Sign InThe Forum > Article Comments > The Great Barrier Reef and the prophets of doom > Comments
The Great Barrier Reef and the prophets of doom : Comments
By Walter Starck, published 8/5/2008Even the more extreme model projections only depict tropical oceanic warming still well within the limits that thriving reefs tolerate.
- Pages:
- ‹
- 1
- Page 2
- ›
- All
“Many scientists fear that the carbon dioxide build up in the atmosphere will trigger a modern greenhouse climate change. Others welcome a modern greenhouse, claiming that it will benefit our civilization.
"Those latter people do not seem aware that the reproductive systems of modern mammals—including humans—are easily damaged by environmental heat. Today, the heat of normally hot summer days is already destroying vast numbers of mammalian embryos on a global scale. Any additional heat load imposed by a greenhouse can only kill increasing numbers of embryos.”
Eminent paleontologist, Michael J Benton on the Permian Mass Extinction said:
“It took about 50 million years for life on land to fully recover its biodiversity, with the rise of many species of dinosaurs. Nothing resembling a coral reef shows up until 10 million years after the Permian extinction, and full recovery of marine life took about 100 million years.”
Benton and others argue that the rise of carbon in the atmosphere at this time is only explicable if there was also a catastrophic release of methane from gas hydrates under the ocean.
However, past catastrophic events occurred without the aid of humans and humans today emit 150 times more CO2 than volcanoes.
So what has this to do with the GBR? Everything if you, like I, believe that all things are bound together - all things connect.
The hypotheses above may be proven incorrect, however humans have been extremely efficient at trashing Earth's eco-systems which are seriously polluted, predominantly from carbon based chemicals.
Pollution cares not whether we have a warming or an ice age and the quantity of the anthropogenic pollution on this planet is unprecedented.
Your veiled suggestion that we should continue trashing this planet with fossil fuel emissions and your indecent haste in refuting the contents of an affiliate's article, leads me to believe that your own hypothesis is bereft of any real substance.