"But the truth will out eventually".

We're talking about climate science here. What's the truth got to do with it?

"This comment edited and corrected by Grammarly."

That anyone with 4 degrees would need Grammarly is an indictment on our education system...or something.

Well this is not selective facts.

I dived in Rabaul harbour where 120 Jap ships were sunk, many with cargos of all the nasty things you can imagine. Not only were the corals thriving, in much hotter water than anywhere on the Great Barrier Reef, but were competing strongly for a foot hold on all those ships.

I also dived along the shores of Iron Bottom Sound, again with wrecks on the bottom & the shore line, & the coral is fantastic.

I saw the increase of marine seaweed on the inshore reefs between 1950 as a kid, & the 70s, when we were paying cane farmers & others to use fertilisers far too liberally. I then saw a return of healthy coral to many areas where seaweed had taken over, as farmers reduced this usage.

Over years of carting 700+ tourists a week out to the same spot on Hardy Reef, & many overnight & longer fishing/exploring parties to the reefs out from there, I saw very little change over the years. The change I did see was cyclone damage & repair over many years.

Not once did I ever see another boat out round Net, Knuckle or Kennedy reefs, my favourite spots, in all my time out there.

Overuse is a total fallacy, pushed by the Townsville grant chases.

Hasbeen,
Yeah, 30 or more years ago all was fine. The northern GBR didn't have to cope with the outflow from that massive Goldmine in PNG.
I spent a week on the Ribbons three weeks ago & I was really taken aback at the poor marine life.
Tourist numbers 40 years ago were a fith of what they became in the 90's. All up, the only activity that has thankfully decreased is trawling but damage was done already.
Another thing that doesn't help is international ships pumping ballast water into the waters of the GBR. God only knows what that introduces here.

Coral be bleached, Turn Turn.

There is a reason. Turn Turn Turn.

And a time for every bleached col, under Heaven.

Sing it Byrds http://youtu.be/W4ga_M5Zdn4

Nice to see the support for Peter Rudd in his efforts to overwhelm the climate fraud promoters with honesty.
Allan B typifies the dishonest boneheads with his puerile, baseless comment “ it was apparently first published in an extremely right-wing ultra-conservative Journal? Where birds of a feather flock together and parrot one another's opinions?” A complete lack of science from Allan, and nothing to verify his assertion.
He fails to understand that there are no denialists, since the fraud promoters have no science to deny. There is no science to show any measurable human human effect on climate. You really show your lack of education, Alan

Technically, there's a difference between Climate change & pollurtion but pollution very likely contributes to any warming in our atmosphere. Climate change is a natural occurrence & just because it doesn't suit us we come to all sorts of crazy conclusions. One of the outcomes of such conclusions is of course the opportunistic nature of people is coming into play and, so far as they're concerned, as long as money can be made from such hype all is good.
I doubt if the GW warriors would be inclined to do their bit in slowing their contribution to the warming. As a matter of fact it's them who do most of the emission travelling. The worst offenders are the Military. The recent rise in atmospheric temperature was very likely due to the oil fires, particularly those in the mad East.
Ask these "deeply concerned" people to stop using pollutants & see what answer you get from them.