Advertisements

Great Barrier Reef Expert : Don’t Trust Climate Alarmists

Professor Ridd - Great Barrier Reef .png

“We have got to a point now where a large fraction of the science that we see cannot be relied upon.” Professor Ridd (Source – Sky News)

STRAIGHT-TALKING James Cook University marine geophysicist, Professor Peter Ridd has been an outspoken critic of the relentless tide of fear-mongering, misinformation and anti-science hysteria coming from climate change activists concerning the health of the Great Barrier Reef.

In June this year, Ridd made the headlines after suspecting something was wrong with photographs being used to highlight the apparent rapid decline of the Great Barrier Reef.

After attempting to blow the whistle on the bogus pictures, Ridd was censured by James Cook University and threatened with the sack…

After a formal investigation, Professor Ridd was found guilty of “failing to act in a collegial way and in the academic spirit of the institution”!

His crime was to encourage questioning of two of the nation’s leading reef institutions, the Centre of Excellence for Coral Studies and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, on whether they knew that photographs they had published and claimed to show long-term collapse of reef health could be misleading and wrong.” Graham Lloyd – The Australian – 11 June 2016

Similar totalitarian treatment was dished out by free-thinking James Cook University to the late and great Bob Carter, a former JCU adjunct Professor. Carter was a world renowned climate change expert and sceptic. His crime – speaking outside the permitted doctrine of global warming climate change.

JCU caves in to badgering and groupthink — blackballs “politically incorrect” Bob Carter « JoNova 

Don’t Trust Alarmist Scientists 

Speaking to Andrew Bolt on Sky News’ The Bolt Report, Professor Ridd says you can’t trust alarmist scientists who claim the Great Barrier Reef is dying, thanks to man-made warming.

Watch:

(Click picture to view video || 1m:19s length)

Ridd The Bolt Report Sky News.png

“When you go back over the science and check it, you find that about half the time the work is wrong.” – Professor Peter Ridd JCU

•••

Great Barrier Reef scare related :

Advertisements

Inconvenient: Giant Coral Reef That ‘Died’ In 2003 Teeming With Life Again

“Our [alarmist] projections were completely wrong,” he says.
“Sometimes it is really nice to be proven wrong as a scientist, and this was a perfect example of that.” –Jane Palmer, BBC, 6 September 2014

What other alarmist predictions, exaggerated claims and catastrophic projections are you fed in order to push the global warming agenda?

Watts Up With That?

From the “global warming and ocean acidification will kill everything, forever” and the “nature always finds a way” department comes this inconvenient truth.

Back From The Dead: Giant Coral Reef That ‘Died’ In 2003 Teeming With Life Again

In 2003, researchers declared Coral Castles dead.

On the floor of a remote island lagoon halfway between Hawaii and Fiji, the giant reef site had been devastated by unusually warm water. Its remains looked like a pile of drab dinner plates tossed into the sea. Research dives in 2009 and 2012 had shown little improvement in the coral colonies.

Then in 2015, a team of marine biologists was stunned and overjoyed to find the giant coral reef once again teeming with life. But the rebound came with a big question: Could the enormous and presumably still fragile coral survive what would be the hottest year on record? This month, the Massachusetts-based research team…

View original post 189 more words


Great Barrier Reef in near pristine condition: dive boat operators

This latest dose of Great Barrier Reef fear-mongering recently beamed across the world, care of climate activist groups and their complicit media, has no doubt done untold damage to Australia’s international reputation. Most critically and sadly to its tourist industry, endangering the livelihoods of the good people who are employed in the region.

Who will be made accountable or held responsible for the blatant lies, exaggeration of data and wreckless alarmism trotted out in order to forward their climate agenda? Falsehoods that do far more harm than good.

Of course, no one will be held accountable. Because again, the worst any reef or climate change alarmist can ever be accused of is an excess of “save the planet” virtue.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

View original post 662 more words


A Response to ABC’s Media Watch’s “Shoot the Coral Messenger” Flimflam!

“Furthermore knowing the Great Barrier Reef was left high and dry just 15,000 years ago when the Ice Age dropped sea level by 400 feet, and then returned to its present glory when sea level rose, made coral resilience a captivating nature story. In addition coral survived the Ice Age’s intense cold and then thrived in warmer waters 2 C warmer than today just 6000 years ago and 1 degree warmer just a thousand years ago. Such resilience to an ever-changing climate suggested scleractinian coral had evolved exquisite mechanisms of adaptation.”

“In contrast Hoegh-Guldberg and Media Watch have eschewed that integrity. Instead of promoting a scientific discussion of alternative explanations that is accessible to the public, they have tried to suppress discussion and obscure any evidence that contradicts their tenuous claims. Even a bird-brain can see they do a great disservice to the scientific process. But Hoegh-Guldberg’s persistent efforts to discredit the adaptive benefits of symbiont shifting and shuffling, serve as blatant example of why Feynman also argued “Science is the belief in the Ignorance of Experts.””

A must read…

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Jim Steele

Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism

clip_image001

Great Barrier Reef With Exposed Coral at Low Tide

Being a Yankee I just recently became aware of the Australian Broadcasting Company’s Media Watch (MW) and The Australian when I first attracted Hoegh-Guldberg and later MW’s wrath by posting my essay, The Coral Bleaching Debate: Is Bleaching the Legacy of a Marvelous Adaptation Mechanism or A Prelude to Extirpation?, to the blogosphere. The essay got widespread attention after being re-posted on Dr. Judith Curry and Watts Up With That’s websites. I garnered additional attention when The Australian’s Graham Lloyd posted a few excerpts from the essay as an alternative viewpoint. Oddly the subsequent discussions about coral resilience did not focus on coral biology and the emerging science my essay detailed…

View original post 3,106 more words


Expert: Scientists exaggerated coral bleaching story

What other falsehoods are environmental activists like Tim Flannery and complicit media – ABC, Fairfax, The Age, BBC, CNN etc etc, willing to spread in order to push their ever-dangerous global warming agenda?

I say dangerous, as this particular incident of blatant climate change alarmism endagers Australia’s international reputation, especially its tourist industry and the livelihoods of the good people who are employed in the region.

Who will be made accountable or held responsible for the blatant lies, exaggeration of data and wreckless alarmism? No one, of course. Because again, the worst any Reef or climate change alarmist can ever be accused of is an excess of virtue, in order to “Save the planet”.

Watts Up With That?

Cam Jones writes via Tips and notes:

This is a biggie. What makes it a biggie is that the Head of the Government-run department is speaking out against intentionally bias claims of climate change induced destruction of the Great Barrier Reef

Great Barrier Reef: scientists ‘exaggerated’ coral bleaching

By Graham Lloyd -The Australian

There is growing scientific conflict over bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Picture: Tourism Queensland

There is growing scientific conflict over bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Picture: Tourism Queensland

Activist scientists and lobby groups have distorted surveys, maps and data to misrepresent the extent and impact of coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef, ­according to the chairman of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Russell Reichelt.

A full survey of the reef ­released yesterday by the author­ity and the Australian Institute of Marine ­Science said 75 per cent of the reef would escape unscathed.

Dr Reichelt said the vast bulk of bleaching damage was confined to the far northern section…

View original post 494 more words


Claim: Ocean Acidification Is Climate Change’s ‘Equally Evil Twin’

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world
.”
– Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment

The emerging ‘environmentalization’ of our civilization
and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global
community will inevitably have multiple political consequences.
Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change
in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must
assume some aspects of a world government.

– Mikhail Gorbachev,
State of the World Forum

The only way to get our society to truly change is to
frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe
.”
– emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

•••

Screen Shot 2013-09-09 at , September 9, 4.51.30 PM

Screen Shot 2013-09-09 at , September 9, 4.51.03 PM

Ocean Acidification Is Climate Change’s ‘Equally Evil Twin,’ NOAA Chief Says

•••

The term ‘Ocean Acidification’ is not a scientific term. It is a term used to scare and frighten. The correct scientific term is ‘less alkaline’.

IPCC and alarmist claims that ‘ocean acidification’, causing harm to corals due to increased human CO² concentrations in the ocean, are completely unsubstantiated by empirical evidence and peer-reviewed science.

Steven Goddard notes:

Corals evolved during the Cambrian Era six hundred million years ago, with CO2 levels 4000% of what they are now. They are made of Calcium Carbonate (CaCO3) – and could not exist without substantial amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Unless the chemical properties of CaCO3 have changed, the corals will be just fine.

•••

A new Peer-reviewed study shoots down NOAA and HuffPO’s ‘Equally Evil Twin’ hysteria:

The Multiple Impacts of “Ocean Acidification” on a Tropical Coral


Reference
Takahashi, A. and Kurihara, H. 2013. Ocean acidification does not affect the physiology of the tropical coralAcropora digitifera during a 5-week experiment. Coral Reefs 32: 305-314.

Background
The authors write that “according to the IPCC (2007) models, atmospheric CO2 is predicted to rise to 540-970 ppm by the end of this century and reach a maximum of approximately 1,900 ppm when the world’s fossil fuel reserves are fully exploited,” while noting that “a substantial number of laboratory studies have suggested a decline in coral calcification with a rise in seawater pCO2.” However, they say that recentstudies “have postulated that the sensitivity of corals to elevated levels of CO2 is potentially more diverse than previously considered,” citing the works of Fabricius et al. (2011), Pandolfi et al. (2011) and Rodolfo-Metalpa et al. (2011).

What was done
Intrigued by these new and diverse findings, Takahashi and Kurihara measured the rates of calcification, respiration and photosynthesis of the tropical coral Acropora digitifera – along with the coral’s zooxanthellae density – under near-natural summertime temperature and sunlight conditions for a period of five weeks.

What was learned
The two Japanese researchers found that these “key physiological parameters” were not affected by either predicted mid-range CO2 concentrations (pCO2 = 744 ppm, pH = 7.97, Ωarag = 2.6) or by high CO2concentrations (pCO2 = 2,142 ppm, pH = 7.56, Ωarag = 1.1) over the 35-day period of their experiment. In addition, they state that there was “no significant correlation between calcification rate and seawater aragonite saturation (Ωarag)” and “no evidence of CO2 impact on bleaching.”

What it means
Contrary to what many climate alarmists have long contended, there is mounting evidence that suggests that the negative consequences they predict for the world’s marine life in a future high-CO2 world are by no means assured, nor are they likely to be widespread. Keep Reading »

Source: CO² Science

•••

Another CO² scare flops. The IPCC alarmist predictions about harm to corals from CO² are unfounded. Again, nature is not cooperating with the IPCC’s fear-mongering.

•••

UPDATE

Via The Australian

Forget the doom: coral reefs will bloom

  • GRAHAM LLOYD, ENVIRONMENT EDITOR
  • THE AUSTRALIAN
  • DECEMBER 10, 2012 5:00AM

A WIDESPREAD belief that the world’s coral reefs face a calamitous future due to climate change is proving less resilient than the natural wonders themselves.

Rising sea temperatures, storm damage and ocean acidification have grabbed the headlines as looming threats to reef survival.

But as each concern is more thoroughly investigated, scientists are finding nature better equipped to cope than they had imagined.

The latest research, published in Nature: Climate Change today, blows away the theory that reefs were doomed due to rising ocean acidification caused by the higher take-up of carbon dioxide in the seas. Keep Reading »

UPDATE

via WattsUpWithThat :

The Ocean Is Not Getting Acidified

Posted on December 27, 2011 by 

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

There’s an interesting study out on the natural pH changes in the ocean. I discussed some of these pH changes a year ago in my post “The Electric Oceanic Acid Test“. Before getting to the new study, let me say a couple of things about pH.

The pH scale measures from zero to fourteen. Seven is neutral, because it is the pH of pure water. Below seven is acidic. Above seven is basic. This is somewhat inaccurately but commonly called “alkaline”. Milk is slightly acidic. Baking soda is slightly basic (alkaline).

Figure 1. pH scale, along with some examples.

The first thing of note regarding pH is that alkalinity is harder on living things than is acidity. Both are corrosive of living tissue, but alkalinity has a stronger effect. It seems counterintuitive, but it’s true. For example, almost all of our foods are acidic. We eat things with a pH of 2, five units below the neutral reading of 7 … but nothing with a corresponding pH of 12, five units above neutral. The most alkaline foods are eggs (pH up to 8) and dates and crackers (pH up to 8.5). Heck, our stomach acid has a pH of 1.5 to 3.0, and our bodies don’t mind that at all … but don’t try to drink Drano, the lye will destroy your stomach.

That’s why when you want to get rid of an inconvenient body, you put lye on it, not acid. It’s also why ocean fish often have a thick mucus layer over their skin, inter alia to protect them from the alkalinity. Acidity is no problem for life compared to alkalinity.  Keep Reading »

•••

Related :

h/t Real Science