Acidifying oceans of the future

[ShangoRaiden]

amillionmonkeys.blog.com  aren't you curious?

[StephanieLisaTara]

HAIKU

I hatch! Crawl! And swim!

Oh how I love my sweet life,

But—why’s the sea so warm?

—A Green Sea Turtle

[figbat1]

they estimate the singularity to be at 1000 trillion degrees celsius or more at the time of the big bang. this is how all the matter fitted into it.....it was so f u c k i n g hot, just like slash or deepak. im just wondering how does a singularity gets to this sort of temeperature on its own accord.......?

[figbat1]

so "new scientist" magazine this week is going to explain how the universe appeared out of nothing. good luck with that one. whenever i try to get my mind around that one i always end up getting lost. i suppose you are going to wheel out steve hawking to explain it. why not try deepak.....have you seen how thick his glasses are...he must be a genius! i would rather listen to justin biebers explanation...because the proper answer is .." I HAVE NO IDEA...YOU CANT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING"

[david222444]

Only the millions of underwater volcanoes could acidify oceans. The rest is scaremongering for bucks.

[DeadHappyFilm]

SO...What they are saying is there have been millions upon millions upon millions upon millions of Co2 coming out in our own atmosphere naturally for millions of years and we are still here? I think the environmentalist are overreacting just a little bit. I know it is important to help the environment but they make it sound like we are going to die in the next 100 years or something.

[TheRealArchAngel]

pffft

The Acidification isn't from the CO2,it's from the other volcanic gases they failed to mention

High CO2 does leach Calcium from the water,however,making it nutritionally deficient for a\animals that get their shell building material from the water thus the weak shells

[CookieLoveAngel13]

At 2100 i will be 100 years old. . . lets see if i can make it. . .

[TheBrightPulse]

@CookieLoveAngel13 with future life extension technology you problably could if you wanted to.

[TheMASTERCHIEF55555]

i got to 10 secs

[pureofdastr]

2100 phew ill be dead

[TheRealArchAngel]

"2100 phew ill be dead"

We;ll,they are hoping anyway that way if they are wrong nobody would be around that cares

won't stop the people from reading history and comparing the Nutters that thought there was pollution cause Cooling in the 70's and comparing them to the nutters in the early 2000 thinking there was pollution caused heating

And of course in both cases they will find it was media hype in thge internet/global media age v.s. sensationalist/reactionary Periodicals in the 70's

[idiotbox1223]

Sorry to be a pest but i believe and support your idea but the name of the video scared me for a bit there.

[Frances3654]

wa wa wa, let me play the smallest violin

[SteveWrathall]

There is no credible scenario whereby the ocean's 1.3 billion cubic kilometers of seawater could have their pH dropped so much. There's simply not enough fossil fuel to burn.

[Archimedes555453525]

Leave an open door for this theory, they might just be right, you know

[nancidrew4]

HOW TO TALK TO A CLIMATE SKEPTIC

gristmill.grist. org/skeptics

The journal Nature has an excellent library of information:

nature. com/climate/index.html

There's also this website from a top British scientific academy. They provide responses to the misleading arguments "put forward by those who seek to distort and undermine the science of climate change."

royalsociety. org/page. asp?id=6229

[nancidrew4]

gristmill.grist. org/story/2006/11/19/51921/827

The models predicted:

1. surface warming accompanied by cooling of the stratosphere

2. warming of the lower, mid, and upper troposphere

3. warming of ocean surface waters

4. energy imbalance between incoming sunlight and outgoing infrared radiation

5. sharp and short-lived cooling of a few tenths of a degree in the event of large volcanic eruptions

6. amplification of warming trends in the Arctic region

All of these predictions came true.

[MylanKlassen]

It's easy to make predictions come true when the people doing the research are looking and hoping to find a specific finding. The most effective researcher is one who has NO interest in their field of study, then there is no risk of bias. But all these green freaks and trying their best to proof these ideas right, rather then letting data speak for itself.

[darknessahead520]

absolutely straight up guy or gal

[CliveSinclairZX]

Misleading arguments like what the IPCC has been telling us lately?

Like emails showing politics instead of science?

Like repeating un scientific claims by the WWF that the glaciers will melt by 2035?

Like introducing a program to cap C02 and then trade it and make money off the derivatives?

Seems like the IPCC is the one putting forward misleading arguments. Undermine the science? Sorry the IPCC has already done that.

It is impossible to predict what will and will not happen.

[AzoreanProud]

dude, too much plants in ocean can provoke an deficient quantity of O2/oxygen, an that can provoke the death of some life beings...

[VanishPoint]

Ok... how does that happen?

[AzoreanProud]

Plants need CO2 in the process to produce glucose and if exist more CO2 more they will creat, that means more development, more smentes, more growing of the plants community...more plants less O2 because they use it for the photosynthesis process...less O2 some live beings(bigger ones) will die.

[Xenoce]

More plants means more O2, not less, plants produce, not consume, oxygen.

[AzoreanProud]

They consume O2 as well CO2, in the process of photosynthesis

[Xenoce]

Where are you getting your info from? O2 is a plant waste product.

[WolYou]

To get this straight: Plants produce both. O2 during photosynthesis and CO2 during night time (when there is no sun for photosythesis). But thats not the problem. The ecosystem will change. And we won't be able adapt in this short period of time. The development is catastrophic and not long term slow motion. You may compare the situation by imaging 150 pinatubo-sized volcanoes erupting at the same time. Thats the amount of CO2 we humans are adding to the atmosphere each and every year.

[plejeune1]

plants perform cellular respiration as well as photosynthesis

[tgold1968]

Azorean is right. Photosynthesis requires O2 as well as CO2, but yields a net of more O2 after converting CO2 to sugars. At night when there is no sunlight, however, plants expire a net of CO2, but not nearly as much as they uptake during the day.

[Darkson13]

dude 2100 1st think what your gona do tomorrow not in 2100 stupid

[rsh2k8]

Funny how people blame man, when actually its not our fault completely

the carbon cycle shows us that CO2 dissolves in oceans and if left to itself is self-sustaining and the carbon cycle is the reason for our atomsphere today with only 0.004% CO2 but million of years ago before plant-life envolved it was much, much higher percentage.

[CavallinoSilver]

Funny how americans dare say anything when the G8 document signed by the science academies of every G8 country says clearly that it is their scientific opinion that it is caused by human activities. Americans are completely corrupted by their own energy needs.

[rsh2k8]

its not global warming

not the acuidifying of the oceans???

and im not american

[CavallinoSilver]

Ocean acidification is due in part to the excess of carbon emissions. And these are covered in the G8 document.

[jas03000]

We'll blow ourselves up before then.

[Daived123]

I know there are many very well informed americans and do not wish to generalise for their sake but when many of the country still denies man made environmental issues, evolution and still spends one third of its aids donations on abstinence lessons you begin to understand why the american economy is in such decline!I only hope science will prevail over religious superstitions and the next government spend more on changing the world for the better rather than paying people to deny information!!

[Daived123]

and for those people who are saying "Google solar cycles" or "Ice cores" I know like every other EDUCATED person on this subject that yes they do alter conditions on our planet and can do severely but do not cause ALL the various problems with man made emissions that we are encountering! These natural phenomenon are typically changing conditions over hundreds to tens of thousands of years and not a few decades!

[Daived123]

If it gets to a stage where the phyto-plankton cannot survive or severely reduce in numbers then our main source of oxygen will be eliminated as 70% of our O2 is created thanks to these amazing plankton aswell of converting the CO2!

Only Ignorant or ill-educated people will dismiss our destructive actions as a natural phenomenon!

[Daived123]

I am studying environmental science at one of the worlds top marine environmental research university Plymouth, England. This film has nothing to do with "Global Warming" it is saying that with more man made CO2 in the atmosphere being absorbed by OUR OCEANS (As in we all exploit it) the lower the pH will get and thus completely alter the types of plants and animals that will be able to live in the seas.

[UcanbeGOD]

Good luck with you're studies. Have you done any research at the university on the effects of meat consumption on global warming?

[unescapablex]

Yeah...did you read the study on vegetables? Especially beans. It produces SO MUCH GAS. They should be banned out right. That would eliminate Mexico from the map. Maybe even taco bell. Its a sad day for the bean.

[UcanbeGOD]

LOL ok?!?!?

[crazytiger630]

The earth will go thru it's cycles no matter what we do. If the libs want to slow it down, let them stick their heads in a cows butt and inhale their farts...as well as holding their own farts in. This does not negate the fact that we all still need to take better care of the planet.

[CavallinoSilver]

The libs? You are aware of the fact that the United States is the only country in the world that denies climate change? Interestingly enough you are the main source of carbon emissions in the world.

Your country is completely corrupted. Sign the friggin Kyoto protocol.

[crazytiger630]

I AM FULLY AWARE OF CLIMATE CHANGE, I myself would sign Kyoto, but the world has always gone thru climate change. Which industrialized nations do more to protect and help the world more than the people of the united states? Who else goes and cleans up land mines that do not belong to them? Who is the first to stand and die for others? Who are the people that get punished for thier good in the world? Actually, if I had my way, i'd begin by shutting down about 94% of foriegn aide, seal the border

[CavallinoSilver]

Well, last time I checked, invading little countries that are not in posession of weapons of mass destruction was outside my list of good things to do for the world.

The truth is the presidents of the academies of science of every G8 country signed a document stating clearly that carbon emissions have a huge role in today's rapid climate change.

And the only "important" group that contests that is the Oregon Petition group. Interestingly they are american...

[crazytiger630]

and i can no longer defend bush......not too sure he's doing us many favors

[VodooWitchDoctor]

this is the ph scale

0 = very strong base

7 = neutral (water basically)

14 very strong acid

when acid and base comes together they become neutral and become water. i learn it in chemistry this year

[Zantaer]

uhh..you've got it the wrong way around.

1 is the strongest acid, 14 strongest base

[VodooWitchDoctor]

O see, i was never good in chemistry. i was just there for the good looks. thats all basically. lol. thats ok. at least i know they are acids and bases.

[CaveMan1308]

like nick said i learned pH 7 was neutral(she said algae in a wierd way)

[sckryde]

global warming is gonna kill us all.

[rffshvj]

I'm sorry to say: come down... we'll all die sooner or later!

No seriously it's already too late! Even if we'd start to care about our Planet we couldn't help it anymore. It's not only caused by us beings on the earth, the sun is the most important factor! I can't stand it if people ignore that fact and I'd love to see some changes in our treatment of these two Planets. And by the way: Greenland has it's name with a reason!

[deadpassive]

"LOL pH 7.8 is still alkali..."

That may be so, however it is still MORE acidic than a pH of 8 for example. The boundary of 7 is only arbitrary, there is no sudden jump from alkali to acidic at that point...

[nickheslop1]

LOL pH 7.8 is still alkali... its not acidic at all, acidic is below pH 7 and pH 7 is neutral i dno how the corals erode more from becoming more neutral? newscientists weird.

[pro7o7ype]

A pH of 7.8 is acidic nowadays?

[EnragedSephiroth]

Isn't 8.2 a higher number? So then the acidity is going down, no?

[theanswer00]

no, much higher is the number [14 is the max], less the water is acid

[rffshvj]

7 = neutral. 14 and 0 are the max and min points.

[yedrellow]

That's what I thought, don't they just mean less basic?

[cmiller1187]

good thing the ice caps are melting to dilute the ocean's acidity! besides grass instead of coral means excess O2 for everyone. the grass is the environment's adaptation in response to the CO2.

[Psycatalyst]

This was always happening CO2 is diffusing into the ocean making Carbonic acid (CO3).

[m0rz]

it's "affect" not "effect" on the profile. You misspelled it.

[dartjoe]

You don't live underwater who cares. Worry about other things instead of stupid fucking fish!

[merrett]

Fish is a big food source for some countries

[davidemil5]

wtf man we eat fish

[skeetmandoo]

well call me out if im wrong, but sence i was in 2nd grade i've been told that plants take in cO2 and sunlight and give off oxygen so why is it so strange that a bunch of plants grow around cO2 vents. The mullosks shells may an effect of the change in PH but also may be some sort of adaptation, mabe to allow the excange of cO2 freely from their shells to the ocean given the fact that their environment has changed and their ingesting more cO2 than before?? I dont know, but hey they didnt check.

[PangPrego]

Well the problem is that we are today cutting down the rainforest that is the major source to this planet's oxygen... Smart? No... And what about the fact that this CO2 leaking out, is another sorce to the global warming... That's why this is so important.

[floureus]

Yes, you're wrong in a way. The plants actually *gives off* CO2 during nighttime, just like Humans. Besides, the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by plants is pretty insignificant compared to the staggering global emission of CO2. That's why we have global warming. Pretty simple, eh?

[floureus]

And who mainly causes that natural emisson? Although it is true that co2 emisson is largely of natural phenomenon, the cause of such phenomenon is not neccesarily intuitive. Sea drilling for oil, for example, would be a good example.

BTW

[CavallinoSilver]

According to what source? I would be surprised if it wasn't american.

[darfunkel]

They takein more CO2 than they emit.

That said, I'm concerned about other more general and drastic changes.

[floureus]

Yes, you're wrong in a way. The plants actually *gives off* CO2 during nighttime, just like Humans. Besides, the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by plants is pretty insignificant compared to the staggering global emission of CO2. That's why we have global warming. Pretty simple, eh?

[9753883]

I did a science experiment like this only much, much smaller

[jondea0]

so your agreeing with me right?

[millriseman1]

Man, I really want to dive there now. Get me a one-way ticket to the Med!

[rocco2k7]

i dont fucking kno what hes sayin ?

[taznc25]

And the animals havent died since the 1800's even though the acidity has changed. Your point?

Animals adapt and evolve to environmental changes whether caused by natural phenomenon or human intervention. This is basic biology.

[jondea0]

they have not evolved, they have adapted, evolving is changing species

[taznc25]

Adaptation is the precursor of evolution. Without adaptation, evolution could not occur. Over hundreds of millions of years, many adaptations force changes within a given species. Without adaptation, these species would become extinct. My point still stands, life in the ocean will adjust to change in PH. Proof of adaptation exists with the home marine aquarium- Multiple Species from different parts of the world can flourish in the same tank even though PH is different in nature for the species.

[Tacoeaterguy]

If the ocean dies.. where are we gonna get our water from? Yes kids. That glass of water your drinkin once came from a fishes dick.

[themisplaced]

you might be stupidest person alive.

[hockeytown98]

since the ph has droped we're gonna have another global extinction, but this time with just the water.

[Zdaytona05]

if life in ocean dies, it doesnt just effect the ocean, were do you think you get your tuna from?

[comarmachado]

where do you think you get your oxigen from?

[sussycoco]

the only way to come to a conclusion these days is to do it yourself or watch non commercialised tv this is a good example of mans ignorance

[mpower6428]

if the ph of the ocean changes? the atmosphere changes. get it? basically its bad.

its happened bfor once millions of years ago, right bfor a mass global extinction.

[RIOTofCARNAGE]

its really bad

[superman64131]

ok im confused is this a good thing or bad thing cause i thought acid was bad? please somebody clarify this for me.

[RIOTofCARNAGE]

bad

[malicho69]

i wish i could live to see acidic oceans, oh well.

[foxtrotthefox]

so is this bad or wut?

[metalalien79]

ok we get it, there are now 100,000 individual ways the earth is screwed and we are screwed along with it. Got it... check!

[shaolindreams]

oceans of sulphuric acid... tsunami tidal sulphuric waves.. great anymore good news? new mutant spiders that cut your penis off in the middle of the night?

[jasong19711]

FACT: Volcanoes whether undersea or land locked can do MORE devastation to the climate than mankind ever could.

Why isn't Gore trying to get those polluting mother fuckers plugged up?

[mrboxleytheonly]

FACT: your wrong, if they pollute so much? how come they are needed to terraform something?

[mileskodama]

Umm, the world's oceans aren't going to become more acidic. Yeah, that place with carbon dioxide bubbling through water is going to create carbonic acid, but it is impossible to lower the pH of the rest of the world's oceans.

In simple, if water has more C02, more plants are going to grow in the water and use it up. On top of that, all the calcium in the ocean(many types of sand are made of calcium) acts like a buffer to neutralize any acids.

[8u77355]

ok who knows more, the scientists who made the video and specifically study this? or some guy who thinks he knows everything on youtube???? you decide

[MonokuroBooHokKan]

Like the trees eating c02, too bad we cut em up and now we get global warming.

[Weohweohweohwe]

Cool

[AnthraxMuffin]

K but whats the actual differance between acid and alkali?

[ccaptorchen]

many difference. generally acid is sour and alkali is bitter, acids near 1 tend to burn your skin off while base does not.

[yedrellow]

Actually, highly basic substances such as Sodium Hydroxide can burn your skin off.

[ccaptorchen]

you are prob right, since I had to handle them with protective gear =P

[chris3443]

"How does this effect marine life?"

Shouldn't scientists know the difference between "affect" and "effect"?

[clevername333]

The eruption of Mt. Saint Hellens released as much CO2 as the past 75 years of industrial human CO2. Stop falling for this propaganda. Pollution is an important issue, but it has been perverted for profit and control. Say hello to your new global carbon tax. A tax on life.

[Walabio]

I call you on your bullshit. That is a lie: USGS: Sulfur Dioxide per year: Volcanoes: 15 million tons (00.75%) Humans: 200 million tons (99.25%) Carbon Dioxide per year: Volcanoes: 200 million tons (00.8%) Humans: 26 Billion tons (26,000 Million tons (99.2%)) You are a lying piece of shit.

[clevername333]

Well, hmmm. 99.2 percent of what? Humans only contribute about 6 percent annually to the total CO2 emissions. This is based on the UN's information which is a bit skewed towards the high side. Other agencies cite less. Also you are giving figures for the annual volcanic output, not an eruption event.

Please try to keep the debate civil. Insults only serve to reduce the level of discourse.

[adrastea99]

He called u on it man. You've been pwned pretty hard, you might want to sit down.

[clevername333]

Dear Adrastea99,

In what regard have I been pwned? Can you elaborate on which aspect of his rebuttal attributed to this pwnage?

Seriously, I am only talking about numbers here. Keep it civil and on topic. If there is information refuting my points, please debate me. I am open to all points of view.

[adrastea99]

Youre asking me to explain? Too dumb to figure it out?

Dude, double pwn.

Wanna go for triple?

[Walabio]

> "Well, hmmm. 99.2 percent of what? Humans only contribute about 6 percent annually to the total CO2 emissions."

¡Oh please! ¿What is the other 94%? The point is we out produce the volcanoes.

> "Also you are giving figures for the annual volcanic output, not an eruption event."

Annual output includes many volcanic events. Mount Saint Helens was not that big anyway. Now, Krakatoa and Tambora are real volcanoes. Yellowstone is even bigger, but it only erupts every few hundred thousand years.

[jasong19711]

n the year following the eruption, average global temperatures fell by as much as 1.2 degrees Celsius. Weather patterns continued to be chaotic for years, and temperatures did not return to normal until 1888.

[jasong19711]

The eruption injected an unusually large amount of sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas high into the stratosphere which was subsequently transported by high-level winds all over the planet. This led to a global increase in sulfurous acid (H2SO3) concentration in high-level cirrus clouds. The resulting increase in cloud reflectivity (or albedo) would reflect more incoming light from the sun than usual, and cool the entire planet until the suspended sulfur fell to the ground as acid precipitation.[9]

[jasong19711]

Walabio (22 hours ago)----If you DOUBT this, then read about what happened when Mount Krakatoa blew its top back in 1883.

[Walabio]

¡That is nothing!:

When Tambora erupted in 1815, it directly killed 10,000 people. The effects of ashfall killed about 100,000 Indonesians within a year. The Volcanic Winter killed million of people via famine and disease (typhus & cholera) worldwide. 1816 became known as "The Year Without A Summer".

1810s is one of the coldest decades of the last thousand years due to Tambora and other eruptions.

[CO2Junkie]

clevername: Humans have dug up almost 1,000 Mt St Helens worth of coal and burned it. Not to mention, we have burned up about 1 trillion barrels of oil in the past 100 years. Oil & coal are a tax on life... but of course you're probably not counting the negative externalities.

[clevername333]

Not sure you statement on humans burning 1000 Mt St Helens worth of CO2 is entirely accurate. In light of the hard numbers it is hard to take the statement seriously.

Oil and coal are a tax on life?  That does not really make sense. Can you elaborate please?

In regards to negative externalities. Please do not make assumptions on my views on any topic. Not even sure what you mean specifically. If you are interested in my point of view on any topic, please just ask. :)

[CO2Junkie]

It was a test to show how ignorant you are. If you had an adequate education you would know what a negative externality is. Anyone educated, when talking about taxes should KNOW what a negative externality is. It's microeconomics 101. There is absolutely no abiguity whatsoever in the term. You need to go back to school son & stop thinking you can disprove climate change via epistemology... As in, you're not relying on empiricism.

[clevername333]

Well CO2 Junkie...

You seam much more interested in ego and insults rather than tackling any of the points I have made based on facts and numbers.

Honestly, insults are more indicative of your own personal insecurities rather than my presumed (and tested ;) intellectual short comings.

My very best wishes on your personal search for truth.

[CO2Junkie]

Aw you poor wittle guy. I hurt you? So sowwy... Insecurity? No son. Did you even bother to look up 'negative externality'? Probably not huh? Instead you turn your argument to how I've been mean to you. This is what I'm talking about. Your arguments are emotional and they lack any empiricism. I'm not aiming to insult you (tease you sure). But your lack of education on the very topic you're talking about here is obvious. Prove me wrong & list the textbook negative externalities on oil/gas/taxes.

[xFlashbackxbrd]

I find your arguement shallow and pedantic. (I can use big words too.)

[samsun1975]

You lost is dude!

[icetrout2]

Carbon footprint tax.If ya fall for that one than boy do I have a deal for you-200 hector mushroom farm on the bottom of the Flat Earth:O

[samsun1975]

Natural carbon dioxide!

[CO2Junkie]

samsun: Meaning what?

[samsun1975]

Beginning of more earthquakes, more smogg, weather gething more warmer,

[buckamoona]

2100? wow NewScientist must have high hope for this world.... also ph of 7.8? ...thats not that acidic O_O

[CO2Junkie]

When you consider the size of the ocean that's a massive change. It takes an enormous amount of CO2 to make that big of a difference.

Slight pH changes can be the difference between life and death. For instance, a pH change of only 0.2 in your blood will kill you.

[swyft187]

What can an everyday normal guy do to help preserve the ocean's pH level?!?!

[OurHighSchoolLolTeam]

Don't drink coke!

It has a pH of 2.

[yedrellow]

Obviously the only rational thing that people like us can do is pour detergent in to the ocean.

[JohnDeBunkTest]

It is scary to realize how much we are changing the oceans, and how little we care, and how much our continued existence on the planet depends on us not

[sarahology]

I'm sure what the predictions are will end up worse. We consume so much, and our population is growing. Thanks for the enlightening, and eye-opening.

[LizzyAston]

alkacid

[AnthraxMuffin]

Weird accent

[TacosAgain]

...

Are you dumb?

[hartnell114]

from 8.2 to 7.9?

thats a decrease surely,i mean, even i can tell that one is less lmao, so it should infact be getting Better? not worse? ...April was months ago ¬¬

[newscientistvideo]

No, acidity is measured according to the pH scale, which is a little confusing the first time you see it.

Anything less than 7 is acid, with the lower numbers the most acid. 7 is neutral, then anything above 7 is alkali, with the higher numbers the most alkali.

A drop from 8.2 to 7.9 is a move from alkali to acid - you could either call it "more acid" or "less alkali".

[teemuruskeepaa]

If your group made this video, good script. You've improved your performance lately.

[newo1990]

u learn that in like, year 6 =P

[hartnell114]

so why doesnt it start from base 0?

[ccaptorchen]

the measurement starts from 1, which is the most acidic, decrease to 7 and anything after that is base, ( base was what the middle school science teacher call it anyways ) but yeah... seem like people come laugh at scientist only to look like a total moron... next time if you have a question skip the "LMAO"

[hartnell114]

I think we can thank Darwin for explaining evoloution about a hundered years ago for us :)

theyll get used to it,they will adapt

[Abbelin]

evolution is SOOO slow though, You'll kill off everything before it adapts to the new environment.

[hartnell114]

it depends i guess

[ThompsonSeedless]

Narration sucks bring back Saudrine, or whatever her name is!

[JDRyder15]

his name.

[ThompsonSeedless]

her name, the nasal voice of most videos is a woman i'm pretty sure, everyone thinks her voice is annoying except me

[ndjarnag]

wow, clever experiment.

[ellyn27]

o2 vents-- the real global warming terrorist

[AtheistCitizen]

except that the CO2 venting [not O2] are not said to have changed over any span, while Human 'venting' of various has grown exponentially over 4K yrs, from tiny to colossal. SO which is more plausible to explain change?

[zqueenbean]

Obviously, you do not read up on science in the Wall Street Journal. Good for you!

[AtheistCitizen]

& that;'s a rare event...there is a sporadic series of volcanic events. If one cites the american volcano then one should see if there is historic changes in the volcanism rates. Not likely, but one need check the historic record, rather than simply pick one's nose.

[Abbelin]

where do you get your information?

[soulhunger1]

I love these videos.