Coral Bleaching- Normal and Natural Variation... Not due to AGW

[Billy_Bob]

Remember when they told us coral bleaching was a sure result of recent man-made global warming? Never mind.

Reconstructing Four Centuries of Temperature-Induced Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef

Abstract:

Mass coral bleaching events during the last 20 years have caused major concern over the future of coral reefs worldwide. Despite damage to key ecosystem engineers, little is known about bleaching frequency prior to 1979 when regular modern systematic scientific observations began on the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). To understand the longer-term relevance of current bleaching trajectories, the likelihood of future coral acclimatization and adaptation, and thus persistence of corals, records, and drivers of natural pre-industrial bleaching frequency and prevalence are needed. Here, we use linear extensions from 44 overlapping GBR coral cores to extend the observational bleaching record by reconstructing temperature-induced bleaching patterns over 381 years spanning 1620–2001. Porites spp. corals exhibited variable bleaching patterns with bleaching frequency (number of bleaching years per decade) increasing (1620–1753), decreasing (1754–1820), and increasing (1821–2001) again. Bleaching prevalence (the proportion of cores exhibiting bleaching) fell (1670–1774) before increasing by 10% since the late 1790s concurrent with positive temperature anomalies, placing recently observed increases in GBR coral bleaching into a wider context. Spatial inconsistency along with historically diverging patterns of bleaching frequency and prevalence provide queries over the capacity for holobiont (the coral host, the symbiotic microalgae and associated microorganisms) acclimatization and adaptation via bleaching, but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.

Well....

My oh my... This is a natural and cyclical event caused by Super El Niño events and has no relation or correlation to AGW...

 

[Kosh]

Most of these claims are usually debunked at some point.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Reconstructing Four Centuries of Temperature-Induced Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef

The paper is open access..

 

[Kosh]

 

[S.J.]

The left has been busy busy busy over the decades with all of their hoaxes. And all of them are efforts to arrive at the same goal, which is to control our movements, our behavior, and our votes.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Wow..

I expected our resident self proclaimed oceanographer to jump in and scream, jump up and down, call names, etc for posting up this peer-reviewed work....

Crickets...........

 

[mamooth]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

 

[Billy_Bob]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

You obviously didn't read the paper I read... It clearly exposed Natural variation as the primary driver and that we are no where near a catastrophic collapse of anything.... LOL... Your projecting your views again without facts to support your conjecture.. You've been reading SkepticalShitScience again..

 

[Old Rocks]

Reconstructing Four Centuries of Temperature-Induced Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef
Nicholas A. Kamenos1* and Sebastian J. Hennige2

• 1School of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
• 2School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Mass coral bleaching events during the last 20 years have caused major concern over the future of coral reefs worldwide. Despite damage to key ecosystem engineers, little is known about bleaching frequency prior to 1979 when regular modern systematic scientific observations began on the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). To understand the longer-term relevance of current bleaching trajectories, the likelihood of future coral acclimatization and adaptation, and thus persistence of corals, records, and drivers of natural pre-industrial bleaching frequency and prevalence are needed. Here, we use linear extensions from 44 overlapping GBR coral cores to extend the observational bleaching record by reconstructing temperature-induced bleaching patterns over 381 years spanning 1620–2001. Porites spp. corals exhibited variable bleaching patterns with bleaching frequency (number of bleaching years per decade) increasing (1620–1753), decreasing (1754–1820), and increasing (1821–2001) again. Bleaching prevalence (the proportion of cores exhibiting bleaching) fell (1670–1774) before increasing by 10% since the late 1790s concurrent with positive temperature anomalies, placing recently observed increases in GBR coral bleaching into a wider context. Spatial inconsistency along with historically diverging patterns of bleaching frequency and prevalence provide queries over the capacity for holobiont (the coral host, the symbiotic microalgae and associated microorganisms) acclimatization and adaptation via bleaching, but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.

Reconstructing Four Centuries of Temperature-Induced Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef

Note the last sentence. "May suggest coral populations are reaching an upper threshold, a "tipping point" beyond which coral survival is uncertain. That says exactly opposite to what the WUWT article is saying. Yes, there have been bleaching events in the past. And how long did it take the coral to recover? There were not 7+ billion people on this planet then, 2 billion of which are dependent on the ocean for their protean. And the corals are the richest habitat in the ocean.

 

[Old Rocks]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

You obviously didn't read the paper I read... It clearly exposed Natural variation as the primary driver and that we are no where near a catastrophic collapse of anything.... LOL... Your projecting your views again without facts to support your conjecture.. You've been reading SkepticalShitScience again..

More shit from you ample ass. Burger flipper, WUWT is not a credible source. And their interpretation is 180 degrees off. Just as yours is.

 

[Billy_Bob]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

You obviously didn't read the paper I read... It clearly exposed Natural variation as the primary driver and that we are no where near a catastrophic collapse of anything.... LOL... Your projecting your views again without facts to support your conjecture.. You've been reading SkepticalShitScience again..

More shit from you ample ass. Burger flipper, WUWT is not a credible source. And their interpretation is 180 degrees off. Just as yours is.

Say's the moron who thinks Hotwhopper and SkepticalShitScience are credible sources...

 

[Billy_Bob]

may suggest

And then they show no proof.... All while showing Natural Variation and cycles not connected to AGW are in fact the cause...

You see what you want to see and fail to use cognitive thought...

 

[Crick]

YOU post a paper that says exactly the OPPOSITE of what you contend, then criticize them of no proof when they point out that simple and well demonstrated FACT? What a fucking idiot you are.

 

[Muhammed]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

You obviously didn't read the paper I read... It clearly exposed Natural variation as the primary driver and that we are no where near a catastrophic collapse of anything.... LOL... Your projecting your views again without facts to support your conjecture.. You've been reading SkepticalShitScience again..

More shit from you ample ass. Burger flipper, WUWT is not a credible source. And their interpretation is 180 degrees off. Just as yours is.

The climategate emails absolutely destroy your idiotic rants, jackass.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Reconstructing Four Centuries of Temperature-Induced Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef
Nicholas A. Kamenos1* and Sebastian J. Hennige2

• 1School of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
• 2School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Mass coral bleaching events during the last 20 years have caused major concern over the future of coral reefs worldwide. Despite damage to key ecosystem engineers, little is known about bleaching frequency prior to 1979 when regular modern systematic scientific observations began on the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). To understand the longer-term relevance of current bleaching trajectories, the likelihood of future coral acclimatization and adaptation, and thus persistence of corals, records, and drivers of natural pre-industrial bleaching frequency and prevalence are needed. Here, we use linear extensions from 44 overlapping GBR coral cores to extend the observational bleaching record by reconstructing temperature-induced bleaching patterns over 381 years spanning 1620–2001. Porites spp. corals exhibited variable bleaching patterns with bleaching frequency (number of bleaching years per decade) increasing (1620–1753), decreasing (1754–1820), and increasing (1821–2001) again. Bleaching prevalence (the proportion of cores exhibiting bleaching) fell (1670–1774) before increasing by 10% since the late 1790s concurrent with positive temperature anomalies, placing recently observed increases in GBR coral bleaching into a wider context. Spatial inconsistency along with historically diverging patterns of bleaching frequency and prevalence provide queries over the capacity for holobiont (the coral host, the symbiotic microalgae and associated microorganisms) acclimatization and adaptation via bleaching, but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.

Reconstructing Four Centuries of Temperature-Induced Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef

Note the last sentence. "May suggest coral populations are reaching an upper threshold, a "tipping point" beyond which coral survival is uncertain. That says exactly opposite to what the WUWT article is saying. Yes, there have been bleaching events in the past. And how long did it take the coral to recover? There were not 7+ billion people on this planet then, 2 billion of which are dependent on the ocean for their protean. And the corals are the richest habitat in the ocean.

May suggest coral populations are reaching an upper threshold, a "tipping point" beyond which coral survival is uncertain.

We’ll add that to famines from overpopulation, Hetrosexual HIV epidemic, boob implants slaughtering women, upcoming ice/heat/whatever age and the other dozen predicted catastrophes that never came true.

You’re batting 1.000

 

[polarbear]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

You obviously didn't read the paper I read... It clearly exposed Natural variation as the primary driver and that we are no where near a catastrophic collapse of anything.... LOL... Your projecting your views again without facts to support your conjecture.. You've been reading SkepticalShitScience again..

More shit from you ample ass. Burger flipper, WUWT is not a credible source. And their interpretation is 180 degrees off. Just as yours is.

Say's the moron who thinks Hotwhopper and SkepticalShitScience are credible sources...

Say's the moron who thinks Hotwhopper and SkepticalShitScience are credible sources
Matter not to him that John Cook used Lubos Motl, the name of the prominent physicist to log on and praise John Cook posts. Then after he got caught he "explained" that he was doing this for "use of a psychology experiment".
Lets see him try that again today after facebook & Twitter finally started to give people like that the boot.

 

[mamooth]

Matter not to him that John Cook used Lubos Motl, the name of the prominent physicist to log on and praise John Cook posts. Then after he got caught he "explained" that he was doing this for "use of a psychology experiment".

You're lying. You probably don't know it, because you're an authoritarian follower who just parrots what he's told. All the dictators in history have loved Useful Idiots like you.

Why didn't you mention that the discussion only occurred in a private forum, and never saw any public exposure, until denier fascists swiped the data? Did your cult not mention that? Cook played a little injoke in a private discussion. Your side swiped data. Your side looks corrupt, and you look corrupt for supporting them.

The violently psychopathic Motl also started screaming that Cook should be killed. I won't ask you to condemn that, because we all know you don't have the guts or integrity to go against your cult, and because everyone knows how the thought of violence gives you a tingle up the leg. That's how you authoritarian-followers roll.

Meanwhile, while you all get ever more violent and unhinged, we'll all just keep kicking your weepy butts with hard data, like we've always done. Run back to your cult and ask them how to respond to that.

 

[Sunsettommy]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

I see that you and Old Rocks LIED like hell since WUWT posted the entire Abstract with the part YOU are squealing about in it:

"May suggest coral populations are reaching an upper threshold, a "tipping point" beyond which coral survival is uncertain."

What you two completely left out is this, ALSO FROM THE SAME PAPER,



Figure 4. Massive Porites spp. bleaching frequency and prevalence. NOAA extended sea surface temperature (SST) for Great Barrier Reef (GBR) (A) from ship and buoy data (1854–2000, 11 yr moving average, red line) (Smith et al., 2008). Southern hemisphere surface temperature anomaly (ocean and land) reconstruction (Mann et al., 2008) (solid line) with the uncertainty (0.23°C) on the reconstruction indicated (the reconstruction includes coral extension rates so is not fully independent of our reconstruction). Dashed line indicates mean temperature over record length (1570–1995). Bleaching frequency (B) (number of years per decadal bin in which bleaching occurred) and prevalence (C) (% of corals bleached per decade) observed in at least 20% of coral for the GBR denoted by blue bars. Red color bars indicate years in which less than 2 (frequency)/3 (prevalence) coral cores were available; those years were excluded from further analysis (see Supplementary Material). Number of coral cores available in each decade indicated by solid black line. Dashed black line indicates breakpoint determined linear trend in bleaching and horizontal solid black lines represent breakpoint location 95%CI. For (B) decade notation marks the start of the bin for frequency and each coral core (n = 44) contributed up to 10 annual growth extensions per decadal bin."

This stated possibility doesn't make sense anyway since the TIME FRAME of the paper mostly occurs during the LIA, when the waters were cooler:

" but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain."

Not only that they don' show what it was like during the MWP, Roman Warming, Minoan Warming or the warmest of all Holocene Optimism, when the world was at its warmest by at least 2 degrees F higher than now.

Corals have been around for at least 100 million years, most of the time the planet was MUCH warmer than now.

 

[Billy_Bob]

From the paper:
---
but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain.
---

So, the paper says the current bleaching has the corals reaching a point of no return. That is, it's unprecedented.

I wonder why WUWT lied about that? Oh wait, I don't wonder. Lying is what they do.

And I don't have to wonder why the usual suspects here just repeated the lies, instead of reading the paper themselves. Repeating propaganda is all they're capable of.

I see that you and Old Rocks LIED like hell since WUWT posted the entire Abstract with the part YOU are squealing about in it:

"May suggest coral populations are reaching an upper threshold, a "tipping point" beyond which coral survival is uncertain."

What you two completely left out is this, ALSO FROM THE SAME PAPER,



Figure 4. Massive Porites spp. bleaching frequency and prevalence. NOAA extended sea surface temperature (SST) for Great Barrier Reef (GBR) (A) from ship and buoy data (1854–2000, 11 yr moving average, red line) (Smith et al., 2008). Southern hemisphere surface temperature anomaly (ocean and land) reconstruction (Mann et al., 2008) (solid line) with the uncertainty (0.23°C) on the reconstruction indicated (the reconstruction includes coral extension rates so is not fully independent of our reconstruction). Dashed line indicates mean temperature over record length (1570–1995). Bleaching frequency (B) (number of years per decadal bin in which bleaching occurred) and prevalence (C) (% of corals bleached per decade) observed in at least 20% of coral for the GBR denoted by blue bars. Red color bars indicate years in which less than 2 (frequency)/3 (prevalence) coral cores were available; those years were excluded from further analysis (see Supplementary Material). Number of coral cores available in each decade indicated by solid black line. Dashed black line indicates breakpoint determined linear trend in bleaching and horizontal solid black lines represent breakpoint location 95%CI. For (B) decade notation marks the start of the bin for frequency and each coral core (n = 44) contributed up to 10 annual growth extensions per decadal bin."

This stated possibility doesn't make sense anyway since the TIME FRAME of the paper mostly occurs during the LIA, when the waters were cooler:

" but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain."

Not only that they don' show what it was like during the MWP, Roman Warming, Minoan Warming or the warmest of all Holocene Optimism, when the world was at its warmest by at least 2 degrees F higher than now.

Corals have been around for at least 100 million years, most of the time the planet was MUCH warmer than now.

They choose to ignore real science and cognitive thought process.. Unfortunately there is no hope for people with this affliction. Until they are lambasted with facts, which are undeniable and they have no way out, they will continue to believe... Even then many will not change their belief in the made up crap..

 

[mamooth]

I see that you and Old Rocks LIED like hell since WUWT posted the entire Abstract with the part YOU are squealing about in it:

And they lied about that abstract, in the WUWT headine and in the text.

And you're fine with such lying. You always are. Look at you here, running cover for it.

That's one reason why it's so good to be on the rational and moral side. We don't have anyone commanding us to lie and defend lies, hence we never end up looking stupid and corrupt.