Slashdot Mirror
Australia's Great Barrier Reef Showing 'Signs of Recovery' (stuff.co.nz)
Australia's Great Barrier Reef appears to be showing signs of recovery after a massive coral bleaching event in 2016 and 2017. Stuff.co.nz reports: The nonprofit Reef & Rainforest Research Centre has reported signs of recovery due to a milder 2017-18 summer, as well as cooperation among science, industry, and government in supporting the reef's recovery, according to the report issued on Wednesday by the Queensland State Government. The RRRC, in cooperation with the Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators, conducted detailed surveys at key tourism dive sites around the city of Cairns in 2016 and 2017 and says certain reefs that were strongly affected in the bleaching event are showing significant signs of improvement.
Coral bleaching occurs in multiple stages, according to RRRC Managing Director Sheriden Morris, ranging from the equivalent of a mild sunburn to coral mortality. "When a reef is reported as 'bleached' in the media, that often leaves out a critical detail on how severe that bleaching is, at what depth the bleaching has occurred and if it's going to cause permanent damage to the coral at that site," Morris said in the statement, adding that the Barrier Reef "has significant capacity to recover from health impacts like bleaching events." Reports that the entire reef is dead due to severe bleaching are "blatantly untrue," Morris said. Still, he warns that the recovery is "contingent on environmental conditions" and that the reef "may suffer further bleaching events as the climate continues to warm."
Coral bleaching occurs in multiple stages, according to RRRC Managing Director Sheriden Morris, ranging from the equivalent of a mild sunburn to coral mortality. "When a reef is reported as 'bleached' in the media, that often leaves out a critical detail on how severe that bleaching is, at what depth the bleaching has occurred and if it's going to cause permanent damage to the coral at that site," Morris said in the statement, adding that the Barrier Reef "has significant capacity to recover from health impacts like bleaching events." Reports that the entire reef is dead due to severe bleaching are "blatantly untrue," Morris said. Still, he warns that the recovery is "contingent on environmental conditions" and that the reef "may suffer further bleaching events as the climate continues to warm."
LOTS of hot water from that super El Nino (largest since 1998), and the temperatures have dropped dramatically since then... Not really a surprise.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Watch this news being used to spin that the politicians solved the problem and it's all good now. Please ignore the half billion dollars they handed out with no tender, see it was totally a good idea, it fixed the reef before they even spent it!
Please tell me it's still okay!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
"as well as cooperation among science, industry, and government in supporting the reef's recovery"
Wouldn't you all have loved to be in the room where such co-operation can reach out and rescue a biosphere?
Funny how suddenly the disaster fixed itself as soon as the money flowed across the Reef healing everything with its cooling touch. .........
Can we save the Koala now? Do I hear co-operation to the tune of say $500M? You Sir at $500M going once, going
At least it wasn't a high school boy.
Listen to the doctor...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vqlq3wsWrI
The reef is fine. CO2 is a nutrient, not a pollutant. There is climate change because the climate ALWAYS changes. Of all the signers of the Paris accord none of them reduced their CO2 output more than the USA. There is no oceanic acidification. The planet is getting greener, in large part because of the CO2 increase in the air.
Can we do better? OF COURSE! Again, listen to Dr. Patrick Moore. We need hydro and nuclear power.
If CO2 is a problem, and it isn't but let's assume it is, then we need nuclear power and hydroelectric dams. Dr. Moore left Greenpeace because they failed to understand the science of the environment.
For people that claim to be such proponents of science they seem to fail at the very basics of it.
Here's a paper by Patrick Moore, a PhD in ecology, on how increased CO2 emissions from human activity has benefited the planet. That includes ocean life like coral reefs.
http://ecosense.me/ecosense-wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/CO2-Emissions.pdf
No wonder the reefs recovered, we are feeding them with our carbon!
Most people think sustainable development was a compromise between environmentalists and industrialists, the development part, but no. It was a compromise among environmentalists, because if you’re an environmentalist in a developing country, you cannot be against development. Whereas most of the environmental people from the industrial countries were basically against mega-projects and developments like large dams and nuclear power plants, huge construction projects they were always opposing, and still do today. But in developing countries, if you’re against development, you are laughed away from the room, because developing countries are developing and that’s all there is to it, they’re trying to have a better life for their citizens and more wealth for their countries.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/03/13/a-conversation-with-patrick-moore/
Have these "environmentalists" thought of saving the people as well as the whales? People need food, water, and shelter. That means buildings, farming, and dams for drinking water and electricity. It also means nuclear power plants.
Every single conversation on slashdot devolves into âtrump this, trump thatâ(TM) in less than four posts these days.
You could post an article about microbes asexually reproducing on the bottom of the mariana trench, and the comments would turn into pro and anti trump yelling withing seconds.
New York Times, March 15th 2017 by By Damien Cave and Justin Gillis:
"Large Sections of Australia’s Great Reef Are Now Dead, Scientists Find"
"Huge sections of the Great Barrier Reef, stretching across hundreds of miles of its most pristine northern sector, were recently found to be dead"
"Subsequent surveys of the Great Barrier Reef, conducted late last year after the deadline for inclusion in the Nature paper, documented that extensive patches of reef had in fact died, and would not be likely to recover soon, if at all."
How convenient that they are vaguely referring to "Surveys" but not actually naming or linking to them.
Everything the man touches turns to gold. Not only is President Trump busy saving America, England, and the World, he saves the fields and forests. And now, he is saving the coral reefs with his policies. High Fives To POTUS! He is the man above all men!
The RRRC has been the recipient of many millions of dollars of government funding. Much of this has been sqandered on wasteful programs ranging from pointless sub and sub sub contracting of maintaining the reef to tour boat operators to the downright absurd such as installing giant fans underwater to mix the deep cold water with warm surface water and average everything out.
The RRRC is constantly at odds with scientists who study the reef and also have maintaining commercial tourism in their primary remit. It should come as no surprise that they are giving a rosy outlook despite what many scientists say.
We hysterical climate zealots were wrong yet again! Happens all the time. We still need more of your money though. 100% of climate scientists agree that they need your money, and that's a consensus so you know it must be true. You better also say 10 Hail Gaias just in case, you don't want to be seen as a heretic.
President Trump lives rent-free in all the snowflakes' heads. They are pwned.
The reefs are doing fine, and they always were.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/20...
Also in that article we find that the polar bears are doing well, CO2 emissions will not lead to a climate catastrophe, pesticides are not poisoning you from fresh fruits and veggies, GMOs are good for you, farmed fish are good for the environment and nutritious, nuclear power is our future, there is no floating plastic island the size of Texas (or of New Hampshire), CO2 is not turning the oceans to acid, and climate change is not killing the trees.
Has anyone noticed that there's no pictures of the plastic floating out at sea? Certainly something that big is visible from space. Or maybe there's some kind of tour one could take to see this plastic, kind of like people going out to see whales.
Getting back on topic, shouldn't there be pictures of the damage to the coral reef? They claim they've documented this. I assume they have before and after photos. I'd like to see those photos. I realize that a lot of this stuff is out at sea where it's difficult for people to see for themselves but someone certainly has taken photos by now. In the past such equipment might have been exceedingly expensive but now a waterproof cameras are sold as child's toys, are a feature of most every cell phone, and if someone wants to get real deep in the water then they might have to spend a few dollars more. For the most part the ability to document this in a way for all to see is quite inexpensive and should be available to even a hobbyist.
In other words, photos or it didn't happen.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
I wonder what the next global panic event will be, that the media decides to blow totally out of proportion. I mean, in the US, the media is undoubtedly cursing Hurricane Florence for no longer being a proper hurricane, but just a strong storm. They'll still find some idiot in his beach house, and splash it all over the news - that will keep them occupied for a couple of weeks. After that, what's next? /s
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
God, what a fucking dipshit. That's the exact OPPOSITE of what happened, but since Liberals are such awful degenerate scumbags, lying is all they have left. What awful repulsive monsters.
The reefs are doing fine, and they always were.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/20...
Also in that article we find that the polar bears are doing well, CO2 emissions will not lead to a climate catastrophe, pesticides are not poisoning you from fresh fruits and veggies, GMOs are good for you, farmed fish are good for the environment and nutritious, nuclear power is our future, there is no floating plastic island the size of Texas (or of New Hampshire), CO2 is not turning the oceans to acid, and climate change is not killing the trees.
Has anyone noticed that there's no pictures of the plastic floating out at sea? Certainly something that big is visible from space. Or maybe there's some kind of tour one could take to see this plastic, kind of like people going out to see whales.
Getting back on topic, shouldn't there be pictures of the damage to the coral reef? They claim they've documented this. I assume they have before and after photos. I'd like to see those photos. I realize that a lot of this stuff is out at sea where it's difficult for people to see for themselves but someone certainly has taken photos by now. In the past such equipment might have been exceedingly expensive but now a waterproof cameras are sold as child's toys, are a feature of most every cell phone, and if someone wants to get real deep in the water then they might have to spend a few dollars more. For the most part the ability to document this in a way for all to see is quite inexpensive and should be available to even a hobbyist.
In other words, photos or it didn't happen.
How does a post giving the opinion of someone with a doctorate in ecology get moderated down? This is relevant information, is it not?
This is good news, isn't it? We should be pleased with ourselves for treating the planet so well.
So full of shit. A few seconds produced hundreds of photos you claim don't exist. That alone invalidates everything else you falsely claim.
Plastic in the ocean:
https://www.google.com/search?q=plastic+floating+in+the+ocean&client=firefox-b-1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigmu3P2rrdAhVmHTQIHfseC_AQ_AUICigB&biw=806&bih=454
Comparison photos of dead/living coral:
https://www.google.com/search?q=pictures+comparing+dead+and+living+great+barrier+reef&client=firefox-b-1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwir4rno2rrdAhUTMH0KHVT8B-4Q_AUICigB&biw=806&bih=454
Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
How does a post giving the opinion of someone with a doctorate in ecology get moderated down? This is relevant information, is it not?
This is good news, isn't it? We should be pleased with ourselves for treating the planet so well.
The provided link is to a website that collates information showing flaws in the AGW dogma*. Any and all references to that blog will be down-modded by moderation-bot scripting.
*AGW dogma is not what any climatologists say. It is the layman's misunderstandings, sculpted by opportunistic politicians, and amplified by idiotic journalism.
The way trump is going , we wouldn't have the science to even FIND those microbes, you neo nazi racist xenophobe (of microbes).
Glad to see Watts Up is still spreading lies. I read multiple articles on that website and every one misreported the science they claimed it was based on. No clue if this is intentional or not, but I don't even both to follow links there any more. Fox New and Breitbart are less of a scam.
Seriously.
Show us actual video proof, moving from healthy-if-bleached coral to dead coral.
Otherwise, all you're doing is regurgitating something you've been told/sold.
Not "comparison photos" or set shots of patches of trash directly offshore.
Actual photos of the great garbage patch, as it's supposedly so large you have to be in orbit to see it all.
And try getting video moving from healthy, if bleached, coral to dead coral.
Because anyone can stitch two photos together and go "Look! This supports what I say!"