Saturday, December 7, 2019

+Myth: Ocean Acidification Requires that an Ocean Becomes an Acid

The outline for this post is as follows:
  1. The Myth and Its Flaw
  2. Context and Analysis (divided into multiple sections)
  3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis
  4. References

This is the "+References" version of this post, which means that this post contains my full list of references and citations. If you would like an abbreviated and easier to read version, then please go to the "main version" version of this post.

References are cited as follows: "[#]", with "#" corresponding to the reference number given in the References section at the end of this post.

1.  The Myth and Its Flaw

The myth claims that ocean acidification occurs only if the oceans become an acid. And since the oceans have not become an acid, no ocean acidification occurred. Scientists recently began to mislead the public into thinking human-made (a.k.a. anthropogenic) ocean acidification occurred, because scientists wanted to illegitimately frighten people about environmental changes.

Proponents of this myth include the oil industry scientist [154] David Middleton [86; 148] of the blog WattsUpWithThat [86; 148], Patrick Moore [14, Executive Summary; 15], Ned Nikolov [100], Chip Knappenberger [329], Christopher Monckton [246, page 3], James Delingpole writing for The Spectator (Australia) [15; 313 - 315], Roger Helmer [35], Tim Ball [37], Kenneth Richard of the NoTricksZone blog [420], the Climatism blog [36], Matt Ridley of Quadrant [32; 33], Cliff Ollier of Quadrant [89], Principia Scientific International [31], and various contrarians on the Internet [18 - 29; 41; 42; 90 - 93; 136; 149 - 151; 156].

Other individuals rebutted this myth as well [32; 39, slide 6; 40, slide 28; 46, pages 133 and 134; 94; 313; 314; 395].

The myth's flaw: Acidification in science means an increase in acidity, which is measured in terms of an increased concentration of H+ (or H3O+) ions and a decrease in pH [48, page 400; 49; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 102; 153; 395]. So ocean acidification occurs when ocean pH decreases [5, page 170; 6, page vi; 7, page 391; 102; 153], regardless of whether or not the ocean becomes an acid with a pH below 7. If one claims otherwise by using dictionary definitions of "acidification", then one incorrectly assumes that dictionary definitions that reflect common usage must match what scientific terms mean in technical disciplines. Scientists', doctors', chemists' [47; 50 - 52; 53, page 282], climatologists' [5 - 7; 10; 34; 38; 62; 71; 72; 74; 80 - 83; 87; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 99; 101; 102 - 106; 108], etc. use of terms such as "acidification" and "acidosis" reflects standard technical terminology, not some malicious conspiracy to mislead and terrify the public.

Anthropogenic ocean acidification occurred [5; 6; 10; 62; 71; 72; 74; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 99; 101 - 106; 108; 146; 152; 153; 304 - 310; 312; 399], increasing ocean acidity by ~30% during the post-1750s industrial-era that continues to the present [6, page vi; 11, figure 3 on page 6232; 12, figure 1 on page 1; 80; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 132, page 1658; 133; 134; 304; 307 - 310]. The ocean acidification accelerated during the late 20th century [11, figure 3 on page 6232; 304; 307 - 309], leading to a ~13% or more increase in acidity since the 1990s [9; 10; 11, figure 3 on page 6232; 74; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 103 - 106; 108; 146; 152; 304; 305; 312; 399, page SPM-6]. During this post-1990 period, ocean de-oxygenation also continued [101; 332 - 338; 399, page SPM-6; 400; 401], ice melted across the globe [257; 369 - 388; 391; 399, page SPM-6], and a human-made mass extinction progressed [98; 121 - 131; 402]. Moreover, sea level rose [339 - 341; 359 - 368; 389, figure 3 on page 8, citing 340; 390; 399, page SPM-6], and the Earth's surface warmed [249 - 262; 342 - 358; 399, page SPM-6] (including warming of the oceans [346 - 356; 399, page SPM-6]), at a rate predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as discussed in "Myth: The IPCC's 1990 Report Over-estimated Greenhouse-gas-induced Global Warming".

(Note: section 2.1 below covers the science rebutting the myth, while supplementary sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 dismantle the paranoid, conspiracist reasoning myth defenders use to prop up the myth. So section 2.1 serves as the main rebuttal of the myth, while the supplementary sections are just for those interested in understanding flaws in deluded, denialist reasoning.)

2. Context and Analysis

Section 2.1: What "acidification" means in science, and what this means for observed ocean acidification

The discipline of chemistry includes at least three main definitions of chemicals as acids and bases [1, pages 169, 738, and 751; 2 - 4; 84, page 284]:
  1. Arrhenius' definition: Acids form H+ ions (also known as a protons or hydrogen ions) in water and bases produce OH- ions (also known as hydroxide ions) in water.
  2. Brønsted + Lowry's definition: Acids donate an H+ ion and bases accept an H+ ion.
  3. Lewis' definition: Acids accept electrons and bases donate electrons.

The Brønsted-Lowry definition is the most pertinent definition for this blogpost. On the Brønsted-Lowry definition, acidity is determined by the concentration of H+ ions [1, page 758; 3; 84, page 284]. This makes sense since acids donate an H+ ion and thus increase acidity, with stronger acids donating more H+ ions more readily [1, pages 776 and 777; 3; 84, page 284]. In water-based solutions (also known as aqueous solutions), H2O often binds to available H+ ions, forming H3O+. So H3O+ concentration can be used as a surrogate for H+ concentration in aqueous solutions [1, page 758; 3]. H+ concentration is also related to the pH, where pH is the negative logarithm of H+ concentration (pH = -log[H+]). Thus decreasing pH means increasing H+ (H3O+) concentration. An acid solution has a pH below 7 and base solution has pH above 7 [1, pages 759 - 761; 3].

So taken together, this means that increased acidity involves:
  • increasing concentration of H+ (or H3O+)
  • decreasing pH
Since pH is a logarithmic scale, each pH change of 1 represents a 10-fold change in H+ concentration and therefore a 10-fold change in acidity [1, page 759 - 761; 3]. So a solution with a pH of 5 is ten times more acidic than a solution with a pH of 6.

In science, increased acidity means "acidification" [48, page 400; 49; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 102; 153; 395]. For example, take the example of blood acidification. Blood pH is normally around 7.40 [47; 50, figure 1 on page 28; 52, table 1; 54, page 5; 55, figure 2 on page 486; 95, page 367; 96, page 19]. Since blood is a buffered solution, blood resists pH changes within a range of pH values [50; 52 - 54]. Despite this, blood pH can still change under duress; acidosis or acidemia involves blood pH dropping (that is: acidifying) to below 7.30 or 7.35 [48, page 400; 49; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 102; 153; 395], and occurs in various organisms [47 - 56; 95; 96], including humans [48 - 51; 54 - 56; 95; 96]. So a blood pH of 7.05 qualifies as acidosis, even though blood pH is above 7 and thus the blood is not an acid [48, page 400; 49; 50, page 26; 52; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 395].

Blood is not the only buffered, aqueous solution to which this applies; the point extends to rain and oceans as well. Acid rain forms when compounds such as SO2 (sulphur dioxide) enter rainwater, generating acids that make the rainwater more acidic [1, pages 239, 240, and 1069; 57 - 60]. Industrial processes produced this SO2 [1, pages 239, 240, and 1069; 57 - 60], just as human industry produced CO2 (carbon dioxide) [61; 62, page 2; 63 - 65]. So human industry released greenhouse gases such as CO2 [61; 62, page 2; 63 - 65; 88, figure 6], causing a near-exponential increase in atmospheric CO2 levels [66 - 68; 69, page 3; 88, figure 6] to the highest levels in at least 2 million years [392 - 394; 407; 408; 410; 419, pages 11, 31, 53, 133, and 151] and at a rate not seen for tens of millions of years [67; 70; 107; 133; 409]. This increase in atmospheric CO2 drove some CO2 from the atmosphere into the non-CO2-saturated oceans, as per Henry's law [5; 6; 62 - 64; 71 - 80; 88, figure 6; 146] (for further discussion of this, see section 2.8 of "Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation"). This CO2 uptake by the oceans forms acidic compounds that result in ocean acidification [5; 6; 10; 62; 71; 72; 74; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 99; 101 - 106; 108; 146; 152; 153; 304 - 310; 312]. 

Figure 1 below depicts recent ocean acidification in a particular region, in conjunction with increased CO2 levels in both the ocean and the atmosphere:

Figure 1:  Ocean surface pH, ocean CO2 levels (pCO2), and atmospheric CO2 levels at the noted locations in the north Pacific. This image is taken from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website [9], adapted from another paper [5, figure 1a on page 171], and with another paper cited as the data reference [10].

Other sources discuss ocean pH changes at various depths below the ocean surface [10; 146; 152; 153; 305].

While ocean acidification involves a decrease in ocean pH [5, page 170; 6, page vi; 7, page 391; 102; 153], ocean alkalinization comes with an increase in ocean pH [81 - 83]. Discussion of water alkalinization in the scientific literature dates back to at least 1985 [85, page 118]. Similarly, alkalosis or alkalemia [47; 50 - 52; 54; 95; 96] involves an increase in blood pH to above 7.45 [95, page 367; 96, page 19], just as acidosis involves a decrease in blood pH to below 7.30 or 7.35 [48, page 400; 49; 50, page 26; 52; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19]. In addition to the aforementioned terminology, scientists use the word "hypercapnia" to discuss CO2 increases in the context of acidification of both blood [142 - 144] and oceans [137 - 141]. Thus scientists are fairly consistent in their "acidification" / "alkanization" terminology across scientific disciplines when discussing aqueous solutions, though scientists may use alternative definitions when discussing acidification in other topics, such as soils [84, page 288].

So just as doctors, biochemists, etc. refer to blood acidification (acidosis) from excess CO2 dissolving in blood [47; 50 - 52; 53, page 282], ocean biologists, climatologists, etc. discuss ocean acidification [5 - 7; 10; 34; 38; 62; 71; 72; 74; 80 - 83; 87; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 99; 101; 102 - 106; 108; 152; 153] from excess CO2 dissolving in the oceans [5; 6; 10; 62; 71; 72; 74; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 99; 101 - 106; 108; 146; 152; 153; 304 - 310; 312], and have done so since at least 1977 [7, page 391]. For instance:

"Ocean CO2 uptake, however, is not benign; it causes pH reductions and alterations in fundamental chemical balances that together are commonly referred to as ocean acidification [5, page 170]."

"The oceans are absorbing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and this is causing chemical changes by making them more acidic (that is, decreasing the pH of the oceans) [6, page vi]." 

"Another mechanism that might remove excess CO2 is dissolution of near-surface carbonate sediments due to acidification of the seawater by the higher CO2 concentration (see below), which would correspond to a lower apparent buffer factor [7, page 391]."

"The deep sea will be gradually “acidified” by the downward mixing of surface water enriched in fossil fuel CO2 [...] [145, page 340]."

This rebuts denialists [86; 148 - 151], such as the oil industry scientist David Middleton [154] of the contrarian blog WattsUpWithThat [86; 148], who peddle the fabricated claim that scientists invented the term "ocean acidification" out of thin air in 2003 in order to scare people.

Increases in greenhouse gases such as CO2 also caused ocean acidificationglobal warming, sea level rise, and ice melt in the distant past, along with ocean de-oxygenation, contributing to mass extinctions [109, table 2 on page 549; 110 - 115; 117 - 120; 421]. This has pertinent implications [111; 112; 117; 118; 421] for the current anthropogenic mass extinction [98; 116; 121 - 131; 402], which also came with a near-exponential increase in atmospheric CO2 to the highest levels in at least 2 million years [392 - 394; 407; 408; 410; 419, pages 11, 31, 53, 133, and 151] and at a rate not seen for tens of millions of years [67; 70; 107; 133]. Along with this CO2 increase came ocean acidification [5; 6; 10; 62; 71; 72; 74; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 99; 101 - 106; 108; 146; 152; 153; 304 - 310; 312; 399, page SPM-6], ocean de-oxygenation [101; 332 - 338; 399, page SPM-6; 400; 401], global warming [249 - 262; 342 - 358; 399, page SPM-6] (including warming of the oceans [346 - 356; 399, page SPM-6]), sea level rise [339 - 341; 359 - 368; 389, figure 3 on page 8, citing 340; 390; 399, page SPM-6], and ice melt [257; 369 - 388; 391; 399, page SPM-6] (for further discussion, see section 2.2 of "Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation"). So CO2-induced ocean acidification negatively impacted various organisms in the distant past, recently, and for the foreseeable future [6, section 3 on pages 15 - 24; 30; 34; 38; 87; 101; 147; 155; 316]

During the recent post-1750s industrial-era that continues to the present, ocean pH dropped by about 0.1, representing a ~30% increase in ocean acidity [6, page vi; 11, figure 3 on page 6232; 12, figure 1 on page 1; 80; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 132, page 1658; 133; 134; 304; 307 - 310]. The contrarian Judith Curry manufactures false doubt [13] about this well-established [6, page vi; 11, figure 3 on page 6232; 12, figure 1 on page 1; 80; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 132, page 1658; 133; 134; 304; 307 - 310] ~30% increase. The calculation for this increase is relatively simple, though a particularly petulant myth proponent struggles with this junior-high-school-level calculation [43; 45; 135]. Below is an illustration of how to do this calculation [44; 135; 395]:
  1. pH  =  -log[H+]
  2. Given point 1, for a pH of 8.2  :  [H+] = 10 ^ -8.2  =  6.3e-9 moles/liter
  3. Given point 1, for a pH of 8.1  :  [H+] = 10 ^ -8.1  =  7.9e-9 moles/liter
  4. 7.9e-9  /  6.3e-9  =  1.26
  5. Given point 4, a ~26% acidity increase occurs for pH decrease from 8.2 to 8.1
  6. Rounding ~26% to the nearest tens of a percent yields a 30% acidity increase

The calculation can be modified to:
  • 10 ^ (-X)  =  Y
where X is the change in pH, and Y is the corresponding fold-change in acidity. So, for example, a decrease in pH from 8.2 to 8.1 would be a decrease in pH of 0.1, giving an X on -0.1, a corresponding Y of 1.26, and thus a 26% increase in acidity. As noted previously, this represents the increase in ocean surface acidity during the post-1750s industrial-era that continues to the present [6, page vi; 11, figure 3 on page 6232; 12, figure 1 on page 1; 80; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 132, page 1658; 133; 134; 304; 307 - 310]. This increase accelerated during the late 20th century [11, figure 3 on page 6232; 304; 307 - 309], resulting in a ~13% or more increase in acidity since the 1990s [9; 10; 11, figure 3 on page 6232; 74; 97, table 1 on page 7178; 103 - 106; 108; 146; 152; 304; 305; 312; 399, page SPM-6].

Figure 2 shows increased ocean acidity globally since the 1990s, while figure 3 illustrates model-based projections of near-future ocean acidification under different scenarios for anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases such as CO2:

Figure 2: Relative change in average ocean surface pH globally from 1990 to 2018. The solid red line represents the pH relative to a baseline of the average pH from 1990-2010. The red shaded area depicts the standard deviation range (+/- 1σ), while the red dotted lines on the far-left and far-right depict the long-term trend in pH. The number on the top-right is the slope of the dotted line (i.e. the rate of ocean acidification), with "±" indicating the 95% confidence interval [105].

This ~0.052 decrease in pH from 1990-2018 represents a ~13% increase in ocean surface acidity in 29 years, as per the acidity calculation discussed earlier in this section.

Figure 3: 1870-2100 modeled decrease in ocean surface relative pH over the historical period, and under various future greenhouse gas emission scenarios. The pH is relative to a baseline of the average pH from 1990-1999. The RCPs (representative concentration pathways) reflect different emissions scenarios, with RCP 2.6 having the lowest level of greenhouse gas emissions, RCP 4.5 having greater emissions, then RCP 6.0, and finally RCP 8.5. The numbers in parentheses represent the number of climate models used in the corresponding estimate [11, figure 3 on page 6232; 12, figure 1 on page 1; 311, figure 4 on page 113].

Based on the acidity calculation discussed earlier in this section, the depicted historical change in pH constitutes a ~25% increase in acidity from 1870 to the early 21st century. The RCP 2.6, RCP 4.5, RCP 6.0, and RCP 8.5 scenarios have the following increases in acidity from the early 21st century to 2100: ~10%, ~33%, ~59%, and ~110%, respectively.

At this point, one might object that the ocean pH decreases in figures 1, 2, and 3 do not qualify as ocean acidification, since the oceans did not become acids with a pH of less than 7. One might also then claim that scientists misled the public when they discussed ocean acidification, likely in an attempt to unjustifiably scare the public about the environmental effects of anthropogenic CO2 [14, Executive Summary; 15; 18 - 29; 31 - 33; 35 - 37; 41; 42; 86; 89 - 93; 100; 136; 148 - 151; 156]. This line of objection is the myth this blogpost focuses on. 

The central, scientific portion of the myth fails since ocean acidification does not require that the oceans become an acid with a pH of less than 7, as covered in this section. To give an analogy [395]: "cooler" means decreasing temperature, and "warmer" means increasing temperature. One can also use the term "cool" to refer to objects below a given temperature, while using the term "warm" to refer to objects above a given temperature. But that is still compatible with a warm object cooling (ex: warm water getting cooler) and a cool object warming. Similarly, "acidifying" means decreasing pH / increasing acidity [48, page 400; 49; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 102; 153; 395], and "alkalizing" means increasing pH / decreasing acidity. One can also use the term "acid" to refer to objects below a pH of 7, while using the term "base" or "alkaline" to refer to objects above a pH of 7. But that is still compatible with a base acidifying and an acid alkalizing. Therefore, an ocean can acidify while remaining a base with a pH above 7. The same point applies to acidifying blood, as per the aforementioned acidosis [48, page 400; 49; 50, page 26; 52; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 395].

In addition to this 'warm object cooling' example, one can make the same point with other comparisons, such as a 'young people aging'. The general point is that something of one side of a scale (ex: a base on the high end of the pH scale, a young person on the low end of the age scale, etc.) can shift towards the other end of the scale; one refers to that shift using terms such as "acidifying", "cooling", and "aging". The myth falls afoul of this point, and is thus akin on par with saying only cool objects can cool. So let's close with an illustration of what myth proponents engage in when they misrepresent CO2-induced ocean acidification in order to avoid policies/regulations on CO2-producing industries:

"Air Traffic Control: Six-Niner-Charlie, lower your altitude by five thousand feet!

Pilot: But I'm not low.  I'm 38,000 feet in the air!  You mean make less high.

ATC: ...

Pilot: *Crashes into oncoming plane* [418]"

This concludes section 2.1's discussion of the scientific flaws in the myth. Supplementary sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 will cover other flaws in the paranoid reasoning underlying the myth. If you are not interested in responses to the deluded, denialist reasoning myth defenders resort to, then there is no need to read the supplementary sections.

Supplementary section 2.2: Myth proponents confuse common usage with technical usage

Take the following dictionary definitions of "acidification" or "acidify":

"the action or process of making or becoming acidic [413]"

"To acidify something is to chemically turn it into an acid or make it more acidic [414]."

These dictionary definitions fit with section 2.1's point that making a solution more acidic (by decreasing its pH) suffices for acidification. Myth proponents, however, sometimes defend their position by citing other dictionary definitions of "acidification [19; 20; 92; 93]," such as:

Definition of acidify
acidified; acidifying
transitive verb
1 : to make acid
2 : to convert into an acid
— acidification [8]" 

Yet this same dictionary cites multiple examples of acidification being used to refer to ocean acidification and decreased pH:

cent Examples of acidify from the Web
But even as seas are rising, coral reefs around the world have been suffering from severe bleaching events, and are also weakened further by acidifying oceans.
Organic matter will lower the pH (that is, acidify it) and hold moisture and nutrients in sandy soil, or break up claylike soil.
Oceans acidified and heated up to the temperature of bathtubs [8]."

So though myth proponents rely on dictionaries, many dictionaries [8; 297 - 301; 414] cite myth-rebutting examples as instances of how terms such as "acidification" and "acidifying" are used. 

But there is a larger problem here: dictionaries reflect common usage of a term, which often does not match the technical/scientific usage of a term. A classic example of this is creationists claiming that evolution is just a theory, while using a dictionary definition of "theory" as meaning something like "educated guess". Theory may often mean "educated guess" in everyday life, but that is not what it means in science. In science, theory is one of the highest, if not the highest, position an idea can reach, once the idea becomes a comprehensive explanation supported large amounts of evidence. Evolutionary theory is a theory in this scientific sense [157 - 159], as are cell theory, germ theory, Einstein's theory of relativity, gravitational theory, and the theory of plate tectonics.

So just as "theory" does not mean the same thing in science as it means in everyday life [157 - 159; 416, page 1 (with 417)], "acidification" need not mean the same thing in science as it sometimes means in everyday life. A similar point applies to other scientific terms, such as the meaning of "flavor" in particle physics [302; 303] (hint: it is not about how a particle tastes). Since dictionaries often reflect everyday, common usage, dictionaries are not the best guide to what terms mean in science [157 - 159]. Instead one should rely on technical/scientific sources, such as those cited in section 2.1 with respect to what "acidification" means. Yet as previously noted, even if one still chose to rely on dictionaries, there are dictionaries that use "acidification" to refer to ocean acidification [8; 297 - 301; 414] and that allow increasing acidity (via decreasing pH) to qualify as acidification [413; 414]. So the myth would still fail.

Despite the aforementioned points on common usage vs. technical usage, one might still be tempted to use non-expert guessing to determine the meaning of scientific terms. For instance, one might defend the myth by saying that the meaning of a term can be revealed just by looking at the term's structure. So since "acidification" comes from "acidify", which contains the word "acid", then "acidification" must mean become an acid. But this line of argument fails, since in science, the "acid" in "acidify" applies in the context of "becoming more acidic due to decreasing pH", not "becoming an acid".

Moreover, one often cannot read the meaning of a term from the term's structure. Take the following example: based on word structure, one would think that Democrats and Republicans in the United States debate over a democracy vs. a republic as organizing principles. But that is not what the Democrats vs. Republican debate is about [160; 161]. "Democrat" and "Republican" have specific meanings in the technical disciplines of politics and public policy, and these meanings cannot be simply inferred from the structure of the terms "Democrat" and "Republican". 

This point applies not only to technical usage, but common usage as well. So, for instance, a denialist does not have to be someone who denies a well-evidenced claim. Refusing to accept the claim in the face of strong evidence suffices for denialism, as reflected in both technical sources [165; 166, page 1; 167; 168, pages 239 and 240; 169; 170, section 2; 171; 172, page 1; 173, section 5; 174; 175, section 6] and dictionaries of common usage [162 - 164], as per sections 2.1 of "Myth: Science Denialism is as Rampant Among Liberals as Among Conservatives". So the meaning of the term "denialism" (and the related term "denier") cannot be read off the term's structure, just as in the case of "Democrat" and "Republican". One instead needs to examine what those terms mean in the disciplines that use these terms. A parallel point applies of "ocean acidification": one cannot defend the myth simply by noting that the term contains the term "acid" and thus must mean "oceans become an acid".

Supplementary section 2.3: There is no malicious conspiracy behind scientists use of terms such as "(ocean) acidification"

Not only do myth advocates abuse language, but many of them also defend paranoid ideas about the scientific community. Hence the myth that scientists abuse the term "ocean acidification" in order to underhandedly scare the public regarding environmental effects [14, Executive Summary; 15; 18; 35 - 37; 41; 86; 89; 91; 136; 156; 246, page 3]. This amounts to a conspiracy theory, a tactic many science denialists use to avoid accepting evidence-based claims [165; 166; 170; 176 - 180; 411].

A conspiracy theory of this sort under-estimates the public's intelligence. Many people with access to the Internet (or a library) can look up what "ocean acidification" means in science. And members of the public with at least a high-school-level education in chemistry ought to know that "acidification" means "pH reduction / increased acidity" in science. Scientists likely know these points regarding public knowledge. So scientists would not ignorantly believe that they could use the term "acidification" to trick the public into thinking that the oceans became an acid. That is especially the case since scientists often tell the public that "acidification" means pH reduction / increased acidity [5, page 170; 6, page vi; 7, page 391; 48, page 400; 49; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 102; 153; 395], as shown in section 2.1. This leaves myth advocates in the absurd position of saying scientists want to mislead the public into thinking something that explicitly conflicts with what those same scientists repeatedly tell the public. Scientists would not get the public to believe a fabrication by repeatedly telling them true claims that debunk that fabrication

The myth proponents' position suffers from a further problem: the public would not be necessarily frightened by terms such as "acid". For example, many people know that citric acid is present in many tasty citrus fruits, that folic acid is a good molecule to ingest in moderate doses, that amino acids are crucial building blocks in the human body, that nucleic acids make up the DNA and RNA that is essential to human life, that the body uses fatty acids for energy, etc. So scientists, doctors, etc. are not involved in a malicious conspiracy to scare people by using terms such as amino acid and folic acid. Similarly, the myth fails when it assumes that scientists unfairly try to frighten people by abusing terms such as "ocean acidification".

In addition to under-estimating the public's intelligence, the myth's conspiracy theory also suffers from a number of the flaws I discuss in response to objection 1 in section 3.1 of "John Christy, Climate Models, and Long-term Tropospheric Warming". To see this, note that the myth's conspiracy would need to go back to at least 1977 [7, page 391] to cover every scientific discussion of ocean acidification. The conspiracy must also include a large number of scientists and scientific organizations who discuss ocean acidification and ocean alkanization. And the conspiracy needs to include biochemists, doctors, etc. who discuss alkalosis [47; 50 - 52; 54; 95; 96] and acidosis [48, page 400; 49; 53, page 275; 55, 56, page 528; 95, page 367; 96, page 19; 102; 153; 395], since those individuals support the conspiracy by accepting that acidification does not require that an aqueous solution becomes an acid (as I discussed in section 2.1). These scientists must have also maintained the conspiracy by saying that excess CO2 dissolves in blood to cause acidosis [142 - 144], paving the way for climate scientists, ocean biologists, etc. to claim that excess CO2 dissolves in oceans to cause ocean acidification [137 - 141]

By 1915, this CO2-induced acidosis was so well-known that medical scientists called it a familiar condition [47, page 89]. Thus the medical scientists engaged in the conspiracy by at least 1915, less than 20 years after the scientist Arrhenius proposed in 1896 that increased amounts of CO2 would cause large amounts of warming [181, page 1328; 182; 183, page 68]. So the myth implicitly posits a complex conspiracy of a large number of scientists from diverse fields spanning at least 104 years, beginning near the early stages of the science on CO2-induced climate change

Such a conspiracy is very unlikely to exist, since conspiracies become more difficult to maintain the longer they continue and the more people they include [184; 185]. In contrast to this ad hoc conspiracy theory, section 2.1 and supplementary section 2.2 offered a more parsimonious, evidence-based explanation: scientific experts correctly used "acidification" to mean "increased acidity" in science, while myth proponents applied their own uninformed, non-expert misconceptions about what this scientific terminology meant. The myth advocates' conspiracy theory just allows them to feel better about themselves, as having access to special insight lacked by the wider public; this represents a common psychological need among many conspiracy theorists [186 - 189].

Supplementary section 2.4: Why ideologically-motivated myth proponents will likely stand by the myth, even in the face of contrary evidence and rebuttals

Many myth advocates also use logic that can be turned against the advocates' own position, as per the response to objection 1 in section 3.1 of "John Christy, Climate Models, and Long-term Tropospheric Warming". For instance, the myth proponents' paranoid conspiracy theory includes doctors, medical scientists, and other experts that myth proponents likely rely on other topics; so their conspiracy theory amounts to special pleading / a double standard regarding which scientists to trust [165; 166; 169; 179, pages 203, 207, 213, 216, and 217; 190 - 192; 193, from 10:11 to 14:31; 194 - 196; 245; 411; 412]. And just as many myth advocates accuse scientists of malicious intent with respect to ocean acidification [14, Executive Summary; 15; 18; 35 - 37; 41; 86; 89; 91; 136; 156; 246, page 3], one could accuse myth proponents of malicious intent with respect to their distortion of the term "ocean acidification". Maybe many myth proponents want to confuse the public on this aspect of CO2-induced, anthropogenic climate climate, because either:
  1. many myth proponents wish to avoid certain policy responses to anthropogenic climate change, and/or
  2. many myth proponents think humans cannot detrimentally affect the climate God creates, and that the science on anthropogenic climate change is associated with nature worship?

Unlike the myth proponents' evidence-free conspiracy theory, there is scientific evidence showing that many people object to climate science for these religious [197 - 202; 203, from 6:21 to 7:24] and political reasons [197; 204; 205; 206, from 10:52 to 21:42; 207 - 212; 213, page 1; 406]. This results in a negative correlation in the US between political conservatism vs. trusting climate scientists and accepting various scientific claims regarding climatology [204; 207; 211; 214, figure 2; 215 - 227; 406], as discussed in sections 2.1 and 2.2 of "Myth: Science Denialism is as Rampant Among Liberals as Among Conservatives". It also results in a negative correlation between certain religious positions vs. environmental concern and accepting various scientific claims regarding climatology [214, figure 1; 215; 227 - 232]. So the myth proponents' motive-based critique more likely applies to myth advocates than to the scientists myth proponents criticize. It also helps explain why myth advocates may stand by the myth, even in the face of evidence debunking it.

Not only do myth defenders use self-undermining reasoning, but they will also likely defend their myth in unfalsifiable ways, as conspiracy theorists and science denialists often do [235, section 2.3.2]. In the conspiracy theorist's mind: 
  • Evidence against their conspiracy theory is actually evidence for their conspiracy theory, since the conspirators must have fabricated the contrary evidence [165; 166; 178; 185; 193; 195; 196; 235, section 2.3.2; 236 - 240; 411, page 23]. Accordingly, scientists fabricated when they discussed "acidification" as being pH reduction for decades (as per section 2.1).
  • Absence of evidence for the conspiracy theory is also evidence for the conspiracy theory, since the conspirators must have suppressed the evidence [165; 185; 238; 239; 411, page 23]. Thus scientists suppressed any scientific sources defining "acidification" as being "become an acid", and/or pressured scientists who might object to the terminology.
  • Baseless claims count as support for the conspiracy theory, even if the baseless claims come from uninformed people who contradict the evidence [165; 166; 169; 185; 193; 239]. So, for instance, the oil industry scientist David Middleton [154] must be right when he says climate scientists invented the term "ocean acidification" out of thin air in 2003 in order to scare people [86; 148], despite clear evidence that scientists were using such terms decades earlier [7, page 391; 145, page 340] (as per section 2.1).

Objecting to the conspiracy theory also means you are either part of the conspiracy or you are among the ignorant sheeple duped by the conspiracy [193; 236 - 238; 240; 245]. So I must be one of the sheeple duped by scientists on ocean acidification, or I am one of the scientists in the conspiracy. Furthermore, denialists often move the goalposts in order to avoid accepting evidence against their position [169], as will likely occur in response to the evidence I cited in section 2.1.

In these ways, the denialist offers an impossible burden of proof that no scientific research could ever meet [165; 166; 237; 238; 240; 411, page 23], and the denialist immunizes their position against falsification [235, section 2.3.2; 411, page 23]. I expect most (maybe even all) myth proponents will resort to these sorts of tactics in order to defend their myth in the face of the points I made. So I am under no illusion that I can convince committed myth defenders, anymore than I am under the illusion [165; 166, page 1; 167; 168, pages 239 and 240; 169; 170, section 2; 171; 172, page 1; 173, section 5; 174; 175, section 6; 411, page 23] that I can use evidence-based arguments to convince other paranoid science denialists, such as flat Earthers. It is instead enough for me to expose the flaws in the myth and in the myth advocates' position.

Supplementary section 2.5: How the contrarian Judith Curry uses false balance and other fallacious tactics to mislead people on ocean acidification

Contrarians [13 - 17; 45] such as Judith Curry [13] attempt to distort the science on ocean acidification. Curry offered her distortions [13] in response to 2013 congressional testimony from Scott Doney [263], an expert in ocean acidification who has numerous peer-reviewed scientific papers in the topic [5; 264 - 272]. Curry, who admits to having no expertise in the topic of ocean acidification, objected that when she did a word search through Doney's testimony, she did not find enough instances of the terms "uncertain," "disagreement," "debate," and, "unknown." So she performed a quick Google search [13].

Curry used this Google search to find [13] a document written by Craig Idso on ocean acidification [246], on behalf of the fossil-fuel-industry-funded [280 - 282] Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (a.k.a. CO2 Science). Idso, in contrast to Doney [5; 264 - 272], lacks expertise in ocean acidification, as illustrated by his lack of a significant number of peer-reviewed publications in this field [278], in reputable journals with substantial impact factors and listed in citation indices such as the Master Journal List [279]. Yet Curry still presents Idso's article as illustrating "another side to this story [13]" that conflicts with Doney's testimony [263], thereby (supposedly) reflecting uncertainty, disagreement, and debate [13].

Curry's therefore resorts [13] to a number of fallacious tactics often used by science denialists. One tactic involves manufacture of false doubt, where one exaggerates disagreement on a topic [166; 172; 173; 178; 179]. This tactic lacks merit since, as Curry herself notes [330; 331], some scientific points are so well-evidenced that they are beyond reasonable doubt, no matter how much one appeals to "uncertainty", "debate", or "uncertainty" to cast false doubt on those points. Moreover, doubt about one topic does not necessarily constitute grounds for doubt about a different topic [166; 233, pages 21 - 22 of chapter 1; 234, page 1]; I discuss this further in section 2.9 of "Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation". In section 2.5 of that post I also discuss how Craig Idso gave presentations for [283], and was paid by [284; 285, page 14], the fossil-fuel-industry-funded Heartland Institute [273 - 277; 321]; this is the same tobacco-industry-funded [273; 277; 286, page 244; 287 - 289] front organization [287; 291; 292] who's leader used fake experts to manufacture false doubt [290; 323; 324] regarding smoking's health risks [325 - 328]. Curry also receives funding from the fossil fuel industry [396 (cited by 397 and 398); 403 - 405]. 

This makes it rather telling that Curry employs [13] those same tactics with Heartland's Idso [283; 284; 285, page 14] to mislead the public on anthropogenic ocean acidification. And as mentioned above, another tactic used by denialists involves relying on non-peer-reviewed claims by fake experts who's claims contradict scientific evidence [165; 166; 172; 173, pages 3 - 4]; Curry does this on the topic of ocean acidification when she cites [13] Idso' CO2 Science work [246], and she does do habitually on other topics, as I discuss in "Myth: Judith Curry Fully and Accurately Represents Scientific Research". Curry also resorts [13] to false balance and false equivalence [179; 241; 242], where she acts as if both sides in a discussion are on par [13], when she compares Idso's CO2 Science article [246] to Doney's work on ocean acidification [5; 264 - 272]. This makes as little sense [168, page 244; 192; 243, page 712; 244] as saying AIDS denialists' non-peer-reviewed reports need to be taken as seriously as peer-reviewed, evidence-based claims from mainstream medicine, immunology, and virology.

To put the magnitude of Curry's cited distortion into context: the CO2 Science article [246] Curry cites [13] peddles no less than three fabrications within its first paragraph [246, page 3]. The article falsely [293; 294; 295, from 12:55 to 14:06; 296] claims there was a shift from the term "global warming" to "climate change" because global warming stopped [246, page 3]. Curry's [13] source [246, page 3] then follows that up by falsely stating that climate was changing no more than it ever had, a claim rebutted in sections 2.5 and 2.7 of  "Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation", along with figure 4 below:

Figure 4: Global surface temperature trend over the past 2000 years back to 1 CE, based on instrumental data (thermometers) and reconstructions from indirect, proxy measurements of temperature [247; 248]. The instrumental data extends from 1850 - 2017 [249, figure 1a]. Each trend covers a period of 51 years, stated in units of °C/century, and ends on the year given on the x-axis. The horizontal lines represent the upper range of pre-industrial (pre-1850) warming rates from reconstructions (solid green line) or calculated by climate models (dashed orange line).
This figure is a simplification [247; 248] of a previously published analysis [249, figure 4a].

Multiproxy analyses confirm the instrumental warming trend [250, figure 1c; 251 - 257; 415], as do other indirect measures that do not use thermometer data for air temperatures [252, figure 3; 253, figure 4; 258; 259, generated using 260, as per 261, with the re-analyses from 258 and 262]. For further discussion of industrial-era temperature trends relative to the distant past, see sections 2.5 and 2.7 of "Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation".

And the article [246, page 3] rounds out its first paragraph by advocating a form of the myth debunked in this blogpost: that scientists switched from the term "climate change" to "ocean acidification" in order to unjustifiably frighted people, even though anthropogenic increases in CO2 cannot cause ocean acidification. It is quite telling that Curry cites [13] this nonsense source [246] in order to offset Doney, a scientist who co-authored peer-reviewed, reputable papers on anthropogenic, CO2-induced ocean acidification [5; 264 - 272]. This seems surprising... until one remembers that Curry defends the Heartland Institute [318; 319] (with thanks from its leader [318; 320], who previously used fake experts to [290; 323; 324] mislead the public on smoking [325 - 328]), and her libertarian ideology [317] likely accords with Heartland's anti-regulation stance [275; 277; 321; 322]. So it makes sense that she would cite [13] an article [246] from Heartland's Idso [283; 284; 285, page 14].

(For more on the negative correlation in the US between politically conservative ideology vs. trusting climate scientists and accepting various scientific claims regarding climatology [204; 207; 211; 214, figure 2; 215 - 227], see sections 2.1 and 2.2 of "Myth: Science Denialism is as Rampant Among Liberals as Among Conservatives").

3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis

4. References

  1. Brady and Senese's: "Chemistry: Matter and its changes, 4th edition"
  2. "Understanding the relationship among Arrhenius, Brønsted–Lowry, and Lewis theories"
  3. Jensen's: "The Lewis acid-base definitions: A status report"
  5. "Ocean acidification: The other CO2 problem" [2009; doi: 10.1146/annurev.marine.010908.163834]
  6. "Ocean acidification due to increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide"
  7. "Predicting future atmospheric carbon dioxide levels"
  8. [as of May 17, 2018 ;]
  10. "Physical and biogeochemical modulation of ocean acidification in the central North Pacific"
  11. "Multiple stressors of ocean ecosystems in the 21st century: projections with CMIP5 models"
  12. "Ocean acidification" (DOI: 10.14465/2017.arc10.001-oac)
  13. []
  14. "Ocean acidification alarmism in perspective" []
  15. []
  16. []
  17. []
  19. []
  20. []
  22. []
  23. []
  24. []
  26. []
  27. []
  28. []
  30. "Ocean acidification affects marine chemical communication by changing structure and function of peptide signalling molecules"
  31. []
  32. []
  33. ("Taking fears of acid oceans with a grain of salt") []
  34. "Have we been underestimating the effects of ocean acidification in zooplankton?"
  35. []
  37. Tim Ball's: "Analysis of alarmism: ocean acidification" []
  38. "Reversal of ocean acidification enhances net coral reef calcification"
  39. (Richard Feely's: "Ocean acidification: The other CO2 problem")
  40. (Phil Williamson's: "Communicating ocean acidification & climate change")
  41. []
  42. []
  43. (Mark Pawelek; "This is a massive blunder by NOAA. It shatters my confidence in "climate scientists".") []
  44. []
  45. []
  46. "Climate change: Examining the facts"
  47. "The acid-base equilibria in the blood after parathyroidectomy"
  48. "Metformin-associated lactic acidosis: Case reports and literature review"
  49. "Metformin and lactic acidosis: cause or coincidence? A review of case reports"
  50. "Management of life-threatening acid–base disorders" (first of two parts)
  51. "Bench-to-bedside review: Carbon dioxide"
  52. "A quick reference on respiratory acidosis" (DOI: 10.1016/j.cvsm.2016.10.012)
  53. "Acidosis in cattle: A review"
  54. "Acid-base disorders in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a pathophysiological review"
  55. "Definition of clinically relevant lactic acidosis in patients with internal diseases"
  56. "Factors determining survival in patients with cardiac arrest"
  57. "Acid rain and its ecological consequences"
  58. "Effects of acid rain on freshwater ecosystems"
  59. "A fresh look at the benefits and costs of the US acid rain program"
  60. "Effects of acid precipitation on terrestrial ecosystems"
  61. "Annual global fossil-fuel carbon emissions - graphics"
  62. "Comment on “The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature” Humlum et al. [Glob. Planet. Change 100: 51–69.]: Isotopes ignored"
  63. "Comment on “The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature” by Humlum, Stordahl and Solheim"
  64. "Linking emissions of fossil fuel CO2 and other anthropogenic trace gases using atmospheric 14CO2"
  65. "Deep carbon emissions from volcanoes"
  66. "Atmospheric CO2 over the last 1000 years: A high-resolution record from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Divide ice core"
  67. "Cenozoic mean greenhouse gases and temperature changes with reference to the Anthropocene"
  68. "Climate change 2007: Working Group I: The physical science basis; FAQ 2.1: "How do human activities contribute to climate change and how do they compare with natural influences?"
  69. "Climate change 2014: Synthesis report; Summary for policymakers"
  70. "Anthropogenic carbon release rate unprecedented during the past 66 million years"
  71. "History of seawater carbonate chemistry, atmospheric CO2, and ocean acidification"
  72. "A time-series view of changing ocean chemistry due to ocean uptake of anthropogenic CO2 and ocean acidification"
  73. "The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2"
  74. "Detecting anthropogenic carbon dioxide uptake and ocean acidification in the North Atlantic Ocean"
  75. "Increase in observed net carbon dioxide uptake by land and oceans during the past 50 years"
  76. "Agreement of CMIP5 simulated and observed ocean anthropogenic CO2 uptake"
  77. "Global ocean carbon uptake: magnitude, variability and trends"
  78. "Trends in pCO2 and sea–air CO2 flux over the global open oceans for the last two decades" (summarized in "Global ocean carbon dioxide (CO2) uptake: Distribution and temporal variation")
  79. "Is the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions increasing?"
  80. "Studying ocean acidification with conservative, stable numerical schemes for nonequilibrium air-ocean exchange and ocean equilibrium chemistry"
  81. "Impacts of artificial ocean alkalinization on the carbon cycle and climate in Earth system simulations"
  82. "Assessing the potential of calcium-based artificial ocean alkalinization to mitigate rising atmospheric CO2 and ocean acidification"
  83. "Could artificial ocean alkalinization protect tropical coral ecosystems from ocean acidification?"
  84. "Acidification and alkalinization of soils" (DOI: 10.1007/BF02369968)
  85. "Acidification and alkalinization of lakes by experimental addition of nitrogen compounds"
  86. ["The relationship between CO2 and pH has been observed for a long time.  Why did they suddenly fabricate the phrase “ocean acidification” to describe this process?  Because “people” are almost as afraid of acid as they are of radiation. The phrase was literally invented out of thin air in 2003 by Ken Caldiera…" ;]
  87. "Meta-analysis reveals negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine organisms"
  88. "A revised 1000 year atmospheric δ13C‐CO2 record from Law Dome and South Pole, Antarctica"
  90. []
  95. "Could vital signs predict carbon monoxide intoxication?"
  96. "Acidosis and alkalosis" (DOI: 10.1016/S0031-3955(16)30757-X)
  97. "Decadal variability in seawater pH in the West Pacific: Evidence from coral d11B records"
  98. "Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines"
  99. "Current CaCO3 dissolution at the seafloor caused by anthropogenic CO2"
  100. (
  101. "Declining oxygen in the global ocean and coastal waters"
  103. "Ocean acidification off the south coast of Japan: A result from time series observations of CO2 parameters from 1994 to 2008"
  104. ["Ocean acidification in the western North Pacific";]
  105. ["Ocean acidification in the global ocean";]
  106. ["Ocean acidification in the interior of the western North Pacific;]
  107. "Temporal scaling of carbon emission and accumulation rates: Modern anthropogenic emissions compared to estimates of PETM onset accumulation"
  108. "Trends and drivers in global surface ocean pH over the past 3 decades"
  109. "Mass extinction events and the plant fossil record"
  110. "What caused Earth's largest mass extinction event? New evidence from the Permian-Triassic boundary in northeastern Utah"
  111. "Ocean acidification and the Permo-Triassic mass extinction"
  112. "End-Permian mass extinction in the oceans: An ancient analog for the twenty-first century?"
  113. "Climatic and biotic upheavals following the end-Permian mass extinction"
  114. "High-precision geochronology confirms voluminous magmatism before, during, and after Earth’s most severe extinction"
  115. "Global warming and the end-Permian extinction event: Proxy and modeling perspectives"
  116. "Accelerating extinction risk from climate change"
  117. "Temperature-dependent hypoxia explains biogeography and severity of end-Permian marine mass extinction"
  118. "Flood basalts and mass extinctions" [DOI: 10.1146/annurev-earth-053018-060136]
  119. "Systemic swings in end-Permian climate from Siberian Traps carbon and sulfur outgassing"
  120. "Initial pulse of Siberian Traps sills as the trigger of the end-Permian mass extinction"
  121. "Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction"
  122. "Could a potential Anthropocene mass extinction define a new geological period?"
  123. "Climate change and the past, present, and future of biotic interactions"
  124. "Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines"
  125. "Vertebrate biodiversity losses point to a sixth mass extinction"
  126. "Ecological selectivity of the emerging mass extinction in the oceans"
  127. "Has the Earth's sixth mass extinction already arrived?"
  128. "Climate-driven declines in arthropod abundance restructure a rainforest food web"
  129. "The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection"
  130. "Marine metazoan modern mass extinction: Improving predictions by integrating fossil, modern, and physiological data"
  131. "Current extinction rates of reptiles and amphibians"
  132. "Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability; Part B: Regional aspects; Chapter 30: The ocean"
  133. []
  134. []
  135. []
  136. []
  137. "Predicting the impact of ocean acidification on benthic biodiversity: What can animal physiology tell us?"
  138. "Future ocean acidification will be amplified by hypoxia in coastal habitats"
  139. "Future ocean hypercapnia driven by anthropogenic amplification of the natural CO2 cycle"
  140. "The influence of hypercapnia and the infaunal brittlestar Amphiura filiformis on sediment nutrient flux – will ocean acidification affect nutrient exchange?"
  141. "Utility of deep sea CO2 release experiments in understanding the biology of a high‐CO2 ocean: Effects of hypercapnia on deep sea meiofauna"
  142. "Acidosis induced by hypercapnia exaggerates ischemic brain damage"
  143. "Hypercapnic acidosis and mortality in acute lung injury"
  144. "Vasodilator effect of hypercapnic acidosis on human forearm blood vessels"
  145. "Neutralization of fossil fuel CO2 by marine calcium carbonate" (in: "The warming papers: The scientific foundation for the climate change forecast")
  146. "Rapid anthropogenic changes in CO2 and pH in the Atlantic Ocean: 2003–2014"
  147. "High risk of extinction of benthic foraminifera in this century due to ocean acidification"
  148. []
  149. ["The phrase “ocean acidification” was literally invented out of thin air in 2003 by Ken Caldeira, Ocean acidification is the biggest con since Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick";]
  150. []
  152. "Deep oceans may acidify faster than anticipated due to global warming"
  153. "Meridional overturning circulation conveys fast acidification to the deep Atlantic Ocean"
  154. []
  155. "Vulnerability and adaptation of US shellfisheries to ocean acidification"
  157. []
  158. []
  159. []
  165. "Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?"
  166. "How the growth of denialism undermines public health"
  167. "Commentary: Questioning the HIV-AIDS hypothesis: 30 years of dissent"
  168. "AIDS denialism and public health practice"
  169. "HIV denial in the internet era"
  170. "The ethics of belief, cognition, and climate change pseudoskepticism: Implications for public discourse"
  171. "Science denial: a guide for scientists"
  172. "Countering evidence denial and the promotion of pseudoscience in autism spectrum disorder"
  173. "Dealing with climate science denialism: experiences from confrontations with other forms of pseudoscience"
  174. "Commentary to: How to respond to vocal vaccine deniers in public"
  175. "Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015"
  176. "Relationships among conspiratorial beliefs, conservatism and climate scepticism across nations"
  177. "Climate change conspiracy theories" [DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.328]
  178. "Science denialism: Evolution and climate change"
  179. "Manufactured scientific controversy: Science, rhetoric, and public debate"
  180. "Advocating for vaccination in a climate of science denial"
  181. "The myth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus"
  182. "On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground" (alternative version here)
  183. "The idea of anthropogenic global climate change in the 20th century"
  184. "On the viability of conspiratorial beliefs" ["Correction: On the viability of conspiratorial beliefs"]
  185. "Conspiracy theories in science"
  186. "Too special to be duped: Need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs"
  187. "“I know things they don’t know!”: The role of need for uniqueness in belief in conspiracy theories"
  188. "Why conspiracy theories matter: A social psychological analysis"
  189. "Something’s going on here: Psychological predictors of belief in conspiracy theories"
  190. "A blind expert test of contrarian claims about climate data"
  191. "The importance of assessing and communicating scientific consensus"
  192. "Science and the public: Debate, denial, and skepticism"
  193. Youtube, potholer54's video: "Conspiracy theories conspiracy"
  194. Youtube, c0nc0rdance's video: "Intelligent Design and AIDS Denialism: What do they have in common?"
  195. "I’m a skeptic, and I love the flat-Earth movement"
  196. "Kyrie Irving’s “flat Earth” comments reveal the danger of science denial"
  197. "Why conservative Christians don’t believe in climate change"
  198. "Dobson, others seek ouster of NAE vice president"
  200. "Prominent signers of "An evangelical declaration on global warming"
  201. "An evangelical declaration on global warming"
  202. "Ralph Hall speaks out on climate change"
  203. Youtube, potholer54's video: "26 -- Science vs. the Feelies"
  204. "The influence of political ideology on trust in science"
  205. "As a conservative, evangelical Republican, why climate change can’t be True (even though it is)"
  206. Youtube, potholer54's video: "6 dumbest ideas politicians have about science"
  207. "Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change"
  208. "Challenging global warming as a social problem: An analysis of the conservative movement's counter-claims"
  209. "Regulating climate change: Not science denial, but regulation phobia"
  210. "The challenge of climate-change neoskepticism"
  211. "Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010"
  212. "The ideology of climate change denial in the United States"
  213. "Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions"
  214. "It’s not my consensus: Motivated reasoning and the sources of scientific illiteracy"
  215. "Conservative Protestantism and skepticism of scientists studying climate change"
  216. "A four-party view of US environmental concern"
  217. "Not all skepticism is equal: Exploring the ideological antecedents of science acceptance and rejection"
  218. "Trust in scientists on climate change and vaccines"
  224. "GSS 1972-2012 cumulative datafile" [Row is "GWSCI"; Column is "POLVIEWS(1-7)", Selection Filter(s) is "Year(2010)"]
  225. "The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public's views of global warming, 2001–2010"
  226. "Predictors of trust in the general science and climate science research of US federal agencies"
  227. "Weather, climate, politics, or God? Determinants of American public opinions toward global warming"
  228. "Examining links between religion, evolution views, and climate change skepticism"
  229. "Religion does matter for climate change attitudes and behavior"
  231. "An examination of the “Greening of Christianity” thesis among Americans, 1993–2010"
  232. "The role of religion in environmental attitudes"
  233. "Advancing the science of climate change (2010)"
  234. "The scientific challenge of understanding and estimating climate change"
  235. Rutjens et al.: "Attitudes towards science" (chapter in "Advances in experimental social psychology")
  236. "How bad ideas gain social traction"
  237. "What makes weird beliefs thrive? The epidemiology of pseudoscience"
  238. "Immunizing strategies and epistemic defense mechanisms"
  239. "Episode 49: Billy Meier, Michael Horn, and asteroid Apophis" []
  240. "How convenient! The epistemic rationale of self-validating belief systems"
  241. "Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press"
  242. "Public enemy No. 1? Understanding media representations of outlier views on climate change"
  243. "Climate change denial books and conservative think tanks: Exploring the connection"
  244. "Internet blogs, polar bears, and climate-change denial by proxy"
  245. Youtube, potholer54's video: "The Moon is Made of Cheese -- and other scientific conspiracies"
  246. ""Acid test: The global challenge of ocean acidification", A new propaganda film by The National Resources Defense Council fails the acid test of real world data"
  247. (
  248. [ ; image: [])
  249. "Consistent multidecadal variability in global temperature reconstructions and simulations over the Common Era" [figure 4a:]
  250. "Causes of climate change over the historical record"
  251. "Global warming in an independent record of the past 130 years"
  252. "Last Millennium Reanalysis with an expanded proxy database and seasonal proxy modeling" [data addition: "Additions to the Last Millennium Reanalysis Multi-Proxy Database"]
  253. "The last millennium climate reanalysis project: Framework and first results"
  254. "Early onset of industrial-era warming across the oceans and continents" ["Corrigendum: Early onset of industrial-era warming across the oceans and continents"]
  255. "A global multiproxy database for temperature reconstructions of the Common Era"
  256. "Reconstructing paleoclimate fields using online data assimilation with a linear inverse model"
  257. "Global and hemispheric temperature reconstruction from glacier length fluctuations"
  258. "Independent confirmation of global land warming without the use of station temperatures"
  259. []
  260. "Web-based Reanalysis Intercomparison Tool: Monthly/seasonal time series"
  261. "Web-Based Reanalysis Intercomparison Tools (WRIT) for analysis and comparison of reanalyses and other datasets"
  262. "ERA-20C: An atmospheric reanalysis of the twentieth century"
  263. (Written testinomy of Scott C. Doney, Hearing on "Climate change: It’s happening now" ; {})
  264. "Ocean acidification: Present conditions and future changes in a high-CO2 world"
  265. "The growing human footprint on coastal and open-ocean biogeochemistry"
  266. "Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organisms"
  267. "Impact of anthropogenic atmospheric nitrogen and sulfur deposition on ocean acidification and the inorganic carbon system"
  268. "Nutrition and income from molluscs today imply vulnerability to ocean acidification tomorrow"
  269. "Anticipating ocean acidification’s economic consequences for commercial fisheries"
  270. "Spatiotemporal variability and long-term trends of ocean acidification in the California Current System"
  271. "Ocean acidification: a critical emerging problem for the ocean sciences"
  272. "Will ocean acidification affect marine microbes?"
  273. []
  274. ("Smoke, mirrors & hot air: How ExxonMobil uses big tobacco’s tactics to manufacture uncertainty on climate science")
  275. ("Debunking the Heartland Institute’s efforts to deny climate science: A message from the National Center for Science Education")
  277. "The sceptic meets his match"
  280. []
  281. []
  282. []
  283. []
  284. []
  285. "When good arguments do not work: post-dialectics, argument assemblages, and the networks of climate skepticism"
  286. "Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming"
  287. "The Atlas Network: a “strategic ally” of the tobacco industry"
  289. []
  290. "Five lies about tobacco: The tobacco bill wasn't about kids" ("A fourth lie is that even moderate smoking is deadly. Several experts (including two who are very anti-smoking) have told me that smoking fewer than seven cigarettes a day does not raise a smoker's risk of lung cancer. When have you seen that fact reported in a newspaper or admitted by a public health official?" ; [])
  291. "The creation of industry front groups: the tobacco industry and “get government off our back”"
  292. "Industry front groups: a tobacco case study"
  293. "Polluted discourse: Communication and myths in a climate of denial"
  294. "“Global Warming” versus “Climate Change” and the influence of labeling on public perceptions"
  295. Youtube, potholer54's video: "26 -- Science vs. the Feelies"
  296. []
  297. []
  298. []
  299. [ ;]
  300. []
  301. []
  302. "Flavor physics constraints for physics beyond the standard model"
  303. "Flavor physics in the quark sector"
  304. "Surface ocean pH variations since 1689 CE and recent ocean acidification in the tropical South Pacific"
  305. "Rapid changes in anthropogenic carbon storage and ocean acidification in the intermediate layers of the Eurasian Arctic Ocean: 1996–2015"
  306. "The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2 from 1994 to 2007"
  307. "Acceleration of modern acidification in the South China Sea driven by anthropogenic CO2"
  308. "Coral records of reef-water pH across the central Great Barrier Reef, Australia: assessing the influence of river runoff on inshore reefs"
  309. "Evidence for ocean acidification in the Great Barrier Reef of Australia"
  310. "Ocean acidification trend in the tropical North Pacific since the mid-20th century reconstructed from a coral archive"
  311. "Historical and future trends in ocean climate and biogeochemistry"
  312. "Direct observations of basin‐wide acidification of the North Pacific Ocean"
  313. ["Two views of ocean acidification - which is fatally flawed?" ;]
  314. []
  315. []
  316. "Impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms: quantifying sensitivities and interaction with warming"
  317. []
  318. . []
  319. . []
  320. []
  321. "Heated debates and cooler heads: Think tanks and climate politics in the United States"
  322. "Challenging global warming as a social problem: An analysis of the conservative movement's counter-claims"
  323. []
  324. Youtube, Evidence Squared's video: "Heartland Institute's tobacco denial"
  325. "Health consequences of smoking 1–4 cigarettes per day"
  326. "Health effects of light and intermittent smoking: A review"
  327. "Association of long-term, low-intensity smoking with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in the National Institutes of Health–AARP Diet and Health Study"
  328. "Non-daily cigarette smokers: mortality risks in the US"
  329. []
  330. []
  331. []
  332. "Decline in global oceanic oxygen content during the past five decades"
  333. "Observed decreases in oxygen content of the global ocean"
  334. "Ocean deoxygenation in a warming world"
  335. "Global Ocean Oxygen Network 2018. The ocean is losing its breath: Declining oxygen in the world's ocean and coastal waters"
  336. "Upper ocean O2 trends: 1958–2015"
  337. "Drivers and mechanisms of ocean deoxygenation"
  338. "Anthropogenic ocean change: The consummate threat to marine mammal welfare"
  339. "Global sea level linked to global temperature"
  340. "Temperature-driven global sea-level variability in the Common Era"
  341. "Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era"
  342. "A limited role for unforced internal variability in 20th century warming"
  343. "Causes of irregularities in trends of global mean surface temperature since the late 19th century"
  344. "A fluctuation in surface temperature in historical context: reassessment and retrospective on the evidence"
  345. "The 'pause' in global warming in historical context: (II). Comparing models to observations"
  346. "Recent United Kingdom and global temperature variations"
  347. "A reassessment of temperature variations and trends from global reanalyses and monthly surface climatological datasets"
  348. "Assessing recent warming using instrumentally homogeneous sea surface temperature records"
  349. "Assessing the impact of satellite‐based observations in sea surface temperature trends"
  350. "A new compilation of globally gridded night‐time marine air temperatures: The UAHNMATv1 dataset"
  351. "Estimating biases in sea surface temperature records using coastal weather stations"
  352. "Improved estimates of ocean heat content from 1960 to 2015"
  353. "Industrial-era global ocean heat uptake doubles in recent decades"
  354. "How fast are the oceans warming?" [DOI: 10.1126/science.aav7619]
  355. "Global reconstruction of historical ocean heat storage and transport"
  356. "2018 continues record global ocean warming"
  357. "Insights into Earth’s energy imbalance from multiple sources"
  358. "Earth's energy imbalance measured from space"
  359. "Internal variability versus anthropogenic forcing on sea level and its components"
  360. "Quantifying anthropogenic and natural contributions to thermosteric sea level rise"
  361. "Anthropogenic forcing dominates sea level rise since 1850"
  362. "Anthropogenic forcing dominates global mean sea-level rise since 1970"
  363. "Detecting anthropogenic footprints in sea level rise"
  364. "Long-term sea level trends: Natural or anthropogenic?"
  365. "Detection and attribution of global mean thermosteric sea level change"
  366. "The rate of sea-level rise"
  367. "Model estimates of sea-level change due to anthropogenic impacts on terrestrial water storage"
  368. "Uncovering an anthropogenic sea-level rise signal in the Pacific Ocean"
  369. "Global glacier mass changes and their contributions to sea-level rise from 1961 to 2016"
  370. [; World Glacier Monitoring Service]
  371. "Historically unprecedented global glacier decline in the early 21st century"
  372. "The land ice contribution to sea level during the satellite era" ("Corrigendum: The land ice contribution to sea level during the satellite era (2018 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 063008)")
  373. "Accelerating changes in ice mass within Greenland, and the ice sheet’s sensitivity to atmospheric forcing"
  374. "Ice core records of West Greenland melt and climate forcing"
  375. "Nonlinear rise in Greenland runoff in response to post-industrial Arctic warming"
  376. "Greenland and Antarctica ice sheet mass changes and effects on global sea level"
  377. "Global sea-level contribution from Arctic land ice: 1971–2017"
  378. "Forty-six years of Greenland Ice Sheet mass balance from 1972 to 2018"
  379. "Mass balance of the Antarctic Ice Sheet from 1992 to 2017"
  380. "Four decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet mass balance from 1979–2017"
  381. "Comment on ‘Mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet exceed losses’ by H. J. Zwally and others"
  382. "Reconstructed changes in Arctic sea ice over the past 1,450 years"
  383. "Observed Arctic sea-ice loss directly follows anthropogenic CO2 emission"
  384. "Decreasing Arctic sea ice mirrors increasing CO2 on decadal time scale"
  385. "Attribution of Arctic sea ice decline from 1953 to 2012 to influences from natural, greenhouse gas, and anthropogenic aerosol forcing"
  386. "Observations reveal external driver for Arctic sea-ice retreat"
  387. "Global sea ice coverage from satellite data: Annual cycle and 35-yr trends"
  388. []
  389. "Global and regional sea level rise scenarios for the United States"
  390. "Climate related sea-level variations over the past two millennia"
  391. "Glacier fluctuations during the past 2000 years"
  392. "Mid-Pleistocene transition in glacial cycles explained by declining CO2 and regolith removal"
  393. []
  394. []
  395. []
  396. ("I do receive some funding from the fossil fuel industry. My company [...] does hurricane forecasting [...] for an oil company, since 2007. During this period I have been both a strong advocate for the IPCC, and more recently a critic of the IPCC, there is no correlation of this funding with my public statements." ;
  397. []
  398. []
  399. "Special report on the ocean and cryosphere in a changing climate"
  400. Stramma and Schmidtko's: "Global evidence of ocean deoxygenation"
  401. "Manifestation, drivers, and emergence of open ocean deoxygenation"
  402. "The ecology of plant extinction: rates, traits and island comparisons"
  403. []
  404. []
  405. []
  406. "Mitigation system threat partially mediates the effects of right‐wing ideologies on climate change beliefs"
  407. "Reconstruction of a continuous high-resolution CO2 record over the past 20 million years"
  408. "CO2 over the past 5 million years: Continuous simulation and new δ11B-based proxy data"
  409. "The role of long-lived greenhouse gases as principal LW control knob that governs the global surface temperature for past and future climate change"
  410. []
  411. "Climate modeling: comments on coincidence, conspiracy, and climate change denial"
  412. "Are conspiracy theorists epistemically vicious?"
  413. []
  414. []
  415. "Recent global temperature “plateau” in the context of a new proxy reconstruction"
  416. "Unquestioned answers or unanswered questions: Beliefs about science guide responses to uncertainty in climate change risk communication"
  417. "Scientific truth or debate: On the link between perceived scientific consensus and belief in anthropogenic climate change"
  418. []
  419. "Climate science special report: A sustained assessment activity of the U.S. Global Change Research Program" []
  420. []
  421. "Lethally hot temperatures during the Early Triassic greenhouse"

No comments:

Post a Comment