Jan
The oceans are dissolving!
Take a breath, no, they’re not.
In late 2009, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) released a shabby but mercifully short 21-minute film entitled Acid Test: The Global Challenge of Ocean Acidification. The NRDC discusses the upcoming “megadisaster” facing our oceans, “ocean acidification.” However, the film has been quickly proven to be nothing more than a rehash of earlier shock-horror mocumentaries where, as usual, the villain of the story is poor old industrial man. Featuring Sigourney Weaver as its narrator, the NRDC film focuses on the views of a handful of self-interested scientists, a commercial fisherman, and two employees of the NRDC. If you haven’t seen it, here it is below:
Now the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI)–a DC think tank–has has debunked this latest junk science. The level-headed folk over at SPPI offer a thorough report in a science-based critique. The SPPI paper is entitled Acid Test: The Global Challenge of Ocean Acidification – A New Propaganda Film by the National Resources Defense Council Fails the Acid Test of Real World Data.
The NRDC film tries hard to persuade us that mankind has “altered the course of nature” by poisoning the oceans. They say CO2 dissolves into the surface of the world’s oceans causing a chemical reaction, and lowering the pH status of the waters. These scientists want us to swallow the tale that this phenomenon is reducing marine calcification rates. They want to leave us scared that if left unchecked, sea water will become so corrosive that it “will cause sea shells to dissolve” and drive coral reefs to extinction “within 20 to 30 years.” It’s just another crock by the climate change alarmists.
The SPPI report, written by Dr. Craig D. Idso for SPPI, reveals that an equally strong, if not more persuasive, case can be made that the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration will actually benefit calcifying marine life. As such, the NRDC’s portrayal of CO2-induced ocean acidification as a megadisaster-in-the-making is seen, at best, to be a one-sided distortion of the truth or, at worst, a blatant attempt to deceive the public and their elected representatives.
According to Dr. Idso, “Surely, the NRDC and the scientists portrayed in their film should have been aware of at least one of the numerous peer-reviewed scientific journal articles that do not support a catastrophic–or even a problematic–view of the effect of ocean acidification on calcifying marine organisms; and they should have shared that information with the public. If by some slim chance they were not aware, they should be called to task for not investing the time, energy, and resources needed to fully investigate an issue that has profound significance for the biosphere and public policy making. And if they did know the results of the studies we have discussed, no one should ever believe a single word they may utter or write in the future.”
“Typically, the NRDC chose to present an extreme one-sided, propagandised view of ocean acidification in their film,” says SPPI president, Robert Ferguson. “The part of the story that they clearly don’t want the public and policy makers to know was just released in our newest review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature,” added Ferguson.
Possibly related posts:
[...] Film by the National Resources Defense Council Fails the Acid Test of Real World Data. hat tip to Climategate.com for the full story Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Climategate – Copenhagen IPCC [...]
How can (the same) human CO2 emissions dissolve into ocean and stay in atmosphere for thousands of years (according to IPCC) at the same time? Phil? Mike? Gavin? Anyone?
Easy question to answer Andrew Suprun….they don’t.
That was a rhetorical question.
It’s an awfully simple process. First the CO2 dissolves into the oceans, then it kills the marine life, then positive feedbacks drive it back out of the ocean again because CO2 has lower solubility in warmer water. What you have to understand is that CO2 goes everywhere, in all directions all at once because the IPCC says so.
What part of this is difficult to understand?
Oh Goody..our resident ‘legal advocate’ is back with some more useless information presented to provide heat rather than light.
Mr. O’Sullivan..could you please give us some legitimate information regarding your status as a lawyer. I can’t undertstand why a bonafide attorney, involved with international governmental mal-feasance for the last ten years, as you have so often and so humbly told us, would be so bashful about revealing his C.V. Where were you called to the bar and which bar? I’m resisting making a bad joke here..
By comparison, the top fraud attorney presently trawling the Penn State U. with whistle blower bait is very forthcoming on his successes and his C.V. Interestingly enough, he teaches law at Liberty University – a southern baptist institution which I’m sure has an unadulterated interest in science.
Incidently, any bites yet on that fishing expedition?
Suspiciously silent this Mr. O’Sullivan when he’s asked a direct question. Ready and able to roll out the hot air and inuendo but unable to answer simple questions.