Corals Adapt to Global Warming

Chuck1318 writes "Articles in Nature and New Scientist indicate that corals are more adaptable to global warming than previously thought. Large areas of coral reefs had been devastated by bleaching due to the loss of the coral animals' algae partner, which is sensitive to changes in water temperature. Some scientists had projected that coral reefs would all be gone in 20 to 30 years. Now it is found that a more heat-resistant strain of algae is able to colonize the bleached coral, returning them to life."

Comments

Once again...

[cephyn]

...Nature finds a way. The only "downside" to this good news is that people may decide that the environment is very resilient and will care less about preservation and ecological awareness. Yes, earth can bounce back from a lot, but that doesn't mean we should try and stress it from all angles at all times!

Re:Once again...

[MammaMia]

Exactly what I thought... however, at the end of the article they have this to say:

"Corals are still threatened by factors such as water pollution and damage caused by fishing. But most of these factors are easier to reverse than climate change, Baker points out, especially if conservation efforts are spurred on by the idea that corals are not doomed by global warming.

"We may have more time than we thought to put policies in place," he says. "But this argues for us really getting on top of the factors that we can control."

So, there is still a lot we can do to protect the ones that are surviving, rather than force them to try and adapt to further damage.

Chalk up one more

[Jesrad]

Chalk up one more for these guys.

Re:Chalk up one more

[Tiassa]

Chalk up one more for these guys.

I did not read anything by that Lomborg fellow, but I RTFA, and the articles do not say "Rejoice, for Global Warming is a myth!", but rather "Rejoice guardedly, for we may have a bit more time than we feared to rein in Global Warming."

So I wouldn't break out the Champagne yet.

--
Severin's first law: "For every ratio, there is an equal and opposite irratio."

Re:Evolution works

[Sepper]

But it's not going to kill off the entire species, now is it?

Maybe yes, maybe no. Maybe Species X will disapeer and be replace by Species Y+1. But the problem is, will we know the planet will likely survive a lot of transformations, we may not....

And thoses transformation may spell doom for eco-diversity, but not life itself. You still have 'life' if there only microbes on the surface of the earth.

So, yeah, evolution is cool and all, but it has its limits... (If earth get as hot as Venus, for exemple, I doubt much species will adapt...)

Re:Evolution works

[Ayaress]

Its not so much single shocks that pose problems (although, yes, many people do claim so). Global warming will pose more problems for people than animals, I would suspect, since our technology effectively stops us from adapting genetically to changes in circumstance - we can harness fire faster than we can grow fur, invent the wheel faster than we can evolve faster running legs, and discover medicines faster than we can evolve immunities. So, when those technologies fail us, we're left even more defenseless than we were to begin with. Very hot summers in many first-world countries lead to power grid failures because of the excessive drain by air conditioning. When that happens, many people are hospitalized or even killed because of the heat. The reverse happens in cold winters. When diseases develop resistance to our medicines, we get epidemics.

Re:Evolution works

[Marxist Hacker 42]

And, of course, those able to live with 120 degree heat are largely unaffected by the power outages, and the reverse happens in cold countries.

Nobody ever said evolution was NICE.

Re:Evolution works

[Jonas the Bold]

Ugh. Shoulda posted that without karma bonus: Anyway:

I'm sorry, but you have to be truely batshit insane to believe that a personal god, as described by the bible, factually exists. If you use religion as a moral code or whatever, that's fine and even sorta makes sense (it's been tried and tested), but to seriously believe in God is just insane.

Even if we have trouble explaining or just can't explain how life on earth got started, "the magic man made it with magic" simply isn't a better theory.

Re:Evolution works

[Anonymous Coward]

A few problems with your claims:

For one, environmental controls haven't prevented the creation of new power plants. Consumers in Michigan said recently they could increase their power output in the state 35% within the environmental regulations, even more if they reinstate several nuclear power plants that were shut down because of operational expenses. That would have been more than enough to prevent the brownouts in my area this year, and would have been even enough even during the much worse summers we've had over the last few years. They just haven't built the additional plants.

Furthurmore, lawyers have nothing to do with the epidemics. They exist because of the overuse of antibiotics. Because of me being prescribed multiple antibiotic series while I was young, I suffered permanant ear damage from an inner-ear infection that was immune to all the available antibiotics. Lawsuits against pharmacutical companies were next to nothing in 1985. How can you blame the fact that the flu virus mutates so rapidly that the vaccine developed one year is useless two months later on trial lawyers? Not only can they not develop vaccines as fast as new strains of the flu appear, people couldn't hanlde the stress of almost constant innoculations if they could.

Re:Evolution works

[hal9000]

Humans are imperfect beings, and I totally agree with you on all points about effective parenting requiring saying "no," punishment, etc. We truly do become stronger with pain.

But to compare humans with God is to compare imperfection with perfection.

Why would God, as a Perfect being, set up such a system wherein harming people is the only way to teach them and make them grow? A Perfect being wouldn't have to do that, and could achieve the exact same thing without doing it.

We really are running in circles here!

[For the record, I don't reject God because I feel I have been hurt in some way. I reject God on the basis of logic (e.g. the problem of evil), and because the universe as revealed by science is way more amazing than one any religion could ever dream of describing.]

Re:Evolution works

[Jonas the Bold]

Hehe, thanks. Anyway, why it's insane:

The fact that it can't be disproven doesn't mean much, lots of stuff can't be disproven. You can't prove there aren't pink unicorns, you can't prove this sentence isn't in spanish when nobody's looking, you can't prove that your dog isn't a criminal mastermind. However, if you believed any of these things, you'd be considered insane.

If you believed it because you found some really old book that told you it was true, you'd still be considered insane. The only reason, as far as I can tell, for people to believe in God is that a really old book tells them to. The bible is bronze age mythology.

It's insane to believe in God because there's absolutely no evidence or indication (outside the bible) that he exists, and theres no plausable explaination as to how he could possibly exist (almost by definition).

The fact that there's a really old book that says he exists is not enough evidence to believe something as out there and unreconsilable with reality as an invisible man in the sky.

adapt?

[Transcendent]

Corals Adapt to Global Warming ...what global warming?