Seabird ammonia emissions contribute to atmospheric acidity

"And climate change is of concern to us all."

What a bunch of drivel. You slobbering morons need to shut up about climate change and go scrape the bullshit out of your two front teeth.

Very convincing.

Kill all seabirds to stop global warming. Good idea...

Uhm, did this guy say that mammals don't excrete urea? Last I checked, that's what urine is made up of. Someone needs to take this guy back to basic biology class.

Vellanarris,i think as always your prejustice inhibits you from extracting the facts.

Read The Frakkin Article, and anyone will see that you have completely missed the following:

According to Chief Editor Peter Brimblecombe, this study is "fascinating in the context that birds excrete uric acid unlike mammals, where excreted urea is readily converted to ammonia. Ammonia is the only major alkaline gas in the atmosphere and has a major effect on atmospheric acidity. This work uncovers a potentially large biological source of ammonia.

Does this make you see that you were not correct and does this makes you less sure about other "facts"?

Dont worry ill keep pointing them out until you get better at it.

Vellanarris,i think as always your prejustice inhibits you from extracting the facts.

Read The Frakkin Article, and anyone will see that you have completely missed the following:

According to Chief Editor Peter Brimblecombe, this study is "fascinating in the context that birds excrete uric acid unlike mammals, where excreted urea is readily converted to ammonia. Ammonia is the only major alkaline gas in the atmosphere and has a major effect on atmospheric acidity. This work uncovers a potentially large biological source of ammonia.

Does this make you see that you were not correct and does this makes you less sure about other "facts"?

Dont worry ill keep pointing them out until you get better at it.

And you'll keep looking like a fool. All mammals excrete urea which quickly turns to amonia gas, hence why most cat (another mammal) litters have ammonia reduction agents.

How can:"Seabird ammonia emissions contribute to atmospheric acidity"??
IS it because the authors want seabirds to be replaced by mammals so that excreted urea will decompose to ammonia and CO2 thus reducing the acidity of the atmosphere?? or

Seabirds are bad because they excrete uric ACID??? ooooh..... acid is bad!...??? (uric acid is a mildly acidic purine that has virtually no vapor pressure so it can't "acidify" the atmosphere and it slowly decomposes to ammonia, CO2, and organic carbon compounds in solution, though it's solubility is very low.)

There is no point to this review because the reviewer apparently didn't understand what the authors were talking about. Although maybe the authors didn't either.

If you read this:
http://www.scienc...4535.htm
the supposed problem is due to eutrification from the "ammonia" form the uric acid

If you read this:
http://www.scienc...4535.htm
the supposed problem is due to eutrification from the "ammonia" form the uric acid

That's the way food chains work. The birds create food for the plants, the plants are eaten by bacteria and small fish, which are eaten by larger fish, which are eaten by bird and other predators that take a crap which feeds the plants....


How they correlated this with atmospheric acidity boggles the mind. After reading that suppliment I can see where the relevance for the biodiversity study comes into play, but why would you ever title the article anything involving atmospheric acidity rather than biodiversity, or food chain interruption?

I know! You are suggesting that they are biased towards Alarmist views!

Do i win The Prize?

I know! You are suggesting that they are biased towards Alarmist views!

Do i win The Prize?

Maybe the journalist who recycled the paper into this article is, but the paper itself is a rather clear cut study in the effects of biodiversity and bird species ratios affecting sea going plant life.

And you'll keep looking like a fool. All mammals excrete urea which quickly turns to amonia gas, hence why most cat (another mammal) litters have ammonia reduction agents.

The whole point is the article never implied anything else: "birds excrete uric acid *unlike* mammals".

That's the way food chains work. The birds create food for the plants, the plants are eaten by bacteria and small fish, which are eaten by larger fish, which are eaten by bird and other predators that take a crap which feeds the plants....

If that was the case it would be called food circle! Plants use solar energy and CO2 as "food". They do need certain elements and will absorb them from soil and detritus but it is not their food (just as elements are not food for humans although they are required).

Birds certainly DO NOT create food for plants!

Get your facts straight before posting, almost every your comment contains factual errors.

And you'll keep looking like a fool. All mammals excrete urea which quickly turns to amonia gas, hence why most cat (another mammal) litters have ammonia reduction agents.

The whole point is the article never implied anything else: "birds excrete uric acid *unlike* mammals".

That's the way food chains work. The birds create food for the plants, the plants are eaten by bacteria and small fish, which are eaten by larger fish, which are eaten by bird and other predators that take a crap which feeds the plants....

If that was the case it would be called food circle! Plants use solar energy and CO2 as "food". They do need certain elements and will absorb them from soil and detritus but it is not their food (just as elements are not food for humans although they are required).

Birds certainly DO NOT create food for plants!

Get your facts straight before posting, almost every your comment contains factual errors.

Look up "plant food" and tell me what's in it.

Horseshit,bullshit,and lots of other shit.

And you'll keep looking like a fool. All mammals excrete urea which quickly turns to amonia gas, hence why most cat (another mammal) litters have ammonia reduction agents.

The whole point is the article never implied anything else: "birds excrete uric acid *unlike* mammals".

That's the way food chains work. The birds create food for the plants, the plants are eaten by bacteria and small fish, which are eaten by larger fish, which are eaten by bird and other predators that take a crap which feeds the plants....

If that was the case it would be called food circle! Plants use solar energy and CO2 as "food". They do need certain elements and will absorb them from soil and detritus but it is not their food (just as elements are not food for humans although they are required).

Birds certainly DO NOT create food for plants!

Get your facts straight before posting, almost every your comment contains factual errors.

Look up "plant food" and tell me what's in it.

Look up food chain, and tell me what it is, even if you feed on "plant food" you are an exception.

Look up food chain, and tell me what it is, even if you feed on "plant food" you are an exception.

You know, when a base television show like South Park is more accurate than your commentary you should seriously consider a rethink of where your info is comming from SH.

There is a reason why farmers spread manure on their fields. I wonder what it is.

Nitrogen fertilizer is often synthesized using the Haber-Bosch process, which produces ammonia. This ammonia is applied directly to the soil or used to produce other compounds, notably ammonium nitrate and urea, both dry, concentrated products that may be used as fertilizer materials or mixed with water to form a concentrated liquid nitrogen fertilizer, UAN. Ammonia can also be used in the Odda Process in combination with rock phosphate and potassium fertilizer to produce compound fertilizers such as 10-10-10 or 15-15-15.

So Urea is manufactured to boost crop yields, amazing.

It is found in mammalian and amphibian urine as well as in some fish. Birds and reptiles excrete uric acid, comprising a different form of nitrogen metabolism that requires less water.

And all animals produce it. Even more fascinating.

OMG, do you really have to have everything explained to you step by step?

Read your comment again:

That's the way food chains work. The birds create food for the plants, the plants are eaten by bacteria and small fish, which are eaten by larger fish, which are eaten by bird and other predators that take a crap which feeds the plants....

Food chain definition:
http://en.wikiped...od_chain

A food chain is the flow of energy from one organism to the next and to the next and to the next. Organisms in a food chain are grouped into trophic levels,based on how many links they are removed from the primary producers.

See the word *ENERGY* in there, take a good look at it. This is what I mean, the concept of food chain is based on *ENERGY*, this is also why it cannot be a circle, 2nd law of thermodynamics forbids such circles.

Plants can't get *any* energy from manure or fertilizer, or urea, plants get energy from the Sun. Fertilizer provides plants with needed elements, just as humans need mineral salts and microelements but that doesn't make it *food*.

This makes your whole comment about food chain *blatantly wrong*, yet you keep arguing, yes I know it confused you that its called "plant food" but thats your problem and I already pointed out your error *twice*! So think for a moment before you type in another useless comment.

Seeing as this entire argument is whether animals other than birds create urea and uric acid who is correct?

And by the way, the second law of thermodynamics does not make cyclical energy transfer impossible. The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the universal law of increasing entropy, stating that the entropy of an isolated system which is not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium. At no point in time would a cyclical system violate that law unless it created a state of lower entropy. So a cyclical food chain would not violate the second law especially since predator prey relationships ensure equilibrium or extinction.

Seeing as without those "needed elements" plants aren't able to construct the structures necessary for photosynthesis I'd say the plants pretty much NEED them to absorb energy, wouldn't you?

See the word *ENERGY* in there, take a good look at it. This is what I mean, the concept of food chain is based on *ENERGY*, this is also why it cannot be a circle, 2nd law of thermodynamics forbids such circles.

Required nutrients are, by definition, food. The plants require other materials than CO2 and sunlight. Sunlight provides energy during the day time (and the plants burn sugars at night) but any analysis of the ash left over from burning plant material will have all sorts of other goodies in it.