JF, I'm sure that I can't answer your "basic question" to your satisfaction.

Apart from not being sufficiently expert in the field to do so, I suspect that there is no answer which does not align with your own preference that you might find satisfactory.

If you feel sufficiently strongly, then perhaps you might consider doing the "real" science yourself and then you might look to engineering a solution that you can convince others is worth supporting.

You might be surprised at how much "real" science has already been done on the subject if you take the trouble to look. That makes your job much easier - all you have to do is the engineering...

Craig,

What evidence do you have to establish you cannot answer the question to my satisfaction? I will be satisfied with an honest answer. Are you dishonest?

I feel I have done enough basic science and extensive research on relevant subjects sufficient to ask the question I wrote at the head of page one of this OLO thread.

The question has of course been addressed but is not answered.

Some OLO writers have already seen the following but maybe you have not.

Research shows precipitation occurring in association with ocean algae, such as pinpoints of cloud forming parallel to algae in the Bering Sea, here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Phytoplankton_Bloom_in_the_Bering_Sea_amo_2009281_lrg.jpg

Also, algae has been scientifically discovered well after AGW Kyoto and IPCC made statement about climate that subsequently changed taxation laws and economies causing loss of business and hardship. Note the time and date well after Kyoto, here:
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/june/arctic-algal-blooms-060712.html

I am coming to understand nothing is special about 'science' or real science, because that obviously important and however basic and inconvenient question, is not being answered.
What is going on, Craig?

Right now science should be reporting to government and media there is need to attend to ocean seafood devastation linked to algae that is now impacting people of Vanuatu.
News media should be investigating outer communities and loss of garden food due to cyclone Nathan, PLUS loss of essential protein (amino acid) supply that once sustained good health.
Vanuatu has recently had and may still have a problem with small babies talking up ward space needed for normal births.
Evidence indicates malnutrition and anaemia is causing stunting and/or early deliveries and also maternal mortality among Pacific Islands people.

I wonder if Vanuatu and other islands will get real aid needed to sustain health and life.
But who knows about those things, media is not telling news truthfully as it should be told.
Media fobs off seriousness of fish devastation and shortage of food by blaming science for lack of scientific evidence.

Lack of expertise in specific field’s should not delay finding an answer to a serious question, or two.

JF, I've already given you an honest answer and you're not satisfied.

Sorry, that's all I can do.

Cyclone Pam I should have said in my previous post. My error but now corrected.

As for that question, insight to the situation shows the answer points to exceptional business and employment and more sustainable prosperity, so it is inevitable it will be answered and addressed.

Delay in answering is holding science back in more ways than one, especially because prosperity opens the door to resources for science.

JF, you're continuing to confuse politics with science.

No matter how clear the scientific evidence for any given problematical situation being real, whether it is prioritised by decision-makers is a matter for politics.

Science can only inform, it cannot decide and if it claims to do so, it is not science.

Craig,

Science can do more than just inform.
Science can lead the way.
Science could be very special.

The CSIRO should answer that question, then science could help lead the way to productively and viably rehabilitating the whole of the water ecosystem of this planet.

Google: water shortage and find for example,
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/world/UN-warns-of-water-crisis-by-year-2030/shdaily.shtml

Science is inextricably linked to politics, especially via economics and the world ocean and AFFORDABLE world protein supply sustainability.

Present policy makers seem oblivious to the real state of world ocean water ecosystem. There is aquaculture policy but no water ecosystem policy. And development of aquaculture is being increased in contained conditions that generate nutrient overload that adds to the sewage nutrient loading and unprecedented proliferation of algae and consequent impact on climate.

The following URL provides further example, of precipitation occurring over the exact area in the Gulf of Mexico where the world's biggest ocean dead zone is located. Too much algae consumes available oxygen at night and under heavy cloud, resulting in anoxia and that dead zone.

http://microcosmnews-earthwatch-report.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/deadly-monster-winter-storm-batters-us.html

Is there any science paper that informs policy makers about nutrient pollution proliferating algae in that dead zone being linked to that precipitation and severe weather?
Does anyone know if marine biology is included in meteorology?

Does anyone know if science is informing politicians and policy makers about the oceans already being in such a critical state of devastation that weather is being changed?

Do politicians and policy makers comprehend innovation and new productivity could eventuate from scientifically engineered solutions that could stimulate the world economy and prove science to be very special?
Most countries have water issues that require solutions.