Slashdot Mirror
Images Show Further Damage To Great Barrier Reef, But Scientists Assure It's Not Dead (huffingtonpost.com)
New images of the Great Barrier Reef, the largest living thing on Earth, are alarming and show the extent of the damage climate change has caused to the coral. But it's not dead yet, scientists have assured, reports the HuffingtonPost citing several scientists. In April, researchers found that more than a third of corals in central and northern parts of the reef had been killed and 93 percent of individuals reefs had been affected by a condition known as coral bleaching (which happens when the water is too warm). New research shows the damage has worsened. A story, however, doing rounds on social media claims that the Great Barrier Reef has died. The viral story has been picked up by many well-read outlets, creating confusion among people. From a HuffingtonPost article: But as a whole, it is not dead. Preliminary findings published Thursday of Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority surveys show 22 percent of its coral died from the bleaching event. That leaves more than three quarters still alive -- and in desperate need of relief. Two leading coral scientists that The Huffington Post contacted took serious issue with Outside's piece (the misleading viral story), calling it wildly irresponsible. Russell Brainard, chief of the Coral Reef Ecosystem Program at NOAA's Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, told HuffPost he expects the article was meant to highlight the urgency of the situation. But those who don't know any better "are going to take it at face value that the Great Barrier Reef is dead," he said. The Spokesman-Review, in Spokane, Washington, fueled the myth Thursday, when it published a blog with the headline: "Great Barrier Reef pronounced dead by scientists." Brainard told HuffPost the recent bleaching event was a "severe blow" that resulted in serious mortality. Still, "we're very far from an obituary," he said.
how quaint
cant manishs do responsive design?
how can you hope to be relevant in the age of reddit and mobile when mobile site is seperate
this is the design philosophy of yesteryear
why do you think slashdot media site runs on wordpress php instead of slashdot perl
Seems it was politically useful to describe them as "dead", facts notwithstanding.
Not unusual, if highly annoying.
Just amp up the negativity of the description, and if necessary change the definitions of basic words. Worked for "they let you do it".
your gettign news form the liberal canadian propoganda site...they are AWFUL.....another nail in coffn for why i just get news from real people in hte area rather then here or the nets lil govt buddies
Its probably pining for the fjords!
Images Show Further Damage To Great Barrier Reef, But Scientists Assure It's Not Dead
It's not dead, it's just CRESTing!
It's only resting...
...that as a geological feature, the GBR is relatively new.
As it only developed over the last 8000 years or so (since the last ice age) it's entirely possible that - in geological spans - the GBR is an ephemeral thing, like foam on the crest of a wave to us. To our short timeframe it seems permanent but it really isn't.
I know, that's not part of the FUD-creed, so downvote me to oblivion.
-Styopa
"93 percent of individuals reefs had been affected by a condition known as coral bleaching (which happens when the water is too warm)" ...or when the water is too cold, or when the sun shines too much, or when the corals die off from diseases brought in by ecologists who swim around the area while getting paychecks for goofing around on a boat in the tropics...
The Great Barrier Reef has been monitored by AIMS since 1980. The first mass bleaching event occurred in (then) record warm year 1998 when 50 per cent of the reefs suffered bleaching. The next in 2002 where 60 per cent of reefs were affected. In both events, about five per cent of the Great Barrier Reef's coral reefs were severely damaged. (compared to 22% now)
The impact from this most recent bleaching event, the most widespread and severe ever recorded on the Great Barrier Reef, is still unfolding.
The Humongous Fungus is the largest organism on Earth
Confucius say: "Man who associates with smarter men than himself is smarter than the men he associates with."
They should just move further south to cooler waters. Unless they're lowlife corals who wont' get a job and are just leaching off the system, in which case they can rot in their dependency hell until the die and make room for more productive members of society to take over and turn the place into luxury flats.
Thanks!
Envirowackos are disappointed that Mathew wasn't worse
Taking the HG wells time machine back a few decades when we could have probably saved it? Even if all greenhouse gasses were stopped completely right this second its going to take a very long time for the earth to trap that carbon again and start returning to normal temperatures. So call it now or call it later but I really can't see what can be done about it at this point.
Maybe if we act on carbon caps we can save some of what is still alive in the ocean.
Great Barrier Reef: I'm not quite dead yet!
Global Warming: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Science: Yes he is
Great Barrier Reef: I'm not
Science: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill
Great Barrier Reef: I'm getting better
Science: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
How is it that no one beat me to this post here on slashdot?
Tetchy mods! Guess I should have put /s ?
Time for humanity to drink the People's Temple brand kool-aid to save the earth! /s
If "living thing" is a name for an area dense with living organisms, wouldn't most of the continents be bigger?
1. The mineral structure, the big rocky stuff that sinks pirate ships that run afoul the reef, IS...NOT...ALIVE... Never has been, never will be. It is merely the mineral deposits that corals deposit on things to use as a base on which to grow. So when they go on an on about it being thousands of years old and being the largest organism on the planet, they are either woefully ignorant or blatantly lying. It's like saying the human race is the biggest organism on the planet because we build cities and have people everywhere. Scratch off the top inch of a reef and you have hit the dead stuff.
2. Corals do not take thousands of years to grow. They take days, weeks, and sometimes months to grow. Many spawn free swimming and drifting larva every lunar cycle or so (full moon).
3. That's right boys and like the 2 girls here, corals are not plants, they are animals that cultivate algae inside themselves to use as a food source. That is the dreaded "bleaching" they are always worried about. Bleaching does not always equal death to a coral, nor is it always cause by a change in temperature. Disease, stress, salinity, water chemistry, water clarity, sand settling, and people (touching, nets, poisons, boats etc.) all cause that. Sometimes the corals dump the algae in order to get a more productive local algae to grow. Corals also catch and eat various things, hence why the bleaching is not a death sentence.
4. Coral reefs are not static. They move over time. When they spawn they dump millions of larvae into the currents which spread everywhere. If they find a spot that is favorable they will start a new reef. Storms break up the reefs and the chunks can go on to form new reefs or end up in dead spots on the old reef and patch the holes. So when they go on about parts of a reef dying, yep it probably is. Is that normal? Depends on why. A reef being smothered by runoff silt, probably not. Water temps changing, yep happens all the time. Currents and regional temps have never been static, they move and change with time. The reef will die off during the change. Temperature tolerant organism will take over, and when the temperature shifts back they too will move on or die and the corals will take over again....growing right back on top of the "dead" reef" like nothing ever happened..
5. Coral reefs can be replaced at an time in locations they find favorable by the average person. They'd like you to think that only dedicated government certified highly trained scientists are the ones capable of dealing with the problem. Not even remotely true. There is an entire cottage industry in the aquarium trade of people who grow corals in their homes. Those same techniques are used often to repopulate areas that have been damaged much in the same way you would replant trees after a hurricane. I personally have been kicking the idea around for years of building my own patch reef offshore for fun and profit down here in Florida away from the well known dive spots loved to death by tourists.
I love the ocean and spend is much time in it as I can, but I grow weary of the shrill land lubbers claiming to know what is best, if only we would just put them in charge. Fuck that. If the government was in charge of the ocean there would be a shortage of sand within 10 years.