Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 121 posts

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#51

Post by endorphone »

simonsarris wrote: post #44
endorphone wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Their own characterization is more nuanced than that." Of course it's more nuanced. I'm speaking directly to their conclusions relative to global warming, clearly, and your very firm put-down of it, though you seem to be backtracking now. "The study is fine and full of expected caveats. The reporting is bad." How is the reporting bad? Why? Because it doesn't take a contrarian approach because the science of a massiv…

The reporting is bad because: 1. Oceans are not running out of oxygen, as the title suggests 2. The article leads with 700 ocean sites suffering from low oxygen, up from 45 in 1960, which is not because of oxygen solubility but because of eutrophication. The paper specificually discusses eutrophication here, and goes on to mention "but through nutrient and organic loading management about 70 (10%) of them can now be…

"1. Oceans are not running out of oxygen, as the title suggests"

Does "running out" to you mean hitting 0%? In real-world use it means reduces to the point where it has a negative effect on the system, which is reportedly happening. You and a few others have taken this tact that you just disagree with the claimed alarmism of the article (and its completely accurate title) -- read the executive summary. It's pretty "alarmist" too.

Again you're back to run-off, which is weird -- the science has long targeted it, and regulations and behaviors have changed dramatically to ease it, to good effect. Things as little as most laundry detergent not having phosphor anymore. Yeah, they were "alarmist" about that, solutions were found, and the problem has improved in a lot of the world. But now global warming is coming and it is a massive external force that you can't simply change a laundry detergent around. The report isn't even saying "oh no, get rid of your pick-up", it's simply saying "this is happening". Understanding and planning, if that's the best we can do, is pretty valuable.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#52

Post by endorphone »

marcosdumay wrote: post #39
endorphone wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read an article citing the conclusions of an international group with 15,000+ experts in their respective field, many member nations and their scientific establishment, etc, and you believe some random comment by some random guy on the internet adds "clarity", you need to really reconsider how you evaluate information. This is how we ended up in the situations of enormous ignorance in the climate change and im…

The article is written by a single journalist, and clearly sensationalist. What does it matter he quotes 15000 experts if he intentionally distorts what they say? That random comment by a random guy on the internet is adding clarity.

What did he distort? What is sensationalist?

This claim has been made multiple times, and the single example has been a misunderstanding of the English language (e.g. "running out").

"That random comment by a random guy on the internet is adding clarity."

That random comment that inserted non-fact, dismissed essentially the entire report...yeah, no, it added just noise. Oh look now the root comment instead of just blanket dismissing global warming entirely has now listed a small sub-summary dealing just with run-off. This is a classic denialist tactic, just moving the fence posts enough, pretending to actually be considering the science.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#53

Post by taxidump »

endorphone wrote: post #16
czbond wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not informed enough to make a reply comment, but thank you for adding clarity - it informed me.

If you read an article citing the conclusions of an international group with 15,000+ experts in their respective field, many member nations and their scientific establishment, etc, and you believe some random comment by some random guy on the internet adds "clarity", you need to really reconsider how you evaluate information. This is how we ended up in the situations of enormous ignorance in the climate change and im…

That "blowhard" has added more to this discussion than you have with this comment. Would you like to counter his position, or just call names?

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#54

Post by ThomPete »

moultano wrote: post #38
ra1n85 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Demanding a feel-good or less dire reporting on it isn't a solution. It's not about feeling good, it's about accuracy. If accuracy is something you see as an optional component of reporting, then I'm not going to be able to get on your wavelength.

If you have complaints about the article's accuracy, spell them out instead of knee-jerking from the headline.

3-4% in 2100 if things continue is NOT "the ocean running out of oxygen"

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#56

Post by endorphone »

ThomPete wrote: post #54
moultano wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have complaints about the article's accuracy, spell them out instead of knee-jerking from the headline.

3-4% in 2100 if things continue is NOT "the ocean running out of oxygen"

If that has an extremely adverse effect on ocean life, it most certainly is "running out of oxygen".

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#57

Post by endorphone »

taxidump wrote: post #53
endorphone wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read an article citing the conclusions of an international group with 15,000+ experts in their respective field, many member nations and their scientific establishment, etc, and you believe some random comment by some random guy on the internet adds "clarity", you need to really reconsider how you evaluate information. This is how we ended up in the situations of enormous ignorance in the climate change and im…

That "blowhard" has added more to this discussion than you have with this comment. Would you like to counter his position, or just call names?

Okay. Clearly this discussion has drawn in the HN crank squad of denialist and anti-science nuts, so I'll cede this to them.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#58

Post by NeedMoreTea »

simonsarris wrote: post #8

Boy are characterizations like this getting tired. An actually accurate title would read something like: Farm and industry run-off in certain areas of the world is depleting oxygen in certain parts of the ocean. The vast majority of the issue isn't related to rising temps, it would still be there if there were no rising temps. It is the agricultural and industrial runoff in what I suspect are very, very specific part…

Page 109 is a summary specifically relating to estuaries and semi-enclosed seas. There are multiple other summaries relating to other ocean types preceding it.

From the executive summary at the beginning:

The loss of oxygen in the ocean can broadly be put down to two overlying causes – eutrophication as a result of nutrient run-off from land and deposition of nitrogen from the burning of fossil fuels, and the heating of ocean waters as a result of climate change, primarily causing a change in ventilation with the overlying atmosphere so that they hold less soluble oxygen, and compounded by reduced ocean mixing and changes in currents and wind patterns. Ocean deoxygenation is but the latest consequence of our activities on the ocean to be recognized. Ocean warming, ocean deoxygenation, and ocean acidification are major ‘stressors’ on marine systems and typically co-occur because they share a common cause.

Then from Section 2.1, Global Evidence of ocean deoxygenation:

+ Open-ocean deoxygenation is resulting mainly from a warming ocean, increased stratification and changing circulation which interact with eutrophication-induced hypoxia (oxygen concentration below ~60 to 120 µmol O2 kg-1) and biological activity in shelf regions.

+ Oxygen loss is closely related to ocean warming and acidification caused by CO2 increase driven by CO2 emissions as well as biogeochemical consequences related to anthropogenic fertilization of the ocean; hence a combined effort investigating the different stressors will be most beneficial to understand future ocean changes.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#59

Post by mempko »

edoo wrote: post #35
endorphone wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Science isn't there to make you feel good, motiviated, etc. They're just pointing out what's happening to the best of their abilities to measure and analyze. Demanding a feel-good or less dire reporting on it isn't a solution.

They are almost always wrong with science when it comes to policies that aren't backed by a falsifiable hypothesis. It turns out animal fats are the safest fats and vegetable oils are poison. It turns out you don't have to worry about eating cholesterol. The same for salt. The climate hoax is about to be called out for what it is due to the models exponentially diverging from reality. They claim the ozone hole is shr…

And yet, here we are, 30 years later, still increasing emissions, still using fossil fuels, still having a weak global coordination. How long do you expect this 'climate hoax plan' to take? Another 10 years? When will the 'globalists' finally take over with their climate hoax plan?

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#60

Post by taxidump »

endorphone wrote: post #57
taxidump wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That "blowhard" has added more to this discussion than you have with this comment. Would you like to counter his position, or just call names?

Okay. Clearly this discussion has drawn in the HN crank squad of denialist and anti-science nuts, so I'll cede this to them.

Maybe the reason you are getting pushback is your tactic of insults. Blowhard, HN crank squad and anti-science nuts... The best way to represent a position here is through dialog, not name calling. Emotional jabs tend to undermine your argument.
Post reply on HN