How climate scientists mislead the world about the Great Barrier Reef 

Posted: October 2, 2017 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, ENSO, Ocean dynamics, propaganda
Tags:

Coral reef [image credit: Toby Hudson / Wikipedia]


Reports by scientists that climate change has damaged the Great Barrier Reef beyond repair have been greatly exaggerated, says the GWPF.

Once again, climate alarmists have ignored the science of coral bleaching which is a regular El Niño-linked occurrence and regularly leads to post-El Niño recovery.

Optimism is rising among scientists that parts of the Great Barrier Reef that were severely bleached over the past two years are making a recovery.


Scientists from the Australian Institute of Marine Science this month surveyed 14 coral reefs between Cairns and Townsville to see how they fared after being bleached. The institute’s Neil Cantin said they were surprised to find the coral had already started to reproduce.

“We’re finding corals that are showing early signs of reproductive development, really visible eggs that we can see under the naked eye,” Dr Cantin said.

Continued here.

Comments
  1. AlecM says:

    The warmist problem is that climate scientists have made a basic mistake no competent engineer would make. Dissenters were kicked out of Academia and publications of dissenting papers banned. They then grabbed grants and promotions by pushing this fake science, the precursor of of fake news.

    And as for the mistake; it’s to fail to understand that Max Planck’s 1913 treatise is based on an assumption of equilibrium between radiative emitters in a vacuum. The atmosphere is not a vacuum. This explains the details of OLR and is countered by another mistake – extra extinction coefficient explains darker bases/higher albedo for rain/convective clouds. NASA claims that is due to lots of small droplets when it’s large droplets.

    The Planck misunderstanding creates 40% more radiative transfer in the atmosphere than reality. They then do a work-around using the big mistake in cloud physics – van der Hulst in1967, Hansen 1969. Thus they pretend rain and convective clouds are dark underneath – high albedo – is because droplets are small when it’s a large droplet phenomenon; ultimate scientific incompetence that was used as the basis for the NASA/IPCC fraud

    Sorry folks but allegedly even Stephen Hawkins is involved in the scam and has been protected by colleagues for 25 years. Planck’s vacuum assumption is fine but prohibits the use of his theory for much of radiative energy transfer at the junction between a solid surface and a ghg-containing gas.

    Myles Allen is escaping by blowing the whistle to survive the denouement of the incompetents.

  2. tom0mason says:

    The biggest problem for the warmist when it comes to corals are two fold.
    One is a lack of knowledge — there is no long term studies of corals, so anything unusual that happens with them is flagged up as ‘unprecedented’. Bottom line is we do not know if anything that happens with coral in the short term is ‘unprecedented’ or not.
    What was the state of corals during other climatically warm periods, say three hundred years ago before the LIA, or the Medieval Warm Period (MWP)? Just an unknown though some core drilling of old coral has and is being done to research this, though it should be noted we have very little idea what is the life cycle of a coral reef.

    Secondly, warmist behave like corals are somehow very fragile.
    It is known that corals die when certain chemicals from suncreams get on them, and that high nitrogen pollution badly affects them but they have been around for millions of years and so have survived huge changes in climate.
    Also of note is the corals around Bikini Atoll that have survived being blasted by an H-bomb. (see http://www.bikiniatoll.com/BIKINICORALS.pdf for more information)
    Fragile? Perhaps not.

  3. oldbrew says:

    If there is a coral problem it’s more likely to be from pollution than so-called ‘climate change’.

    Sediments, nutrients, and pollutants can disperse into plumes extending more than 100 km from the river mouth.

    Solid wastes, whether randomly dumped or in designated coastal dumps or landfills, can directly kill corals or leach toxins into the inshore waters, potentially stressing corals.

    http://www.reefresilience.org/coral-reefs/stressors/local-stressors/pollution/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s