Bruce Schneier
Schneier on Security
A blog covering security and security technology.
« Friday Squid Blogging: Squid Attacks ROV | Main | Trends in Counterfeit Currency »
January 2, 2009
Friday Squid Blogging: Climate Change Affects Squids
Posted on January 2, 2009 at 4:49 PM • 12 Comments
To receive these entries once a month by e-mail, sign up for the Crypto-Gram Newsletter.
John Waters • January 3, 2009 7:57 AM
Don't go diving in Humboldt squid infested waters without your WASP.
http://www.waspknife.com/
(this thing looks like 10 miles of bad road, and should probably be illegal)
Jesse • January 3, 2009 12:21 PM
A fine learned man like yourself actually jumping on the 'global warming' scam. I am saddened.
If you approach this with the same verbosity as you do security research, you would clearly see the flaws in the theory.
Take co2. Co2 is great for plants and we have much room for more. Today’s plants are nearly starved of Co2 and it is the reason why most gardeners (greenhouse) must artificially raise the co2 concentrations in their grow chambers. Its natures own little balancing act. There more co2, the more the plants absorb, the better they grow, the more they absorb...
Nonetheless, ‘global warming’ hysteria is sure a fine way to manipulate and control the populations. The drivers behind it wield flawed science with invented data – no different from those who convinced others the world was flat.
A nonny bunny • January 3, 2009 4:02 PM
@Jesse
CO2 may be great for plants, but it's not so great for squid. Squid, you see, are not plants. CO2 levels are higher that in the past few centuries (plenty of empirical evidence on that point). This in turn makes open water more acidic (basic chemistry). Which has consequences for water life, like squid.
All of this has nothing to do with "global warming hysteria", it would be just as true if increased levels of CO2 cooled the world off or are completely unrelated to temperature in any way.
If you want to be skeptical and deny mainstream science, fine, but at least get your logic straight.
Dash RipRock III • January 3, 2009 10:22 PM
Al Gore has really stepped in it this time. He could have spent the rest of his global warming career collecting money by spreading fear over events that were a century or at least half century in the future. Oh, but that wasn't good enough for Big Al. He's now told the biggest global warming whopper of his alarmist career:
AL GORE HAS GUARANTEED THAT THE NORTHERN POLAR ICE CAP WILL BE COMPLETELY GONE IN FIVE YEARS!!!
When I heard this I assumed it was a rumor started by skeptics to make Gore look bad. It wasn't until I viewed the video that I realized what Gore had done. Gore has started a five year credibility countdown timer ticking and it's up to all of us to make sure that he is held accountable and proven to be a fraud when his dire prediction aimed at drumming up support doesn't come close to coming true.
The mainstream media isn't going to let this video see the light of day because they, unlike Al, understand the precarious position in which he has placed himself.
It is therefore up to us to spread the word about Big Al's prediction. He must be exposed for the fear mongering opportunist that he has become.
To view the video, please visit the following site and click on the picture of Big Al holding up five fingers.
http://www.hootervillegazette.com
While visiting this site, you might want to watch a preview of the film "Not Evil, Just wrong" or watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle" which is found in the video section. Happy Viewing!!!
A nonny bunny • January 4, 2009 10:55 AM
@Dash RipRock III
The only swindle is the program "The Great Global Warming Swindle" itself. Even scientists on their program distanced themselves from it and complained to ofcom about being misrepresented. And ofcom ruled against the program ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... )
@konvm
It's Bruce's regular Friday feature about squid. He likes them and it's his blog.
Moderator • January 5, 2009 6:24 AM
Note that the message from "Dash RipRock III," above, has been posted to several other blogs in the last few days:
I'm leaving it up as an example, because we're seeing more and more of this kind of political astroturf lately. Please be aware and try not to let astoturfers sucker you into off-topic flamewars. Thanks.
Fred H • January 5, 2009 12:59 PM
@Jesse.
Your metaphors don't work to prove your point. Quite the opposite. It is understandable that there are people who do not want to accept global warming. Heck, that would involve changes to their lifestyle, and accepting responsibility for not only creatures like the Humboldt Squid, but the Polar Bear as well as others. It is far easier to poke holes in the theory, and ridicule those who see merit in it.
David • January 5, 2009 2:06 PM
@ A nonny bunny
Your confusing two separate issues. Aquatic plants also require co2 and the uptick is more than likely associated with other variables impacting the squid�s ecosystem that has reduced plant life. Blast fishing, nitrogen based fertilizers, oil spills etc are all candidates.
The solution is to restore the ecosystem to a point where the aquatic plants will grow again. At least, this is what we have done in the bay with excellent results. Co2 aquatic levels down with no change to atmospheric levels. Hmmm. Imagine that.
The �mainstream� and �empirical data� you reference is flawed at best. Follow the grants� Far too often, I find, so called �scientists� trying to prove climate change at the expense of real analysis and study.
And make no mistake; the alarmism surrounding �global warming� is hysteria but that is the whole point of the movement.
A nonny bunny • January 5, 2009 3:46 PM
@David
Yeah, I'm sure you're right; 99% of the climatologist are lying and making up data just to secure grants. That's entirely reasonable thinking. The mainstream is one big conspiracy, after all.
Doesn't change the reality of the situation though. And while extra aquatic plant growth can absorb some of the extra CO2, there is only greater growth (in otherwise ideal conditions) if there is a higher concentration of CO2. In other words the latter grows quicker.
Not to mention that without those otherwise ideal conditions the plants are limited by other factors and not the availability of CO2. (Hence why the CO2 levels went down in that bay of yours when the other conditions where improved; it was not the limiting factor)
It is very doubtful the condition of the ocean will be improved to that extent, even if we try (and we won't, will we).
But nevermind all that; I'm just part of the conspiracy. Admitting it is just a ruse to throw you off and make you second guess.
Davi Ottenheimer • January 5, 2009 4:39 PM
"the alarmism surrounding 'global warming' is hysteria but that is the whole point of the movement"
I love watching the trolls of circular reasoning. Let's take a look at the logic:
Alarmism=hysteria=movement.
Who can argue with that?
I have one in response: "the alarmism surrounding 'anti-global-warming' is hysteria but that is the whole point of the movement"
So true, n'est-ce pas?
Moderator • January 5, 2009 4:47 PM
David is a sockpuppet of Jesse.
I'm closing comments because this is a security blog, not a climate change blog, and I'm unwilling to let the agenda be controlled by an astroturfer and a sockpuppeteer.
Squid are delicate creatures and are easily disturbed by loud ax-grinding in their vicinity. I have to think of the squids.
Subscribe to comments on this entry
Comments on this entry have been closed.
Schneier.com is a personal website. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of BT.
|
| Subscribe |
Subscribe via Kindle |
| Blog Menu |
SearchPowered by DuckDuckGoBlog Home Page
Archives by Date2013 J F M A M J
Tags  |
| Latest Book |
more books by Bruce Schneier |
Comments