3 ms·
> Sorry it took so long to get back to this No worries! I appreciate the effort you're putting into your responses, even if we might disagree in our conclusio
by CarelessExpert 7y ago
> Sorry it took so long to get back to this
No worries! I appreciate the effort you're putting into your responses, even if we might disagree in our conclusions. :)
Now, not to boil down your extensive post, but I'm going to highlight a key statement from that 2017 paper that you describe as the "most comprehensive study" about the GBR:
> unusually warm sea temperatures in the northern Great Barrier Reef resulted in widespread coral bleaching in 2016 and 2017.
This directly contradicts your claim that ocean temperature has absolutely no effect on coral survival.
In fact, in multiple places that paper speaks to climate change as a key contributor to coral die-off. Here's another one (Section 5, "Condition of coastal and marine ecosystems", "Summary of evidence"):
> Mid-shelf and outer shelf reefs in the southern half of the
Great Barrier Reef have shown the capacity to rapidly
recover from previous disturbances; however, a severe mass
thermal coral bleaching event in 2016 resulted in significant
coral mortality, especially north of Port Douglas.
I honestly don't know what to say at this point.
I'll be extremely blunt: I feel like you're cherrypicking, not just papers, but statements within papers, to support a conclusion you've already come to.
Again: I absolutely agree with the conclusion that controlling coastal pollution can have a profound effect on reef health. That is unquestionably true. But the evidence is clear that climate change is also an important factor, as indicated in the very papers that you cite, and that coral will continue to die off if we don't work to solve both problems. Finally, I agree that coastal pollution management is lower hanging fruit that, if addressed, may give us more runway to address the larger issue of climate change, as these reefs may then be more resilient to increased water temperatures if pollution stressors are reduced or eliminated.
- kls 7y agoSo on the 2016 and 2017 bleaching there is no doubt that in the presence of higher temperatures the nitrogen (and for that matter micro-metals like zinc in sunscreen) become more deadly. Ocean temperature is only speculation as they did not measure other variables. There is an effort in Australia to reproduce the findings in the US but it has not concluded. I am trying to find that information. The prevailing though is those warming events coincided with a water quality event which make the water quality events (the true killer) even more deadly. The belief is that that link will established just as it was in Florida. The issue is though that die off has been observed in the absence of temperature and the survival has been observed over what was believed to be threshold but die-off always happened with the ratio of nitrogen to phosphates hit a threshold. I try provide the links as they are, not trying to cherry pick my opinion is based on experience with the reefs and the range of studies I have seen. There is no doubt that there is still a prevailing theme of temperature as it was long believed to be the primary driver, it takes time for the mind-shift to happen even in the research community. I am also trying to find the Cuban reef study as it sits in the same thermocline as the Florida Keys barrier reef. I will post them when I find them as I said I help out and help my daughter with her studies, I am not a researcher but I feel I have a pretty good handle on the scope of research and findings on reef destruction, I just don't have every paper at my fingertips like the researchers do. I have a query out to a few of the Mote scientist to see if they can provide me with some public accessible links to those studies.