Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[iyamwhatiyam]

And more...
Another climate alarmist admits global warming isn’t about science but about destroying capitalism | Poor Richard's News

Desperate times call for desperate measures, show trials anyone?
Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics | The Daily Caller

[iyamwhatiyam]

Back to the subject of ad hominem attacks, the fact that a puffin scientist scratches his ass certainly has no bearing on the validity of his findings, I just wouldn't want to borrow his pen.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by iyamwhatiyam

One of many. Google climategate and you will have both sides, (it doesn't matter!!!), but it's pretty clear that there was and is data manipulation and dirty politics.

So I Googled climategate and got

Investigations Clear Scientists of Wrongdoing

Six official investigations have cleared scientists of accusations of wrongdoing.

A three-part Penn State University report cleared scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing.

Two reviews commissioned by the University of East Anglia"supported the honesty and integrity of scientists in the Climatic Research Unit."

A UK Parliament report concluded that the emails have no bearing on our understanding of climate science and that claims against UEA scientists are misleading.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Inspector General's office concluded there was no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of their employees.

The National Science Foundation's Inspector General's office concluded, "Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct...we are closing this investigation with no further action."

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by iyamwhatiyam

Back to the subject of ad hominem attacks, the fact that a puffin scientist scratches his ass certainly has no bearing on the validity of his findings, I just wouldn't want to borrow his pen.

How's about if the puffin scientist apparently had his head up his ass whilst scratching it?

[mr_f]

Originally Posted by iyamwhatiyam

And more...
Another climate alarmist admits global warming isn’t about science but about destroying capitalism | Poor Richard's News

Desperate times call for desperate measures, show trials anyone?
Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics | The Daily Caller

I will again suggest that you take your own advice about what makes a "weak argument."

The first link readily admits they didn't even bother to watch the documentary they are judging. They do not in any way address the science. They simply make some weird statements about how evil progressives are.

If you are skeptical of the science, feel free to argue what shortcoming you perceive. But if you intend to lecture others on ad hominem attacks, you may want to consider your own actions.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by iyamwhatiyam

And we can add further admissions from the globalists...
U.N. Official Reveals Real Reason Behind Warming Scare | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

I gather you never bothered to read the original interview. Figures.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by mr_f

This is a strange argument. IT IS REALLY WARM. IT CAN'T BE WARMING!!

I said, and I will say it again, (as every source I have seen also says): El Nino conditions resulted in significantly warmer than average conditions leading to bleaching and these warm conditions were superimposed on an existing warming trend. I will say it even stronger: A bleaching event of this magnitude would not have occurred without the impacts of El Nino. However, that does not say that the El Nino event would have led to the same level of impact absent the existing warming. After all, based on your sources, it is the warmest or second warmest April, but somehow not the first El Nino event we have ever experienced.

Good argument, bro. I'll remember that for the next polar vortex.

"We", as in I and most other people living along the coastline facing the GBR, would happily take the 0, zip, zero, nada cyclones we had this season along the east coast in exchange for bleached coral which is actually proven to have high resiliency and recovery rates.

Coral Reefs Show Remarkable Ability to Recover from Near Death - Scientific American

Originally Posted by SailOar

.
‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleached | Washington Post

I'd suggest those scientists wept because it just about elevates them to guaranteed funding despite cut backs at the CSIRO.

Published April 22 (which is actually your April 23)

No Cookies | The Courier Mail
THE Great Barrier Reef’s most popular tourist sites show just two per cent of coral has died off, with the rest in “positive” signs of recovery, despite the world’s biggest mass coral bleaching event on record.
New research found about 68 per cent of reefs from Cairns to Lizard Island had varying levels of coral bleaching, but most of it likened to sunburn on a human body where the coral glows pink before fully recovering.
Latest findings by the Reef and Rainforest Research Centre give hope about the resilience of the living wonder after scientists this week revealed 93 per cent of the 2300km-long reef system was in the grip of a mass bleaching event.
“It’s the Great White Lie,” said Col McKenzie, chief executive of the Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators. “It’s not dead, white and dying. It’s under stress but it will bounce back.’’

yes, I know tourist operators have vested interests unlike researchers . But ask yourself where are the tourist complaints? Why hasn't tourism been decimated? Why isn't fishing decimated? Why isn't coral extinct? Why, as a resident, with a boat, in a major tourist area am I not overly concerned?

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

[...]yes, I know tourist operators have vested interests unlike researchers . But ask yourself where are the tourist complaints? Why hasn't tourism been decimated? Why isn't fishing decimated? Why isn't coral extinct? Why, as a resident, with a boat, in a major tourist area am I not overly concerned?

The thought occurs to me that you have spent a huge amount of time vociferously defending the anti-AGW position, and just maybe you're finding it a wee bit distasteful to now have to acknowledge how completely wrong you've been. As one who's been there and done that, I feel your pain, bro.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by SailOar

The thought occurs to me that you have spent a huge amount of time vociferously defending the anti-AGW position, and just maybe you're finding it a wee bit distasteful to now have to acknowledge how completely wrong you've been. As one who's been there and done that, I feel your pain, bro.

I don't defend anti-AGW. You should read more and cut and past less. I take particular offense to propoganda, doom and gloom and other stupid "sky is falling" climate change articles like your idiotic "93%" article post.

The headline:
‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleached

The supporting graphic:


Call me stupid, I can't see 93% in that, can you?

The fine print:

Australia’s National Coral Bleaching Task Force has surveyed 911 coral reefs by air, and found at least some bleaching on 93 percent of them. The amount of damage varies from severe to light, but the bleaching was the worst in the reef’s remote northern sector — where virtually no reefs escaped it.

Other notable points:
+Many more reefs in the bleaching prone areas were surveyed than those in the less prone areas biasing results.
+ENSO has caused coral bleaching throughout time. Perhaps it's "worse in the last 20 years" because it's been more actively studied in this time.
+When one scientist claims another scientist "is not an alarmist" you can pretty much take that as a given that they're both alarmists. Especially considering they "wept".

Well worth a read:
http://coral.aims.gov.au/info/bleaching-environment.jsp

Best to read this entire document, but in reference to the "93%" article, there is good news on the horizon:

The association between El Niño events and mass bleaching will be a temporary one as far as most reefs are concerned. As the Western Pacific Warm Pool widens and deepens, its central core will increasingly affect more extensive effect outer reef regions in non-El Niño years. At this point the thermal peaks currently delivered by El Niño will become less and less exceptional until they are irrelevant. This process is already beginning for the Great Barrier Reef and similar observations have been made in other parts of the world.
Although El Niño oscillations will become irrelevant for the Great Barrier Reef, they may continue to play a role in transmitting warm water pulses to other regions of the world for some time to come as the Warm Pool deepens and widens.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by jackdale

So I Googled climategate and got

Really? Those are the only references to ClimateGate you encountered, or were these the only ones you choose to reference?

No, don't answer that. We already know the answer.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Really? Those are the only references to ClimateGate you encountered, or were these the only ones you choose to reference?

No, don't answer that. We already know the answer.

Perhaps he has the latest FakeBook filter on his computer that filters out sources he doesn't like?

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Perhaps he has the latest FakeBook filter on his computer that filters out sources he doesn't like?

Could be. Or perhaps an occular dysfunction that prevents him from seeing that which doesn't match his religious sensibilities? Kind of like Cargo Cultists never seem to notice the guy flying the plane?

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

I don't defend anti-AGW. You should read more and cut and past less. I take particular offense to propoganda, doom and gloom and other stupid "sky is falling" climate change articles like your idiotic "93%" article post.

The headline:
‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleached

The supporting graphic:
[left out]

Call me stupid, I can't see 93% in that, can you?

I agree, the title, though perhaps technically correct, was melodramatic. However, the contents of the article pretty faithfully reported the scientific source.

The fine print:

Other notable points:
+Many more reefs in the bleaching prone areas were surveyed than those in the less prone areas biasing results.
+ENSO has caused coral bleaching throughout time. Perhaps it's "worse in the last 20 years" because it's been more actively studied in this time.
+When one scientist claims another scientist "is not an alarmist" you can pretty much take that as a given that they're both alarmists. Especially considering they "wept".

Talk about selective cutting and pasting
Let's look at what you left out from your "Other notable points":

• Enhanced (anthropogenic) greenhouse warming is occurring as a result of the amount and rate of build-up of CO2.
• The oceans are warming far more slowly than the atmosphere because of thermal inertia. A significant proportion of this warm water is remaining in the surface layers of tropical oceans because it is being accumulated too rapidly to be adequately dispersed and mixed by natural water circulation.
• Thermal energy from enhanced greenhouse warming of the oceans is concentrated into the Western Pacific Warm Pool, the world’s largest mobile body of heat.
• El Niño events themselves are not the result of global warming; they are a natural phenomenon of geological antiquity. However, there is continuing debate over the role of enhanced greenhouse warming in altering the frequency and/or intensity of El Niño events.
• The association between El Niño events and mass bleaching will be a temporary one as far as most reefs are concerned. As the Western Pacific Warm Pool widens and deepens, its central core will increasingly affect more extensive effect outer reef regions in non-El Niño years. At this point the thermal peaks currently delivered by El Niño will become less and less exceptional until they are irrelevant. This process is already beginning for the Great Barrier Reef and similar observations have been made in other parts of the world.
• Although El Niño oscillations will become irrelevant for the Great Barrier Reef, they may continue to play a role in transmitting warm water pulses to other regions of the world for some time to come as the Warm Pool deepens and widens.
• We have already entered the time-frame where mass bleaching is occurring without El Niño enhancement. If the relationship of atmospheric CO2 levels to the amount and/or frequency of bleaching continues on its present trajectory, there will be a point where every year will have a similar impact on corals as the worst El Niño events have had in the past.

Well worth a read:
Corals of the World - Mass bleaching and the environment

Best to read this entire document, but in reference to the "93%" article, there is good news on the horizon:

That is hardly good news!

They are saying that the Great Barrier Reef is going to become so warm, all the time, that the warm water transferred to it by an El Nino event will not warm it further! Goodby coral!

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by SailOar

I agree, the title, though perhaps technically correct, was melodramatic. However, the contents of the article pretty faithfully reported the scientific source.

Talk about selective cutting and pasting
Let's look at what you left out from your "Other notable points":

• Enhanced (anthropogenic) greenhouse warming is occurring as a result of the amount and rate of build-up of CO2.
• The oceans are warming far more slowly than the atmosphere because of thermal inertia. A significant proportion of this warm water is remaining in the surface layers of tropical oceans because it is being accumulated too rapidly to be adequately dispersed and mixed by natural water circulation.
• Thermal energy from enhanced greenhouse warming of the oceans is concentrated into the Western Pacific Warm Pool, the world’s largest mobile body of heat.
• El Niño events themselves are not the result of global warming; they are a natural phenomenon of geological antiquity. However, there is continuing debate over the role of enhanced greenhouse warming in altering the frequency and/or intensity of El Niño events.
• The association between El Niño events and mass bleaching will be a temporary one as far as most reefs are concerned. As the Western Pacific Warm Pool widens and deepens, its central core will increasingly affect more extensive effect outer reef regions in non-El Niño years. At this point the thermal peaks currently delivered by El Niño will become less and less exceptional until they are irrelevant. This process is already beginning for the Great Barrier Reef and similar observations have been made in other parts of the world.
• Although El Niño oscillations will become irrelevant for the Great Barrier Reef, they may continue to play a role in transmitting warm water pulses to other regions of the world for some time to come as the Warm Pool deepens and widens.
• We have already entered the time-frame where mass bleaching is occurring without El Niño enhancement. If the relationship of atmospheric CO2 levels to the amount and/or frequency of bleaching continues on its present trajectory, there will be a point where every year will have a similar impact on corals as the worst El Niño events have had in the past.

That is hardly good news!

They are saying that the Great Barrier Reef is going to become so warm, all the time, that the warm water transferred to it by an El Nino event will not warm it further! Goodby coral!

You're an amazing predictor of the future. Can I have next week's lotto numbers?

I also guess you never made it to the last section of that article:

Acclimatisation and adaptation

Acclimatisation (where the individual’s tolerance of environmental conditions increases during their lifetime) and adaptation (an evolutionary process involving natural selection through survival of the fittest) are seemingly the only escape routes corals have from the warm world of the future.

Acclimatisation There is evidence on both local and global scales that the same and/or closely related coral species show different tolerances to temperature in different locations. On local scales, good examples are corals that tolerate the very high temperatures found in intertidal pools, in water around natural thermal vents or close to thermal outlets of power stations. Normal maximum water temperatures found in particular geographic areas play a large role in determining tolerance to bleaching. Whole suites of corals can survive 36 °C in the Arabian Gulf, parts of the southern Red Sea and sporadically elsewhere. Like most animals, corals may adapt to tolerate these temperatures by altering biochemical pathways. On local scales this process is likely to be due to acclimatisation whereas across widely separated geographic areas there may be a larger component of genetic selection, especially where local tolerance to extreme conditions is involved.

Adaptation Corals were probably once adapted to higher temperatures in the geological past. However the template of today’s oceans is so different from those of the remote past that most meaningful comparisons are questionable. Studies showing that the genetic history of corals and that of zooxanthellae closely match argue against any medium-term history of adaptation by the changing of symbionts.

Yes, I can see the last couple of sentences that have been tacked on to keep the alarmist's happy. Perhaps looking forwards if it does transpire, however, I guess whilst battling increased floods, droughts, sea levels, viruses, dust storms, ice storms, heat waves, plagues and goodness knows what else we won't worry about coral so much.

But if it makes you feel better about corals there may be a glimmer of hope...

Building coral reef resilience through assisted evolution

Evidence for wide-spread adaptation or acclimatization of reef corals to the effects of climate change does not currently exist, either due to a lack of observations or to a scarceness of events that would drive rapid adaptation, but there are a few glimmers of hope. For example, an increase in thermal tolerance in the most bleaching-sensitive coral taxa over successive bleaching events has been documented at a small number of localities in the Indo-Pacific (91, 109⇓⇓–112), suggesting that these taxa have acclimatized or adapted to high temperature stress. We propose that assisted evolution initiatives may provide coral reefs with the critical capacity to adapt at a pace closer to that of current climate change trajectories. The economic value of coral reefs through commercial and recreational fisheries, tourism, drug discovery, and coastal protection is incalculable, with peoples’ livelihoods dependent on them. It is therefore our responsibility to find solutions to restore severely degraded reefs, with assisted evolution being one possibility that has not yet been explored.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

]

Except Al Gore never said that.

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_pri...ecture_en.html

Ironically a Danish coal carrier passed through the NWP in September 2013.