« More Fun from Hamas TV | Main | Shrillary Can't Even Manage Healthcare for Her Own Campaign »
April 1, 2008
Global Warming Profiteer Wants to Pollute the Ocean
Hopefully the global warming hoax will run out of gas soon, before ecokooks do something really destructive: not just to our economy and our liberty but to the environment. For example, San Francisco entrepreneur Dan Whaley wants to cash in on the hoax by selling carbon credits to arrest the nonexistent climate change crisis through "ocean fertilization" — i.e., by dumping massive amounts of iron slurry into the ocean.
Yes, it's nuts; but so is the provably false rhetoric gushing out of Al Gore, and many people still manage to take him seriously. Once people have convinced themselves that the weather is an urgent problem and it's up to them to control it, all manner of mischief becomes feasible.
The Earth's climate has had no problem regulating itself for millions of years. Hysterical moonbats and the greedy creeps who exploit them might not do quite as good a job.
Posted by Van Helsing at April 1, 2008 7:52 AM
Comments
This "fertilise the oceans" thing seems to be one of those Professor Branestawm ideas that comes up again and again. I remember reading about in my youth when it was going to feed all the poor people of the world (never anything so simple as growing crops in a modern economy when you can feed the little people on algae for the technocrats!)
Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at April 1, 2008 8:40 AM
Yep, this iron-in-the-ocean business is a re-warmed (sorry) cockamamie idea that's been around for a long time, despite its obviously risible nature.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 1, 2008 10:10 AM
There's enough iron on the bottom of the ocean from WWII
Posted by: JamesB at April 1, 2008 10:15 AM
It doesn't matter if it does good, or not. It only matters that they care and are trying to do something.
Posted by: Lyle at April 1, 2008 12:06 PM
This is bad science, and a bad idea.
Kind of like the bad science cited to discredit Al Gore:
"1. The film claims global warming is responsible for the gradual retreat of the alpine glacier atop Africa's Mount Kilimanjaro. Scientists have conclusively demonstrated no such link exists."
What IS responsible for the retreat of the glacier atop Mount Kilimanjaro if not warming? Are people carrying it away?
Sometimes I think everyone in the world is an idiot except me.
Posted by: Who's yer Army Dad? at April 1, 2008 1:06 PM
"What IS responsible for the retreat of the glacier atop Mount Kilimanjaro if not warming? Are people carrying it away?"
Erm. A local climate change which may have any number of causes is used by you as evidence for a grand theory of global climate change specifically driven by carbon dioxide. Can you see the error there?
Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at April 1, 2008 1:23 PM
One theory regarding the Mt. Kilimanjaro glacial shrinkage is that deforestation in the lowland areas around the mountain has interrupted the hydrologic cycle. Prior to the deforestation, evapotranspiration from the trees provided the moisture to rejuventate the glaciers at the top of the mountain.
It is my understanding that the temperatures at the mountain top have not appreciably increased, it is the decreased moisture that makes the difference.
Posted by: on-the-rocks at April 1, 2008 1:53 PM
Snow caps in tropical areas are especially sensitive to relatively small anomalies in the amount of precipitation. It needs to be replenished regularly, or it melts off and isn't replaced. The results can appear drastic even when average temperature hasn't changed.
This is exactly the kind of thing unscrupulous "scientists" and other climate change salesmen can exploit to great effect on feeble-minded people.
Posted by: forest at April 1, 2008 3:09 PM
What IS responsible for the retreat of the glacier atop Mount Kilimanjaro if not warming? Are people carrying it away?The Nov 23, 2003 issue of Nature stated,
Sometimes I think everyone in the world is an idiot except me.
"Although it's tempting to blame the (Kilimanjaro) ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine."
Also, the March 2004 issue of International Journal of Climatology stated Mount Kilimanjaro was losing it's snowcap due to extremely low humidity. The snow undergoes the process of sublimation and the dry atmosphere is not producing enough snow to replenish it.
Sorry you are unable to see that the picture of climate on this earth is a bit more complex than SUVs, light bulbs, and backyard barbecues.
Posted by: Lyle at April 1, 2008 4:33 PM
How on earth does putting iron sulfate in the water help phytoplankton? I first thought they were talking about iron-reducing chemosynthetic bacteria that live around thermal vents, but now that I see the story, I don't think I understand it any better.
Posted by: Arthur at April 1, 2008 5:54 PM
