We're also creating diseases in labs....go figure.

I was in Italy in June. I had always heeded the warning to never eat unopened clams. But the dish was sooooo good that I are the three unopened clams that I had pushed aside. Now I can spell vibrios. It is not pleasant and I could only blame myself as I suffered. I knew better. But the article plus my own experience means that I will be more careful with seafood in the future.

Chris, that applies anywhere including here. I love seafood and eat clams and muscles all the time. Once boiled if they don't open, then throw them out. They are bad.

CP, I agree. One way or another nature is proving we are NOT the most powerful life from on the planet.

How do you eat an unopened clam?

You would force it open with a knife. But you shouldn't do that. If it doesn't open in the boiling process, then its bad.

Dean, I know I could have added many a line to that question.. LOL

You open it yourself. But I think it means it is possible the clam isn't cooked if it isn't opened. Anyway, sorry to hear Chris. I too love seafood and probably would have done the same. Of concern for me is I love sushi, and while there are always risks, what really concerns me is the lack of quality control out there as it has gotten more popular. Sushi in a supermarket? You can forget it. Discount sushi, do not do it. Sushi lovers know that not every suchi chef is the same, and there is a lot of trust in their hands. Pay attention to where you go, if you have the same weakness I do for raw fish.

Higher water temperatures favor higher levels of bacteria; so this bacteria is more prevalent during the warmer months. This is not some new, never-heard-of bacteria.

Following Katrina there were 22 cases of skin related vibrio infections, of that 2 people died.

There are several posts here of folks eating bad bivalves. I guess they felt so sick that they thought they were going to die or wanted to. I know a couple of people who have ingested bad mussels from a reastaurant. They got so sick that they have not eaten a mussel since.

This "scientific research" does not even mention the cause of the the bacteria in the water. More than a little slanted? Help, help the oceans are getting warmer.

If they would stop pouring raw sewage into our waters there would not be a problem.

MrCool, no where does it say "new bacteria". It says it is spreading because the water is warmer than it had been for some previous time. If that rate of warmth continues and the bacteria continues to spread then it can potentially cause a problem for humans.

Si?

MrCool, this particular study was not addressing the other question, so how can it be "slanted." I'm sorry if people are researching things that you think we should pretend don't exist, but that's the way it goes.

Dean- that is a loaded question that I'm dieing to answer but afraid of being collapsed

Interesting how the article says that warmer waters are "fostering" the proliferation of the bacteria. Additionally, "Millions" in healthcare costs "May" be incurred. Nice way to take a stance and layout the concrete facts. Hopefully, the paper they deliver is a lot more exact and fact filled. However, sensational conjecture seems to pass as science all too much these days; so I'm not holding my breath (and I guess by not doing so, fostering a warmer climate).

onermailliw, same here. Notice I let it pass. It took a lot of effort, and hit the backspace key many times removing what I wrote.

MrCool - The vibrio bacteria they mentioned in the article are naturally occuring species that live in the temperate oceans. What the article implies is that due to global warming, the North Atlantic and the Mediterranian are warming up and these bacterium are indicators of the warming.

Do you eat with that brain?

You first?

Lynyrd either lives in a cave or has already swallowed that brain-eating bacteria.

If you say that the sky is falling to hundreds of independent studies that conclude many ramifications from the same ailment (global warming), at some point you must consider the possibility you're wrong, no?

@LynyrdSky

Don't believe everything your Repooplican overlords say

LynardSky, please go eat dirt, since bacteria ISN'T IN THE BIBLE!. Therefore it doesn't exist and you'll be FINE.

Please set aside your myopic views of "Climate scientists are wrong!!!!!! Science BAD!!!"

Here is the true question:

What if the 99% of climate scientists that agree and predict larger and stronger weather systems (ie. hurricanes, tornados, t-storms, etc.) as well as droughts due to man's spewing of CO2 into the atmosphere were right?

Do we:

A) Address the issue now by spending 'X' amount of money NOW on improving gas mileage, reducing our use of fossil fuels and investing in green energy, etc. In the process we create local jobs and improve the quality of the air and water or do we...

B) Spend 100X (X times 100 for you non-math likin' folks) dealing with payments to repair the damage done by the storms and the health effects due to terrible air and water.

You decide.

Nothing to see here, folks. Global warming is a hoax invented by 98% of the scientific community to turn us all into godless socialists. This is nothing more than Al Gore with a blow dryer. Continue to blindly oppose all climate legislation.

Nothing to see here, folks. Global warming is a hoax invented by 98% of the scientific community to turn us all into godless socialists. This is nothing more than Al Gore with a blow dryer. Continue to blindly oppose all climate legislation.

I often wonder exactly what will have to happen for the "deniers" to come around. I mean, texas just burned to a crisp, this spring thee midwest and appalachia had record floods, the northeast got a years worth of rain in August, and this @!$%# is happening all over the world.

Where I live, we have three 1000 floods in the last ten years.

When the earth is finally consumed in a massive ball of fire, they will say its the rapture, and global warming was a hoax.

Pablo, as long as there are people to tell them what they want to hear, they wil never believe otherwise. Reality doesn't matter.

Just learn to adapt to the changing climate. Our ancestors did 11,000 years ago when the whole northern Hemesphere was covered in 2 miles of ice. Nothing lasts forever.

I wonder what caused the ice to melt 11,000 years ago and if it is still going on today?

Dell, yes, we will have to adapt, but the less change the better, so there is still reason to limit our effect. The choice is ours.

Most (but not all) of the ice age warmups were caused by CO2 increases. Go figure.

I will bet money they will live better than us.

Tell them to live within their means and they'll be fine.

Bacteria have been around for 3.5 BILLION YEARS. I'm just say'in.

So, they're just taking back what's rightfully theirs....

We may have originally come from bacteria, but we've become old mold. Nature is cleaning house.

I would never eat sea food that has not been frozen first,sushi for example can have worms that die if frozen.

Yes! Back to your caves! Eat only plants! Quit wearing artificial materials for clothing! Quit wearing animal skins too! And remember that the communal fire will only be lit one time per month and that's only if we can convince a tree to drop a dead branch of it's own free will. We must do all possible to drop the earths temperature by .0005 degrees each year BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!!!

The warming of the Earth was suppose to melt the ice caps that would cool the oceans that would stop the Mid Atlantic Conveyor that would bring about the next ice age.

How could it be the oceans are actually warming? We need to stay on topic here. No changing the rules as we go along. It is either cooling or warming. Which is it? Or do we have to pass the bill before we can read it?

Dell, the Atlantic conveyer is not shut down by cold water, but by fresh water. The local water conditions will be cooler too, of course, but globallw we have predicted warmer oceans and that is exactly what we are getting.

My bad for neglecting that. Yes, it is fresh water "damming up" in the northern Atlantic Ocean stopping the conveyor which cools the Atlantic, then Europe and creates the Ice Age which will cool the whole northern Hemisphere of earth including all the other oceans.

It's been only 11,000 years since the last major Ice Age that lasted for about 6 - 8 thousand years. What caused the ice to melt then and wouldn't that reason still be around today?

Eleven thousand years is not a long time in the scheme of things. It is less than twice the time of recorded history and only a little over 4 times since the birth of Christ and about the time the northern part of Africa dried up and became a desert. Small time periods.

The mini ice age about 200 years ago happened without the industrialization of the world. Wonder what made the Earth cool then? Didn't have the population we have now, no "carbon footprint", no Fluorocarbons. Just nature. Some say it may have been the Atlantic conveyor stopping for a while. Others say it was the ceasing of the Sun's solar flare activity for that period. Which is happening again in our life time.

Notliborcon above wants to spend money now to stop global warming. How much money will it take to take over the chore of natural selection? Sorry, but mathmatically we are beyond the point since time began for man. We can never catch up to nature.

All the money in the world will not stop her and why should we try? Adaptation to the new conditions is a better alternative and more viable.

Dell, we are not trying to "stop mother nature." We are only talking about the effects that WE are having, and whether we should keep doing that or not. Adaptatoin and cleanup will almost certainly be more expensive than just reducing the effect we are having in the first place.

Del - The little ice age has not been completely pinned down to one event, but we were in a lengthy solar minimum (less energy from the Sun) and a series of volcanic eruptions in the northern hemisphere, mainly in Iceland. The Atlantic conveyor system was the third contributor. There was the medieval warming, prior to the little ice age, that is believed to have significantly melted the glaciers in the Arctic. This could have caused the conveyor system to shut down. This coincides when the Vikings landed in Greenland and found it very temperate, with lush vegetation (this why they called it Greenland) and built a community there. That community died when the little ice age began. They couldn't adapt.

We had ice in the ocean its melting.

So we put more ice in.

You want to form a bucket line?

It takes energy and heat to make ice... so you lose no matter what.

For 2000 years, they used Bible as an excuse to gain control over peoples of the world.

Maybe you should be using your brain instead of your nose.

Sorry, Laureen, but by the time you pull your head out of the dark place it's hiding, it will be a little late to change your mind.

Laureen,

A doctor will examine your head, I will examine the area you store it.

Yes, but those of us who believe in global warming will go to Heaven, and those who deny it will burn in the lake of fire for all eternity. Plus I think believers get 72 virgins, don't we?

I wouldn't know anything about 72 virgins, thumpin' the Bible or the Koran. I am not sure if believing in Global warming will get yothrough the pearly gates either!

However you might want to grasp the fact that extinction is a part of this planets life cycle, either man made or nature made!

Chach

Yes, extinction can be natural. So what is your point? Surely you are not saying that makes it OK to drive more species extinct? That would be like saying murder is OK because death is part of the individual life cycle too.

Actually, I was wondering if things warm up again, and we get a lot more CO2 back in the atmosphere, we might have the right conditions to bring the dinosaurs back?

From Wikipedia: At the peak of the Mesozoic, there were no polar ice caps, and sea levels are estimated to have been from 100 to 250 meters (300 to 800 ft) higher than they are today. The planet's temperature was also much more uniform, with only 25 °C (45 °F) separating average polar temperatures from those at the equator. On average, atmospheric temperatures were also much higher; the poles, for example, were 50 °C (90 °F) warmer than today.^[123][124]

The atmosphere's composition during the Mesozoic was vastly different as well. Carbon dioxide levels were up to 12 times higher than today's levels, and oxygen formed 32 to 35% of the atmosphere,^{[citation needed]} as compared to 21% today.

Chach,

Cool, so why do we care about what happened in 9/11 when we are all going to be dead any way?

Hey Doug, I heard the 72 virgins are all men.....lol :)

Adapt or die. Humans are destined to go the way of the dino.

The Kochs have poured an absolutely astonishing sum of money into an astroturf campaign "debunking" global warming- one which has been almost as effective among morons as the one funded by big oil against nuclear power.

If anyone wants control over "the peoples of the world", wannabee Kings like the Kochs would be number one on the list.

A hideous, ancient evil, rises from the depths of greed to threaten the middle class: "King Koch", coming soon to a theatre near YOU!.

Have you ever seen an old tarred road that was left in that state? Perhaps on a nasty curve they may have straighten out. After a few years, other than noticing a swath cut through the tall trees growing on each side of it, you'd never know there was a tarred road under the canopy of grass, flowers and shrubs.

Nature comes back after a few years and even today, there are new organisms being created in the oceans we have never seen before. In a few million years, they will probably crawl onto land and develope legs. The Earth will not perish until the sun burns it up. Mankind could perish in a wink of an eye and it wouldn't hurt the Earth in the least. Mankind is so conceited.

Your use of the term "THE CAUSE" implies that you think there can be only one. Is it possible that all you have said about pollution is true AND it is made worse by warming waters?

I noted that it may be contributory. But the daily flushing of billions of gallons of untreated wastewater concerns me far more.

Fine, but you seemed to be showing a hostility toward doing anything about the other problem, and the people who suggest we should.

Hostility? No. Frustration. In every discussion about environmental issues today, CO2 is front and center, whether it should be or not. This snippet of an article doesn't even address the issue of effluent, as though it doesn't even exist, leading to the conclusion that the sole reason we have "dangerous bacteria" spreading (sounds spooky, doesn't it) is CO2. That is simply not true. CO2 may have some role in this (I am not saying one way or the other), but the clear and present, obvious, in-your-face truth that we have a worldwide sewer system that isn't up to the requirements of the 21st century ISN'T EVEN MENTIONED! It's shoddy reporting or selective reporting. Take your pick. It's a bit like reporting that JFK missed his speech in Dallas without explaining why.

My golly, it is hard to believe. Deniers will postulate any argument to avoid the idea that we can and should do something about global warming. "Extinction of the human race is okay by me" is one I haven't heard before.

Please read the post by notliborcon above (at about 12:20PM). It lays out the arguments very rationally.

Chris - The vibrio bacteria is not caused from pollution or raw sewage. It is a naturally occuring bacterium found in the temperate oceans.

...in the house of representatives

And that is the whole truth!!

Actually, I'm torn between humans being a virus, or a parasite consuming our host. I'll have to think about that. Maybe we have to infect another planet before we can consider ourselves a virus.

Oh, and I have complete faith that man has created/invented all the gods and religions.

But is the host defined as the planet Earth or just the general biosphere? I think it's unlikely that we could destroy either, at least not inadvertently. They used to speculate that if we set off enough bombs at once, everything would die in a nuclear winter, but it seems like we're past that temptation.

Doug, you are probably right that it would be virtually impossible to destroy all life on Earth, but somehow that doesn't comfort me!

There is a difference between literally killing the earth -- making it inhabitable for all life -- and merely rendering it uninhabitable for human life. The latter would be bad enough for us, even though the earth would wobble on regardless.

The higher the life form, the more vulnerable you are. Bacteria will survive way longer than us.

I don't even think it likely that we will make it uninhabitable for human life, but there is an awful lot of damage we can do short of that. We WILL increase the amount of human suffering and the expense of dealing with the problems we created.

We may have to break down and make friends with the bacteria, they have us outnumbered. We'll all be eating yogurt before long.

Danon strawberry custard is delicious. And I'm not just saying that to kiss up to the bacteria. Nice bacteria.

You say that as if i found lobster of crab disgusting. It is probably one of the most delicious treats. Add melted butter, and oh man. There isn't much from the ocean I don't eat.