I pointed you to that page to see the explanation for why there's the lack of the kind of pictures you are asking for.
I'll repeat: The plastics are in the water and not some exciting floating continent that can be photographed from a satellite. The worst effects any plastics can have anywhere on land or sea is when they break down small and get into the bodies of living creatures. There are loads of articles on that.
But just look around. I have walked extensively over the years. I can't run thanks to bad knees but I love to walk. I see so much. We have drainage pipes that lead to our local bay. They are always clogged with plastic debris. Even the ones in a field next to my house...out in the middle of nothing. I can't imagine where the bottles and bags and plastic cups are even coming from. But it's there and I pick it up as best I can when I see it. I've lost count of how many twisted ankles and bruises I've suffered trying to get at it all.
Since our conversation here I made sure to pay attention on the drive to school and there was so much plastic litter along the side of the road and on the edges of farmers fields it was just too depressing to look at. It can be easy to overlook. Just lift your eyes and look at the trees and cattle. It's horrible but you can almost train yourself to not see it anymore. I think too many people do.
Now getting back to bodies of water, I don't see it too badly along the shores in most parts of the Carolinas I've been to. But where you see it the most is at the bays and marinas and I have seen it a bit in California at this one inlet. I'm going by what I see in person. What I have seen with my own eyes is bad enough, that I will trust the word of people who have made a scientific study of it.
I do know the term "climate change" is a buzzword that is very heavily politicized. It's frankly exploited by many different groups with different competing agendas that have negative effects on the environment and on economies and jobs. I could give examples but that would be likely to start arguments with both Republicans and Democrats on this board. I don't wish to do that. I've got other things I would rather be doing. I have been a member of both parties and can see where both of them go unreasonable and illogical on certain points.
I think maybe the best thing is to just drop the highly charged all encompassing and vague term "climate change" and go back to fighting specific problems like erosion--which is a natural process but it has terrible economic repercussions for coastal towns and resources and even naval defense. We need to stop arguing about what's causing it and just do something to help the people dealing with it.
And pollution--we can probably all agree we don't want or need litter strangling and defacing our environment and toxins poisoning our water and air, whether or not it's causing "climate change" or "global warming".
There are economic repercussions, however, on industry and business in fighting pollution, so we need to work out common sense compromises that we all can live with. People hate the concept of compromise these days, but it is better than the endless fighting between extreme viewpoints that end up locking us into doing nothing or doing too much one way or the other.
If we fight pollution, any pollution that does contribute to climate change should be mitigated without us even having to argue about that aspect of it.
By the same token, those who act as if all climate change is caused by man made issues within our control will also have to acknowledge the evidence in geological and archaeological records, and in what's going on in our solar system and realize not all of the problems we are dealing with are things we caused or control. We will have to figure out exactly what those things are and figure out how to work around them.
