Thanx Mikeb85 , I was asking myself: "am I mad ?" as 8.1 is not acid so... you said so ..., so I am not mad, it just that big news agencies are creating clickbaits .... ;(
A less misleading title would be "PH changes in ocean affect crab shell formation" or something like that.
Or maybe it's the fact I'm Canadian and we generally push back against extremism, alarmism, most isms really.
I've heard there's a hole in the ozone and we're all going to die from cancer and I've heard that New York will be underwater and all the glaciers will be gone by 2020. I've lived through 2 US presidents everyone has said are Hitler and somehow, despite the uproar being the loudest today, the world hasn't come to an end and things actually don't seem that bad.
So yes, when I see headlines that are obviously click bait it hits this little part of my brain that feels compelled to say that maybe, just maybe things aren't all that bad.
The reason you don't hear that anymore is not because there was no problem, but because the problem has been fixed by the implementation of the Montreal protocol. The ozon layer has been gradually recovering ever since.
> Or maybe it's the fact I'm Canadian and we generally push back against extremism, alarmism, most isms really.
How about other forms of alarmism, the reducing use of fossil fuels will destroy our way of life, collapse the economy, etc? I see a lot of people worried about "climate alarmism" but they never seem to be concerned about there own alarmsism.
> and I've heard that New York will be underwater and all the glaciers will be gone by 2020
Citation please? I see this claim frequently yet either no citations are provided or they rely on the readers lack of comprehension, memory or both. The alarmisim is probably in your head.
As for calling it "too acidic", that's fairly obviously more understandable for the lay reader than "not basic enough" would be.
https://www.rd.com/culture/predictions-that-didnt-come-true/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/08/us/g...
For number 2, yes they revised the timeline, the glaciers are still retreating. Does an extrapolation on a long running process even count as being alarmist?
"...too acidic..." doesn't carry that same implication. On some scale, something is more acidic than optimum.
At least, that's the way I interpret the comments above. After reading the article, I knew exactly what was happening and didn't really think the title was click-bait, but can see how others might perceive it that way.
The headline is technically wrong, but the broad point, "things that we rely on are dying because of the changing pH of the ocean", is correct and meaningful.