The tyranny of King Penguins waning with global warming
A king penguin makes his dignified way: to the chopping block.Courtesy VivaAntarcticaAs Americans, I’m sure we call all agree that regicide is awesome. I mean, we don’t generally participate in it, but we appreciate it. And, say what you will of the French, they have a sympathetic tradition, which makes the alarmist tone of recent findings out of the French Academy of Sciences somewhat surprising: it seems that the guillotine blade of global warming is slowly descending toward the gilded necks of the king penguins.
Despite what we might wish, though, the king penguins are not actually being decapitated. The French (and Norwegian) research team, in fact, began to notice a strong correlation between ocean temperatures, and king penguin breeding success. It makes sense when you think about it—monarchies have always been vulnerable to breeding issues.
Tracking a portion of the 2 million strong population of king penguins on the Crozet Islands, the researchers observed that the penguins were having to travel further and further from their colonies to forage for food (usually between 300 and 600 km, and sometimes as far as 2000 km). The reason for this, scientists believe, is that many marine organisms prosper only at lower ocean temperatures, and king penguins—living at the top of the food chain—depend on these organisms for sustenance. As the waters near their islands warm, nearby food becomes scarce, and the less food the penguins can bring back to their chicks, the smaller their chance of survival becomes. According to the team’s model, an increase in just .26 degrees Celsius will lead to a 9 percent decrease in king penguins’ survival rate.
Bad news if you’re a penguin. Or if you’re into penguins. Or… Maybe I do understand why the French are so nervous about the decline of king penguins—after all, who would better understand what would probably take their place.
EmailYour Comments, Thoughts, Questions, Ideas
Explore
Recent comments
Subscribe
Connect with Science Buzz on Facebook and Twitter.
You can also subscribe to our RSS feed using any newsreader software.
Have any of you guys hear what the New Jersey Nets are doing to in the fight against global warming? Not only are there games now carbon-neutral, but they traded Jason Kidd to the Dallas Maveriks for the a “better environment” also. Julianne Waldron explained to the media that Kidd was giving off to much Carbon dioxide. “Jason Kidd always hustles when he is on the basketball court, and we all admire that greatly. But all of that running up and down the court, pushing the team out on fastbreaks, expending extra energy just to make a few extra points and possibly win a game, caused all of the players to breathe a great deal more heavily and thereby expel extra amounts of carbon dioxide into the air, and we all know that is bad for the environment. We made the difficult decision to trade Kidd in order to save the planet.” Check out this article I found on it Environmental Activism is the Key to the Current Success of the New Jersey Nets
That would be something if the oceans were, in fact, warming. On the contrary the Argos probes revealed ocean temperatures are stable and/or cooling.
Scientists in the U.K. have reported evidence that further refutes one theory of global climate change.
In the heated debate over global warming, there is an opposing idea, called the cosmic ray theory, which contends that climate change is simply caused by cosmic rays coming from the sun.
You know, I heard something on the radio last night about the cosmic ray theory--that it probably doesn't work.
I may have some of details off, but I think the idea is that the magnetic activity of the sun influences the amount of cosmic rays that reach earth. As the sun's magnetic activity waxes and wanes, the earth is subjected to varying exposure to cosmic rays. The cosmic rays are thought to warm the stratosphere, and affect cloud production, which could, in turn, affect global temperature. However, a recent study has shown that in the last 20 years (the period for which we have accurate measurements of the cosmic rays hitting earth) there has been "no significant link between changes in cosmic rays coming to Earth and cloudiness and temperature." Here's an article on it. And here's a link to the actual study.
Also, the whole of your comment is cut and pasted from the link under your name (http://www.lifeofearth.blogspot.com/). And the post you link to continues on to say that that theory is probably groundless.
I had thought you were arguing for that theory, but I might have jumped the gun on my response.
isn't that exactly what it is? i mean it's just the sun rays being trapped by greenhouse gases or are you talking about a different type of radiation?
different I think
this theory is about cosmic rays themselves affecting cloud buildup. greenhouse gases don't play a role in it.
Post new comment