Aussie Coral Reef Rises from the Dead

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t JoNova – the Australian ABC reports scientists from the Australian Institute of Marine Science are surprised how rapidly the Australian Great Barrier Reef is recovering from the 2016 bleaching event.

Great Barrier Reef starts to recover after severe coral bleaching, survey of sites between Cairns and Townsville shows

By David Chen

Updated Fri at 3:41pm

Scientists from the Australian Institute of Marine Science this month surveyed 14 coral reefs between Cairns and Townsville to see how they fared after being bleached.

The institute’s Neil Cantin said they were surprised to find the coral had already started to reproduce.

“We’re finding corals that are showing early signs of reproductive development, really visible eggs that we can see under the naked eye,” Dr Cantin said.

“[It’s] very surprising as previous studies have shown a two-to-three year delay in reproductive activity following bleaching events.

“It means they have enough energy, they’ve recovered the zooxanthellae and the symbiosis and they even have energy to invest in reproduction and egg development.”

Read more:

This is a very different narrative to last year;

Great Barrier Reef coral bleaching at 95 per cent in northern section, aerial survey reveals

7.30 By Peter McCutcheon

Updated 28 Mar 2016, 9:12pm

An aerial survey of the northern Great Barrier Reef has shown that 95 per cent of the reefs are now severely bleached — far worse than previously thought.

Professor Terry Hughes, a coral reef expert based at James Cook University in Townsville who led the survey team, said the situation is now critical.

This will change the Great Barrier Reef forever,” Professor Hughes told 7.30.

“We’re seeing huge levels of bleaching in the northern thousand-kilometre stretch of the Great Barrier Reef.”

Of the 520 reefs he surveyed, only four showed no evidence of bleaching.

From Cairns to the Torres Strait, the once colourful ribbons of reef are a ghostly white.

“It’s too early to tell precisely how many of the bleached coral will die, but judging from the extreme level even the most robust corals are snow white, I’d expect to see about half of those corals die in the coming month or so,” Professor Hughes said.

“There’s good and bad news — the bottom three quarters of the reef is in strong condition,” he said at the time.

“Nonetheless we’re looking at 10-year recovery period, so this is a very severe blow.”

Read more:

Who could have imagined that an organism which survived hundreds of millions of years of mass extinction events, and thrived during the warm Holocene Optimum would demonstrate noteworthy recovery capabilities?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 1, 2017 4:19 am

Coral reefs and polar bears… both are tough customers in their own ways.

Reply to  daveandrews723
October 1, 2017 4:37 am

Wow, the “lovely and cute polar bears” can also be quite different. Just like an Asian lion, which I had recently visited in the zoo and threw himself against the glass panes with his entire length of almost three meters, screaming that the glass rattled. A real King of the Animals. Predators are just predators and no cuddly animals.

Reply to  daveandrews723
October 1, 2017 6:34 am

Hans-Georg October 1, 2017 at 4:37 am
Wow, the “lovely and cute polar bears” …

It’s Walt Disney’s fault. link

Reply to  daveandrews723
October 1, 2017 8:01 am

Welsh rugbyman Scott Baldwin got a reminder about how real lions are not big kittens, yesterday.
Well worth watching the vid:

Reply to  daveandrews723
October 2, 2017 3:25 pm

@Greg “petting the lion like it’s a pet cat” – yeah, that’s about what my cat does, too.

M Seward
Reply to  daveandrews723
October 1, 2017 3:15 pm

It still leaves the big question unanswered. Will the ‘Coral Reef Scientists’ rise from the brain dead?

Reply to  M Seward
October 1, 2017 4:20 pm

There’s good and bad news — they may be brain dead, but the bottom three quarters of these coral reef scientists are in strong condition. So, we may be looking at a 10-year recovery period for most of them. /sarc

Reply to  M Seward
October 2, 2017 2:00 am

Their lack of resiliency due to the high level of grants from the UN, environmentalist scam artists, and AGW sycophants make it hard to believe we’ll see much recovery here. lol

October 1, 2017 4:29 am

From the ABC cataclysmic bleaching event article:
“We have coral cores that provide 400 years of annual growth,” explains Dr Neal Cantin from the Australian Institute of Marine Science.
“We don’t see the signatures of bleaching in reduced growth following a bleaching event until the recent 1998/2000 events.”
When did the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ end? 1100 AD? 400 years is a convenient number…although I find it very hard to believe that the first bleaching event to be recorded in 400 years was during the Super El Nino of 97-98. I trust these experts as far as I can throw them…there’s too much money to be made perpetuating their propaganda.

Reply to  Fred
October 1, 2017 4:57 am

Corals can even tolerate temperature differences of more than 2 degrees in a short distance. I think that the “coral bleaching” hyphenated by the climate alarmists is nothing but an adaptation to higher temperatures.
Here one tries to cross two subspecies, which live in two degrees Celsius different water. But I think this is unnecessary. Nature has finally demonstrated the survival ability over millions of years:
and so on. Researchers from Israel even showed that corals of the same species can survive in 5 degrees warmer water than the normal tropical temperature level.
There are a huge number of works that prove this. Equally huge, however, is the number in which these works are negated. Until one again is “surprised” that corals are nevertheless tougher than thought. I call this typical life in a bubble, that BUBBLE of the climate alarmists.

Reply to  Hans-Georg
October 1, 2017 6:03 am

Red Sea is a lot hotter and saltier…..same corals…they do not bleach
…different zoox clade..that’s all

Reply to  Hans-Georg
October 1, 2017 4:09 pm

Thanks Hans-Georg, appreciate the input and links but I’ll need to brush up on my German! Many of us non-Europeans are multilingually challenged. :<O

Willy Pete
Reply to  Hans-Georg
October 1, 2017 4:17 pm

Corals survived and thrived in the much hotter oceans of the Cretaceous and early Paleogene Periods.

Larry D
Reply to  Hans-Georg
October 1, 2017 8:42 pm

Shallow water coral have symbiotic algae, a bleaching event is merely the shedding of one type, the coral will soon gather another. Corals evolved back during a hothouse climate, they can handle warmer water.

October 1, 2017 4:34 am

I am going to enjoy the goracles disciples screams and attempted rebuttals of this

Reply to  ozspeaksup
October 1, 2017 5:37 am

No you won’t. You will barely hear a whisper, if you’re lucky. Recovering coals is contrary to the Watermelons propaganda, therefore, it’ll be ignored. And if they can’t ignore it, they’ll minimize it to the greatest possible extent.

Reply to  SMC
October 1, 2017 8:16 am

The Guardian recently bigged up the “death” of the GBR corals as a consequence of Global Warming. Oddly enough, I can’t find any mention of this recovery on their website. Perhaps someone should remind them.
The Guardian: wrong about everything, every time.

Peta of Newark
October 1, 2017 4:55 am

Aussie Coral Reef Rises from the Dead

Thank fook for that, before legions of well intentioned goody gooders applied a panic stricken and ill-conceived ‘fix’ that would have utterly & completely wasted the thing.
Ma Nature dodged one there alright

Reply to  Peta of Newark
October 1, 2017 5:46 am

Are we sure it isn’t a Zombie Reef? 🙂

Paul r
October 1, 2017 5:09 am

Who would’ve thought that a coral reef that has survived hundreds of millions of years wouldn’t be able to survive a couple of years of unusual weather patterns? Well most people with a brain and not an agenda.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  Paul r
October 1, 2017 5:17 am

Well said Paul R. In another who would have thunk it gem, there was a report that scientists at Stanford University (presumably desparate to find climate alarm) had researched how people felt about what I would call weather and found that people felt better when it was warm, miserable when it was wet, but not so positive when it got over 30C.
Astonishing news no doubt and well worth whatever money expended on this Earth shattering piece of academic work. Although I’ve actually personally enjoyed temperatures above 30C, but obviously I’m deplorable – you just have to be a bit sensible about working or living in those condition.

Jeff in Calgary
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
October 2, 2017 9:34 am

I’m from Canada. Right now we are in the middle of a winter storm. When I was down in Florida in September, all the locals seemed unaffected by the 34° 99% humidity. And lets face it, a lot of us Canadians pay big bucks to go to hot (30°C) locations in the winter. The whole notion that hot is bad is completely bogus.

October 1, 2017 5:12 am

“There’s good and bad news — the bottom three quarters of the reef is in strong condition,” he said at the time.

The northern Great Barrier Reef has tides. How can coral be exposed to air before it dies?comment image

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 6:36 am

air, direct sun that would cook it, fresh water/rain, drying winds…..

October 1, 2017 5:15 am

These coral reef researchers sure seem to get into the news a lot. Funding, bleaching, extinction, rebuilding, new rsearch vessel, funding, recovery, global warming, diving equipment, nice tan, New York Times, $500 to save the coral, $1,000 to accompany researchers on a dive day, live at the beach, Institue of Marine Sciences. Chasing Coral.

Reply to  Bill Illis
October 1, 2017 5:33 am

Corals are doing fine. There is a more dire research need further south. This is how Glaciologist Dr Andy Smith studies ice shelf calving according to David Attenborough in the Frozen Planet. I can imagine how e.g. Turney’s ship of fools expedition would have benefited from it

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 5:44 am

oo, oo… I sense a headline!
‘Warmunist’s Blowing Up Ice Shelves to Support Global Warming Narrative’

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 3:31 pm

I’m sure he’s looking for echo imaging of the ice. Well, he might be surprised to find he’s placed his equipment over an unknown fissure.

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia
Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 8:40 pm

He is really in the pay of big oil and is conducting a seismic survey. But he need to dampen those holes.

October 1, 2017 5:16 am

If corals cannot tolerate warming, why do reef locations look like this?

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 5:41 am

Because…because…It’s all Man’s fault. 🙂

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia
Reply to  SMC
October 1, 2017 8:56 pm

Or, El Nino’s fault.

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 8:22 am

Notice: even it the tropical zone there are no reefs off the west coast of South America, Baja California, most of West Africa or Oman.
Why? The water is too cold!

steven F
Reply to  tty
October 1, 2017 11:08 am

NO the water is too deap for coral. It you only go a couple of miles off shore the water is already too deep. A few more and it’s over a mile deap. Coral needs light to survive. also the water is only warm near the surface. There are corals there but only in a narrow stripallong the coast which the tape doesn’t show.

Reply to  tty
October 1, 2017 3:34 pm

Well, not exactly true. Just inside the tip of Baja is an excellent dive location known as Cabo Pulmo:

Reply to  tty
October 1, 2017 3:56 pm

Anyone who has surfed around Cabo knows, no wetsuit needed on south side and to the east of Cabo, slightly north on westside of the peninsula and you better have one handy…upwelling from deep water makes it much less-pleasant.

Willy Pete
Reply to  tty
October 1, 2017 3:58 pm

Two other small Mexican coral reef systems:
And the largest one in Central America, where the cool California Current peters out:
But in general, TTY is right. While North America’s south-flowing California Current is cool, South America’s north-flowing Humboldt Current is downright cold. As in frigid. Hence penguins on the equator.

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia
Reply to  tty
October 1, 2017 8:44 pm

Depends on the current too. For example, in Western Australia the corals extend along the SW coastline because of the Leeuwin Current.

Reply to  tty
October 6, 2017 4:02 am

That can depend on the type of coral
Here in southern Australia at latitude 37 south there are coral gardens at the entrance to Port Phillip bay where winter ( late May to mid September ) air temperatures would range from 6c to 14 c with water temperatures probably about 12 to14 c compared with water temperatures in the tropical north of around 28-32 c

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 1, 2017 12:29 pm

We have corals off the UK.
A quote: –
“Deep-water corals are also referred to as cold-water corals, as they, unlike tropical corals, grow in water with temperatures ranging from 4°C to 12°C. They form on silt or rocks on higher surfaces that provides them better access to ocean currents that are rich in nutrients.”
But not, strictly, reefs: –
“The coral form colonies that grow in large patches and in appearance they are much like reefs; the largest recorded in UK waters is 30m in height. The deep water aggregations are often described as mounds rather than reefs as it better describes the calcium carbonate skeleton remaining as the new coral grows.”

Reply to  Auto
October 4, 2017 1:45 am

I’m aware corals grow even in the cold, Antarctic waters.
My point was: if corals cannot survive warm, why do they grow in the tropics? They can even survive being exposed to air under direct mid-day tropical sun the whole duration of a low tide. I might too, just about.

Jeff in Calgary
Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 2, 2017 9:49 am

I am quite certain that coral would not like cooling.

October 1, 2017 5:16 am

More robust recovery than was expected…. well, good. Gaia can take care of her own, as most of us )mature) persons know quite well. I’m not sure I understand the bleaching mechanism, but if it’s a resting cycle before the next growth spurt, who in the blue-eyed world are we mere mortals to interfere with it?
I am utterly fascinated by this desperate need to “fix” things that can take care of themselves quite well without us.
I would be considerably happier if the do-gooders would take some time out of their busybody lives to get rid of invasive species of plants like buckthorn (a UK import) and purple loosestrife. I’d rather see the native wildflowers like prairie smoke or listaria or marsh marigold when I get out with a camera, but these two are the most prolific pests I’ve ever run into.
But the problem with my wish is that the do-gooders are so ignorant about biology, botany and native species that they’d mow down everything in sight, or root out the wrong things and leave the trash plants.
And yes, I blame them for the problem with domesticated honeybees. Their scramble for “natural” products has done more harm than they can possibly imagine.

wayne Job
Reply to  Sara
October 2, 2017 3:46 am

Not a resting cycle, just unusual tides that kept the coral out of the water for to long. Lower down the reefs are fine. These reef experts recently had a surprise some one found another reef system about a half a mile out to sea in deeper water, the experts did not know about. It was pristine.

Latimer Alder
October 1, 2017 5:23 am

But surely the whole of the oceans are already more acidic than a bath of sulphuric acid? Its a wonder any boats can get out there to see the GBR without being eaten alive by the vitriolic seas…
On a serious note I don’t seem too have heard much of the ‘ocean slightly less alkaline, closer to pure natural water pH7’ scare recently…has it gone away? Or has Pres. Trump decide to withdraw from that too?

Reply to  Latimer Alder
October 1, 2017 8:30 am

Boats being eaten alive? Interesting.

Latimer Alder
Reply to  MarkW
October 1, 2017 10:46 am

Mixed metaphors often provide new insights….

October 1, 2017 5:42 am

Can the tourist industry sue the alarmists who claimed the reef would never recover thus scaring away thousands of overseas visitors?

Reply to  Zigmaster
October 1, 2017 6:42 am

There is a long queue of interested parties who should sue alarmists.

Eustace Cranch
Reply to  Zigmaster
October 1, 2017 9:45 am

Thousands of fewer visitors, with their accompanying sunscreen oil slicks, might be a good thing for the reef.

Rudi ru
Reply to  Eustace Cranch
October 2, 2017 2:12 am

This could work if there was a counter suit after the tourists win their case for destroying the reef against the sunscreen companies because as we all know, “corporations evil, must destroy evil capitalists”(said in Frankenstein voice). They just have to wait until the diving and snorkeling season picks up and then they can pay the lawyers to cash in against the environmentalists. There’s a gold mine there if I’ve ever seen one. lol

Tom in Florida
October 1, 2017 6:19 am

FYI, from the AIMS website:
” The Great Barrier Reef has lost half its coral cover in the last 27 years. The loss was due to storm damage (48%), crown of thorns starfish (42%), and bleaching (10%) according to a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences today by researchers from the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) in Townsville and the University of Wollongong.”

Reply to  Tom in Florida
October 1, 2017 8:30 am

So basically even if you are a true Green believer the effect of man is a few percent with the majority of factors being normal natural. What has worried me for several years is that the green warriors are poisoning and manually removing the Crown of Thorn Starfish a completely natural predator. There are a number of competing and conflicting hypotheses that there may be an overpopulation but the debate has never been settled. You would think anyone with Green credentials would tread carefully in that situation but nope Coral is prettier and much more saleable than the crown of thorn starfish.
The fact they may be doing more harm to the reef than good doesn’t seem to enter their heads or even their thoughts.

Sceptical lefty
Reply to  LdB
October 1, 2017 3:11 pm

If you are a ‘true Green believer’ the effect of Man is still catastrophic. Storm damage is obviously due to CAGW / climate change. The crown-of-thorns starfish is obviously reacting to Man’s evil influence by breeding in plague proportions.
Inconvenient facts (truths?) have rarely inconvenienced people of faith, and may be adroitly skirted by those who are making money from convenient lies.

October 1, 2017 6:20 am

This is worse than we thought! These are zombie corals!

Jaakko Kateenkorva
October 1, 2017 6:21 am

This story resembles environmental activist Philippe Cousteau Jr’s coral revelation in the Southern Red Sea. Worth watching and listening carefully every second from 7 minutes onwards.


Stan Vinson
Reply to  Jaakko Kateenkorva
October 1, 2017 6:39 am

It is amazing the display of cognitive dissonance from the 7 minute mark. The effort required to maintain a mindset of impending disaster must be enormous.

Reply to  Stan Vinson
October 1, 2017 8:14 am

I don’t see any cognitive dissonance . He is very surprised to find that coral in such a healthy state and says it goes against all his experience. What would be interesting is how he reacts to that and whether he changes his ideas in face of new evidence. Sadly the video cuts off.

Reply to  Jaakko Kateenkorva
October 1, 2017 4:30 pm

Just stupid people. At 5:14 notice the freckles on his fingers. His skin will look like a loose hanging leather in another decade or two, assuming he isn’t killed by a melanoma. These fools need to have sun protection. Their white skins should not be exposed to the UV at those latitudes. Yeah. I am sure they just happened to find an obsidian clam digger’s tool walking around like that.
And, that stupid Cousteau. Gawd. I have heard for years how great the coral diving is in the Red Sea.
The age of Stupid is in full flower.
Are they really this stupid or is their audience that stupid?

October 1, 2017 6:26 am

Many religions have a myth involving cyclical death and rebirth, for instance of a god. The Egyptians had Osiris, the Sumerians their Tammuz, the ancient Greeks Adonis and Dionysis, the Norse had Balder, and so pn.
For the cult of the satan gas with the atomic number of the beast, the Great Barrier Reef fulfils the role of the regular death and rebirth myth.

October 1, 2017 6:36 am

Re: “[It’s] very surprising as previous studies have shown a two-to-three year delay in reproductive activity following bleaching events” Moral: Don’t just believe previous studies.

October 1, 2017 6:39 am

Um, what caused the bleaching? How much of that cause has changed to now allow recovery? Can’t be the atmospheric CO2 level since it keeps rising, can it?

October 1, 2017 6:55 am

Researchers are surprised == Please read this non-news that goes against the story line we gave last time.
Scientists are flabbergasted. == Oh, the consensus was just again found to be unbased.
Could not believe their eyes == Yet again an academic institution has replaced open mind with preassumptions.

October 1, 2017 7:02 am

I do think it important for all of us to cite “global warming” as a natural fact of interglacial periods as to those who would prostitute facts related to AGW (anthropogenic global warming) .

Reply to  Roger
October 1, 2017 9:33 am

On top of gentle warming there was a sudden Climate Shift around 20 years ago, but there is a bit of a deafening silence about it, maybe because it doesn’t fit with the consensus CO2 control knob.

Harry S
October 1, 2017 7:11 am

I seem to recall at the time of the alarming press releases that there were no mentions of a possible recovery. The death of the reef was final. It’s recovery is great news. The alarmists can recycle the story in another 15 years or so after the next large El Niño.

October 1, 2017 7:13 am

This just in – block of ice falls from the sky!!
The angry sky god is warning us that more CO2 emissions and he / she will smite us with an ice age!

October 1, 2017 7:50 am

I have commented a number of times on the speed with which coral recovers from bleaching. If the Australian scientists are surprised by this, then shame on them for not knowing the most basic facts about their chosen field of study. This wilful blindness on their part makes it clear just how much of the koolaid they have drunk …

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
October 1, 2017 8:19 am

Like so many plants a hard prune or bush fire just shows how resistant end determined living organisms are to survive and how they spring back newly invigorated.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
October 1, 2017 8:35 am

As I stated above they don’t even understand the 42% factor being the Crown of Thorn starfish and yet they are willing to wage war on a natural species with almost zero understanding of it.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
October 1, 2017 4:32 pm

Yes you have, and thank you very much.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
October 1, 2017 6:16 pm

Any amateur reefer (marine aquarist) can attest to the hardiness of reef-building corals. That these ‘experts’ are so surprised at the recovery is an indictment of their lack of knowledge. How does the old saying go, ” … they know more and more about less and less until eventually they know all about nothing.”

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
October 1, 2017 8:52 pm

All for the purpose of their careers and grant funding, Willis. What other reasons would there be, as all geoscientists and reef biologists know this.

October 1, 2017 8:21 am

OT, dont like the look of that sunspot pointing right at us. Time to check the earth strap on my Faraday’s box.

Rhoda R
Reply to  Greg
October 1, 2017 1:53 pm

Any evidence it’s getting ready to burp?

Stephen Singer
October 1, 2017 8:26 am

This isn’t surprising at all. I’m 71 and I recall at least one maybe two times in the past a serious bleaching occurred and the coral recovered though I don’t recall the time frame for the recovery. It seems that the coral is more resilient than some scare mongering scientists expect. Nature tends not to pay much attention to man kinds expectations.

J Mac
Reply to  Stephen Singer
October 1, 2017 10:55 am

RE: “It seems that the coral is more resilient than some scare mongering scientists expect.”
Just so. Another example of ‘Linear Thinking In A Cyclical World!’

October 1, 2017 11:36 am

I have a theory about that bleaching.
At the time, the water currents up there were particularly slow.
That means that the normal wafting of food across the reef would have dropped sharply.
The coral inhabitants all decided to take a holiday and find a better food source.
(I don’t like to think they died of starvation)
Now they are coming back home.

Reply to  AndyG55
October 1, 2017 6:18 pm

Good one, Andy 😉

Reply to  Streetcred
October 1, 2017 9:51 pm

Its not as far fetched as it might seem.
The waters at the time were definitely low on food, oxygen and CO2. plus theyexposed more of the coral than usual because the El Nino dragged the water level DOWN.

October 1, 2017 11:53 am

A coral reef is one giant battle for living space. If a section of reef dies off, that suddenly represents prime real estate that has opened for recolonization.

October 1, 2017 12:24 pm

Wait. Maybe bleaching is a natural cycle. Maybe corals have done this for millions of years. Maybe we being lied to. Nah that’s impossible.

Reply to  RockribbedTrumpkin
October 1, 2017 1:06 pm

I agree.
Corals have lived in invariant conditions – until the hour of the day of the invention of the SUV.
Then – Kapoweeeee!
Bleaching, and moving, and, and, oh, thriving . . . .
Mods – there is a slight hint of //SARC! in the foregoing.

Brett Keane
October 1, 2017 2:56 pm

All this based on aerial photos. We knew that was the limit of their ‘science’, good to have it confirmed.

October 1, 2017 3:27 pm

Didn’t Prof Jim Steele show recently that many recent coral bleaching events were caused by sea level fall and corals getting exposed to air?
In the light of the GBR rebound from the bleaching, it’s amusing to remind ourselves of the acrimonious exchange between Jim Steel and our friend Tripp Funderburk, who has made coral dystopia his career:
[quoting the above thread:]
Tripp Funderburk April 11, 2017 at 8:30 pm
Jim Steele, the bird call expert, says: “widescale bleaching not worrisome.” That is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read. The fact that so many sheep believe in this fiction is sad. Bleached corals expel algae that provide 90% of their food. Bleached corals do not grow, they do not reproduce, they have lost their food source and energy. Starving not worrisome? The fact that the denialists are so hopeful that widescale bleaching is not glaring obvious example of the destruction of climate change that they prop up Jim Steele, a nature walk expert, is unseemly. He is a charlatan, and pretending that the Great Barrier Reef is not bleaching due to anything but climate change is poppycock.

[NOTE: according to his Facebook page (linked in his response name section) Tripp has an MBA from Duke University and is the “Director of Operations at Coral Restoration Foundation International”.

So it seems Tripp is just an policy/politics/business management guy with an interest in diving that found a job after his patron, Rep Bob Livington, imploded and resigned after a series of adulterous affairs made him national news. Other than surroundign himself with people who on this coral foundation, he appears to have no scientific training, unlike Jim Steele, otherwise he would not have to resort to to ad hom attacks on Mr. Steele’s training, and no other substantial arguments. Given coral is his sole source of employment, this famous quote is applicable to Tripp
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” – Upton Sinclair, 1935
– Anthony Watts]

Reply to  ptolemy2
October 1, 2017 6:24 pm

Most of the alarmist “scientists” in Australia have no qualifications to support their hysteria … notably one, Tim Flannary, a mammalogist, who said we’d never have rain again … which led to the states of Queensland and Victoria building multi-billion dollar RO water plants which now, only a few years later, are rusting hulks.

October 1, 2017 6:44 pm


Reply to  Steven Mosher
October 1, 2017 8:49 pm

The answer is 42.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
October 1, 2017 9:45 pm

Is that how many used cars/lemons you sold last year?

Reply to  Steven Mosher
October 2, 2017 7:27 am

Mosher ==> Obviously, the BEST method has been applied. Current data showing that the past must be altered in order to maintain the cosmic order.

October 1, 2017 8:36 pm

That’s because one article is talking about NORTHERN sections of the great barrier reef (i.e. cairns to the top of cape york) and the other about a section from Cairns to Townsville (a couple of 100 miles SOUTH of cairns). Why are all you d’niers such utter morons?
Not only do you know absolutely nothing about climate science, you haven’t got a clue about basic geography.

Reply to  Bruce
October 1, 2017 8:52 pm

Both start at Cairns. How is one study “100s of miles” from the other?
What’s your opinion of the contradictions in the studies? Or do you believe there are none?
Either way you really haven’t offered a rebuttal to the fact the ‘doom gloom’ of the former study, isn’t supported by the latter.

Reply to  Vicus
October 1, 2017 9:14 pm

Because Cairns to Cape York is >1000 kms. Cairns to Townsville is 350km. Far enough for you?

Reply to  Bruce
October 1, 2017 10:37 pm

There seems to be an agreement: coral bleaching is highly localised, in addition to being temporary and reversible. What a relief to any sentient and rational human being.
Drop the misanthrope lexicon Bruce. Even the name of its own pet conjecture is unstable.

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 2, 2017 1:55 am

The bleaching isn’t localized- just worst in the northern part of the reef where about 80% of reefs are severely affected. 2014 – 2017 was globally the worst bleaching event in recorded history. The fact that some corals are seeing the potential for recovery is small comfort given that this is going to require a couple of years of cooler water temperatures in the region, which judging on the last 30 years is not going to happen. Hell, why don’t we chop down 1000 square miles of amazonian rainforest- I’m sure we’ll see the green shoots of recovery in a couple of years.
I wonder if any of you had actually dived in the region and saw for yourself the destruction rather than sat masturbating on your computers on WUWT you would think differently. But somehow I suspect not.

Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
October 2, 2017 3:51 am

We seem to agree there is more to the misanthropogenic climate faith than Cape York-Townsville shoreline. However, where I come from, your idea of destruction seems somewhat limited:
-10% of my people starved to death in the optimum reference temperature of the misanthropic faith i.e. during the year without summer at the end of 19th century.
-Each generation culled in the battlefields all the way back to the recorded history in the 11th century, the 21st century being the only exception so far.
-It’s been exposed to Soviet era radiation e.g. Tsar Bomb, Chernobyl, Kola peninsula.
-And the shorelines share the same sea as the sewage pipes from Russia’s second-largest city after Moscow.
Yeah, that could count as destruction of >100,000 sq mi or at least gives you some perspective.
Never seen any coral around these shores though, not that anyone would shed tears because of it. Lack of coral could be because the season is too cold and short for cultivating even corn. Still able to see a cup half full, rather than half empty: coral has been taking care of itself some 542 million years without you. For these reason I suggest you try both your hobbies elsewhere for a change.

Reply to  Bruce
October 2, 2017 6:18 am

Bruce said: “2014 – 2017 was globally the worst bleaching event in recorded history.”
And how long is this “recorded history”? How many years can we go back and say that “globally” we have dived on the multitude of coral reefs around the world all in the same year to safely state with any scientific confidence that this is the worst event in recorded history.
This has all happened before and after a Super El Nino and this on a remote reef with few sources to re colonize.
Yet lo and behold here we go again….
same reef…similar bleaching and it will do a similar recovery yet the headlines are the same as in 1998. We are all doomed…the reef is doomed….but it will recover just like last time. I suspect that this reef has bleached many times over in the past, but it was not observed.

October 1, 2017 9:38 pm

Climate change, climate change, climate change. Greenhouse gasses in the ozone and yet, the temperatures aren’t changing that much. HOWEVER, thousands of people going down to the coral reefs in their motor boats might not have any effect on those delicate corals. I would think they might be amazed at how nature recovers if they simply restricted motorized boats in the area.

October 1, 2017 9:54 pm

Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
CORALS evolved during the Cambrian era when atmospheric CO2 levels were at 6,000-7,000 ppm, around 4,000 percent or 20 times higher than today’s “CO2-starved” environment of 400 ppm, with atmospheric and ocean temps temps far higher than today.
CORALS have survived millions of years of dramatic and sudden climate change, yet climate alarmists want us to believe that a few hundred ppm more atmospheric CO2 is going to end us!?
CORAL bleaching is a naturally occurring phenomenon essential to the health and regrowth of coral reefs.
THE “Great Barrier Reef” is only “great” because it has died off at least 7 known times over the millennia.
CORAL reef fear-mongering is another man-made lie to push the man-made global warming aka climate change scam…

Patrick MJD
October 1, 2017 9:57 pm

There is a TV program going to air here in Australia soon on ABC I think and it’s about how science will save the GBR with some sort of biological engineering IIRC. I reckon these “scientists” should just leave it well alone seems to be doing rather well and has been for a lot longer than we’ve been on this rock..

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 2, 2017 2:52 am

Not hubris Eric. They want to rush to the front of the parade and “save” the coral because they now are worried it is saving itself just fine.
These guys shouldn’t be allowed near the coral with any “ideas” now that it’s revealed they don’t know anything about their life’s study.
I have to conclude that these creatures are the most successful lifeform that ever came into existence. Corals have been flourishing for 500million years, since the Cambrian, when animals with hard preservable parts (forming fossils) came into existence.
As I said in a recent thread, corals have been to the funerals of over 95% of all species of life that have ever lived. Their robust “lifestyle” has resulted in proliferation of countless varieties, a testiment to their unsurpassed adaptability.
Australian science itself will take a generation to recover from the brain-bleaching of the mainstream consensus ‘bludger spangled drongos’.
Nowhere on earth will you find more courageous skeptics, though, but they seem to number few. I hope they have healthy reproductive systems. The main thing is to somehow effect a massive change in their sclerotic structure and modus op of government.

October 2, 2017 6:28 am

“Remarkable recovery” is what the Aussie tourism lobby demanded.

Kaiser Derden
October 2, 2017 7:10 am

file this in the same folder as the “Where did all the oil go in the Gulf of Mexico ? stories” …. more “experts” revealing they are mostly ignorant about their chosen field …

October 2, 2017 7:41 am

The retraction of the headline news is always on page B9.

October 2, 2017 7:48 am

This is entirely expected by all who are aware of the dynamics of the GRB Wars. AIMS (Australian Institute of Marine Science) does real unbiased research and publishes something closer to the truth a month or two after the so-called ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University issues yet-another “all is lost — the reef is dead” cry for global warming alarm.
This has been going on so long that it is a standing joke to those on the sidelines of Australian science.
Aligning on the side of truth and justice in Australia is the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) which is the government agency responsible for protecting and managing the reef.
There is no doubt that the two consecutive years of bleaching events have damaged portions of the reef and that the typhoon added to the havoc.
But like forests after a wildfire, the reefs will repopulate and rejuvenate — on their own time scale. It can be heartbreaking to visit a forest recently burned off by fire — but the Springs to come bring forth wildflowers, new growth, and the beauty of the young forest — an essential environmental niche for many plants and animals unsuited for life in a mature forest. I suspect the same is true for the GBR and other reefs around the world.
Bleaching events and powerful storms not only damage but also present the reef with the opportunity of a new start, with different species in different developmental stages.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
October 3, 2017 12:33 am

Very well said, Kip.
Another example of an shocked environmental system occurs when a hurricane picks up speed heading north up the east coast of the USA, and slams into New England. Such hurricanes are rare; most either curve out to sea or move so slowly they weaken. When a hurricane accelerates north it retains winds strong enough to flatten New England’s forests, especially up on the tops of hills. We haven’t had such a hurricane since Carol in 1954, so when it happens again it will seem “unprecedented.”
When I was young, besides a “zest for the best” I had a “thirst for the worst.”. I didn’t like old geezers telling me “it has happened before.” Now I have become one of those old geezers. When the young get wide-eyed with excitement I’m always spoiling their fun by saying, “That tain’t nothing. Back when I was young…”
I suppose the young are bored, and one needs to feed their enthusiasm for mayhem a bit. When walking in the woods around here all the trees blown down in 1954 have rotted away, but in places there are still stripes of green moss on the forest floor where those logs once were. I like to point out the stripes, and then make my eyes round and my voice a bit spooky, and talk about all the trees being flattened in 1954, ending, “And it could happen again, this coming September.”
That livens up a dull day, without increasing anyone’s taxes.

Reply to  Caleb
October 3, 2017 1:23 pm

Caleb ==> (an interesting Biblical name — with an interesting connotation. Studied his story when being indoctrinated into the arcane world of Intelligence).
So many things are improved by taking the long view — “presentism” is one of the great plagues of our day.
The fine people of Woodstock, NY all believe they are living in a oh-so-wonderful primeval forest — which are, in fact, third and fourth growth scrub (weed) growth atop the tailings of last century’s bluestone quarries.

PW Gibbons
October 2, 2017 11:25 am

Visited Great Barrier Reef near Cairns in March of 2017. Beautiful. Consensus of local divers was that bleaching is normal in hotter years for coral near the surface. If the seas haven’t risen fast enough to keep the coral covered (like after the last ice age) it thrives at deeper depths. Plus freshly bleached coral (within one year) is a ready host for newly spawned coral.

Reply to  PW Gibbons
October 2, 2017 2:31 pm

Bollocks. No diver would have said that.

Reply to  Bruce
October 3, 2017 1:28 pm

Bruce ==> I am afraid that this is the case — bleaching only affect shallow-water reefs those reefs that can be viewed from glass-bottomed boast and snorkelers. That’s why you can always see the surface in photos of bleached coral.
Reefs that required scuba gear are almost never affected at all, and supply the replenishment organisms that migrate to the bleached coral on the shallow reefs.
Suggest you do a little research of your own to discover this for yourself.

Reply to  PW Gibbons
October 3, 2017 12:45 am

Actually, some years ago, (2007?) when I first became aware of the “bleaching” hysteria, what I did was to travel via the web to various Australian tourism sites, and read the comments at those sites.
At one site, at a place where tourists were taken on scuba and snorkeling dives, the divers were rather gruffly discussing the scientists. They did seem to feel “it has happened before,” and the hysteria was “much ado about nothing.”
What the discussion seemed to revolve around was whether the idiot scientists would drive tourists away, or attract more tourists who would want to see the reef “before it was too late.”

PW Gibbons
October 2, 2017 3:48 pm

One did.

PW Gibbons
Reply to  PW Gibbons
October 2, 2017 3:50 pm

But he was Ginger.

%d bloggers like this: