[Coral-List] Evidence that ocean warming has caused most Caribbean coral loss

[Richard Plate]

Ulf,

I'm unclear about what you mean by "dramatic" in this context.  Are you
saying that we have geological records showing us climatic changes similar
to the current changes in magnitude and rate of change that did not result
in massive reduction of corals and other species?

If so, could you direct me to a paper where I could read more about that
kind of comparison?

I'm referring to this statement:

"The hypothesis of those who warn of climate change seems to be that the
anthropogenic temperature changes at the present time are more dramatic
than anything in the past, and that they will lead to consequences that are
unique. They seem to think that past changes were never that dramatic. That
is where I beg to differ. In what we Earth Scientists call "Recent" time,
as late as a few hundred human generations ago, there were much larger and
at least as dramatic changes according to the geological archive."

Thanks for your help.

-Richard

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Ulf Erlingsson <ceo at lindorm.com> wrote:

> Doug,
>
> The hypothesis of those who warn of climate change seems to be that the
> anthropogenic temperature changes at the present time are more dramatic
> than anything in the past, and that they will lead to consequences that are
> unique. They seem to think that past changes were never that dramatic. That
> is where I beg to differ. In what we Earth Scientists call "Recent" time,
> as late as a few hundred human generations ago, there were much larger and
> at least as dramatic changes according to the geological archive. And if we
> look at absolute temperatures, then it is disingenuous to compare to the
> 19th or 20th century as a baseline, since that was the peak of the Little
> Ice Age.
>
> Furthermore, after the existence of an Ice Age covering northern Europe
> (Germany, Poland, Holland) had been convincingly shown by Swedish geologist
> Otto Torell in the 1860's, and it later was understood that there had been
> several, combined with the evidence of falling temperatures, science
> started worrying about a new ice age. It was in that atmosphere (no pun
> intended) that Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius in 1896 calculated that
> our emissions of greenhouse gases might actually prevent a new Ice Age.
>
> However, we still don't know for sure why the Ice Age happens, although I
> have an idea which I have presented as a project on ResearchGate, which has
> to do with ocean circulation, and if that is true, it is very unlikely that
> global warming can do more than delay the onset a little.
>
> But back to corals: I am convinced that the biggest issue is NOT global
> warming, but POLLUTION.
>
> Ulf
>
>
> > On 2017-04-27, at 20:13 , Douglas Fenner <douglasfennertassi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Ulf,
> >     It may be that geologists, because of their understanding of the
> vast expanse of earth history, which has included periods of larger
> temperature variation than the last few decades, and which some groups of
> organisms survived, have been more resistant to the evidence of
> human-caused global warming in recent decades.  However, my understanding
> is that most if not all geological societies now agree that the recent
> rapid warming of the earth is mostly caused by humans, by greenhouse gas
> emissions, deforestation, carbon soot on snow absorbing heat, positive
> feedback from melting of Arctic ice which reflects light more than water,
> etc.  In fact, some of the effects of humans, such as the emissions of
> aerosols (such as SO2 from burning fossil fuels) actually work to reduce
> global temperatures, though the effects of other emissions are greater and
> cause net global warming.
> >      Am I wrong about the geological societies?
> >     Cheers,  Doug
>
> also responding to this:
>
> > Ulf,
> >     My understanding is that climate science data supports the view that
> the rapid increases in world temperature in recent decades has been caused
> mostly by human emissions, while earlier, more gradual temperature
> increases were caused mostly by natural processes (in spite of claims that
> we are in the beginning of a new ice age).  Both of these were present in
> the graph John presented in his essay.  However, it seems unlikely to me
> that corals either understand the causes of temperature increases, or care
> what those causes are.  Corals are impacted by temperature increases,
> whatever the causes of those temperatures are, surely.  That includes
> turning up the heat in aquaria in experiments.  So it seems to me that
> John's graph of increasing temperatures IS relevant to the question of
> whether corals in the Caribbean have been impacted by temperature increases
> or not, and I don't see the relevance of the question of what caused the
> temperature increases, at least to the questi
>  on of impacts on corals.  The effect of increasing temperatures on corals
> is a mechanistic thing, higher temperatures stress or kill corals.  Cause
> of temperature increase is irrelevant for that.
> >      That said, it is good to remind us of the broader processes over
> geological time.  That could include the fact that present temperature
> increases exceed those that have happened in a very long period of time,
> well beyond the range of time you've referred to.
> > Cheers,  Doug
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>