WTF?

So when Mikko2 is confronted with facts he resorts to the following:
1) The Obama shell game misdirection

2) Consensus Gentium: if many in population in my sphere agree with me I must be right. The contributors to forums are not experts as you yourself said. Agreeing with the opinions of non-experts without using factual information doesn't make you right. Using your own argument you would dismiss Ridd's claims as they are out of step with the majority of marine researchers.

3) Giving extra consideration to a site because it is in FNQ. An opinion site based in FNQ is not, by that nature, superior.

4) Padding out his opinion with quotes about sea-levels at different geological times. Marine Scientist know about this oh too well and they are presenting scientific data about what is happening right now.

Present some factual information from experts that can be checked not the ramblings of echo chamber dwellers.

One good thing about WTF - his moniker is very apt for his posts. Keep it up with old mate John D , but don't hold your collective breath if you think anything you say or Bowen and Albanese do will affect climate or the Great Barrier Reef.

WTF?

Mikko2 states: WTF - his moniker is very apt for his posts.

Where's The Fridge? I don't get the connection.

So no facts then? Just throwing in a couple of extra names as if that has any bearing on the topic?

WTF’s nailed the rhetorical games here.

I’ll just add that the “record acropora” line isn’t proof the Reef is thriving, it’s a textbook case of short-term rebound after disturbance. Acropora grows fast, but it’s also the most vulnerable and gets wiped out quickly in the next bleaching, cyclone, or crown-of-thorns outbreak.

AIMS calls that “volatile” for a reason.

And as for sea levels and CO2 millions of years ago, yes, the planet was different then. But those shifts happened over thousands of years, not within a human lifetime. The problem now is the rate of change: bleaching events that used to be once in a generation now come every 4-6 years. That’s too soon for full resilience to return, which is why biodiversity and structural complexity are trending down despite occasional spikes in cover.

If we stick to current data and actual recovery rates instead of nostalgia, political tangents, or geological trivia, the picture is clear: the Reef’s not gone, but it’s under sustained stress unlike anything in recorded history.

John Daysh,
How often do you visit the GBR ?

I just want to record a visit I made last year to Heron Island with a bunch of UQ alumni.
The director of the research station told us how the provision of pure, uncontaminated water for researchers to experiment with was fundamental to the stations survival. So when I asked about the dreaded effluent from the pesky farmers he said ‘we test the water and have yet to find any trace of contamination.' Yet we are told endlessly, as we are told the reef is dying, that the farmer’s run off is destroying the reef etc etc. Heron is I think 75km from shore, so the main reef, which is a further 75 km east of Heron must be even cleaner?

I was tickled to find that the old WWI -WWII Aus naval ship used as a break water, was built in Newcastle on Tyne in the 19th century, at the bottom of the street I grew up on.