A new study dispels the claim that coral reefs are at risk from modern environmental changes or rates.
From about 8000 to 6000 years ago the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) mean annual water temperatures were 4°C warmer than today.
Relative sea levels were ~2 meters higher and seas were rising at rates of ~6 to 7 meters per millennium (6-7 mm/yr).
The Early Holocene climate was also wetter than today, resulting in higher rates of terrestrial runoff (more turbidity and nutrient-rich waters) as GBR coastal land areas were increasingly inundated.
It has been assumed by modern scientists (and popularized by the recent preference for alarmist narratives) that reefs could not favorably withstand these environmental conditions – nor such rapid change.
However, new data suggest coral reef growth was “substantial and active” during this interval, which also characterizes the modern reef growth in this region.
“[W]ater quality during the Holocene between 8 and 7 ka was turbid and with high concentrations of nutrients, yet coral reef growth was substantial and active. The same holds true for modern corals in inshore environments, which can display very high percentage coverage.”
Image Source: Sanborn et al., 2024
____________________________________________________________________________
A Google [images] search on “coral reef distribution map” turns up world maps showing that coral reefs are distributed primarily in the tropics and subtropics. The notion that warmer water damages the great barrier reef or any coral reef isn’t supported by that fact. So why is it assumed that they are? Makes no sense unless you let your imagination explore political reasons.
On edit the above search finds this NOAA page:
Assessing the Threat of Hypoxia to Coral Reefs
So it’s low oxygen according to NOAA.
Has low O2 always been the case or is that new?
Low water levels due to tides or cyclones can cause low O2 levels for corals near the surface.
Except on the outer edge, the top of coral reefs are pretty much dead flat on the surface where the corals can’t grow any higher due to lack of water.
Toss in a foot of sea level rise and the reef will rapidly grown back to the surface.
As I gazed upon ocean side bluffs in Western Australia a few months ago, I thought to myself, it sure looks like sea levels were much higher. You’re told not to believe your lying eyes.
The underlying concern about the GBR is that the lucrative taxpayer funded research grants might die off.
They’ve been around since the mid Triassic so what’s the problem?
“So what’s the problem?”
Dynamite, arsenic, fertilizer runoff, trawling, sand dredging, to name a few that are more trouble to coral than the water being a degree warmer….
Well, although I won’t disagree that some people in some places have zero respect for literally anything – what’s the percentage? – I thought the graph might have provided a clue.
Add to it, pieces of coral collect to sell to tourists. Not a trivial amount.
More live coral is stripped from the GBR by USA university coral research programs than what gets collected in Australian waters for souvenirs.
None of those things occur along the GBR.
#Dynamite fishing in Indonesia and the Pacific Islands has been all but stamped out.
#The GBR is too far off shore to be affected by arsenic and fertilisers … the inner flats are not the GBR.
#Good luck trying to trawl along the Reef, you’ll be at the bottom quick smart.
#There is NO DREDGING on the GBR.
6,000 to 8,000 years ago the sea level was 2m higher? I think not. The sea level was 8 m higher during the Eemian or last interglacial period 125,000 years ago. This can be seen in fossilized coral heads throughout beaches in the Caribbean. The lack of accuracy here makes this article complete B.S!
Yes, I would have thought lower.
Oops.
Even I just tried to give myself a down vote for this.
20 000 years ago they were 120 m lower than present (Williams et al. 1993; Miller et al. 2005).
https://coastadapt.com.au/how-climate-and-sea-level-have-changed-over-long-term-past
(hey, 13,000 years here, 13,000 years there, and pretty soon we’re talking serious diary stuff-ups)
Sorry, but rock platform all along the east coast of Australia show that sea levels were 1.5 to 2.5m higher during the early to mid Holocene.
The lack of accuracy and knowledge shown in your comment, makes your comment complete BS. !
Some of the most colourful healthy corals come from the turbid inner reef areas of the GBR.
Yep, like weeds, corals will grow just about anywhere warm.
And cold too.
If warm water and warm air temps are so damaging to coral as to cause their imminent extinction, and given that geologists know for a fact that there have been both warmer eras than now, and that coral has thrived throughout geologic history, the warmunist claims just never made any sense. Plus of course the obvious matter of corals only existing in substantial numbers in tropical and subtropical coastal seas – the warmest water on the planet.
Warmunists trumpet coral bleaching events as “kills” when they are not kills, they are just change outs in the organisms that live on coral and “bleach” (not actually bleach) due to temporary upsets in environmental conditions, and which come back as before after the temporary stress is relieved.
You were expecting the Eco-Nazis to make sense?!
Don’t confuse them with that real-world observation stuff, their POOMA climate models say warmer waters will be “bad” for coral reefs. 🙄
How did you conclude that it was 4°C warmer than today?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems more like a +4°C change from 8000 to 6000 BP rather than being 4°C warmer than today.
It also does not match this study, which indicates it was only 0.7°C warmer during holocene relative to 2024:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13770287_Temperature_and_Surface-Ocean_Water_Balance_of_the_Mid-Holocene_Tropical_Western_Pacific