[Coral-List] Evidence that ocean warming has caused most Caribbean coral loss
sealab at earthlink.net
Fri Apr 28 10:38:44 EDT 2017
At first I didn't realize that you were asking for feedback. I thought you were just pointing out that my probable ignorance of Quaternary Geology brought my perspective into question. (It's true, I had to look up the term). Anyway, I know there have been climatic changes over geological time, but I don't believe that the organic sciences are purposely ignoring geological research. I agree with Doug that they are simply recognizing the fact that this time around climate change is different, as in anthropogenic.
On your field of study, I would think that it would be extremely relevant if applied with acceptance of the distinction mentioned above.
Sent from my iPad
> On Apr 27, 2017, at 8:10 AM, Ulf Erlingsson <ceo at lindorm.com> wrote:
> I'm an Earth Scientist. Since the first day of talking about global warming as a threat, back in the 1980's when I was still a student, those studying climate change since over a century have expressed deep scepticism/skepticism depending on the side of the pool, since climate researchers are typically willfully ignoring the research of those in fields such as Quaternary Geology. Yet, the one who doesn't know his Quaternary Geology is a complete ignoramus when it comes to climate change, wouldn't you agree?
> My field of study is coastal processes and sea level change as a function of climate change, that's what I wrote my thesis on, but according to the climate change researchers all of that is irrelevant. Why?
> Ulf Erlingsson
>> On 2017-04-26, at 11:41 , Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Dear John and Mike,
>> I ask this respectfully, don't you both (as well as the vast majority of your colleagues) ultimately arrive at the same conclusion?
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but regardless of how we got here, don't you agree that it is ocean warming that now represents the consummate threat? I may be interpreting things incorrectly, but It seems to me that at this point we need a unified message reflecting the urgency of addressing this particular issue.
>> At the same time we can all remain supportive of the various efforts aimed at addressing local stressors.
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 8:50 AM, Bruno, John <jbruno at unc.edu> wrote:
>>> Dear Mike, thank you for your ongoing interest in this topic and my post..
>>> "the Caribbean had already lost more than half its reefs before water temperatures had increased by more than a fraction of a degree”
>>> This is a common misconception from folks unaware that global warming began many decades ago. Please have a look at the NOAA data plotted in this figure from my post: http://theseamonster.net/2017/04/caribbean-bleaching/nclimate2915-f4/ Or the graphics in Kuffner et al 2014 below it. These data should sort you out. The Caribbean had clearly warmed significantly by the time mean coral cover had been roughly halved (around the mid-1980s). Also, we haven’t lost any reefs yet, what we’ve lost is coral cover (and fish biomass).
>>> Iv’e dove near Havana and I agree - its a mess and was probably locally impacted. And I don’t understand the logic in arguing managers should give up because climate change has had significant impacts on corals.. I’ve said it a million times: local impacts need to be mitigated.. We all agree on that. I think you’re underestimating managers and local conservation capacity. (All the managers I know acknowledge climate change but aren’t giving up). As the Ocean Optimism symposium highlighted over the weekend, local successes are realistic and very much meaningful and worthwhile.
>>> "and there is overwhelming evidence of land-based stress going back to the 70’s”
>>> You have been promising this list-serv these references for years now. If you ever find them, please do share with us if you have the time.
>>> "how well could coral reefs survive ocean warming if they were not already stressed by [local] human impacts?”
>>> That experiment has been run dozens of times. On the northern GBR, on Scott Reef, off Southern Cuba or in the Bahamas, across the central Pacific, etc.. The answer is not well at all.
>>> The reason is that local impacts do not appear to act synergistically with ocean warming. As Cote and Darling suggested (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000438), the interaction appears to be antagonistic, not synergistic. Either that or the impact of warming is so much stronger that it swamps the local and synergistic signals. Also see Darling et al 2010: htt
>> Coral-List mailing list
>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
More information about the Coral-List