CHERFUL, your post reminded me of this comment in a newspaper article:
“New research found about 68 per cent of reefs from Cairns to Lizard Island had varying levels of coral bleaching, but most of it likened to sunburn on a human body where the coral glows pink before fully recovering.”
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/great-barrier-reef-signs-of-recovery-despite-major-coral-bleaching/news-story/e826d014a1b593efaf879cbb030804d5

The “destruction of the Reef” lie is a favourite of the climate fraud promoters, who infest the Forum.

Leo Lane

Thanks for the link.

Reflux made the baseless assertion that Robert Carter’s science, which nullified the science put forward by Reflux, consisted of “proven falsehoods”.
Reflux has been asked how and by whom these alleged falsehoods were “proven” .
Reflux has not replied, which is typical of his mode of handlind a situation, where he has cornered himself with his dishonesty. Rodent-like, he will disappear into the crevices..

The flea says above:”But, a little exercise completed earlier today was to find 20 climate science papers published in peer reviewed journals in 2016. The majority of the papers having been published in April 2016.
Those who believe there is no consensus should be able to produce references to papers by skeptical scientists in peer reviewed journals published in 2016.”
So 20 papers by the fraud promoters, and 133 by the truth promoters
“already this year alone (2016) some 133 consensus-skeptical papers have been published.”

Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/03/28/already-133-consensus-skeptical-papers-in-2016-over-660-past-two-years/#ixzz47nD9Nsd8
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18187&page=0
There is a well received resource here:
1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
The flea in his usual ignorant manner, has put up a post irrelevant to the topic, because he refuses to respond to the relevant question as to the science to show any measurable human effect on climate to justify the flea’s assertion of human caused global warming. He insolently and uncivilly ignores the question. He does not even acknowledge that he has been asked, hejust pigheadedly posts irrelevant rubbish, lately without even a comment as to why he thinks he is posting the links in this irrational manner..

Leo
The caveat I gave was papers be published in peer reviewed journals.
A fail on that account.
Shown by: "Received date: Jan 25, 2016; Accepted date: Feb 15, 2016; Published date: Feb 17, 2016"

Many scientists complain about the length of time it takes to have a scientific paper published; it can take up to a year after firs being presented due to the review process.

When Powell did his research in 2013 and 2014 he found that around 12,000 papers are published each year in peer reviewed journals.

A quote from reference you provided:

"Though most of the papers the Kenneth Richard lists support that climate change is happening (it always has) and that human activity appears to be one factor, the alarmist scenarios often trumpeted by the media and IPCC scientists are in fact turning out to be more hype and less reality."

Satellite temperature for April 2016:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2016/05/uah-v6-global-temperature-update-for-april-2016-0-71-deg-c/

Your source states that climate change is happening; whether created partially by man or natural changes.

What are we going to do about it?

For Example:

http://assets.climatecentral.org/pdfs/AgeofAlaskanWildfires.pdf

Now for the comedy session, your abuse.