NASA released its monthly global temperature data, revealing November was easily the hottest in the temperature record. The “meteorological year” — December to November — was also the hottest on record. Calendar year 2010 appears poised to be the hottest on record.

These records are especially impressive because we’re in the middle of a strong La Niña, which would normally cool off temperatures for a few months, and we’ve been in “the deepest solar minimum in nearly a century.” It’s just hard to stop the march of man made global warming, other than by sharply reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

"The “meteorological year” — December to November — was also the hottest on record. Calendar year 2010 appears poised to be the hottest on record."

Fabulous! The real year isn't going to break any records, so you invent a new one that is! And it's 'poised', you say? It hasn't actually DONE it yet?

Honestly, you couldn't make this stuff up.

You will note from Cancun, that emissions targets were put aside to achieve the REAL aim of this whole fiasco - wealth distribution.

Hope all the warmers are glad that they have pushed for,and now had committed through Greg Combet 1.5% of our GDP annually, to be handed to despotic 3rd world overseas regimes who are going to use it for 'climate abatement'. Of course there is no policing of how they use the money as this would be 'disrespectful' to other cultures. It is probably grossly disrespectful of me to suggest they will waste it on corruption and armaments.

So now every Australian family is about $2400 poorer per year. That's why Gillard needs to get a Carbon Tax through. To pay 3rd world despots.

How stupid are those who've led us into this mess and their eager, brainless, lackeys who keep quoting 'the science' like trained parrots while they drag us into a very dim future for ourselves and our children.

Anyone here actually dived the GBR lately?
The inner reefs are already mostly dead, though I believe this is more from cane farming than SST causing bleaching. The outer reefs are bleaching more and more with less live coral to be found each year.
Before you scream "alarmist"...just go there and chat to an older diver.
The damage due to acidification is a bigger worry in the outer Pacific islands as it impacts their resilience to storm damage. When coral stops growing, or slows, it can make entire islands become very susceptible to storm surges and other wave damage.
The big issue for nature is the sheer speed that we are changing things. Several million years worth of carbon released in less than 100 years will have some "snapping rubber band" like effects...these, not the gradual predictable ones, are the scary part of all this. Mind you, compared to a dino-killer asteroid GW will still be a relatively slow and easy cradle eviction for us humans!

Hay Andy, who told you all this stuff.

The worst thing for coral is fresh water, so this year is shaping up to be not a good one. However, if you investigate the reef cores, drilled many years ago, you will find many times when it was worse for the coral, & others when it was so dry, for so long, our land use would not survive.

Damage caused by farming, which was a real problem is much diminished today. Farmers can't afford to waste fertilizer these days, too expensive.

However, I ran tourist boats in the reef for many years. The blokes running those boats, to the same reefs, out from the Whitsundays tell me that the coral viewing is at its best right now.

Strange that those marine biologists, looking for grants always see a reason of worry, requiring research, just as it was when AIMS, & the authority first started.

1) Cyclical variation in solar irradiance is what drives climate change, not atmospheric CO2 levels. Only 3% of CO2 emissions are anthropogenic. As increasing solar energy warms the oceans their capacity to hold CO2 in solution is diminished and degassing into the atmosphere occurs. Elevated atmospheric CO2 levels are a consequence of global warming, not a cause.

2) Ocean warming will result in an expansion of coral reef growth towards higher latitudes. For example, a 130,000 year old fossil reef outcrops on the shoreline of Rottnest Island 20k west of Fremantle. It grew when sea level was at least 3m higher than at present and when higher seawater temperatures allowed coral growth. Global cooling and resultant lowering of sea level during the last Ice Age caused the demise of this reef. Today no similar coral reefs exist in WA waters south of Houtman Abrolhos, 500k north.

3) All ocean waters are alkaline even though CO2 dissolved in water is a mild acid. The least alkalinity occurs in the ocean depths where higher pressure and lower temperature results in a higher CO2 saturation. Conversely, shallow surface waters where coral reefs grow have the highest alkalinity.

4) The mass extinctions in Earth’s history that Dr Veron refers to are the result of cataclysmic events such as massive volcanicity on a continental scale or collision with a comet or asteroid, not ocean acidification. At such times not only corals but up to 75% of all species, marine and terrestrial, can become extinct.

5) Dr Veron claims to have consulted widely, and depressingly found no dissenters from his conclusions. Evidently consultations were limited to like minded scientists. Contrary opinions abound. To obtain a little cheer he could, in his own city of Townsville, have talked to marine geologist and environmental scientist, Professor Robert Carter of James Cook University. In his recently published book, “Climate: the Counter Consensus” Bob Carter outlines a very different view to that of Dr Veron. I recommend this book to anyone seeking a balanced view on climate change.