Global warming dud predictions on the Great Barrier Reef

by Andrew Bolt

image
Andrew Bolt, left, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, right

THE ABC was among the first to fall for it, of course. In 2002, it reported the Great Barrier Reef was as good as dead already.

Host Kerry O’Brien groaned that our “once-spectacular” reef was “threatened by global warming” and “up to 10 per cent of the reef has been lost to bleaching since 1998”, turning it “bone white”.

Up popped Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, a Queensland reef researcher with a natty patter, to warn us to “change our lifestyles” or the reef would go — killed by hotter seas.

My god, but journalists are suckers for warming scares.

It’s like they actually want to be fooled — or to fool you.

image

Hoegh-Guldberg is now arguably the world’s most influential reef scientist in global-warming circles, having got big government grants, chaired a $20 million World Bank study of warming, and worked as an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author.

Last week, he bobbed up again, waving a report he’d just done for the WWF green group to help promote this month’s Earth Hour.

Again journalists lapped it up, not bothering to check how all Hoegh-Guldberg’s other warnings had panned out. (Answer: terrible, as you’ll see.)

(Read full article here.)

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

60 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 10, 2014 12:35 am

You forget that, besides all his other achievements, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg also employs John Cook.

el gordo
March 10, 2014 12:37 am

Overcoming mass delusion is no easy task, but The Bolter has been unwavering in his efforts and as the hiatus continues on its merry way he must eventually receive accolades for his contribution.

KNR
March 10, 2014 12:45 am

He as found a good way to make easy money and get personal glory , by playing on the lazy and uninformed nature of journalists, why should he stop when it still works.

somersetsteve
March 10, 2014 12:49 am

Is this the reef that has also survived 100m+ of sea level rise since the end of our last glaciation? Methinks its a tad more resilient than might be thought!

Txomin
March 10, 2014 12:50 am

I prefer that nature proves them wrong even if they are robbing us blind than nature proving them right and game over for the planet. Strange choices we are left with.

Layman
March 10, 2014 1:02 am

What ACGW could not do to the Great Barrier Reef in a hundred years, the ADWD anthropogenic dredge waste dumping would surely finish the job in a decade.
At least we get the A right.

Jim Bo
March 10, 2014 1:06 am

KNR says: March 10, 2014 at 12:45 am

…the lazy and uninformed nature of journalists…

I’m afraid that you woefully understate the nature of this grotesque problem common to all warm-mongers…it fills their personal rice bowls. No alarm, no rice.
“Journalists” are as complicit in this wretched funding scam as are the “climate scientists” and politicians that instigated it.

diogenese2
March 10, 2014 1:19 am

As he can still pull down grants and commissions despite always being wrong the only conclusion is that his performance is meeting expectation, that is his predictions are those required even if wrong. On the other hand, all his predictions are consequent on global warming. As there hasn’t been any the outcome is consistent failure. So he is right after all!

Ursus Augustus
March 10, 2014 1:31 am

Richard Tol:- “Ove Hoegh-Guldberg also employs John Cook”
Thanks Richard, heard enough. ‘Hasso’ as theJapanese would say.
Resume normal programming folks, its just a passing Ove-Cook storm in a herbal teacup.

Patrick
March 10, 2014 1:39 am

“Layman says:
March 10, 2014 at 1:02 am”
If you are trying to imply this is Abbotts fault, you fail right off the bat! All the environmental studies, contracts etc etc we all conductedand signed during the farcical last term of the ALP. The LNP made the final signed off on the project. But then it’s only Abbots Point, not the entire reef. Still never let facts get in the way of a scare story eh?

Peter Miller
March 10, 2014 1:55 am

‘Climate science’ = Repeatedly crying wolf when there is no wolf there.
Reason? Personal egos and financial gain.
Mechanism? Gullible journalists and government grants.

cnxtim
March 10, 2014 1:57 am

Some teacup, $20m what a travesty. Who apporved this c..p?

Jimbo
March 10, 2014 2:01 am

Is this the same O Hoegh-Guldberg mentioned above? [paywalled]
“Coral Reefs
September 2004, Volume 23, Issue 3, p 444
Low temperatures cause coral bleaching
O. Hoegh-Guldberg, M. Fine ”
Wake me up when corals can’t recover.

Abstract – 2009
Doom and Boom on a Resilient Reef: Climate Change, Algal Overgrowth and Coral Recovery
……….Methodology/Principal Findings
In 2006, mass bleaching of corals on inshore reefs of the Great Barrier Reef caused high coral mortality. Here we show that this coral mortality was followed by an unprecedented bloom of a single species of unpalatable seaweed (Lobophora variegata), colonizing dead coral skeletons, but that corals on these reefs recovered dramatically, in less than a year. Unexpectedly, this rapid reversal did not involve reestablishment of corals by recruitment of coral larvae, as often assumed, but depended on several ecological mechanisms previously underestimated.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005239#pone-0005239-g006
——————————
Abstract – 2008
Bikini Atoll coral biodiversity resilience five decades after nuclear testing
Five decades after a series of nuclear tests began, we provide evidence that 70% of the Bikini Atoll zooxanthellate coral assemblage is resilient to large-scale anthropogenic disturbance……

And what’s this?

Abstract – 1983
A dead Central American coral reef tract: Possible link with the Little Ice Age
…..Coral growth in the Gulf of Papagayo consisted mainly of dead reefs that died from 150–300 years B.P. The 18O records revealed that most of the dead reefs were exposed to relatively cool water immediately preceding death. We propose that during the latter part of the Little Ice Age there was probably an equatorward shift of the Northern Trade Wind system, which caused an intensification of upwelling at lower latitudes. This increased upwelling was the likely cause of the demise of coral reefs in the Gulf of Papagayo.
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/jmr/jmr/1983/00000041/00000003/art00010

Brian H
March 10, 2014 2:02 am

He seems to be one of those dudes who can’t learn.* Bleached reefs are rapidly recolonized by opportunistic algae adapted to the new conditions, everywhere.
*You can’t learn what you think you already know.

Coldish
March 10, 2014 2:02 am

I have read that a major hazard for a coral reef ecosystem is a rapid local relative fall of sea-level of >10 metres or so in a matter of years. This can leave the whole ecosystem high and dry. However reef organisms can generally recolonise from elsewhere at the new lower sea level. Aharon and Chappell, 1986, Palaeogeography, palaeoclimatology, palaeoecology vol 56, p 337.

Jimbo
March 10, 2014 2:03 am
Jimbo
March 10, 2014 2:59 am

Hoegh-Guldberg tells us about the resilience or corals. He must have been surprised.

Phase Shifts, Herbivory, and the Resilience of Coral Reefs to Climate Change
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.12.049

Jan 03, 2013
“Deep-sea corals discovered at Great Barrier Reef”
“What’s really cool is that these corals still have photosynthetic symibionts that supposedly still harvest the light,” Hoegh-Guldberg told AFP.
“It’s interesting to know how they can handle such low light conditions—it’s very deep dusk, you can barely make out much at the bottom.”
http://phys.org/news/2013-01-deep-sea-corals-great-barrier-reef.html

No doubt nature will continue to surprise him as he continues to predict doooooom

David L
March 10, 2014 3:00 am

Love this quote “And see the journalists trailing behind their messiah, questioning nothing, repeating everything.”

Joe
March 10, 2014 3:14 am

Got to say I’m uneasy about accusing them of “crying wolf”. The moral of that story was that nobody listened when the wolf did arrive.
Given that it’s becoming increasingly apparent that the wolf of AGW doesn’t exist, using that phrase lends the doom-mongers unwarranted legitimacy and a basis to continue their claims of “ahh, but one day soon….”

Patrick
March 10, 2014 3:17 am

By far the biggest threat to the barrier reef is the starfish called The Crown of Thorns. Warmer/higher water levels not so much (If at all).

Jimbo
March 10, 2014 3:21 am

Surprise!

“Coral reef thriving in sediment-laden waters”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120731201251.htm
——-
“Evidence of very rapid reef accretion and reef growth under high turbidity and terrigenous” sedimentation. Geology, 2012
http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/G33261.1

Jimbo
March 10, 2014 3:28 am

Surprise!

New Scientist – 1 January 2014
Pacific coral happy as acidity of the ocean rises
“This suggests that the corals have a way to calcify in more acidic waters, says Philip Munday at James Cook University in Brisbane, Australia, or that they have adapted to low carbonate levels.”
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129503.500-pacific-coral-happy-as-acidity-of-the-ocean-rises.html
————–
Abstract – 16 JAN 2014
“Diverse coral communities in naturally acidified waters of a Western Pacific reef”
“Here we report the existence of highly diverse, coral-dominated reef communities under chronically low pH and aragonite saturation state (Ωar). Biological and hydrographic processes change the chemistry of the seawater moving across the barrier reefs and into Palau’s Rock Island bays, where levels of acidification approach those projected for the western tropical Pacific open ocean by 2100. Nevertheless, coral diversity, cover, and calcification rates are maintained across this natural acidification gradient.”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013GL058489/abstract

Jimbo
March 10, 2014 3:37 am

Surprise, surprise!

Abstract –
Coral bleaching — capacity for acclimatization and adaptation
…. There is information that corals and their symbionts may be capable of acclimatization and selective adaptation to elevated temperatures that have already resulted in bleaching resistant coral populations, both locally and regionally, in various areas of the world. There are possible mechanisms that might provide resistance and protection to increased temperature and light. These include inducible heat shock proteins that act in refolding denatured cellular and structural proteins, production of oxidative enzymes that inactivate harmful oxygen radicals, fluorescent coral pigments that both reflect and dissipate light energy, and phenotypic adaptations of zooxanthellae and adaptive shifts in their populations at higher temperatures…..
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2881(03)46004-5
—————
Brief Communications
Coral reefs: Corals’ adaptive response to climate change
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v430/n7001/abs/430741a.html
—————
Abstract
The role of zooxanthellae in the thermal tolerance of corals: a ‘nugget of hope’ for coral reefs in an era of climate change
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/273/1599/2305.short

izen
March 10, 2014 4:04 am

Given the fact that half of the Great Barrier Reef has died off in the last 27 years it is difficult to see how the change in climate, warmer seas, more intense tropical storms, acidfification; has not had some, even minor influence on its continued shrinking.

March 10, 2014 4:16 am

Went diving in the Great Barrier Reef in 2005 – it looked great to me.
Lovely country Australia – best I’ve ever been to.
Really nice people and the country is so much warmer than Canada.
This has been a very long and cold winter across North America – we are all tired of it and we pray for Spring.
Most intelligent people rejected the hypo of Catastrophic Humanmade Global Warming long ago. Now even the dummies* are getting it.
_____________
* You know how stupid the average person is, right? Well half of them are dumber than that!
– George Carlin
Regards to all, Allan 🙂

1 2 3
Verified by MonsterInsights