[Coral-List] SPPI Report
tolope at gmail.com
Mon Jan 19 11:49:11 EST 2009
I don't agree to call opponents in science to those who think different, or
interpret in a different manner the same proofs we get. I think
that debating anxiusly with this people for our point of view to be accepted
just makes wider the gap (which is not a favorable situation from a
political point of view, where political groups could go after the best
economic proposal). No one can be sure that the interpretation made from a
resarch is the absolute truth (i.e. previous messages from Gene and
Lister's about a journalist's interpretations of Ove statements), and I
think this also applies for the GCC controversial situation. Every paper we
publish or word-idea we give is our *bona fide* contribution to science and
to society, but taking the risk that our contributions can eventually be
Tha actual atmospheric CO2 levels, the intensity and magnitude of oceanic
and meteorological events, the glacial melting by higher T°,... ; lead us to
question about the future of nature and human kind. The issue is not just to
keep asking about the cause-consequences and relation between this facts
(which always is gona be a controversial issue, even if there are a lot of
scientific basis), but to look for what we could do about it to
adapt and mitigate this situation. If the GCC is a fact we must take action
now, but if not, we could keep with our life style. The bottom line is that
"maybe" we won't have a second chance to find an answer, so modifying our
life style is the minor risk we could get. And this is mainly a political
2009/1/17 RainbowWarriorsInternational <southern_caribbean at yahoo.com>
> Dear listers,
> I have read the SPPI report, and have some questions.
> Is this report the first one of its kind to venture this "ThermoSolarStat"
> concept and this ridiculous notion that the planet keeps the ocean
> temperature fluctuating between 28 and 30 degrees, or plus or minus one (1)
> degree the threshold temperature for corals?
> This other issue is even more ridiculous, this "symbiont shuffling
> hypothesis", and then the suggestions that climate change and sea level rise
> are "beneficial" for coral growth.
> The most outrageous point however is the CO2 increase and increasing
> acidification of the oceans not harming corals.
> After reading the report I would to get a shortlist of articles and reports
> that refute all these allegations.
> An important question remains, for which audience was this report published
> and to whom has it been distributed, and where has it been commented on the
> In my organization we do not have marine biologists readily at our disposal
> as full paid staff, so when the time comes that we must debunk bad science
> as well, we depend on others.
> For practical purposes, has anyone ever bothered to make a listing and keep
> it updated on bad marine biology science as related to global warming
> climate change etc.?
> I am almost sure of the fact that our opponents have a fully updated
> reference list of climate change-alarmist literature and actors in this
> It is important to know your opponent.
> Milton Ponson, President
> Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation
> (Rainbow Warriors International) Tel. +297 568 5908
> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
> Email: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com Web Sites:
> http://www.southerncaribbean..org http://www.rainbowwarriors.net
> To unite humanity in a global society dedicated to a sustainable way of
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
More information about the Coral-List