Diver Dan I'm surprised at you, your post is emotive watermelon talk, with so little reality it is useless. I expected better from a diver.

I have to ask Alan, have you ever seen a coral reef? Anyone who can refer to a coral reef as fragile has very little grip on reality. Even the big cyclones that destroy the strongest efforts of man leave such a small mark on the reef, it is impossible to call it fragile.

I have considerable experience of coral, having hand built over 30 jetties on a few isolated high islands, but mostly on very isolated atolls through our near Pacific islands.

More importantly I explored much of the WW11 sights through the Solomons, New guinea & a few others. I have dived on Iron Bottom Sound shores, & reefs, & know that despite all the destruction & the tens of thousand of gallons of heavy fuel oil spilt from all those sunken ships, in the early 70s, less than 30 years later there was not a single bit of evidence of residual damage to any coral.

I have dived Rabaul Harbour with it's hundreds of Jap wrecks, which are now mostly reef themselves.

Coral is remarkable fertile stuff. Talk to anyone who has sailed through the great barrier reef in October after the spawning. They will tell you of sailing through hundreds of acres of brown & yellow dead coral spore, so thick it reduces wave action. They will also tell you of losing the battle to prevent staining of their topsides from this stuff, or the stinking drifts of it washed up on lea shores.

If global warming ever actually occurred, the coral would cover Moreton Island tidal zone in half a decade.

Stop worrying, the reef will still be thriving long after all these academic carpetbaggers, & those who cry for the reef today are long gone.

Alan B.

In addition to your comments about New York and Sydney (nothing academic):

Alaska has had a very warm November and December 2017, the first dog sled race of the winter season Kuskokwim River, had to be postponed for a fortnight. Rivers when iced over create a route between communities, they have not had enough ice formed to make travel by ski doo safe.

Quote:

"The race in southwest Alaska had been scheduled to happen two weeks before. But warm weather — just above freezing — made the trails unsafe."

The worst fire in California's recorded history is still smouldering in some places.

JMA (Japanese Meteorological Agency) has indicated that 2017 was the third warmest year they had recorded, it was a non el nino year.

Alaska, dated 5/01/2018:

http://www.npr.org/2018/01/05/575905776/while-the-eastern-us-freezes-its-too-warm-in-alaska

Thomas Fire (winter), the estimated containment of the fire is 20 January 2018:

http://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/5670/

JMA:

http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/gwp/temp/ann_wld.html

Seems like the heat is now hiding in the warmist fried brains. Snow again in the Sahara. Of course its all part of the modelling. Just keep fleecing the public and brainwash the kids. How dumb can the elite make the getup clowns.

Hasbeen

I'd like you to actually address the points I raised in my post. So far, you haven't addressed one of them!

But here is another. The science is in. Global coral reefs are stuffed, on two major grounds.
One, is coral bleaching caused by rising sea temperatures, and the change in ocean currents.

Two, is the outcome of rising sea temperatures on the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The effect is to acidify surface layers of the ocean.
Ocean acidification prevents corals from regenerating, after bleaching events.

If you can disprove this theory, than you become one of the three percent of disbelievers with a brain. As for the rest, I don't give a tinkers damn.

runner

Just making rude put down comments without providing any evidence for your opinion, is meaningless, and not a Christian thing to do.

You are not able to pull apart the science which is investigating jet streams as you do not have the appropriate data. Dr Barber, a Canadian climate scientist, certainly says that the polar vortex is having an impact on lower latitudes weather wise.

It is greenhouse gases that maintain the temperature of Earth, an increase in greenhouse gases creates a warmer atmosphere. Try investigating what's happening between the Troposphere and Stratosphere in relation to greenhouse gases. Collection of data has occurred.

There is no doubt that CO2 can take up warmth and hold it, experimentation has shown this to be the case.

The argument that deniers use is that very little CO2 is exhausted into the atmosphere; and so, climate change is wrong. Metaphorically, try injecting a quarter of a ml of insulin (25 units), an extremely small amount in relation to a healthy adult person; but, it would be deadly. A type 1 diabetic might inject 4 units, or 4/100ths of a ml which could put them in a coma.

Ant,

I believe your claim that the IPA is a political Agency which denies anthropogenic climate change is completely false, primarily because I have yet to see any statement from them along those lines. In fact the book that they published on climate change does not claim that global warming is divorced from human activities, but challenges the semi-religious dogma that the only solutions are renewable energy.

Engineers have for more than a decade been predicting that unreliable wind and solar would need to be backed up by at least 90-95% equivalent dispatchable generation which was ignored by south Australia with predictable results.

I am happy to combat global warming with nuclear and Hele plants that will give guaranteed massive CO2 emission reductions without nearly the same cost and unreliability of wind and solar.