'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'And today's word is
Princeton's Word Net defines acidification thus:
For the hard of comprehension, that Anthony Watts and his commentary team, the first part is the important one. The process of becoming acid.
- acidification(noun)the process of becoming acid or being converted into an acid
You see, one of Anthony's biggest problems is that the oceans are not actually acidic. They are actually alkaline and one suggestion is that the term should be becoming less alkaline. But there is already a good and well worn word for that. It is acidification. Scientists all over the world understand. Perhaps retired TV weathermen don't.
I'm not sure if Anthony understands what is going on. pH levels in the ocean, according to Wikipedia, have decreased by a pH of 0.11 since pre-industrial times. That might not seem a lot, but in terms of hydrogen ion concentrations, which is really what pH is a measure of, there has been a scary increase of 28.8%. And if Watts isn't concerned by that, then perhaps he might remember that the ocean is a very big volume of water. My calculator goes into meltdown when it gets into the number of zeroes we'd have to put on the end of 6 if we wanted to write Avagadro's Constant and convert that to the actual number of particles involved. Let's not bother. It's very big.
By 2100, it is projected that the pH will be down to 7.824, a whopping 126.5% hydrogen ion concentration increase. It's hard to see that sort of change not affecting ecosystems.
Yes, Anthony, a pH of 7.8 isn't actually acid, but it is becoming more acidic compared to the current pH. Just because you don't like a word, doesn't make that word disappear in a puff of unsmoke and the world become just a little more like you would like it to be. The world doesn't work that way.
Where Anthony goes, the ducks walk into the echo chamber:
theOtherJohninCalifNo, the appropriate term would be cooling because freezing is a more precise process. Get with the language program, John.
Greg just decides to deny the evidence:
Marco, sadly, remembers his not so good chemistry education:
MarcosTim, on the other hand, spots a consporacy:
timspence10The Reverend (Methodist) Richard S Courtney BA (Open), DipPhil (Cambridge), Diploma (Bath) feels he has to contribute his four penn'orth:
ty vab hernenn dhivamm ! (Answers on a postcard to the usual address. The first correct answer to be drawn out of Willis Eschenbach's woolly hat will win a straight to Betamax copy of Monckton - The Movie, which should be available in time for Christmas, the perfect present for those people in the office you can't stand.)
Just in case we didn't know:
LatitudeOr we could just get a buy one get two free denials squeezed into one comment:
higley7Just to answer: first sentence - perhaps but it is happening.
Second sentence - and? Perhaps trilobites didn't care but plenty of humans do.
Third sentence: conspiracy ideation, and unevidenced claim.
|Trilobites not giving a stuff about ocean acidification|
Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.And this one is apt for Anthony Watts:
|Not real, just a funny not drawn by Tosh (from http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2013/01/19/saturday-morning-breakfast-cereal-editon/)|