lockstep Democrats behind AOC [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y.] and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi. We’ve got to pull together and take this House back and save America from *********socialism.********** That’s the bottom line.”

      Even the GOP recognizes that the Democrats who no longer even bother to hide their agenda are socialists now. They are perfectly willing to have Portlands and anarchists destroying public and private property all over the state and burn down forests during the summer for an agenda that destroys the very essence of what we are.

      A nation that is not RACIST. YES we might have racists living here, but the nation itself is NOT RACIST in fact a study conducted shows the USA to be one of the least racist nations on the planet as far as laws on the books are concerned.

      The left is one giant lie. Led by racist socialists. Funded by Communist Maoists and led by Anarchists bent on destroying everything America stands for. Trump was a lone voice standing against this when the rest of the GOP hid in the fuking corner. After a few years the GOP started to understand what the hell was going on and that this was BIGGER THAN THEIR UNDER THE TABLE PAYDAYS from CORPORATIONS TO STFU.

      This fight is bigger than all of us. The world depends on the USA standing against MAOISM SOCIALISM embraced by the left to destroy the fabric of western civilization for their benefactors the COMMUNIST PARTY OF CHINA. Who has said. Publicly and posted books and papers of the subject. IT IS THEIR INTENT TO TAKE OVER AND RULE THE WORLD and they aint shitting.

    • Kye says:

      Well the Elwood’s are doing a fine job. Now we get gas lines Carter style.

      • Est1950 says:

        Yep Russia is attacking the USA with cyber attacks designed to do massive economic damage and we do nothing. We sanction a few billionaires and seize a 100 million of their dollars from people who are worth 50 billion dollars.

        Such great punishment. China, IRAN, N. Korea and others have joinned the fray and they pay no price. The USA is like a one armed blind man tasked with swatting flies in a darkened closet.

        Cyber warfare is no less of an act of war than anything else. Israel has kept Iran in check by using cyber attacks and I doubt people even know that Israel has attacked 17 oil tankers taking illegal oil to Syria in the last several years.

        No they did not bomb them. They used cyber attacks. It is warfare people. The problem with the USA is we let billionaires convince us it was WISE and SAGE to transfer all our national security to other nations including CHINA for a buck.

        Now we are responding to acts of war with strongly worded messages. Don’t get me wrong Trump was not much better in this regard because any kind of attack would have been met with catastrophe by the USA.

        Why? Because quite literally the USA has volunteered to be an economic hostage to prevent issuing those strongly worded messages. Money under the table was more important than jobs and our own national security.

        That is why TRUMP had to go. That is why the Elwoods of the world believe what they have been told by an entire establishment that is horrified that they will have their collective throats slit if Trump reveals what really has gone on behind Americans backs for 50 years.

        • Zachriel says:

          Est1950: Yep Russia is attacking the USA with cyber attacks designed to do massive economic damage and we do nothing.

          Russia attacked the U.S. election in 2016. The Trump campaign welcomed that interference. Russia relies upon gullible Americans to cover for their actions, using social media to amplify conspiracy theories. It will take time to find a way to rein in Russia’s meddling, but whatever solution, must include a united effort by American allies.

          • david7134 says:

            Child,
            That is a lie.

          • Zachriel says:

            david7134: That is a lie.

            Starting with the first claim, that Russian interfered in the U.S. election, that is the findings of the Mueller investigation and of the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee.

    • Zachriel says:

      Est1950: The Chief Scientist of Australia in charge of the GREAT BARRIER REEF said about 3 years ago that not only was the REEF N O T DYING but in fact was GROWING and THRIVING despite the AGW AGENDA to the Contrary.

      Peter Mumby, who was Chief Scientist of the Great Barrier Reef Foundation three years ago, found that “Ocean acidification and warming will lower coral reef resilience”.
      https://www.marinespatialecologylab.org/peter-mumby

      • Est1950 says:

        Feb 08, 2018 · Professor Peter Ridd, I have been served with a gag order by my university. I am now having to sue for my right to have an ordinary scientific opinion. I am fighting for academic and scientific freedom, and the responsibility of universities to nurture the debate of difficult subjects without threat or intimidation.

        This is what happens when you use academic freedom to express a view that is counter to the prevailing bullshit coming from AGW TERRORISTS…they silence you.

        SO:

        On April 16, 2020. A federal judge ruled that Australian coral scientist Dr. Peter Ridd had been unlawfully fired from his position at North Queensland’s James Cook University, for questioning his colleagues’ research on the impact of climate change on the Great Barrier Reef. In his ruling, the judge criticized the university for not respecting Ridd’s academic freedom.

        There is a difference between the GBRF…..

        SAVING OUR REEF FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS
        We are the action station for the Reef, bringing together people and science to deliver the world’s largest coral reefs program and more than 100 Reef-saving projects.

        D O N A T E

        Sorry to burst your bubble WIKI ZACH but you put in charge of the great barrier reef a man who runs a foundation to SAVE THE REEF. NOT RESEARCH IT.

        The reef is managed cooperatively by the Commonwealth and Queensland governments through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, which reports to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Tony Burke.

        And uses the sage wisdom of the Cook University to dictate how they manage the reef. One of those primarily responsible for their sage wisdom was….well you get the point.

        Please take Wiki Zach’s posts with a grain of salt. I post facts not opinions or conjecture and do not try to misinform by telling you that a pay for play foundation is in charge of the Great Barrier Reef.

        That is akin to saying The Nature Conservancy is in charge of our national parks in the USA.

        • Zachriel says:

          Est1950: In his ruling, the judge criticized the university for not respecting Ridd’s academic freedom.

          Ridd was not the Chief Scientist of the Great Barrier Reef. Your claim was false.

          In any case, the Ridd ruling was overturned on appeal, but the case will be heard by the high court later this year. Ridd apparently personally attacked other scientists, including accusations of swindling. This may or may not violate his employment contract, but latitude should be given to preserve academic freedom.

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    The national average for a gallon of gas stood at $2.985 on Tuesday, according to AAA.

    A gain of three more cents would push the national average to its highest level since 2014.

    AAA forecasts prices will continue to rise as much of the Colonial Pipeline, which transports about 45% of the East Coast’s fuel supply, remains offline.

    Heckuva job Joey! https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

    #BelieveTheLie
    Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

  3. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Teach, ever the victim, whines: This is all probably your fault, though

    “They” say it’s all your fault!!

    The US National Academy of Sciences (no doubt a collection of ivory tower brainacs) thinks that ocean acidification and global warming are real and and harming the coral reefs on Earth today.

    https://www.pnas.org/content/118/21/e2015265118

    Teach claims, quite falsely: Of course, the acidification is not actually happening.

    Of course, the pH of the oceans is decreasing from absorbing gigatons of CO2 from the atmosphere.

    The reversible reaction of carbon dioxide with water is represented as: CO2 + H2O –> H2CO3 –> HCO3- + H+ . pH (Fr. puissance of hydrogen) is the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion (H+) concentration, so 10-8 M [H+] is pH 8. Ten times MORE hydrogen ion, ie, 10-7 M is pH 7. Carbonate, CO3(2-) is used by shelled ocean creatures to build shells. H+ decreases the amount of carbonate by converting to bicarbonate.

    The observed drop in ocean pH from 8.2 to 8.1 may not seem significant to a partisan non-scientist such as Teach, but scientists recognize that this increase in H+ (acid) changes ocean chemistry. Note that an increase or decrease in blood pH of 0.2 pH units is the difference between serious illness and health.

    Teach asks, threateningly: Who’ll be held responsible for positing a scaremongering study

    In fact the scientists published their results in PNAS where scientists can let fly at it if they find deficiencies. Does Teach think scientists should express their informed opinions? Who’ll be held responsible for all the predictions made by trump, Hannity, Hoft, Beck etc?

    Actually, Porter Good can submit a letter to the PNAS editor for publication with specific criticisms of the methods and conclusions of the article in question.

    The research article concluded:

    Given the increased risk of globally declining coral cover and the mean global net decline in carbonate production predicted under current emissions trajectories, we must now markedly reduce CO2 emissions to have any possibility of sustaining positive carbonate production and reef accretion rates, thus maintaining the critical ecological and societal services that reefs provide.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      In reply to Rimjob, dipshit that he is,

      The reality is that with an average pH of 8.1, the oceans are a long way from actually turning acidic, but using the word “acidic” instead of more neutral in media reports sounds scarier for the cause of climate alarmism.

      Calm down, dipshit and learn something.

      #TheScienceIsSettled
      Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

      • david7134 says:

        If you look at their sampling, you find definite pinpoints of acidity, and warming that is not reflected in the oceans as a whole, usually over volcano vents. Then the idiot puts in chemistry equations that show his oh so wonderful intellect. But he never references what acid is actually in the sampling, only the hypothesis. The same argument were being made about acid rain in the 70s and stuck us with catalytic converters. Of course he will say that the acid rain was cured and we have a different issue now. Just like the ozone hole which is actually still there and that resulted in reduction in armpit antiperspirant. And elimination of Freon which was too heavy to get to the upper atmosphere. In the end we have a very stupid person trying to make it look like he has more than a remedial education.

        • drowningpuppies says:

          I particularly enjoy when Rimjob, dipshit that he is, pulls little tidbits out of his ass like:

          The observed drop in ocean pH from 8.2 to 8.1

          In reality, which dipshit refuses to acknowledge,

          Although climate models suggest the ocean’s surface pH has dropped from pH 8.2 to 8.1 since 1750 that change was never actually measured >The pH drop is merely a modeled conjecture that is, unfortunately, constantly repeated as fact.

          But hey what do you expect from a guy as dishonest as Rimjob. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_scratch.gif

          #TheScienceIsSettled
          Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Teach the dipshit appears as ignorant as his little dog too, who is also a dipshit.

            Teach’s lapdog, dipshit that he is, actually quotes an infamous Tony WUWT essay in the infamous Heartland Institute rag, the whole mess masquerading as science.

            Keep on suckin’, dipshit.

          • drowningpuppies says:

            This is where Rimjob, dipshit that he is, actually provides a citation that actually discredits the quote but he cannot because he is intellectually lazy and dishonest.

            #TheScienceIsSettled
            Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          doogie hoser, this would be where you supplied credible references to support your contentions that pH changes are only regional and the ocean heat content is due to undersea volcanoes.

          Did they not teach any science at LSU. Surely you realize that acetic acid, sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, citric acid etc are dissociate to H+ (hydrogen ion) and their conjugate base, chloride, acetate, sulfate, citrate etc. Doogie, why do you persist in trying to mislead your brethren here?

          So acid rain brought on catalytic converters and smoke stack regulations (thanks to that radical, R Reagan who started the gov’t investigations of acid rain). So have catalytic converters and the cap-and-trade systems for smokestack regulation or pollutants worked? Sure have.

          Anyway, doogie, we suspected you might not understand why CO2 dissolving in ocean waters would be adding acid. So our apologies if our explanation was too primitive and simple.

          Looking in the mirror, doogie states: In the end we have a very stupid person trying to make it look like he has more than a remedial education.

          • david7134 says:

            Jeff,
            You fascinate me. How can you say so much and not make any sense or advance your claims. Why don’t you inform everyone here as to what happens almost as soon as carbonic acid is formed. Given you half truths I am sure you do not desire for them to know.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            doogie hoser, thinking he has discovered some hidden truth, asks: Why don’t you inform everyone here as to what happens almost as soon as carbonic acid is formed.

            Asked and answered above in the equation that doogie hoser mocked. Carbonic acid (H2CO3), like every acid, dissociates to a hydrogen ion and a base ion (bicarbonate for carbonic acid). So, einstein, as you form more carbonic acid by adding more carbon dioxide to the ocean waters, you create more hydrogen ion (H+). If they taught chemistry in Louisiana you’d realize that pH IS determined by the concentration of free H+ in solution and nothing else.

            Did you have a point to make with your silly AHA?

          • david7134 says:

            So you are unaware of the breakdown of this very unstable acid. Keep lying Jeff.
            Oh, as to references, you can look those up. Somehow I don’t think to put aside a reference to satisfy a pharmacist who will not understand the science nor believe a demonstrated truth that does not fit the ridiculous agenda.
            Then why are you so upset. Seems you have all you could desire. You have a slime ball president (stolen) and congress working 24/7 to destroy the country and economy.
            Any way, you are a pathetic individual.

          • Zachriel says:

            david7134: So you are unaware of the breakdown of this very unstable acid.

            Ocean acidity has been observed to increase 10% just since the 1990s. About 8 gigatons of net CO2 are absorbed by the oceans each year.

            You also seem to be confused about the “breakdown of this very stable acid.” Minerals from rivers and shoreline weathering can reduce, or buffer, acidification; but only over longer periods of time. Oceans are acidifying much faster than the natural buffering mechanism,

        • Zachriel says:

          david1734: If you look at their sampling, you find definite pinpoints of acidity, and warming that is not reflected in the oceans as a whole, usually over volcano vents.

          There is now a worldwide monitoring systems called ARGO.
          https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/argo/

          ARGO has directly confirmed ocean acidification, with a 10% increase in H+ ions since the 1990s.

          david1734: And elimination of Freon which was too heavy to get to the upper atmosphere.

          Perhaps you are unaware of this technology too. Turns out that humans now have devices that can reach the upper atmosphere, where they have directly detected CFCs.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Teach the dipshit, sends his lap puppy, Lil dipshit to do his bidding.

        To drop the pH from 8.2 to 8.1 one must add acid, hence acidification. No wonder you don’t cite your sources (hint: it’s the hyper-partisan Heartless Institute).

        • drowningpuppies says:

          As quoted before which Rimjob, dipshit that he is, doesn’t quite understand


          The pH drop is merely a modeled conjecture that is, unfortunately, constantly repeated as fact.

          Perhaps the term conjecture is confusing. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

          #TheScienceIsSettled
          Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Teach, who is a dipshit, keeps trotting out his dipshit lap puppy to say inane things.

            Pro tip, lap puppy: Bolding a falsehood does not turn it into truth.

            https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

          • drowningpuppies says:

            Again Rimjob, dipshit that he is, offers no rebuttal.

            Because he can’t.
            Big surprise. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

            #TheScienceIsSettled
            Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Lil dipshit parrots his dipshit daddy, Teach.

        Repeating the false claims of TV weatherperson Tony WUST is hardly making an argument.

  4. Professor Hale says:

    Another dire prediction for ten years from now. No worries. We can afford to put it off for 8.5 years and then check to see if it is really happening.

    • david7134 says:

      There are several hot words and phrases that the liberals use to try and get an emotional response.
      Hilary always said something would be good for the children. Didn’t matter what it was or how it would influence kids, but when lying she would bring up the children.
      Environmental phrases always have something to do with coral and they drag people out to a reef that died long ago.

  5. david7134 says:

    z.
    Took the time to look up your ocean monitoring system, my statement stands, you are not very bright like I said before.

    As to CFC in the atmosphere, so what, link it to Freon. You did not, just made one of your very stupid statements.

    • Zachriel says:

      david7134: Took the time to look up your ocean monitoring system …

      And what did you discover? You claimed that “If you look at their sampling, you find definite pinpoints of acidity, and warming that is not reflected in the oceans as a whole, usually over volcano vents.” Please provide support for this claim.

      ARGO is a network of about 4000 buoys that report on ocean temperature, salinity, and acidity, from the surface to 2000 meters.

      Here is ARGO’s distribution:
      http://sio-argo.ucsd.edu/statusbig.gif

      ARGO with temperature anomaly:
      https://argo.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/361/2020/05/argo_status_mockup.png

      david7134: As to CFC in the atmosphere, so what, link it to Freon.

      Oh, gee whiz. Freon is a trademark for CFCs and HCFCs, e.g. Freon-12 is dichlorodifluoromethane.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Despite our sophisticated global fleet of 3,800 Argo floats that measure ocean temperature and salinity, only 10 percent also measure ocean carbon chemistry, and just 40 floats measure ocean pH suggesting the researchers don’t think it is a really big problem. Measured trends in ocean pH only began in the 1990s, which is far too short a time period to allow a robust analysis.

        Gee whiz, Kiddiez.
        Just go away.

        #TheScienceIsSettled
        Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

  6. david7134 says:

    Kid, and idiot Jeff,
    You keep saying the ocean is acidifying, what acid??? You have never, ever answered that question. In the past, it was sulfuric acid. Now, I understand that you are trying to link carbonic acid to the issue, but you don’t have sampling to determine this. And, carbonic acid does not hang around a long time as it further changes with interaction, same with your little ions. Then, child, your monitoring system has demonstrated pinpoints of acidity. You do not understand this due to your lack of knowledge and desire to lie.

    Then child, you made a definite error in discussing CO2 in the atmosphere. You link the increase in CO2 to warming due to correlation. Correlation does not equal causation. In fact, it rarely does. Now people lying on this issue always come up with “but this is different” or ” science accepts this”. No. In order to satisfy a move from hypothesis to theory, you must preform a physical experiment to prove your statement of CO2 warming, not any vague assessment. For that matter, what happens to a CO2 molecule on absorbing all this energy. That has not even been addressed here. The same point applies to Freon and CFC in the atmosphere. How can a gas heavier than air reach to upper atmosphere.

    • Zachriel says:

      david7134: You keep saying the ocean is acidifying, what acid???

      When water absorbs CO2, it creates carbonic acid.

      david7134: And, carbonic acid does not hang around a long time as it further changes with interaction, same with your little ions.

      Carbonic acid dissociates into bicarbonate and hydrogen ions. It’s the hydrogen ions that make the ocean more acidic. Ocean acidity has increased 10% just since the 1990s.

      david7134: your monitoring system has demonstrated pinpoints of acidity.

      Sure. But if you have a large number of instruments spread over a large area, then we can use statistics to determine whether there is a significant trend.

      david7134: You link the increase in CO2 to warming due to correlation. Correlation does not equal causation.

      Causation is based on the fundamental physics of heat. The causative mechanism was discovered long before human emissions were sufficient to cause significant global warming. It was investigated because the fluctuation between ice ages and ice-free ages couldn’t be explained with just orbital variations, but required positive feedbacks. Arrhenius, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground, London, Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 1896.

      david7134: For that matter, what happens to a CO2 molecule on absorbing all this energy.

      It reemits the energy. You might want to look up both the absorption and emission spectrums for CO2.
      https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/inchi?ID=C124389&Mask=200

      david7134: How can a gas heavier than air reach to upper atmosphere.

      Because gases in the atmosphere are well-mixed by currents. You do realize that CO2 is heavier than O2, but people don’t suffocate on the surface due to lack of oxygen? In any case, we directly observe CFCs in the stratosphere, so whatever you might think about it, if it doesn’t include CFCs in the stratosphere, then you are simply wrong.

      • david7134 says:

        Kid,
        That series of comments was so wrong and counter to your objective that it is not worth a return. You need much more education.

        • Zachriel says:

          david7134: That series of comments was so wrong

          That’s not an argument. Let’s start with the first two claims: When water absorbs CO2, it creates carbonic acid. Carbonic acid dissociates into bicarbonate and hydrogen ions. Do you think this is incorrect?

          NOAA: Carbon dioxide, which is naturally in the atmosphere, dissolves into seawater. Water and carbon dioxide combine to form carbonic acid (H2CO3), a weak acid that breaks (or “dissociates”) into hydrogen ions (H+) and bicarbonate ions (HCO3-).

Bad Behavior has blocked 7240 access attempts in the last 7 days.