mhaze

The paper is hidden behind a pay wall, only the Abstract and first page of the Introduction are available. Kenneth Richard is unreliable in giving a synopsis of any article in relation to climate change as indicated by my last post.

Meta Reports which give an overview of what is happening in the Arctic provide data and information that is very reliable ... peer reviewed in relation to a whole gamut of matters relating to the Arctic:

http://www.sei-international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/ArcticResilienceReport-2016.pdf

A final thought on 2016 Australian 'warming' is that Australians like ant have learned nothing about reality and continue with non-sense about CO2 emissions causing warming.
No offence, ant, it's just that in your post above you provide perfect example of the non-sense.

There is no sense or scientific evidence proving wild natural coral is being killed by warmer water.

Reality is that on a hot day at low tide there are pools of water on top of coral reef that often have varying amounts of coral growing in them and that coral does not bleach or die, despite fact that pooled water gets very warm.

Killing coral with warmer water in a laboratory would make sense if the water was say very very hot, or very hot for an un-natural number of hours.
Tides do not stay low all day, reef top pools of warm water are quickly filled and cooled.

Try to understand, a human can stay outside on a very hot sunny day but cannot stay for very long without cooling with water or shade.

If warm water was killing coral the top of every reef would be dead.
Coral exposed to sun and heat on reef tops dies during storms and/or big seas and waves that smash the coral to bits.

Sewage and land use nutrient overload pollution is feeding invasive algae that is smothering coral in local events involving hypoxia, leading to bleaching.

JF Aus

The science of climate change has been in existence for almost two centuries.
Your comments suggest that Fourier in the early 1800s was wrong.
Eunice Foote in the 1850s was wrong in relation to experiments she conducted with CO2.
John Tyndall was wrong in the work he completed later in the 1800s.
A long line of increasing understanding created by experimentation, observation, and use of increasingly sophisticated equipment must also be wrong.

Your previous comments imply that Fourier, Foote, Tyndall et al were wrong.

I happen to believe in science, and not contrived statements.

ant,

Your own reply there is actually contriving that I am implying those et al you refer to were all wrong.

It is your opinion that my comments are wrong. Do tell on what grounds they are wrong. Show science proving I am wrong, if you can.
Be specific instead of generalizing.

I too believe in science, but complete science, not BS science that is politically motivated or science that is underfunded and incomplete.

JF Aus

At a Symposium in 1856 the work of Eunice Foote was presented, her experimentation showed the interaction between CO2 and light. I have provided a reference a number of times in the past. Were Fourier, Eunice Foote, Tyndall, politically motivated? Guy Callendar till the early 1960s kept records of temperature from every place possible, was he politically motivated? ExxonMobil scientists in the 1970s indicated that fossil fuels damage the climate, were they politically motivated? Later, a couple of ExxonMobil scientists used modelling to show the state of the Arctic as it is now. Projecting what they believed would be the case in something like three decades into the future, politically motivated?
In 1991 Shell provided a video on climate and a theme of the video was the high risks involved in relation to climate change, politically motivated?

On the other hand, since Reagan and Thatcher a new political/economic way of viewing the world has evolved overthrowing concepts previously held.

You say "...I too believe in science, but complete science"

What that means is that you know better than CSIRO, NASA, NOAA, the Royal Society et al, and Journals such as Nature, AAAS, Lancet etc which publish peer reviewed research. You also know better than scientists working out in the field in at times hostile conditions. You know better than Physicists, Oceanographers, Meteorologists etc. You know better than Universities that provide Earth Science cources.

The implication is that you believe Monckton, Rose, Delingpole, Taylor, Watts, Nova etc who are continually proven wrong.

Where is your data?

ant,

It looks like your comments are politically motivated. Are you chasing commissions from from emissions trading? Are you an agent selling wind turbines to government? Are you in alternative energy business?

Look back on my comments on this thread.
Did Eunice Foote in 1856 prove warm water kills coral?
Did any of the other sources you refer to, prove CO2 or hot water is linked to death of coral?

Sometimes I have known a tiny bit better than CSIRO, NASA and NOAA, for example in 1982 I reported a major government search for 4 missing fishermen was in the wrong direction south to Gabo island, and 3 weeks later their boat was found north off Newcastle where I had even searched. Search procedure was subsequently changed.

I am not disputing CO2 is linked to atmosphere that is liked to climate.

Where is my data?
Science has no data to show how gravity is formed yet gravity exists.

The Great Barrier Reef has been a place of work for me, I have been a cameraman and co-produced and produced underwater films in GBR waters.
Inside a giant fishing lure mobile blind I was towed feet first backwards underwater for a total distance of 400 nautical miles for the first time filming the previously unknown locomotion and feeding habits of giant black marlin - locomotion and habits then unknown to CSIRO, NASDA and NOAA et al.

I have rested and warmed up many times while walking on top of the GBR, as other divers do, exploring, observing, walking in shallow warm pools.
First hand I have observed healthy coral in very noticeably warm pools while cooler moving tidal water flows nearby.

You pay, ant, take me there, bring a scientist and measure temperature of my feet and the warm pool water, show in natural conditions that warmer water is killing GBR coral, then you can have some data. LOL.

Anthropogenic sewage and land use nutrient overload pollution, not CO2 emissions, is proliferating invasive algae that is killing coral and sometimes leading to bleaching, worldwide.