Read here. Climate science alarmists predicted that coral reefs would decline due to increase ocean "acidification" from human CO2 emissions. To test that prediction, scientists examined over 1,900 coral reefs in the Caribbean over a 35 year span. Other than an outbreak of a coral disease in 1981, the coral reefs have been stable, showing no impacts from changes in water pH.
"Schutte et al., as they describe it, "analyzed the spatio-temporal trends of benthic coral reef communities in the Caribbean using quantitative data from 3,777 coral cover surveys of 1,962 reefs from 1971-2006".....Clearly, the temporal history of Caribbean coral cover change does not bear any resemblance to the gradual and continuous decline that could have been expected from the concomitant increase in oceanic pCO2 and decrease in pH. Indeed, after suffering the sharp one-year decline caused by the white band disease outbreak, coral cover once again stabilized, which phenomenon, in the words of Schutte et al., "could be interpreted as relatively good news""
Read here. Despite the growing non-empirical speculation by AGW climate alarmist scientists and Hollywood celebrities that increased levels of CO2 in sea water would adversely affect shellfish, new research involving oysters finds their speculative predictions unable to-hold-water.
"Miller et al. report that when the larvae of both species were cultured continuously from 96 hours post fertilization for 26 to 28 days while exposed to elevated CO2 concentrations, they "appeared to grow, calcify and develop normally with no obvious morphological deformities, despite conditions of significant aragonite undersaturation," stating that these findings "run counter to expectations that aragonite shelled larvae should be especially prone to dissolution at high pCO2." More specifically, they state that "both oyster species generated larval shells that were of similar mean thickness, regardless of pCO2.....Clearly, these two calcifying organisms appear not to suffer the deleterious consequences so frequently claimed by climate alarmists to accompany the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content"
Read here. Ocean waters around the island of Tasmaina have warmed significantly over the last century. Have these warm waters disrupted and destroyed the aquatic life within and among the reefs surrounding Tasmania as climate models and AGW alarmists predicted?
Australian researchers conducted a peer-reviewed scientific study and determined that the prediction of ocean warming harming coastal reefs was wrong.
Contrary to what they had expected to find, the four researchers discovered that "Tasmanian shallow rocky reef communities have been relatively stable over the past decade," in spite of the "substantial rise in sea surface temperature over this period" and the "continuation of a considerable warming trend in oceanographic conditions over the last 50 years." ....Contrary to many people's expectations, as well as their own initial thoughts on the subject, the Australian scientists found very little evidence to support the "doomsday" scenarios of the world's climate alarmists, who foresee continued global warming decimating earth's highly productive coastal marine ecosystems.
Read here. Climate alarmists state that most species will be forced to move substantial distances from their present territories because of global warming. The climate alarmist scientists developed models to predict just how far a species would move due to the increased warmth. Researchers compared the outcome of the models to the actual empirical evidence of birds shifting their territories in the Italian Alps. Surprise! As is most often the case, the computer models were wrong.
"In light of their findings, as well as those of others they cite, Popy et al. conclude that "until a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms is achieved, predictions based only on 'climate envelope' models should be either validated or considered cautiously," which in our view is a pretty generous conclusion. We would suggest that such poorly-performing models not be used at all."
Read here. For the oceans to become sufficiently "acidified" to have any impact on coral larvae, it would require an atmospheric CO2 level that exceeds 2100 ppm. The likelihood that level of CO2 will be attained due human emissions is extremely low, and very far into the future if it were to happen. The possible impact would be a reduction in size of larvae but would also include a positive increase in survivorship.
"In discussing their findings, the seven scientists say they indicate that "the survival of coral larvae may not be strongly affected by pH change," or "in other words," as they continue, "coral larvae may be able to tolerate ambient pH decreases of at least 0.7 pH units," which, in fact, is something that will likely never occur, as it implies atmospheric CO2 concentrations in the range of 2115 to 3585 ppm. In addition, if such high concentrations ever were to occur, they would be a long, long time in coming, giving corals far more than sufficient time to acclimate -- and even evolve -- to adequately cope with the slowly developing situation."
Read here and here. This type of failed prediction story is becoming old news, almost passe. As with almost every single prediction made by the IPCC and climate alarmist scientists, the prediction about Arctic warming killing off species has been empirically proven to be utter rubbish. What a freaking surprise. One little piece of advice to the unwary: don't believe anything a climate alarmist claims.
“The Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI), like the global Living Planet Index (LPI), illustrates overall vertebrate population trends by integrating vertebrate population trend data of an appropriate standard from across the Arctic and over the last 34 years (1970 as the baseline). A total of 965 populations of 306 species (representing 35% of all known arctic vertebrate species) were used to generate the ASTI … the average population of arctic species rose by 16% between 1970 and 2004."
“Co-author Christoph Zöckler from the UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre says: “The establishment of these results comes at a crucial time for finding accurate indicators to monitor global biodiversity as governments strive to meet their targets of reducing biodiversity loss.” Since the results show no biodiversity loss, it seems that governments are meeting their targets."
Read here. During the extreme warmth of the Super El Nino of 1998, over 40% of northern Tanzanian coral reefs suffered from bleaching. A multi-national group of researchers documented not only the recovery of the reefs, but their actual improvement.
"repeated surveys "indicate general stability of these reefs over time," and they state that "in the context of the high bleaching and mortality of western Indian Ocean reefs after 1998, the general stability and improvement of these reefs six to seven years after the largest ENSO in recent history indicates reefs with considerable resilience to climate change."
As for recommendations to protect reefs in the future:
"all countries need to implement local measures to protect their coral reefs, and not waste precious time thinking that they -- or even all nations acting in concert -- will ever be able to dictate the course of earth's climate over any foreseeable future timeframe. In addition, as we have repeatedly posited on our website, local environmental protection measures will almost surely enable earth's corals to better withstand the negative consequences of whatever global environmental pressures they may encounter in the future."
Read here. Contradicting all the global warming alarmist claims and predictions that coral reefs are being killed by human CO2, the world's largest reef is prospering under conditions of higher CO2. Why? First, human CO2 does not harm corals, nor does a slow rise in temperature as experienced by the world since the end of the Little Ice Age. Secondly, if no-fishing regulations are enforced in coral reef areas, the entire coral environment improves, dramatically - this has been known science for many years.
"The results are actually quite impressive. Having a higher proportion of protected areas is good for marine life, it's good for fish and it's good for people who rely on the reef for a living...."
Read here. A major scare claim by global warming alarmists is the for-sure destruction of coral reefs by climate change. Of course, they say this knowing full well that corals have survived millions of years of climate change already. In a recent example of the amazing resilience of coral, a reef was battered by multiple severe events, including: a category 5 cyclone (Firinga, of 29 January 1989) that caused 99% coral cover loss; a severe coral bleaching event in March 2002 that followed on the heels of cyclone Dina of January 2002; plus other bleaching episodes in 1983, March-April 1987 and February 2003.
Despite this extreme havoc over multiple years, the researchers discovered:
"the coral community distribution and composition in 2006 on Saint-Leu Reef did not display major differences compared to 1973....This pattern of recurrent recovery is truly remarkable, especially in light of the fact that "in the wake of cyclone Firinga, Saint-Leu Reef phase-shifted and became algae-dominated for a period of five years," and even more amazing when one is informed that following an unnamed cyclone of 27 January 1948, no corals survived."
Read here. Peer-reviewed research out of Australia surprises scientists involved:
"the most common prediction is that ocean acidification could [negatively] affect individual performance (e.g. development, growth, survival, swimming ability)," especially during the early life history of such fish. However, they indicate that "contrary to expectations," their findings indicated that "CO2-induced acidification up to the maximum values likely to be experienced over the next 100 years had no noticeable effect on embryonic duration, egg survivorship and size at hatching for A. percula, and tended to have a positive effect on the length and weight of larvae."
Read here. It's another case of wild speculations by climate alarmist scientists that starts it; then it is hysterically blown out of proportion by the mainstream megaphone; and, it is then proven to be demonstrably wrong (the wild speculation) by real scientific research. Surprise!
Everyone repeat after us: any climate or environmental predicted calamity, catastrophe, or crisis reported by the mainstream media is bogus - ignore it. Again. The world is not going to end because of human CO2. In fact, the world may become better because of more CO2.
Read here. Climate alarmists are fond of claiming that avian species have suffered greatly due to the "unprecedented" warming and predict they will continue to do so. As is the scientific case almost every single time, the alarmists have been proven wrong as multiple studies find that bird species have prospered worldwide during the 20th century, especially the late 20th century when warming, natural or otherwise, occurred in many regions.
Read here. Climate alarmists bemoan the fate of polar bears due to global warming (wrongly concluded and hyped), yet are curiously silent about the incredible slaughter of birds due to a favored renewable energy solution - wind turbines. The avian massacre is potentially 300,000 per year - the hypocrisy of major environmental groups and activists is astounding.
Read here. The Keppel Island coral reefs of the Australian Great Barrier Reef has experienced severe coral bleaching multiple times. Based on the best scientific guesstimate consensus, it was determined these corals were doomed because of global warming and climate change. Fortunately, we still have scientists that will actually do field research and investigate. And to the consternation of climate alarmist scientists and pundits around the world, here's what they found at Keppel:
"...have shown rapid recovery of coral dominance, despite repeated coral bleaching events (1998, 2002, and 2006), severe flood plumes (e.g. 1991, 2008), and dense algal overgrowth," Diaz-Pulido et al. conclude that these and other reefs that are "able to rapidly recover abundant corals may serve as key refugia, or sources of larvae for reef recovery at broader scales," and that the unique phenomena they documented in their research "may well be critical to the overall resilience and persistence of coral reef ecosystems globally."
Read here. Species extinction, or threat of, is a favorite catastrophic claim of CO2-caused global warming activists and alarmist scientists. As has been documented, rain forest frogs and toads were suffering major decreases in population, which alarmists immediately claimed was the result of human global warming. Actual scientific research has now proven those wild assertions to have no basis in fact.
Read here. Anything climate event that is perceived as negative usually results in leftist/liberals (and the MSM) assigning blame to the supposed human-caused, "unprecedented" global warming. Unfortunately for global warming alarmists, objective science always seems to find causes other than human CO2 emissions. The large coral bleaching event of 1998 is another one of those that scientists have determined was not human CO2-based but a result of natural, cyclical events.
Read here. Climate alarmist scientists predict sea life will cease to exist because of the increased CO2 being absorbed by the oceans. Unfortunately, it appears no one has told the fish. Another climate prediction about CO2 caused global warming/climate change that fails testing and research.
Read here. Which species extinctions have occurred during last 50 years? Ever seen an actual list from a MSM journalist of all these extinctions? Neither have we, and none of us will. Totally bogus lies and fabrications from uber-biased (moronic?) reporters.
Read here. Research finds more CO2 enhances coral growth.
"Many are the people who have predicted that rates of coral calcification, as well as the photosynthetic rates of their symbiotic algae, will dramatically decline in response to what they typically refer to as an acidification of the world's oceans, as the atmosphere's CO2 concentration continues to rise in the years, decades and centuries to come. As ever more pertinent evidence accumulates, however, the true story appears to be just the opposite of what these climate alarmists continue to tell us."
Synopsis: Polar bears have survived much hotter and colder periods. Continued polar bear hunting is the primary danger to polar bear species.
Source here. "Polar bears have survived changes in climate that exceed those that occurred during the twentieth century or are forecast by the IPCC’s computer models. Most populations of polar bears are growing, not shrinking, and the biggest influence on polar bear populations is not temperature but hunting by humans, which historically has taken a large toll on polar bear populations."
Synopsis: Coral reefs are not fragile; they have survived much hotter climates.
Source here. "The persistence of coral reefs through geologic time—when temperatures were as much as 10°- 15°C warmer than at present, and atmospheric CO2 concentrations were two to seven times higher than they are currently—provides substantive evidence that these marine entities can successfully adapt to a dramatically changing global environment."
Synopsis: Global warming does not cause species extinction.
Source here. "The four known causes of extinctions are huge asteroids striking the planet, human hunting, human agriculture, and the introduction of alien species (e.g., lamprey eels in the Great Lakes and pigs in Hawaii). None of these causes are connected with either global temperatures or atmospheric CO2 concentrations."
Synopsis: Wild species have adapted to large climate change in past, and will do so in future.
Source here. "The world’s species have proven to be remarkably resilient to climate change. Most wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles involving temperature changes on par with or greater than those experienced in the twentieth century."
Synopsis: There is no evidence of extinctions being caused by human CO2.
Source here. "The IPCC claims “new evidence suggests that climate-driven [global warming] extinctions and range retractions are already widespread” and the “projected impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance, since global losses in biodiversity are irreversible (very high confidence).” These claims are not supported by scientific research."
"So death is not the corals’ only response to change. The ability of corals to shuffle symbionts is an effective adaptive strategy for dealing with environmental changes, such as changes water temperatures and light levels...Add these two studies to a growing case file in support of the resiliency (rather than the fragility) of Nature. While coral bleaching appears to be mass suicide to uninformed senators, it could actually be an excellent adaptive strategy that has allowed the species to survive for millions of years."
"In 1954, the US detonated the world’s largest nuclear weapon at Bikini Island in the South Pacific. The bomb was equivalent to 30 billion pounds of TNT, vapourised three islands, and raised water temperatures to 55,000 degrees. Yet half a century of rising CO2 later, the corals at Bikini are thriving. Another drop in pH of 0.075 will likely have less impact on the corals than a thermonuclear blast. The corals might even survive a rise in ocean temperatures of half a degree, since they flourished at times when the earth’s temperature was 10C higher than the present....There seems to be no shortage of theories about how rising CO2 levels will destroy the planet, yet the geological record shows that life flourished for hundreds of millions of years with much higher CO2 levels and temperatures. This is a primary reason why there are so many skeptics in the geological community. At some point the theorists will have to start paying attention to empirical data."
"The authors write that "dense coral patch reefs in the Saih Al-Shaib and Jebel Ali areas of Dubai, United Arab Emirates, were heavily impacted by a 2°C positive sea surface temperature anomaly in the summer[s] of both 1996 and 1998," and that "bleaching virtually eliminated Acropora species that had constituted over 98.7% of the reef building coral in the area."....."After having been "virtually eliminated," the researchers report that "in the decade since the mass bleaching event, there are signs of extensive recovery of Acropora cover in parts of Saih Al-Shaib, ..."Noting that "the patterns of resilience and resistance observed in Saih Al-Shaib have important implications both regionally and globally," Burt et al. state that "the rapid recovery of corals following major stress events 2-4 years apart observed in this study does indicate that regional pockets of resilient taxa can withstand these perturbations.""
"Based on these results and conservative estimates of global sunscreen use and potential sunscreen release in and around tropical reefs, Danovaro et al. further calculated that approximately 10% of the world's coral reefs are at risk of sunscreen-induced bleaching."
"Characteristic bleaching scars and isotope temperature records from coral cores commonly show evidence of past bleaching events going back thousands of years. There is no evidence for a recent increase in frequency and/or severity of bleaching events and nothing to link extended periods of calm winds with global warming...In past geologic periods when global climate was warmer than at present corals enjoyed greater latitudinal distribution. The most likely effect of a warming climate on reefs would seem to be an expansion of their geographic distribution and there is some evidence this is already happening."
"The first of these studies indicates that "large species of branching Acropora corals dominated shallow reefs in the tropical western Atlantic for at least half a million years until the 1980s, when they declined dramatically." The second study indicates that throughout this long period of time, the earth experienced several glacial/interglacial cycles for which we have good proxy temperature data, and that the four interglacials that preceded the one in which we now live were all warmer than the current one -- and by an average of more than 2°C! Hence, the Acropora corals that have taken such a nosedive in health -- and actual existence -- over the past quarter century are clearly able to tolerate temperatures significantly in excess of those of the present (all else being equal), which current temperatures may also be less than temperatures experienced during the Holocene Climatic Optimum and the Medieval Warm Period of only a few and one thousand years ago, respectively......the study of Gardner et al. (2003a), who assessed the extent of decline in coral cover across the Caribbean via a meta-analysis of data obtained from a total of 263 sites described in 65 scientific studies. This effort revealed, in their words, "a massive region-wide decline of corals across the entire Caribbean basin, with the average hard coral cover on reefs being reduced by 80%, from about 50% to 10% cover, in three decades." However, they also report that "the rate of coral loss has slowed in the past decade compared to the 1980s," and they say "there is no convincing evidence yet that global stressors (e.g. temperature-induced bleaching and reduced rates of carbonation via enhanced levels of atmospheric CO2) are responsible for the overall pattern of these recent coral declines." Instead, they more logically lay the blame at the feet of "local factors originating both naturally (e.g. disease, storms, temperature stress, predation) and anthropogenically (e.g. over-fishing, sedimentation, eutrophication, habitat destruction)," which they say "are occurring at Caribbean-wide scales.""
"Focusing on the planet's past, the two marine biologists note that throughout the early to middle Holocene (from 10,000 to 6,000 years ago), extratropical North Atlantic sea surface temperatures (SSTs) were 2-3°C warmer than at present (Balsam, 1981; Ruddiman and Mix, 1991), and that reefs dominated by staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis) and elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata) were common along the east coast of Florida as far north as Palm Beach County (Lighty et al., 1978). In addition, they note that this period "correlates with maximal coral diversity at the northernmost position of coral reefs in the Pacific," and that "evidence from both terrestrial and coastal habitats shows that warming during this millennial-scale, high-amplitude climate flicker caused many species from a variety of ecosystems to expand their ranges northwards (COHMAP, 1988; Delcourt and Delcourt, 1991; Dahlgren et al., 2000)." Of particular interest, in this regard, they note that "Veron's (1992) study of a mid-Holocene fossil reef at Tateyama [the world's highest latitude Pacific coral reef] showed that even a brief period of warming of only 2°C doubled species richness from 35 to 72 species at the latitudinal extreme of extant corals.""
"Golbuu et al. examined recovery rates of coral communities on the Palauan reef complex at two depths (3 and 10 m) at several different sites (nine outer-reef wave-exposed sites, four on the east coast and five on the west coast; two patch reef sites; and two sheltered-bay sites) 3, 4 and 7 years after the 1998 El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO)-induced bleaching event.....Golbuu et al. write that "the recovery on some of Palau's reefs was similar to, albeit less rapid than, recovery on a lava flow reported by Tomascik et al. (1996)," in which "remarkable coral community development" occurred "on a bare andesitic lava substrate following a major volcanic eruption in the Banda Sea, Indonesia," where "in five years, coral coverage averaged over 60%, supporting 124 coral species." They also cite Guzman and Cortes (2001) in this regard, noting that the latter two researchers had found that "populations of massive and branched corals in 1997-1998 were more tolerant to elevated thermal stress than populations in 1982-1983 [when another ENSO-induced period of high sea surface temperatures occurred] in Costa Rica, where both events recorded similar warming trends and temperature maxima," which observations led the two scientists to suggest that over the time period between the two events, the region's corals "had adapted to these warmer conditions."
"Yu et al. describe how they "dated massive Porites and microatolls on the reef flats of Younshu and Meiji Reefs, Nansha area, southern South China Sea using high-precision thermal ionization mass spectrometric (TIMS) U-series dating techniques,""....."The seven scientists report that "at least six mortality events occurred simultaneously on both reefs (e.g. in 1869-1873, 1917-1920, 1957-1961, 1971, 1982-1983 and 1999-2000 AD), reflecting the occurrence of large-scale regional events." In addition, they say that "many of these mortality events appear to correlate in time with historic El Niño events, and were probably related to El Niño-induced high sea surface temperature bleaching.""