From the National Science Foundation, more nuttiness from the reef alarmist Ove Hugh-Goldberg’s sea-buddy John Bruno, who I encountered in Brisbane last year.
I wonder how sea life manages to outrun El Niño and La Niña ENSO events without being cooked in place? These have far greater temperature variability in shorter time spans than “climate change”.
Similar movement rates needed for animals and plants on land and in the oceans
Escaping climate change: one if by land, two if by sea? No, according to recent results.
One if by land, two if by sea?
Results of a study published this week in the journal Science show how fast animal and plant populations would need to move to keep up with recent climate change effects in the ocean and on land.
The answer: at similar rates.
The study was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), and performed in part through the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis at the University of California at Santa Barbara.
“That average rates of environmental change in the oceans and on land are similar is not such a surprise,” says Henry Gholz, program director in NSF’s Division of Environmental Biology.
“But averages deceive,” Gholz says, “and this study shows that rates of change are at times greater in the oceans than on land–and as complex as the currents themselves.”
Greenhouse gases have warmed the land by approximately one degree Celsius since 1960. That rate is roughly three times faster than the rate of ocean warming. These temperatures have forced wild populations to adapt–or to be on the move, continually relocating.
Although the oceans have experienced less warming overall, plants and animals need to move as quickly in the sea as they do on land to keep up with their preferred environments.
Surprisingly, similar movement rates are needed to out-run climate change. On land, movement of 2.7 kilometers (1.6 miles) per year is needed and in the oceans, movement of 2.2 kilometers (1.3 miles) per year is needed.
“Not a lot of marine critters have been able to keep up with that,” says paper co-author John Bruno, a marine ecologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “Being stuck in a warming environment can cause reductions in the growth, reproduction and survival of ecologically and economically important ocean life such as fish, corals and sea birds.”
“These results provide valuable insights into how climate will affect biological communities worldwide,” says David Garrison, director of NSF’s Biological Oceanography Program.
The analysis is an example of the value of synthesis research centers, Garrison says, in addressing society’s environmental challenges.
“With climate change we often assume that populations simply need to move poleward to escape warming, but our study shows that in the ocean, the escape routes are more complex,” says ecologist Lauren Buckley of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, also a co-author of the paper.
“For example, due to increased upwelling, marine life off the California coast would have to move south [rather than north] to remain in its preferred environment.”
“Some of the areas where organisms would need to relocate the fastest are important biodiversity hot spots, such as the coral triangle region in southeastern Asia,” says lead author Mike Burrows of the Scottish Association of Marine Science.
Whether by land or by sea, according to these results, all will need to be on the fly.
-NSF-
Media Contacts
Cheryl Dybas, NSF (703) 292-7734 cdybas@nsf.gov
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency that supports fundamental research and education across all fields of science and engineering. In fiscal year (FY) 2011, its budget is about $6.9 billion. NSF funds reach all 50 states through grants to nearly 2,000 universities and institutions. Each year, NSF receives over 45,000 competitive requests for funding, and makes over 11,500 new funding awards. NSF also awards over $400 million in professional and service contracts yearly.
h/t to Dr. Leif Svalgaard.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention, here’s an analysis by Willis Eschenbach of the dubious techniques used in the paper:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/06/uncertain-about-uncertainty/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong, however from the text it sounds a lot like their “results” are just models. Hopefully one day scientists like these might go back to doing research based on observations.
We can hope this silliness continues. The whole CAGW crowd will be laughed off of the planet. And think of all the money the NSF will have left over for real research.
Migration of any animal because of Climate Change is stupid in every respect.
Have a look at real migration of imported species.
The cane toad for example.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/cane-toad-migration
I’m pretty sure the areas they are moving into are not the same temperature as those they’ve just left. Or the fact that they came from another country with completely different climate all together.
Rabbits, all over Australia in every nook and cranny. Does a change in temperature bother them? Don’t think so.
Rats, mice, dogs, cats, birds, plants. They spread everywhere, regardless of temperature differences in different locations.
Insanity rules the scientific community me things.
Here in Australia, the CSIRO thinks the same.
“Marine life may need to relocate faster than land species as well as speed up alterations in the timing of major life cycle events. This challenges previous thinking that marine life in the ocean would respond more gradually than species on land because of slower warming in the oceans.”
etc etc etc.
http://www.csiro.au/news/No-plain-sailing-for-marine-life.html
That explains why there are no marginal coral reefs outside of the coral triangle region in southeastern Asia………
What is amazing…is these people do not mind embarrassing themselves and showing the world just how stupid they are.
It was while studying the habits of fish they discovered the PDO. The living conditions in the oceans are always changing on a regional basis. Maybe these oceanographers need to learn something about the ocean before they release reports that make them look ignorant. Just the normal annual migration covers more area than they are talking about. Sports fishermen know more about sea life than these so called experts.
Looks like they are really struggling to find justification for all the grants
Fishy conclusions.
It’s OK I have this (non) problem covered. I shall file it under ‘what if’.
There’s something seriously wrong with these people. This isn’t science, this is reading tea leaves.
There needs to be a great “purge” in climate science and most of the recognizable names need to be turfed out. There obviously is no self-policing anymore so who or what body can we turn to for correction of this massive problem?
I don’t understand how they figure that ocean species have to migrate anywhere near the speed of land species. After all, there’s no border line ups to stand…er float…er swim…er whatever…in.
So, if we calculate the distance marine critters had to relocate based on the observed change of global temperatures over the past decade, they had to swim an unprecedented distance of zero miles.
To,
IPCC, UNFCCC, GREEN PEACE, CARNEGIE Instituion of science and others; looking forward to hearing from all of you!!!!
Chair person IPPAN, Kathmandu
Copy to the director ICIMOD, Nepal.
Dear Dr. Pachauri and Mr. Algore,
Challenge to IPCC / UNFCCC, SHAME ON YOU
Solution to CC and Power Crisis
Please give me either one scientific reason/ theory that justifies CC is due to gases OR STOP ACCUSING GASES for CC. Just accusation is not science. CC by gases is impossible. Man has disturbed the ‘rain cycle’ causing the ‘climate change.’ No gas can be ‘green house gas.’
I have also explained that applying the property / theory of standing still water column to the running water condition is the blunder being done in the ‘Hydropower Engineering’ and, its correction can give us unlimited hydropower.
Please visit devbahadurdongol.blogspot.com for solutions to ‘CC and power Crisis.’
Summary is attached for your convenience.
Challenger,
Dr. Dev
Email: dev.dangol@yahoo.co.uk
“Already sent to the addressees, green peace and many others throughout the world”
It makes me wonder how I can make it through a day of temperature swings much less a whole year of temperature swings far greater than the 1 C reported since 1960.
Reminds me of the parable of the swing.
A boy is swinging back and forth on a swing. His sister, who is taking science in high school decides to measure the distance her brother travels on each excursion from the centerline. She uses these measurements as a basis for an award winning science project. She measures that the distance traveled on the swing ranges from 20-40 units at any given location both on daily and annual bases. General observation shows that the swinging is quite regular but careful analysis shows that recently her brother’s swing tends to deviate by 0.42 units from the average. In her rigorous science class, she learns about positive feedback mechanisms. The sister becomes very concerned that her brother’s swinging will cause great harm to himself and everyone else because she notices that her brother’s average swinging is a few fractions of a unit from “normal.” After running several mathematical models (all with positive feedback), the sister convinces herself that the deviations she has found of her brother’s swinging will lead to wild runaway swinging and the world’s gnat, artic fox, desert tortoise, and caribou population will suffer, not to mention a huge increase in hurricane strength and frequency. She labels this deviation from the average swinging as Anthropogenic Global Swinging and becomes convinced that the imbalance must be caused by her brother’s recent overeating. After all, her science class has told her that childhood obesity is on the rise and everyone knows that extra weight obviously changes the swing dynamics. Concerned for her brother and the world, she prohibits him from eating. Due to malnourishment, the boy falls off the swing and dies. The sister, convinced that she has saved the world from an imminent disaster, goes on to a lucrative career in politics trying to stop other global threats.
Is there no study about movement rates of brain cells?
They nulled their own hypothesis when they brought up up-welling. Local temperature change rates are much greater than global or regional average change rates. It’s the local changes that have and will catch them. Migrating birds have a reason for doing it. I wish our local population of Canada geese hadn’t forgotten their way home.
This makes perfect sense. Last year it was so cold in south Florida that we lost significant numbers of our inshore fish population.
If it was up to you wouldn’t you be swimming faster, to keep warm. I doubt this never dawned on the alarmists.
Why don’t supposed scientists care about presenting data that support their claims?
In the past, scientists would bore people with their data, now they’re simply making stuff up simply because they were able start with their conclusion then data mine or build a supporting model.
This paper was the focus of Willis’ article Uncertain about Uncertainty
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/06/uncertain-about-uncertainty/
The full paper can be accesse here
It has been decades since grad school oceeanography, but if memory serves me correctly, most of the biomass in the oceans is in the form of phytoplankton and zooplankton. These trophic levels are at the bottom of the food web and affect any higher level organisms like larger fish. Plankton comes from Greek wandering or drifting, and the definition applies to any organism that does nor or cannot move faster than the ocean currents. By failing to address this simple fact, the paper makes no sense. The paper is similarly silent on the diurnal vertical migrations of zooplankton, where they experience temperature changes greater than any supposed climate change. Absent this fact, the paper again makes no sense.
Being stuck in a warming environment can cause reductions in the growth? You mean like
The incredible story of bigger shrinking birds, courtesy of global climate change? I see said the the blind man, as he crawled over the barbed wire fence. I’ve fished in Ohio for for 44 years and
the the biggest largemouth bass I’ve caught is 6.01 lbs. The world record bass was caught near Jacksonville, Georgia on June 2, 1932 by George Perry. It weighed 22 pounds 4 ounces and was caught from an oxbow lake off the Ocmulgee River called Montgomery Lake.
http://fishing.about.com/od/bassfishing/a/recordbass.htm
By the way, its warmer in Georgia.
“On land, movement of 2.7 kilometers (1.6 miles) per year is needed and in the oceans, movement of 2.2 kilometers (1.3 miles) per year is needed.”
WTF??!! does that even mean??? Tell me what animal has moved it’s habitat at all since 1960 other than someone building a house on top of it and why would sea life have to move at nearly the same speed despite temps rising about a third of land temps (even if we were to believe their figures)?
Do they have grade school students write this crap? Do they know how stupid they sound?
I hope not! A whole file of articles like this will easily convince even a hard core warmista that their prophets have not a clue!
Climatology via Disney. From “Finding Nemo”:
Dory: Hey there, Mr. Grumpy Gills. When life gets you down do you wanna know what you’ve gotta do?
Marlin: No I don’t wanna know.
Dory: [singing] Just keep swimming. Just keep swimming. Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming. What do we do? We swim, swim.
Marlin: Dory, no singing.
Dory: [continuing] Ha, ha, ha, ha, ho. I love to swim. When you want to swim you want to swim.
Marlin: Now I’m stuck with that song… Now it’s in my head.
Dory: Sorry.
I’m left with that feeling again. No logical conclusion, no comfort. Again, they bring it on. “Some poor spedcies has to migrate one mile to escape….escape WHAT? Diurnal variation? This is CLAPTRAP, pure and simple.
Why do the goalposts keep moving?