Wonder of wonders! A Greenie tries to debate a skeptic
Professional environmentalist Phil Williamson has responded to an article by James Delingpole rubbishing the ocean acidification scare.
Straight out of the gate Williamson reveals himself as a subscriber to Greenie lies. He accepts recent claims that bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef has been drastic and sweeping and adds that "Population recovery, through re-colonisation and re-growth, typically takes 10-15 years". Does it now? Then how come a recent extensive survey of the reef by diving professionals found that less than five per cent of coral has died off — compared to the 50 to 60 per cent estimated by Greenie scientists. Instead of 10-15 years, recovery happened in a matter of months. No alarm there!
The article is very long-winded but consists mainly of appeals to authority and "ad hominem" attacks on skeptics. Rather than addressing the scientific evidence quoted, Williamson disparages the academic qualifications of skeptics. Such arguments are disreputable and of no logical force.
I can't imagine doing any kind of fisking of such a lot of wind so I will close my comments with what I think is the fatal flaw in Williamson's article. Delingpole does mention it in passing but makes far too little of it in my opinion.
The point is that ocean acidification and global warming CANNOT occur at the same time. One is incompatible with the other. Why? Because a warmer ocean would OUTGAS CO2, thus reducing the carbonic acid that it forms. A warmer world would have LESS acid oceans.
And if you want to see warm water outgassing CO2 just open a can of Coke without refrigrerating it first. You will get a gas-powered torrent.
Williamson and his friends carefully talk about CO2 levels but fail to mention their founding gospel -- that CO2 rises pump up the global temperature. So if Williamson wants to raise concerns about ocean acidification, he has to DENY that a CO2 rise would cause global warming. I somehow suspect that he is not ready to do that.
So his whole scare is an act of gross hypocrisy and scientific dishonesty. And scientific dishonesty is no science at all. Those who indulge in it should be totally disregarded -- along with any of the alleged "evidence" for their cause.
GBR coral survey
Post a Comment
All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them