Doubt on warming's damage to reef

[Doctor Hurt]

Source: The Australian

NEW Australian research rejects forecasts that the Great Barrier Reef will be destroyed within a generation by climate change, and finds that corals are capable of adapting better than previously believed.

The study, reported in the international journal Science, accepts that reefs are threatened by global warming and are already deteriorating -- just not as quickly as some gloomy predictions for the Great Barrier Reef hold.

Coral reefs were by nature highly diverse and resilient, and could cope with climate change in many ways.

Read more: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/doubt-on-warmings-damage-to-reef/story-fn59niix-1226100103086

---

Let's hope this study is correct.

[HopeHoops]

1. That may be in question, but there's no debate on the benefit global warming has on reefer.

[Doctor Hurt]

2. yes, hopefully this gives us a bit more time, though

That's the gun we're under. Time. Time to decrazy the right wing, time to reconvince the population, time to defear the Democrats.

That's a lot of time we're gonna need. So I hope the result is true.

[HopeHoops]

3. Wait, dude, what?

[Doctor Hurt]

4. uh...I'm hoping that the reefs are resilient as the article suggests

because if they aren't, they're basically already doomed.

[Rebubula]

6. Read the subject of his 1st post again...

...lol

[Doctor Hurt]

9. I just presumed a misspelling

[wysimdnwyg]

5. Very misleading title

The title makes one think the article debated the veracity of the claim that climate change is killing reefs. Instead, it's just saying that maybe the reefs aren't dying as quickly as previously thought.

[Kelvin Mace]

7. Isn't "The Australian"

a Murdoch paper?

[Doctor Hurt]

8. perhaps. But Science isn't.

[Kelvin Mace]

12. I don't question the science

just the framing of the headline/story.

[Esra Star]

16. Yes,,,,,,,,yes it is..nt

[Doctor Hurt]

10. *shrugs*

LBN, had to work with the title I was given.

[Kelvin Mace]

13. I don't think the poster was criticizing you

about the title, but commenting on the title wording by the editorial staff. I commented on this being a Murdoch-owned paper, which may explain the title in the first place.

[ixion]

11. This premise hinges on the idea that coral reefs

"are capable of adapting better than previously believed"

And yet, their remains decades of straight documentation that show otherwise. Coral reefs have been shown to have very delicately balanced eco-system. They don't handle things like algae blooms, pollution and temperature change well.

While I won't dismiss the report out-of-hand, neither will I toss decades of study on the basis of a specious premise that in fact acknowledges itself as being speculation at the onset. That is: Sure, a coral may be able to adapt and survive in some fashion, but it will most probably not be the same fashion know today.

[Viking12]

14. I would suggest finding the report itself or, at least, a different news report

The Australian is a hopeless denier newspaper. (see for example: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/07/the_australians_war_on_science_67.php) I haven't read the original study yet, but I'll bet top dollar, the Australian has grossly misrepresented it.

[ixion]

15. that would be my bet as well...