JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

What a recovery! Hottest ever year causes… coral reefs to grow

Life bounces back

The Great Barrier Reef has had a good year. 2020 might have been the hottest or the second hottest year on record, but it was a bonanza year for reef recovery.

The reef covers 344,400 square kilometres, survived the Holocene Optimum, the Minoan warming, the Roman warming and the Medieval Warming, and is already recovering from a streak of few nasty El Ninos and a cyclone or two.

But the bottom line is that coral deaths are not easily relateable or predicted by hot weather or high CO2. If sea level changes or temperature volatility are the real culprits, the ocean currents or cloud cover may be the driver, and not the number of cars or solar panels in Australia.

As Peter Ridd has said for years: The Great Barrier Reef has about the same amount of coral as it did in 1985

Coral Cover, Northern Great Barrier Reef.

Coral Cover, Northern Great Barrier Reef.

 

What a difference a few years makes. Where, here, is there any sign that either CO2 or high temperatures is a problem?

Coral Cover, Central Great Barrier Reef.

Coral Cover, Central Great Barrier Reef.

 

The trend appeared to be “all down” in 2011, but neither heat nor El Ninos is driving the changes.

Coral Cover, Southern Great Barrier Reef.

Coral Cover, Southern Great Barrier Reef. Some hot years are worse than others:

Great Barrier Reef gets ‘a breather but it’s not out of climate danger yet’

Michael McKenna, The Australian

Australian scientists say the resurgence in coral across the Great Barrier Reef occurred after it was given a “breather” from extreme weather events and not because it is out of danger from climate change.

… last year’s coral bleaching had not killed off coral to the same extent as similar events in 2016 and 2017.

This data is based on underwater manta tow surveys of coral reefs, mainly on the mid- and outer shelf. Unlike some other studies which are based on aerial surveys.

A total of 127 reefs were surveyed from August 2020 to April 2021 (reported as ‘2021’). Detailed reports on the state and trends of reefs by latitudinal sectors and of individual reefs, including their disturbance history, and are available shortly after the completion of each survey trip. Data summaries are available for download.

Australian Institute of Marine Science 2021 Report, Great Barrier Reef

Great Barrier Reef, Australian Institute of Marine Science 2021 Report.

What comes quickly may go quickly, and not all changes are good.

“The AIMS data are promising but it is important to note the recovery of hard coral cover in the surveys has largely been driven by fast-growing branching and table corals, which tend to be the most susceptible species to bleaching events in warmer waters as well as being easily broken in cyclones and the preferred food for crown of thorns starfish.

If we don’t understand what drives bleaching we can hardly control it. Though we can apparently sucker the taxpayer into forking out money to feed bureucrats.

As if 340,000 kilometers of reef does not already have genes and tools to survive millions of years of volcanoes, asteroids, and techtonic shifts.

REFERENCE

The Australian Institute of Marine Science’s (AIMS) Long-Term Monitoring Program – Annual Summary Report on Coral Reef Condition for 2020/21

Latest Great Barrier Reef Condition Report

9.8 out of 10 based on 80 ratings

166 comments to What a recovery! Hottest ever year causes… coral reefs to grow

  • #
    GlenM

    Why do I keep thinking that due diligence is lacking in these maps. I venture that there is a lack of systematic mapping of the Reef over a long period in order to make comparison. I spend a lot of time on the Reef travelling, fishing and snorkeling over many years and in my mind there has been no long term variations in the diversity or overall quality of the Reef. To me, the impacting factors are inshore reef exposure during El Niño, tropical cyclones and Coral phages- such as starfish. All natural and you’ll get the overwhelming majority who do the same as I agreeing.

    391

    • #
      Klem

      I’m not sure you’re allowed to say those things publically, Glen. They don’t really fit the narrative.

      140

    • #
      Geoff Croker

      Assign $1B of research grants to look after 1 square inch of coral reef growing atop Uluru in a minority managed aquarium and we will be told how wonderous that outcrop is and how it will attract millions of tourists and how it requires UN protection.

      It is ALWAYS about the “free” money and who gets it.

      110

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Glen, as you know getting to the reef proper isn’t easy or comfortable, even on a cat it is bumpy and many get sick on the way so I respect the opinion of those who have done it. I wonder how many who comment on, or make laws about the GBR have actually seen it up close over a period of time.

      I’m old enough to remember the reef in the ’60s but sadly too old to do it again. My point is that anyone saying the reef has fully recovered but never saw it pre COT [I do not believe the COT has ravaged the reef “forever”] has no reference point on which to base such a claim.

      I assume you have dived it since my last trip a number of years ago, how would you score it, 1 to 10? A trip way north which included the ribbon reefs in the ’80s I would give a 1. To [maybe Slashers] off Townsville I would score 3. Only the hard corals, fish and turtles score in my system.

      Dr. Robert Endean was a pioneer studying the COT and any serious student should reference his work. As I recall his theories don’t dovetail well with modern assumptions. I can’t say he was right but he did the study so should be respected.

      https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/1997/10/respected-marine-scientist-dr-robert-endean-dies-after-heart-attack

      20

      • #
        GlenM

        To be really honest I haven’t dived for a number of years but I do a bit of snorkeling in water less than 5 metres. My wife being 10 years younger do3s the same. The outer reefs I rarely visit – so it is the inshore ones that I’m more familiar with. Getting a bigger boat soon for trips to main.

        10

  • #
    John R Smith

    “Great Barrier Reef gets ‘a breather but it’s not out of climate danger yet.”

    “Climate Danger” … wow … don’t think I’ve heard that one before.
    Can’t wait til enlightened government policy saves me from climate danger.
    There was an attempted carjacking on my street a few days ago.
    (He was wearing a mask and pointed his pistol from six feet away, so it was a safe interaction.)
    My police district is down from 20 officers patrolling a shift, to 7.
    So ‘climate danger’ and ‘virus danger’ are at the top of MY list.

    John Smith
    it/that

    172

    • #
      OldOzzie

      This week’s global warming predictions

      Every single day, there is something alarming in the news about climate change. Click on any headline about a natural disaster like a forest fire or a flood or a hurricane, and there will be dire warnings in the article about how this particular phenomenon is worse than ever before because of climate change. Google the words “climate change,” and you can learn about how it is making poison ivy itchier, glaciers smaller, and the world generally less pleasant to live in. It is even being theorized that there could be a connection between earthquakes and climate change.

      What I don’t understand is why climate change is seen as a bad thing. It’s normal for the climate to change. Millions of years before the dinosaurs, the Earth was a solid ball of ice. During the time of the dinosaurs, there was no ice at all. The planet continued to cool off and warm up, all without human intervention, and when humans did come along, they adapted to changes in the climate. Up until the 20th century, nobody thought that a change in the weather warranted prophesying the end of the world.

      Today, there is constant alarmism. The media trumpet melting glaciers and how the rising sea levels will wipe out whole countries, ignoring the fact that 30% of the Netherlands was once underwater. Is it only in the Netherlands that water management can maintain human habitation? I think not. Polar bears are seen to be of special concern, with fears that melting ice will cause them to go extinct, yet according to the World Wildlife Fund, they still exist in their original habitat, range, and natural numbers. Such being the case, I take leave to doubt that climate change is wiping out polar bears.

      In short, not a single horror that has been predicted for the 21st century because of a changing climate has come to pass.

      30

  • #
    TdeF

    How dare coral ignore us! We control the universe and whatever goes wrong is our fault and we must pay.

    The rest of the world is playing our Judeo Christian morality back at us as a joke. We are sinners and must be punished for our evil industrial revolution. It must be hilarious for China, the guilt game. Of course China and Russia and Africa and South America and Indonesia and India are completely exempt as third world countries, developing country and historic victims of our carbon pollution. You have to wonder what China was doing in WWII, the Korean war, the Vietnam wars, and the years 1933 through 2020. War after war.

    So now they control the IPCC, WHO and UNESCO and we will be made to pay for our profligate mishandling of the precious and obviously very fragile 2500km long reef which a slave trading thoughtless Captain James Cook damaged with his little wooden ship. Soon the Chinese will have to invade and show us how they handle tropical reefs, like the ones around the Spratlys which are being buried in sewerage by their fishing fleet.

    It’s hard to be sorry enough for the damage we have done. We must be punished. And the UN will decide how.

    280

    • #
      TdeF

      And Dr Ridd must be punished for daring to question The Science of JCU, which is funded largely by the Climate Crisis. So many people doing such good work showing what b*stards Australians are and how no one should visit the reef. Ever. How long before the First People’s claim it is theirs and holy and we must be forbidden? And they will have an ancestral name for it. Of course.

      350

      • #
        TdeF

        How is Malcolm and Lucy Turnbull’s $444million going, 7 1/2 tons of solid gold gifted while he was Prime Minister to Lucy’s friends. Even without a request or a plan or an idea of what the purpose was. Surely that is helping save the reef? Especially the estimated $134 Million they estimate will be spending solely on ‘administration’ of the massive cash windfall. On what the balance of a mere $310 million in gold is possibly yet to be decided but they will definitely do something about the reef. You can be sure it will be spent responsibly. It’s just nice to know the Turnbulls care so much. That’s the thing about really rich people in politics, it’s not their money.

        420

        • #
          yarpos

          I will administer the $444mill for waaaaay less than $134 mill. I estimate $100mill tops due to my innate skill and efficiency.

          150

          • #
            TdeF

            You have to wonder. It’s so hard to get Government grants for anything, but to be handed $444Million without even making an application and without any idea about the purpose must be a first for the Australian government. And no one is saying anything while the UNESCO has declared our reef in danger. And how does anyone spend that sort of money in ‘administration’. That’s a staff of 10 people full time on $100K a year each for 134 years. My gabber is still flasted that the press do not question it.

            Or Turnbull’s Snowy II scheme, again without any financial justification and that is perhaps $6Billion or more. And the bill for the new submarines is heading for $250Bn when all anyone can agree on is that Green submarines are completely useless, as intended.

            And then Julie Bishop’s $400 million for the effects of Climate Change. It never ends, the incredible largesse of pollies with our money, the new Medicis.

            190

        • #
          Dennis

          A black hole swallowed it.

          Please don’t ask embarrassing questions.

          20

  • #
    Furiously Curious

    “As if 340,000 kilometers of reef does not already have genes and tools to survive millions of years of volcanoes, asteroids, and techtonic shifts.”
    This little babe didn’t even exist 12-15,000 yrs ago. Our present shore line was back country back then. Maybe not even much before the Holocene optimum? When was the big melt of the Canadian ice sheet? 20,000- 8000.
    I think coral came after jellyfish, a mere 550 million yrs ago. I just can’t see it surviving a couple of degrees warmer!

    110

  • #
    Flok

    Nature will always win and contradict itself through changing conditions.

    Australian science is too young to make any long term conclusions. It is well equipped to observe seasonal changes and learn associated influences.

    I take my hat off to people that dedicate their life to specific discipline or cause. These people are inspiring, they open perceptions and lead one step towards greater understanding through engaging dialogues.

    In this life nature has grown something just for your own eyes and in dialogue exposes the differences.
    There is so much yet to be seen.

    40

  • #
    Serge Wright

    JCU’s credibility has now reached the point where they might as well do a study on how AGW killed off the Antarctic coral reefs, based on the fact there are none.

    270

    • #
      Jojodogfacedboy

      And yet they, media and politicians, want you to believe that China going full bore fossil fuels extraction and consumption and expansion…will suddenly stop their promises of going green later as we suffer with bad technology and a poor future outlook of what we are supposed to switch over to.
      Good luck with that.
      Just wondering which of our countries will economically race each other to the bottom.

      At least we’ll see some beautiful coral on the way down…

      120

  • #
    John

    Major episodes of coral bleaching occurred on the fringing reef at Moorea in 1984 and 1987. At the time, everyone said that reef would take decades to recover, if ever. We surveyed the same reef during the 1998-99 El Nino. The reef had almost totally recovered in barely more than a decade.

    100

  • #
    tonyb

    Coral sounds a bit like nice English lawns. They often go brown and dead in the summer through lack of rain but then bounce back to green verdancy once the rains come.

    Both corals and lawns seem a lot more hardy than some people believe.

    190

    • #
      clarence.t

      “Coral sounds a bit like nice English lawns.”

      Dunno, you try walking on coral with bare feet ! 😉

      90

  • #
    tonyb

    How will this play out with Peter Ridds credibility, the law case against him and the University who prosecuted him. Is it big news in the OZ media?

    110

    • #
      Sceptical Sam

      We’re still waiting for the High Court’s decision, which is still some time away – possibly as late as September.

      Prof Ridd has had a lot of support throughout the Australian (and world) community. He has stated publicly that this support has “demonstrated to the media, which included the ABC, that there is considerable interest in the general issue of academic free speech and poorly quality assured ‘science'”.

      I suspect it will play out in his favour. The catastrophists will be seen for what they are. The fascists in the university administration will also be seen for what they are. Their ABC? Who knows – it’s beyond redemption.

      212

      • #
        tonyb

        Interesting. I wonder if High Court justices are influenced by what they read in the press about the subject or perhaps they do their own research after the event

        If the judgement is unlikely for another 2 months you would hope the bounce back in Corals would be noted by them.

        130

        • #
          RickWill

          I doubt that the court would be concerned with anything related to GBR.

          One thing in Ridd’s favour is that the law that provides funding for university was amanded to guarantee free speed and academic freedom in 2020.

          In reality. the Australian government will not fund projects that do not support the story line that CO2 is evil. Hence the universities administrators know they can never fund research that shows CO2 is not evil or pay academics who are skeptical of CO2 being evil. In any case the later have been gradually weeded out. The new breed have been so conditioned that their future income depends on toeing the government line that they never even consider anything other than CO2 being evil.

          200

          • #
            PeterPetrum

            “ I doubt that the court would be concerned with anything related to GBR.

            One thing in Ridd’s favour is that the law that provides funding for university was amanded to guarantee free speed and academic freedom in 2020”

            I agree with the first sentence. This whole case is about the legality of Ridd’s right to express his expert opinion, in relation to what JCU claim are the limits set by his employment agreement. The scientific issues to do with the GBR will not come into their decisions,

            In relation to your second sentence, the change in the law came after Ridd was fired and may, legally, not be a consideration.

            I think the decision is very much up in the air and may depend a lot on whether the judges feel that freedom of academic opinion is intrinsically important to scientific discourse and research.

            50

            • #
              RickWill

              In relation to your second sentence, the change in the law came after Ridd was fired and may, legally, not be a consideration.

              My meaning was that the law was changed in recognition of the moral injustice of Ridd’s dismissal. The court may take that now legal endorsement of that moral injustice into consideration. In a sense, the people have spoken on the issue and consider academics should have the freedom to express their opinion. The original contract that Ridd was bound to follow would probably be illegal now.

              However, I am not up to date on the current arguments and the points of law the decision depends on. What I am reasonably confident about it that it has nothing to do with the GBR and false reports on its rapid demise or other questionable research on GBR life.

              30

              • #

                Judges are human too. Even though the condition of the reef is 100% legally irrelevant to Ridds case, if the judgement is balanced on a knife edge, more reminders that Ridd is academically right will surely — in a butterfly wings way — affect the balance.

                It may just silence peers around judges who would be more outraged if they got reminders instead that “the Reef was in dire danger”.

                We all hope this would be irrelevant to a judge either way.

                110

  • #
    Gary Hall

    Would seem that the greatest threat to coral reefs would be falling sea levels. This would have occurred as Earth entered the last 4 glacial periods.

    Also, they seemed to have survived the great warm-up coming out of the last of those 4 periods, as sea level rose some 400 feet in rather quick fashion – often at rates in the 40-46 mm/year range.

    110

  • #
    Simon

    The issue is that the current rate of warming is almost unprecedented in the paleoclimatic record and the reefs may not be able to adapt fast enough. Coral bleaching is a last ditch attempt by the biome to save itself, it may recover but not if the stress is continual or ongoing.

    232

  • #
    yarpos

    If the link in the bottom of the article is correct and we are missing 2005-2020 data of GBR growth/decline status , I wonder how that period was flashed out in these charts. Was the work actually done and data found? are they “adjustments”? what is the split between AIMS and JCU? who does what ? or dont they care as long as its funded? must have a poke about

    60

    • #
      GlenM

      Yes, the missing data from 2005-20. Missing, or not measured due to the never ending frolicking on the Reef and nightclubs and beach parties at tax payers expense. As I posited – the continuity of the data is poor.

      50

      • #
        GlenM

        ..and I reckon they just made it up on their computers. Strong possibility.

        50

        • #
          Serp

          Inspired by Phil Jones and company at East Anglia CRU maybe reasons were found to deep six the fifteen year tranche.

          20

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    As long as you want a reef degraded to only one or two species of coral, then this is good news. None of you understand why the reef is so special so I will give you a hint. The GBR contains the largest variety of coral species of any reef anywhere in the world.

    226

    • #
      el gordo

      Mr Fitzroy the coral bleaching has stopped and the GBR at all levels will return to normal within five years.

      One interesting thing to come out of this is how La Nina had a serious impact on the central and southern GBR. I’ll follow that up.

      140

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘Sea surface temperatures around the northern coasts of Australia were also above average during the 2011–2012 La Niña event, particularly between December 2011 and February 2012, though were not at the record-breaking levels seen in 2010.’ (BoM)

        Warm water off central WA and also along the central and lower GBR suggests those corals were bleached by anomalously warm SST.

        20

      • #
        TedM

        Please tell me what is normal?

        00

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        5 yeasts? Have you published your research? All the papers I am familiar with gives a time frame of 15-50 years to fully recover.

        13

        • #
          el gordo

          They are dead wrong, La Nina like conditions should bring the reefs back to pristine condition within five years.

          10

        • #
          clarence.t

          “All the papers I am familiar with gives a time frame of 15-50 years to fully recover.”

          And yet, there’s the recovery in a much shorter time

          Seems you are displaying your lack of connection to reality, yet again.

          20

    • #
      clarence.t

      And you certainly have zero understanding of the reef.

      No matter how much you pretend to yourself.

      Seems that “zero understanding” is your standard and only mode of operation.

      80

    • #
      GlenM

      Nullius in verba Peter. Oh yes, the term has been debased. But really you must try to resist this MSM and research malfeasance corrupting your thinking.

      60

    • #
      clarence.t

      “The GBR contains the largest variety of coral species of any reef anywhere in the world.”

      Yep, and it still does, and will continue to do so.

      100

    • #
      clarence.t

      Haven’t you figured it out yet, Peter.

      So long as there is sufficient water, ..

      … warmer places nearly always have the widest diversity of life!

      80

    • #
      John R Smith

      “The GBR contains the largest variety of coral species of any reef anywhere in the world.”
      I certainly hope this continues to be true.
      We should be stewards of the environment where we are able to understand it.
      However, northern Africa was once a large grassland with lakes.
      Now it is a large expanse of sand.
      Something happened.
      I don’t think it was humans.
      I suspect there’s lots of somethings out there.
      It is possible would could extinct ourselves by the mere act of trying to stop extinction.
      And I am sincerely hoping we aren’t doing this at this very moment by government decree.

      30

  • #

    That’s from ther German news today:

    Researchers sound the alarm: coral reefs in devastating condition
    Christian Wild from the University of Bremen has clear words for the situation of the world’s coral reefs: “The condition is devastating. And the latest studies indicate that it is getting worse.” He says that 30 per cent of all coral reefs have already been lost, and 40 per cent are massively threatened.

    Around 1,200 researchers from 80 nations will also exchange ideas on how to stop the destruction of these valuable ecosystems at an online congress for five days from Monday. Biologist Wild and his team have organised the 14th International Coral Reef Symposium (ICRS) 2021 virtual, the world’s largest coral reef conference.
    The causes for the destruction of coral reefs are above all overfishing and pollution of the oceans as well as climate change. Climate change causes sea temperatures to rise, which in turn leads to the notorious coral bleaching. “Germany is not a coral reef country, but it contributes to climate change,” says Ferse. Therefore, he also sees a need for action on the part of the German government.

    German source

    50

    • #
      Doc

      I guess dropping a few million tons of concrete on corals, and compacting them with planes and vehicles doesn’t exactly help. By the bible of AGW, the fact the same nation responsible for the above puts out the greatest amount of CO2 each year – with near 8 billion people on the planet to feed, that’s actually great – cops no flak. Hypocrisy abounds everywhere. The greatest ‘laugh’ is the German and EU hypocrisy. They burn immature coal, known as wood, with great abandon and at no cost (they make the rules), and are rejoicing in plugging in to a Russian pipeline delivering gas to their energy systems.

      Any alien seeing how the world responds to its own creeds would be totally flummoxed by our judgement systems. I’m confused myself. How do we elect parliaments that tie themselves to an idea that emerged 40years ago, as though science has never moved on in obedience to their demands that there should be no further debate allowed into the subject? This is the system they are using to continue destroying our economy.

      Why does such destruction take precedence over a determination that current climate science hasn’t matured in the interim and casts their gospel into great doubt? Are they protecting themselves from a past stupidity or are they simply cravenly obeying the demands of overseas powers that they simply seem to be subborned by. I thought we voted in people that we expect to look after Australia and Australians, yet it appears foreigners determine how we are governed. The GBR has been as protected a natural environment as any nation could be expected to tend it. The idea that a natural, living phenomenon has always been idyllic and always can be, is crazy in the face of ever changing climate and local conditions. We are forever being scammed by external powers.

      60

  • #
    V.

    wait for the response: it’s not real coral.

    10

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    I blamed carbon (sic) once, but I think I got away with it …

    Warming Indian Ocean sets stage for spring floods in NSW and Victoria

    “A key climate influence for southern and eastern Australia has shifted to favouring wetter than normal conditions, raising the odds of a damp spring, a late start to the fire season and even floods.”

    https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/warming-indian-ocean-sets-stage-for-spring-floods-in-nsw-and-victoria-20210720-p58be6.html

    Relax. Those corals are gonna coral no matter how many windmills you build.

    40

  • #
    David Maddison

    On a related note, remember that the BoM disregards or deletes original temperature records before 1910. And alters those after 1910.

    In the finest traditions of Marxian/Orwellian rewriting and deleting of history.

    150

    • #
      RickWill

      The BoM disregards the records but they are not deleted. They are there in the raw data and always recorded somewhere in the press. It is just difficult to find the information, which means few people look for it. BoM have the status of a trusted authority, albeit undeserved.

      These days I wonder if I will live long enough to see reality take precedence over models. Right now models prevail. The problem is the models are nothing more than extended weather models and useless when it comes to forecasting climate.

      The Northern Hemisphere has been warming since 1585 while the Southern Hemisphere has been cooling. New temperature records will be set in the Northern Hemisphere for the next 12,000 years but the land masses around the North Atlantic will begin to accumulate ice within 2,000 years. This is real climate change not the imagined CO2 induced variety that comes out of inept models.

      90

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘ … the land masses around the North Atlantic will begin to accumulate ice within 2,000 years.’

        Not good enough, I need to test your hypothesis in real time. Can you give me a forecast for the next five years.

        00

        • #
          • #
            el gordo

            Sort of, these long term forecasts are worthless.

            30

            • #

              Better than what you were asking for. Maybe a thought experiment.

              Go back in time and forecast a future trend, say 1000 years from your chosen time (ie one that we have measured and know lots about it’s physical origins). With all the information in hand derived from actual data- (although you don’t get to have the actual data – that would be cheating) you would have a very good chance of predicting the trend 1000 years hence. However you’d have a miniscule chance of using that data of predicting correctly the next day, week or decade. The error margins would be greater than the variance in the data.

              15

              • #
                el gordo

                Yes, thanks for taking the time.

                We have to rely on proxies of one sort or another, its a fascinating subject. Its possible to know wth reasonable precision what climate was like 1000 years ago, all the way to the present.

                Hubert Lamb did a lot of the groundwork on our drift into the LIA and there are many variables involved. I’m throwing the error margins out the window and relying entirely on intuitive intellect, I can only see five years ahead and all the coral reefs around Australia should be fully recovered.

                10

              • #

                You sound like a pausist. Any dots that don’t align with the trend disprove the trend.

                15

              • #
                RickWill

                You can get my long range forecast here:
                https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNhEUPzdLmLlSCh3_I

                Still working on the short range forecast. I can assure you that no open ocean surface temperature will exceed a peak of 32C or yearly average of 30C in the next millennium. I also know the Southern Hemisphere is currently cooling and the Northern Hemisphere warming.

                30

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘Any dots that don’t align with the trend disprove the trend.’

                Any deviation from a trend is worth forensically analysing for its own sake, the truth will out.

                10

              • #
              • #
                clarence.t

                If you went back 1000 years, you would be in a nice warm period, called the MWP, warmer than the current global temperatures..

                …and would be heading down to a very cold and unsettled period called the Little Ice Age, from which we have thankfully recovered… a bit.

                I doubt you would have had the vaguest clue what future climate was going to do.

                70

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘I doubt you would have had the vaguest clue what future climate was going to do.’

                That is correct but as we enter the 13th century there were clear signs in Europe that there was increased storminess around the North Sea. ‘it seemed a completely haphazard onset of harsher seasons to the inhabitants of Europe at that time but nonetheless it was clearly a time of storms and disasters more frequent than their fathers had known’ (Lamb)

                30

              • #
                clarence.t

                “I doubt you would have had the vaguest clue what future climate was going to do.”

                And I’m absolutely certain that GA hasn’t got the vaguest clue what the climate will do over the next 100 years, yet alone 1000 years.

                30

        • #
          RickWill

          Not good enough, I need to test your hypothesis in real time. Can you give me a forecast for the next five years.

          On Average, SST in 2022 will be cooler than 2021. It will then warm a little to the next peak in 2026. A bit cooler in 2027 to 2029 and then warm again from 2031 to 2034.

          The Northern Hemisphere will continue a warming trend. The Southern Hemisphere continue a cooling trend. Slight downward trend overall.

          I do not have this written up yet but slowly coming together.

          20

          • #
            el gordo

            Okay, no worries, feels about right.

            The warm trend in the Northern Hemisphere should come to an end when the AMO and NAO go negative, with teleconnections to La Nina conditions. Maybe a couple of years.

            00

      • #
        el gordo

        Looking back to a strong La Nina, cool water at the steps of the WPWP and warm water is sent south, causing bleaching.

        http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/history/ln-2010-12/SST-records.shtml

        Can we expect more bleaching under moderate La Nina conditions?

        00

      • #
  • #
    PeterS

    We are witnessing how some refuse to acknowledge the truth that the reef is not dying and in fact alive and well. It never ceases to amaze me how so many, including a few here are blind to the facts and insist the reef is dying due to some mythical man-made global warming catastrophe. It would be an interesting exercise to examine such people to see why they “think” that way. It might help to overcome some of the real problems we are facing and focus our energies there instead of wasting billions if not trillions on destructive exercises, such as reducing our emissions.

    120

    • #
      TdeF

      It’s worse than that. The warmer ocean around the reef which has caused the bleaching is presumed due to man made Global Warming, but no one has ever explained how?

      The other story is that farmers have caused it with their crop enhancing chemistry, again without any proof at all or even remote likelihood.

      So like Cardinal Pell, without any evidence or even any possibility of committing this crime, we Australians and Australian farmers stand convicted by UNESCO.

      And we are accused by the recipients of hundreds of millions of dollars to look after the reef, not only James Cook University but all the usual suspects including their ABC/SBS. Consider if the reef is not in any danger at all and bleaching is a regular event as is likely and affects only part of the reef anyway, why was $444Million given to Lucy’s friends? Ostensibly to ‘save’ the reef?

      130

      • #
        TdeF

        No wonder they want to shut up Dr. Peter Ridd. If he is allowed talk, someone might want an explanation or far worse, want their money back.

        160

        • #
          PeterS

          Evil prevails when good people in power do nothing. I would go further and say the evidence is so blatantly obvious for all to see that some of those so called “good people” are not good at all but evil turncoats of one form or another. Reality bites but of course some people have such hard a88es they don’t feel it, not yet anyway.

          80

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          That description of all the freeloaders in Australia is something of importance.

          The USA has its swamp, and from outside that troubled gun toting land we have a good idea of the depths of their swamp.

          Our own burden, here in the lucky country which “we are all in together” is just coming into view for a lot of people and they are very disturbed.

          Until recently the word to small business owners etc has basically been that government doesn’t care about the damage done during lockdown. Recent media engagement with the CFMEU construction spokesman has shown the voice of a powerful group and coincidentally allowed the plight of other smaller groups to be seen.

          The word is coming out; lockdowns have been emotional death traps bringing an end to a lifetime of work and sacrifice.

          The damage to individuals, families and society is unbelievable.

          The fallout is coming because this can’t continue.

          100

          • #
            PeterS

            The damage has only just started. It will need to get a lot worse before the vast majority of people wake up. Not there yet.

            40

      • #
        Hanrahan

        The other story is that farmers have caused it with their crop enhancing chemistry, again without any proof at all or even remote likelihood.

        I think farm run-off was a factor but farmers have cleaned up their act. The sons have studied and it is in their financial interest to limit the loss of expensive fertiliser and topsoil*. When this was a red hot topic I swam the Ribbon reefs, north of Cooktown, where there was zero agricultural run-iff and they were not exempted from the COT devastation. I cried in my goggles at the almost total wipeout.

        * Sadly graziers in the Burdekin valley have stood idle while their land has eroded and the lower reaches have silted up to the extent that the old railway bridge is now under sand and the swimming holes that existed half a century ago no longer exist. I doubt much of that fresh, dirty flood water reaches 70 kms out to the reef proper though.

        60

        • #
          Doc

          ‘I doubt much of that fresh, dirty flood water reaches 70 kms out to the reef proper though.’ I seem to recall that’s paraphrasing one of Peter Ridd’s statements which seems to have so upset the scientific and activist reef industry.

          40

    • #
      Flok

      Here is a number. 2012 to 2019 total investment into climate change was USD$3,528,000,000,000. To achieve nothing but cause energy insecurity and zero impact on emission reduction.

      https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/9234bfc633439d0172f6a6eb8df1b881-0020012021/original/2020-Joint-MDB-report-on-climate-finance-Report-final-web.pdf

      A statement on world bank website:

      Climate change has not slowed down and its connection with human wellbeing and poverty is increasingly visible. Unchecked, it will push 132 million people into poverty over the next 10 years, undoing hard-won development gains.

      link
      https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climatechange/overview#1

      If so called climate change will push 132 million people into poverty, would you agree that USD$3,528,000,000,000 can fix current poverty and what if that investment is spent to proactively fix poverty?

      Money already spent (washed), nothing achieved and we still have poverty.

      What does world bank got to do with it? Certainly not science. They are creating poverty in science through manipulation.

      60

      • #
        Doc

        Aren’t the current measures demanded to control the world’s climate already pushing people into poverty by high power bills that increase the price of everything? The future measures demanded will eventually push entire nations into poverty; especially the democracies of whom most of the action is demanded. One would expect 132million might already be close to the number in poverty in the current conditions. Only 132 million of 8 Billion in the end will be regarded as a great success imo.

        Imagine the entire world having dumped fossil fuels and going back to the Dark Ages trying to run a world on wind, solar and hydro. Haven’t seen a great number of ‘new green jobs’ appearing. Has anyone? Those that erect these monstrosities will find great employment in pulling them down at the end of their useful lives and replacing them again. That seems to be where big business is trying to gain a foothold for future profits. Remember, the activists pushing this stuff have just started. The world will literally be fed … on what? Ships? Transport, Hospitals, smelting and manufacturing; what is their future, as all those EV’s charge up. Air conditioning and refrigeration? Most people funded by government? Sounds like Cuba and Venezuella to me.

        At the end of the day, this all looks simply like a future world where the democracies destroy themselves and become the paupers of a world run by wealthy nations like China, India, nations of South America and Africa that simply keep doing what they do and ignore the gospel of the climate. Even with our China problems our governments seem to be totally incapable of looking at the future they are heading us towards, even for their own offspring. Maybe I really am getting simple, but what is going on is totally incomprehensible. Governments see a high probability of war breaking out in the near future, but they fail to see the national impoverished future towards which they lead us which will achieve the same result, for us, without a shot being fired in anger. Strange!

        20

  • #
    STJOHNOFGRAFTON

    On the theme Life bounces back: When I did paleontology at uni, the Crown of Thorns hysteria was a big deal. The class studied reef core sample data, in particular for past evidence of that ‘melevolent’ starfish. The consensus was that Crown of Thorns has always been a cyclic part of reef ecology. The biggest nonsense at the time was teams of divers going down to inject the terrorist starfish with formaldehyde solution. That proved to be an exercise in futility.
    Encore! Peter Ridd invokes further real science. Our GBR bounces back despite the periodic panic from the AGW propaganda brigade.

    80

    • #
      PeterS

      Indeed. In the past through when the reef bounced back the alarmists went quiet – until the next cycle. Now, in spite of the reef bouncing back the alarmist crap is getting louder. Something has changed and those who understand what it is know what’s going to happen next. The rest can go back to sleep for a while.

      40

      • #
        yarpos

        Different generation of alarmist that dont learn from the past. History is sooo yesterday. Hence we think socialism and printing money makes sense, again.

        20

  • #
    TdeF

    And the hottest year ever continues in the UK. I do not know if people can survive this extreme heat, let alone coral.

    “The new Extreme Heat National Severe Weather Warning was launched at the start of June 2021, with warnings to be issued based on the impacts of extreme heat with their first ever Amber warning.

    “Amber and red warnings will be made to inform the public of potential widespread disruption and adverse health effects.

    It comes after temperature records were set over the weekend with 31.6C (88.88F) recorded at Heathrow on Sunday, overtaking Saturday’s record-breaking 30.3C (86.54F) recorded in Coton in the Elms, Derbyshire.

    And temperatures are expected to climb further, possibly reaching 33C (91.4F) in some western areas, but widely high 20s and low 30s elsewhere.”

    The record breaking 30.3C in Derbyshire is a disaster. Train rails are buckling. Sheep are exploding. And Climate Extinction looms for the people of Scotland. Sunburn is a new health crisis (Glasgow is 56N but effectively 34 in mid summer)

    If coral really like cold water, you have to wonder why there are no coral reefs around Scotland.

    120

    • #
      Maptram

      In many parts of Australia we would love to see temperature records as low as 31.6C instead of the usual high 40s, except that such temperatures would probably part of a changing climate. And we don’t hear anything about train rails buckling, even at temperatures in the high 40s.

      40

      • #
        Ross

        Funnily enough- when we have extreme heat days in Melbourne, Victoria the trains all slow down. I think mostly because of the possibility of rails not buckling, but slightly bending. Which is always amusing when you consider Melbourne can have (and has always had) extended heat periods in Summer not dissimilar to the rest of state and the country. So, there is something in the rail technology (or type of steel) which is possibly a different spec to the rest of the country?? I know years ago railway lines always had gaps between the rails to allow for expansion etc. Now, I’m pretty sure they are continuously welded to reduce the “click clack” sound.

        80

        • #
          RickWill

          The rails were prone to buckling on the Melbourne network until they moved to concrete sleepers and welded rails. This technology was proven in the Pilbara decades ago and is now common practice in the rail industry.

          The rails have to be held firmly enough to prevent the thermal expansion forces moving the sleepers. Continuos welding eliminates the joints that cause wheel and track impact damage.

          Melbourne has had rail buckling issues this century and is still working to upgrade the tracks. I believe wooden sleepers were still being used in regional Victoria last decade.

          30

          • #
            Ross

            Great info, thanks RickWill. Solves a question I have had for years. Yes, you actually still see some wooden sleepers in the Melbourne metro network. Hence, the slowdown in hot weather. Maybe they are slowly replacing them.

            20

    • #
      TdeF

      I guess my point is that if the UK bureau is seriously suggesting that 30.3C is terrible weather and with adverse likely effects on general health as suggested in the article, this is the biggest beat up of the weather in my memory. And you have to ask why? Is this in support of Climate Change? Are the weather bureaus of the world revelling in their importance as profiteers of doom?

      It is clear enough that James Cook University and othars are destroying Australia’s actively credibility as custodian of the huge GBR, but we are looking at whole organizations, banks, government departments, scientific organizations like the CSIRO and NASA wholeheartedly endorsing Climate Change and its origin, the dreaded Global Warming.

      Frankly in Melbourne Australia at 37C South, this is by far the coldest year I have ever experienced with only a few days in Janurary and February even reaching 30C, but I am supposed to be terrified of Global Warming. I would suggest you could not make this stuff up, but I would be wrong. The coral reef is fine. We have done nothing to harm it and it will outlive everyone on this planet.

      110

  • #
    Ross

    There’s that phenomenon in science reporting whereby the “scientists” observe something new and then proclaim ‘Eureka”. Implying that observation to be important or unprecedented. But it’s simply that is hasn’t been recorded or observed before. It needs a name like “Occams Razor” or something. When I read about GBR science I get that same perception. That in fact, intense scientific study is only a recent undertaking. Since, maybe the 1960’s only?? So, that the observations of reef health from the era are the benchmark. Maybe there was greater diversity of corals back then, but perhaps that was an exception rather than the rule for coral on the GBR. Its like the concept of the ” National Park”- lets lock this little area of nature up and preserve it the way it truly was. Which is nonsense, because nature is evolving all the time. The change in topography over the the Australian continent is immense. Where once were grasslands are now forests. Areas of scrub are now sandy desert. Why would the GBR be any different? We look at natural phenomena in timescales of human life, which is crazy.

    40

  • #
    Dennis

    Is that the hottest year ever, or the hottest year according to worldwide developed nations climate hoax accounting for weather data?

    60

  • #
    Dennis

    When will the UN condemn China for coral reef polluting, many ships anchored over coral as reported recently?

    90

    • #
      PeterS

      Never of course, just as China is not condemned for building hundreds of coal fired power stations. The agenda has nothing to do with reefs, coal, viruses, etc.. It has everything to do with finding any devious means to destroy the West. The rest is just a diversion. It’s that simple and it’s a fact.

      110

    • #

      Dennis – well done for paying attention – David below needs your help.

      07

  • #
    TdeF

    How fragile are these massive ecosystems?

    A total of 23 Atom bombs were dropped on Bikini Atoll in the 1950s. It was a typical atoll, solid coral all the way to the ocean floor as they established by drilling, at least 3km of solid coral so obviously the coral has proven very hardy over a huge time as the mountain sank while coral stayed at the surface and changes and storms and temperature variations which make 1.5C of Global Warming look silly.

    And it is now flourishing. Plenty of living coral.

    So what are we Australians supposed to have done to cause harm to the Great Barrier Reef? It is a ridiculous idea supported directly by grant hungry James Cook University which still hides their fake research. And Phillip Munday. JCU responds in two ways. First they have investigated allegations internally and found no problem. And second, Dr. Munday no longer works there.

    What is being done with our $444 Million, unrequested and unspecified and to ‘save’ the Great Barrier Reef? That is our money, not the Turnbulls’. Who has it? Is it gone forever, the biggest Treasury robbery in Australian history?

    120

    • #
      PeterS

      Under normal circumstances, such fake research is met with much anger from the scientific community. Now it’s different. They are met with applause and praise. Something has changed and those who understand what that change is know what’s going to happen next as they are alert. The rest can go back to sleep, at least for a while. When they wake up they will be in shock.

      30

      • #
        TdeF

        It’s all about the money, fame and world travel. At least prostitution is now legal in Australia, so that is not a crime but when will fake (publicly funded) science be addressed by criminal law? We pay the wages of most of the scientists in Australia on the clear understanding that we are told the truth. And the ABC/SBS/CSIRO/BOM. “In law, fraud is intentional deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain”. Where is our $444Million? What are we getting for 7 1/2 tons of gold?

        90

    • #
      Ross

      It’s similar to what Eisenhower was referring to when he described the “military/ industrial complex” as being one of the greatest threats to democracy. A quote something like that. That has now morphed into the “political/scientific complex”. Where both members feed off each other in a continuous cycle. $ for research grants means more votes, researchers produce doomsday predictions from those $, politicians give more $ to research because it might mean even more votes. Endless. $444 million? The AIMS will pull the same trick that every science researcher employs down to the lowest level. Spend the research $ awarded to them and produce outcomes that are either non conclusive or negative. Then its easy – “Can we please have some more money to do further research?”. Ka ching – another $500m for you, my friends!!!

      30

      • #
        PeterS

        Yes a fair call by Eisenhower but I feel governments tend to become an even bigger threat to democracy. After all they are the ones in power who control the spending towards the military and the tax laws by which companies must follow. The way I see it small businesses are a nuisance to both governments and big business. That might explain why not many tears are coming from either over the dire straights small business are now facing with the repeated lockdowns.

        20

      • #
        PeterS

        Speaking of people of great stature, this is a not so well known quote from Winston Churchill, which is applicable today. Let’s hope that moment of realisation comes quickly before it’s too late.

        “The machinery of propaganda may pack their minds with falsehood and deny them truth for many generations of time. But the soul of man thus held in trance, or frozen in a long night, can be awakened by a spark coming from God knows where, and in a moment the whole structure of lies and oppression is on trial for its life.” Winston Churchill

        30

  • #
    TdeF

    And I am puzzled about what we are supposed to do with the Great Barrier Reef, which unlike the Great Wall of China can be seen from space. We did not build it. We hardly recognized it existed for the first 200 years, except as a barrier to shipping. Now in the air conditioned, snorkel, universal holidays, bikini, tourism, middle class postcard age it is a wonder to be preserved for all time, as it we should build a fence around it? The whole idea of us being custodians let alone failed custodians is absurd. Who owns the Himalayas? I guess that too is being settled at present with China.

    If the allegation is that there is something we should not be doing like tourism or farming, prove it beyond reasonable doubt. That’s why we fund (science) research at places like James Cook University. Their employers are not in China, I hope. Or the UN, you hope. We Australians employ them. Where is our exoneration to present to UNESCO? Is this is, the reef is healthy after all? When did that happen?

    And as for Carbon Dioxide hurting the great barrier reef, would someone please explain how Carbon Dioxide selectively heats the water around the Great Barrier reef and if that’s the case, why no one is angry with China?

    100

    • #

      Tdef you are not up to date with the latest in 1960’s technology for viewing things from space. Indeed there is now amazing publicly available google earth. I have a link somewhere.

      09

      • #
        clarence.t

        So absolutely zero to counter TdeF’s comment.

        Just mindless self-congratulatory nonsense. As usual.

        Pretending you know things you have been proven to be clueless about.

        90

      • #
        TdeF

        Puerile pedestrian puffery. As usual.

        70

        • #
          Greg in NZ

          Can I just say I enjoy, immensely, the wit and humour and banter on this site (big ups to Jo and mods) plus, every day I learn something new about life on planet Earth, and the odd beliefs [The Science] some people hold.

          81

  • #
    David Maddison

    Why don’t I hear any complaints about the damage being done to coral reefs in the South China Sea by the Chicomms?

    https://e360.yale.edu/features/rising_environmental_toll_china_artificial_islands_south_china_sea

    60

    • #

      Oh dear – I suspect it is because you havn’t heard it and I wonder why you haven’t and I have. Maybe because I take an interest and you are feigning one?

      The most recent news making concern is the unregulated sewerage being dumped by boats before they return to port.

      113

      • #
        clarence.t

        Come on ga, link us to a UN statement condemning China’s damage to its reefs..

        110

        • #
          Tel

          Gee Aye was planning to link to one of the many Trump statements condemning China … but now you go and insist on the UN.

          Why don’t you give the guy a break, huh?

          71

      • #
        Doc

        GA, it was simply a mild statement that contained none of the venomous condemnation that would have been directed at any democracy, but particularly at Australia, if we had been responsible. We cop the trashing over the reef whenever some international body wants to make a name for itself or attack us.

        The news reports were simply about the sewerage around the reefs. Nothing about the claiming, take-over and concreting of the reefs. Imagine if Australia had performed such wanton act of destruction on internatially placed reefs. The EU has so much trade dependent on China now that it sounds as though it will leave Taiwan to defend itself.Australia is a different kettle of fish.

        The EU are wimps; they depend on the USA to defend them, hoping to pay nothing for the privelege. China has them by the proverbial and it shows in the tame response, if any, it gets for outright vandalism. For us, that’s international hypocrisy which should be thrown back in the faces of these hypocrits and the media that serves them so well.

        60

    • #
      PeterS

      We don’t hear complaints from the left about anything that doesn’t involved the West. The West is not allowed to do anything except destroy itself by all means available to the leaders and their cohorts, both domestic and foreign. The story line is the West has done lots of bad things in the past (some of it is of course true) and so it must be punished and destroyed. I still can’t understand why so many don’t see this reality as it’s currently being unfolded right under our noses albeit very slowly. That’s the problem, we are too close to it and it’s unfolding very slowly. No matter. Eventually when the fire rages out of control it will be seen and felt by everyone that’s for sure.

      70

    • #
      Ross

      There’s a few people who contribute to this blog who are a little “full of themselves”. Need a little humility maybe. Can I say you are NOT one of those 🙂

      50

  • #
    Harves

    Strange that Qld Premier was telling the IOC how great the 2032 Olympics will be with the GBR as a backdrop … while the usual crowd on this blog would have us believe there won’t be a GBR in 10 years time. Wish the left would get its story straight.

    60

    • #
      David Maddison

      I wonder how many billions the taxpayer will be out of pocket for the games?

      And what’s the point?

      It will be a single sex games only with men dominating both the male and female categories.

      90

  • #
    CHRIS

    Main driver of the GBR is the PH of the enveloping waters, which haven’t changed significantly for millenia. Coral reefs grow and die…it is totally cyclical. I’m sick and tired of moronic “scientists” linking the GBR to CAGW.

    11

  • #
    • #
      Kalm Keith

      That confirms it; we are living in a fantasy world where anything you really and truly believe can come true.

      My own belief system tells me that Australia needs to be free of the Fantasy World exemplified by UNESCO, the UNIPCCC, the United Bloody Nations, WHO and more locally The Great Big Barrier Reef Foundation which has AUD$444 million dollars of Australian taxpayers money stashed away for the next Big Crown of Thorns crisis.

      UNEXIT, PARASITEXIT.

      Free Australia.

      40

  • #

    […] new AIMS report on Monday showed the Great Barrier Reef had a remarkable recovery, but the graphs were of three different sections of the reef (North, central and South). Peter […]

    00