Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oops! "Increased CO2 enhances plankton growth," diametrically opposed to expectations

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oops! "Increased CO2 enhances plankton growth," diametrically opposed to expectations

    "This finding was diametrically opposed to what scientists had expected..."
    Increased CO2 enhances plankton growth

    Coccolithophores—tiny calcifying plants that are part of the foundation of the marine food web—have been increasing in relative abundance in the North Atlantic over the last 45 years, as carbon input into ocean waters has increased. Their relative abundance has increased 10 times, or by an order of magnitude, during this sampling period. This finding was diametrically opposed to what scientists had expected since coccolithophores make their plates out of calcium carbonate, which is becoming more difficult as the ocean becomes more acidic and pH is reduced.

    These findings were reported in the November 26th edition of Science and based on analysis of nearly a half century of data collected by the long-running Sir Alister Hardy Foundation (SAHFOS) Continuous Plankton Recorder sampling program.

    [...]

    https://www.bigelow.org/index.php/ne...lankton-growth


    When new observations are consistently "diametrically opposed to what scientists had expected," it's a good bet that you have a failed hypothesis.

    Abstract of paper... http://m.sciencemag.org/content/earl...a8026.abstract
    Last edited by The Doctor; 27 Nov 15, 15:14.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

  • #2
    Erm, could this also be affected by over fishing?
    Wisdom is personal

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Karri View Post
      Erm, could this also be affected by over fishing?
      No.
      Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

      Comment


      • #4
        Did they also find a increase in zoo-plankton to go along with the increase in phyto-plankton?
        Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

        Prayers.

        BoRG

        http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Salinator View Post
          Did they also find a increase in zoo-plankton to go along with the increase in phyto-plankton?
          The increase was in a specific type of phytoplankton...

          "coccolithophore occurrence in the North Atlantic increased from ~2 to over 20% from 1965 through 2010"


          http://m.sciencemag.org/content/earl...a8026.abstract
          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

          Comment


          • #6
            This is extremely important news, thanks for posting it. It should have been clear that something was wrong with the expectations or the geological co2 estimates but these guys never talk to geologist or paleontologist. They prefer computer models to evidence which unfortunately is become a problem in almost every field of science.

            Computer models are wonderful tools for examining how systems work but they are only as good as the data that is available and the historical data in this case was apparently totally ignored.

            A few cracks are starting to develop in the consensus which is a good sign that climate science is starting to recover from a period of overconfidence.

            I think it is an unreasonable expectation that science nurtured in proximity to the liberal academics is not influenced by those ideas. There are many fine philosophers but they seem to not be the ones that become popular.

            "Marxist understandings of history and society have been adopted by academics in the disciplines of archaeology, anthropology, media studies, political science, theater, history, sociology, art history and theory, cultural studies, education, economics, geography, literary criticism, aesthetics, critical psychology, and philosophy."

            https://://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism

            As Steven Weinberg says "The insights of philosophers have occasionally benefited physicists, but generally in a negative fashion—by protecting them from the preconceptions of other philosophers." What is needed is a revision of the insights of philosophers in are universities.

            The negative influence of Marx in this case is not so much in relation to politics but in a world view that does not require evidence. Almost all of Marx's predictions have failed to materialize because frankly he was not a good philosopher and was prone to make sweeping assumptions.

            The fact that many socialist have latched on to Global Warming as a means to an end of greater centralized control of societies has perhaps distorted science. That said I'm beginning to believe that it's function was more of reinforcing overconfidence than inducing outright fraud although there is evidence that fraud is a reaction to the bad commitments that overconfidence caused. Overconfidence fueled by the enthusiastic support of powerful people scientist would not normally rub shoulders with.
            We hunt the hunters

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
              The increase was in a specific type of phytoplankton...

              "coccolithophore occurrence in the North Atlantic increased from ~2 to over 20% from 1965 through 2010"


              http://m.sciencemag.org/content/earl...a8026.abstract
              That part was understood. I was just curious whether they bothered to measure zoo-plankton also.

              Come to think of it, was there an research done on other strains of phyto?
              Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

              Prayers.

              BoRG

              http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Karri View Post
                Erm, could this also be affected by over fishing?
                Yes.
                How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                  This is extremely important news, thanks for posting it. It should have been clear that something was wrong with the expectations or the geological co2 estimates but these guys never talk to geologist or paleontologist. They prefer computer models to evidence which unfortunately is become a problem in almost every field of science.


                  [...]
                  Anyone whoever took at least one semester of carbonate geology should know that an increase in atmospheric CO2 would lead to increased coccolithophore occurrence. The planet knows what to do with CO2.

                  This "oops" was the second of two recent "oopses"...
                  Two new studies report dramatic changes in phytoplankton abundance and nature, changes that have important implications for storing excess carbon. Collectively, these studies suggest that certain types of carbon-intensive algae are flourishing and will play increasingly prominent roles as carbon pumps, removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Using the isotopic signature of phytoplankton amino acids embedded in skeletons of deep water soft corals, Kelton McMahon and colleagues determined how plankton dominance changed in the North Pacific over the past millennium. Their analysis reveals that there was a transition from dominance by non-nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria to that by eukaryotic microalgae. What's more, around the beginning of the industrial age, another transition occurred to a stronger nitrogen-fixing cyanobacterial community. The two transition periods were found to be markedly different; whereas the first transition took more than 600 years, the second, more recent transition occurred over less than 200 years. Since some bacteria of the more recent transition act as very efficient carbon pumps, the authors suggest that the ongoing trend might lead to a more efficient carbon pump system in the world's oceans.

                  [...]

                  http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-iic112315.php
                  Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                    That part was understood. I was just curious whether they bothered to measure zoo-plankton also.

                    Come to think of it, was there an research done on other strains of phyto?
                    Continuous Plankton Recorder sampling program measures quite a few, but not all, species of plankton.

                    They have reported an overall decline in zooplankton in other publications; although it has been noted that CPR undersamples zooplankton.

                    This particular paper noted a decrease in diatom occurence. Which basic carbonate geology would have predicted.

                    The key point is that coccolithophores have done the opposite of what the Gorebots predicted.
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Does this mean that in like 100,000 years there will be lots of new oil and methane available for use?

                      Or, does oil still only come from these...?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                        Yes.
                        Only in the land of Nickelodeon science.
                        Role in the food web

                        Coccolithophores are one of the more abundant primary producers in the ocean.

                        [...]

                        Predator-prey interactions

                        Their predators include the common predators of all phytoplankton including small fish, zooplankton, and shellfish larvae.

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coccol...y_interactions
                        Last edited by The Doctor; 27 Nov 15, 18:53.
                        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Coccolithophores are the Gorebots' worst nightmare...
                          In the long term, the plants seem to be good for the environment. Coccolithophores make their coccoliths out of one part carbon, one part calcium and three parts oxygen (CaCO3). So each time a molecule of coccolith is made, one less carbon atom is allowed to roam freely in the world to form greenhouse gases and contribute to global warming. Three hundred twenty pounds of carbon go into every ton of coccoliths produced. All of this material sinks harmlessly to the bottom of the ocean to form sediment.

                          The coccolithophores' short-term effect on the environment is somewhat more complex. This effect again has to do with the formation of their coccoliths and the chemical reaction involved in the process. The chemical reaction that makes the coccolith also generates a carbon dioxide molecule, a potent greenhouse gas, from the oxygen and carbon already in the ocean. While much of the gas is sucked back in by the coccoliths (all plants take in carbon dioxide for food) some of it escapes into the atmosphere and immediately becomes part of the greenhouse gas problem. Scientists are concerned in the short term that greenhouse gases will cause the upper layers of the ocean to become more temperate and stagnant. This would increase the number of coccoliths in the world, which would produce more greenhouse gas.

                          The coccolithophores also affect the global climate in the short term by increasing the oceans' albedo. Albedo is the fraction of sunlight an object reflects--higher albedo values indicate more reflected light. Coccolithophore blooms reflect nearly all the visible light that hits them. Since most of this light is being reflected, less of it is being absorbed by the ocean and stored as heat.

                          http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Fea...ccolithophores

                          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                            Yes.
                            Nick, coccolithophores is a specie of phyto-plankton. Overfishing makes an impact on zoo-plankton. That what I was getting at when I asked Doc about the zooplankton. Overfishing would mean an increase in zooplankton, not a decrease.

                            I specifically hyphenated the words to make sure Doc would know what I as asking about.
                            Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                            Prayers.

                            BoRG

                            http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                              [...]

                              Computer models are wonderful tools for examining how systems work but they are only as good as the data that is available and the historical data in this case was apparently totally ignored.

                              [...].
                              Computer models (AKA probabilitistic simulations) are great tools. They are essential tools in science. They are excellent heuristic tools.

                              However, they aren't "observations"... They aren't "data."

                              The "epic fail" of AGW is the fact that climate models have been treated as observations and data since climatology was hijacked by left-wing politicians back in the late 1980's.
                              Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X