Not exact matches
If everything goes according to plan, data from the US probe will help researchers track large natural sources and sinks
of CO2, such as
oceans and forests, and perhaps some
manmade sources, such as sprawling urban
areas or even large power plants.
Variations in
ocean and land terrain, rocks, reefs, bottom contour, stumps, forest growth, and debris, (all
of which may be hidden from view), vehicles, and other machinery and other natural and
manmade obstacles and hazards may exist throughout the
area.
As Howard noted, the Southern
Ocean has absorbed lots of manmade CO2 while temperatures and nutrients have not changed as much, making it more ideal for studying ocean acidification than other a
Ocean has absorbed lots
of manmade CO2 while temperatures and nutrients have not changed as much, making it more ideal for studying
ocean acidification than other a
ocean acidification than other
areas.
As for lying, I have observed many scientists seem to have no difficulty with lying when they connect, without a shred
of evidence, supportive modeling or any data or often even any theory such things as extreme weather is getting worse or is linked to CO2, wet
areas will get wetter and dry
areas will get drier, that the
ocean swallowed the «missing heat», using a proxy upside down doesn't matter, the models are still adequate for policy even after such a huge divergence from reality, coral die - back is due to
manmade warming rather than fishing, all warming must be bad rather than beyond a certain threshold, etc, etc, etc..