Obituary: Great Barrier Reef (25 Million BC-2016)
October 13, 2016 1:57 PM Subscribe
Referenced in the article:
- Is the Great Barrier Reef on Death Row? (The Royal Society, July 6, 2009) -- Professor John “Charlie” Veron, former Chief Scientist of the Australian Institute of Marine Science and widely regarded as the world's leading authority on coral reef ecosystems, presents the effects that climate change is having on coral reefs
- The real story on the Great Barrier Reef (The Saturday Paper [Australia], June 4, 2016) -- As Australia interferes with UN reporting of threats to World Heritage sites, the Great Barrier Reef’s fate is increasingly dire if not already sealed.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:06 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
- Is the Great Barrier Reef on Death Row? (The Royal Society, July 6, 2009) -- Professor John “Charlie” Veron, former Chief Scientist of the Australian Institute of Marine Science and widely regarded as the world's leading authority on coral reef ecosystems, presents the effects that climate change is having on coral reefs
- The real story on the Great Barrier Reef (The Saturday Paper [Australia], June 4, 2016) -- As Australia interferes with UN reporting of threats to World Heritage sites, the Great Barrier Reef’s fate is increasingly dire if not already sealed.
In July 2009, Veron gave a presentation to the Royal Society in London, the famous academy of science established in 1660. It was entitled “Is the Great Barrier Reef on Death Row?”, a question to which Veron gave the qualified answer of “yes”. He apologised to the audience for the gloomy forecast, but seven years later it’s being fulfilled. “The numbers are what I said they would be,” Veron tells me. “I used to have the best job in the world. Now it’s turned sour. The forecasts are abysmal. We haven’t deviated from the track [detailed in the 2009 presentation]. It’s ultra gloomy, but accurate. I’m 71 years old now, and I think I may outlive the reef.”(Emphasis mine)
...
Veron is aware of his stature in this country, and in conjunction with many other scientists has strove to have the reef’s health included in this federal campaign. There’s been success on that front, but he’s sceptical of Hunt’s proposals. “He’s announced funding for water quality and the [abatement] of crown-of-thorns. Well, water quality has nothing to do with it. It’s basically irrelevant. The bottom line is, each year the oceans are just a little bit warmer. El Niño gets more severe. The oceans equilibrate to warming, like a kettle equilibrating to the flame. And there’s a lag in this warming, of about 20 years. Even if we stopped emissions right now, the water temperatures would still rise.”
posted by filthy light thief at 2:06 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Unreal. It's just so hard to grasp.
posted by Splunge at 2:16 PM on October 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Splunge at 2:16 PM on October 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
And 2016 claims another victim.
posted by chavenet at 2:18 PM on October 13, 2016 [14 favorites]
posted by chavenet at 2:18 PM on October 13, 2016 [14 favorites]
This is the kind of shit that grounds me back to reality when people get all pollyannaish about how the world is a better place than it has ever been. Born just in time to watch the world die piecemeal; what a time to be alive.
posted by Sternmeyer at 2:19 PM on October 13, 2016 [40 favorites]
posted by Sternmeyer at 2:19 PM on October 13, 2016 [40 favorites]
.
posted by Become A Silhouette at 2:21 PM on October 13, 2016
posted by Become A Silhouette at 2:21 PM on October 13, 2016
Will we first have to experience some sort of calamitous sea change to motivate us to take action in an environmental sense? Wait, oh, we already are experiencing it, aren't we...? And it still doesn't seem to be enough. Gosh, how awful. I'm ready to hear about the powers of the world doing everything we can to offset impact. I wish readiness-to-act would re-balance accordingly.
posted by a good beginning at 2:21 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by a good beginning at 2:21 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
From a global perspective - not a human perspective - this sort of thing happens all the time. Our world is not immutable.
But, we haven't ever had this kind of thing happen before when it was OUR FAULT, rather than just the vagaries of climactic change on its own.
People are stupid. Sometimes I'm ashamed to be one.
posted by caution live frogs at 2:25 PM on October 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
But, we haven't ever had this kind of thing happen before when it was OUR FAULT, rather than just the vagaries of climactic change on its own.
People are stupid. Sometimes I'm ashamed to be one.
posted by caution live frogs at 2:25 PM on October 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
The Great Barrier Reef
Ain't so great anymore ...
posted by pxe2000 at 2:45 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Ain't so great anymore ...
posted by pxe2000 at 2:45 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
And it turns out I have my own government to thanks for reducing the sense of urgency by supressing part of a key UN climate change impacts report because...wait for it..."experience had shown that negative comments about the status of World Heritage-listed properties impacted on tourism."
Speechless but unsurprised at the apparent importance of PR over a critical call to action for an irreplaceable global treasure. That's the one-eyed short-term-ism that characterises the "lucky country".
I look at my kids and sadly realise that my grainy, fading 110 snaps are probably all they'll get to see of the rainbow garden I floated in for a week in the late '80s.
posted by Lesser Spotted Potoroo at 2:45 PM on October 13, 2016 [12 favorites]
Speechless but unsurprised at the apparent importance of PR over a critical call to action for an irreplaceable global treasure. That's the one-eyed short-term-ism that characterises the "lucky country".
I look at my kids and sadly realise that my grainy, fading 110 snaps are probably all they'll get to see of the rainbow garden I floated in for a week in the late '80s.
posted by Lesser Spotted Potoroo at 2:45 PM on October 13, 2016 [12 favorites]
Wow, 2016. You're really not pulling any punches are you?
posted by Neronomius at 2:50 PM on October 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Neronomius at 2:50 PM on October 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
History repeats the old conceits
The glib replies the same defeats
Keep your finger on important issues
With crocodile tears and a pocketful of tissues
I'm just the oily slick
On the windup world of the nervous tick
In a very fashionable hovel
I hang around dying to be tortured
You'll never be alone in the bone orchard
This battle with the bottle is nothing so novel
So in this almost empty gin palace
Through a two-way looking glass
You see your Alice
You know she has no sense
For all your jealousy
In a sense she still smiles very sweetly
Charged with insults and flattery
Her body moves with malice
Do you have to be so cruel to be callous
And now you find you fit this identikit completely
You say you have no secrets
And then leave discreetly
I might make it California's fault
Be locked in Geneva's deepest vault
Just like the canals of Mars and the Great Barrier Reef
I come to you beyond belief
My hands were clammy and cunning
She's been suitably stunning
But I know there's not a hope in Hades
All the laddies cat call and wolf whistle
So called gentlemen and ladies
Dog fight like rose and thistle
I got a feeling
I'm going to get a lot of grief
Once this seemed so appealing
Now I am beyond belief
I got a feeling
I'm going to get a lot of grief
Once this seemed so appealing
Now I am beyond belief
I got a feeling
I'm going to get a lot of grief
Once this seemed so appealing
Now I am beyond belief
--Elvis Costello, "Beyond Belief"
posted by chavenet at 3:01 PM on October 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
The glib replies the same defeats
Keep your finger on important issues
With crocodile tears and a pocketful of tissues
I'm just the oily slick
On the windup world of the nervous tick
In a very fashionable hovel
I hang around dying to be tortured
You'll never be alone in the bone orchard
This battle with the bottle is nothing so novel
So in this almost empty gin palace
Through a two-way looking glass
You see your Alice
You know she has no sense
For all your jealousy
In a sense she still smiles very sweetly
Charged with insults and flattery
Her body moves with malice
Do you have to be so cruel to be callous
And now you find you fit this identikit completely
You say you have no secrets
And then leave discreetly
I might make it California's fault
Be locked in Geneva's deepest vault
Just like the canals of Mars and the Great Barrier Reef
I come to you beyond belief
My hands were clammy and cunning
She's been suitably stunning
But I know there's not a hope in Hades
All the laddies cat call and wolf whistle
So called gentlemen and ladies
Dog fight like rose and thistle
I got a feeling
I'm going to get a lot of grief
Once this seemed so appealing
Now I am beyond belief
I got a feeling
I'm going to get a lot of grief
Once this seemed so appealing
Now I am beyond belief
I got a feeling
I'm going to get a lot of grief
Once this seemed so appealing
Now I am beyond belief
--Elvis Costello, "Beyond Belief"
posted by chavenet at 3:01 PM on October 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
Surely that's all latte-Marxist propaganda, like climate change? Some of Australia's biggest newspapers, like the Sydney Daily Telegraph and Brisbane Courier-Mail, say that the Great Barrier Reef has never been better!
On a tangent: isn't there some kind of aquatic goth subculture somewhere in the Tumblr/Instagram sphere? Perhaps selling them diving tours to a bleached white reef could be profitable...
posted by acb at 3:08 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
On a tangent: isn't there some kind of aquatic goth subculture somewhere in the Tumblr/Instagram sphere? Perhaps selling them diving tours to a bleached white reef could be profitable...
posted by acb at 3:08 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Humanity: Ha-HA! Take that, Nature!
Nature: [silently glances at watch, looks back up] Mm-hmm...
posted by Emperor SnooKloze at 3:09 PM on October 13, 2016 [7 favorites]
Nature: [silently glances at watch, looks back up] Mm-hmm...
posted by Emperor SnooKloze at 3:09 PM on October 13, 2016 [7 favorites]
Is the milestone event that even the outermost, coolest coral in the top 50% of the reef died, rather than just internal portions of it where the sun-warmed water temperature is highest?
It's a bit confusing because the events of this year are described as:
(I get that it's doomed for a 100% die-off soon in any case.)
posted by XMLicious at 3:25 PM on October 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
It's a bit confusing because the events of this year are described as:
As much as 50 percent of the coral in the warmer, northern part of the reef died.But a few paragraphs up it almost sounds like it's survived a more serious event in the past:
In 1981, water temperatures soared, two-thirds of the coral in the inner portions of the reef bleached
(I get that it's doomed for a 100% die-off soon in any case.)
posted by XMLicious at 3:25 PM on October 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
The Great Barrier Reef: a catastrophe laid bare Guardian Article about the reef.
According to the linked Guardian article, it appears that the northern portion of the reef is 81% severely bleached, the mid section is 33% bleached, and the southern portion is 1% bleached.
Why worry about it now? Surely markets will react and forcefully put an end to what is causing this catastrophe, while monetizing it and creating ample opportunity for business to profit off of the restoration of the reef. Also, nature is resilient and will regenerate itself, duh. All you environmentalist coral-huggers need to calm tha F down!
posted by nikoniko at 3:35 PM on October 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
According to the linked Guardian article, it appears that the northern portion of the reef is 81% severely bleached, the mid section is 33% bleached, and the southern portion is 1% bleached.
Why worry about it now? Surely markets will react and forcefully put an end to what is causing this catastrophe, while monetizing it and creating ample opportunity for business to profit off of the restoration of the reef. Also, nature is resilient and will regenerate itself, duh. All you environmentalist coral-huggers need to calm tha F down!
posted by nikoniko at 3:35 PM on October 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
.
posted by SisterHavana at 3:43 PM on October 13, 2016
posted by SisterHavana at 3:43 PM on October 13, 2016
I've lived beside the reef for thirty something years. Aliens live there. By that I mean life there is so different to anything you see on land, you may as well be on a different planet. It's like being in a riot in a way, a dangerous chaos where everything screams for your attention. 'They should have sent a poet', because I just don't have the talent to give you my experience.
We killed it. I don't doubt that. Adani poised to submit third plan for dredging in Great Barrier Reef .
The third plan. And all it really needs is some greedy people to say yes. Which will probably happen.
posted by adept256 at 3:47 PM on October 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
We killed it. I don't doubt that. Adani poised to submit third plan for dredging in Great Barrier Reef .
The third plan. And all it really needs is some greedy people to say yes. Which will probably happen.
posted by adept256 at 3:47 PM on October 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
This is probably, in the grand scheme of things, more important than anything that happened today or this year but it's not even registering in the news. The front page of the New York Times has nothing. No one cares. It's haunting. The world worth living in is coming to an end and we're all consumed by nonsense.
posted by Brain Sturgeon at 4:00 PM on October 13, 2016 [21 favorites]
posted by Brain Sturgeon at 4:00 PM on October 13, 2016 [21 favorites]
MrsFTBN and I were just diving on the GBR last month. Of course I had heard all of the stories about the bleaching event this year and wanted to see it with my own eyes before it was too late - like seeing a Dodo before they went extinct. I was pleasantly surprised that, at least where I went (somewhere around the mid section), it was still extremely diverse, colorful, and teeming with life. I really couldn't tell that it had been bleached at all. It's not too late - to experience it and to save (at least most of) it.
If you do visit though, be sure to bring your own reef safe sunscreen - no one in Australia seems to know what that is...
posted by MrFTBN at 4:04 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
If you do visit though, be sure to bring your own reef safe sunscreen - no one in Australia seems to know what that is...
posted by MrFTBN at 4:04 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
It's not too late - to experience it and to save (at least most of) it.
As the OP article notes as well as flt's quote, even if humans were to immediately cease all climate-change-promoting activities worldwide overnight, the ocean will continue warming and acidifying.
posted by XMLicious at 4:13 PM on October 13, 2016
Holy shit.
posted by wenestvedt at 4:14 PM on October 13, 2016
posted by wenestvedt at 4:14 PM on October 13, 2016
Sometimes, when I consider the general craziness in evidence this year, I wonder if this is humanity's collective subconscious at work: that we know that earth is dying in some primal way, and our grief and helplessness is breaking out in various kinds of irrationality. Other times, I think not.
posted by jokeefe at 4:42 PM on October 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by jokeefe at 4:42 PM on October 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
"The window is still open, but it's closing rapidly".
I dunno XMLicious, I don't mean to understate the graveness of the situation, and maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I really dislike climate change fatalism. Like "shucks guys, I guess it's too late to do anything now." Still waiting for the world to have a Popeye moment about the real effects of climate change and finally take action.
posted by MrFTBN at 4:45 PM on October 13, 2016
I dunno XMLicious, I don't mean to understate the graveness of the situation, and maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I really dislike climate change fatalism. Like "shucks guys, I guess it's too late to do anything now." Still waiting for the world to have a Popeye moment about the real effects of climate change and finally take action.
posted by MrFTBN at 4:45 PM on October 13, 2016
We are going to go through some shit no matter what, it really is too late to steer away from that. If we change course we can steer away from... some of it? Maybe? I fucking how so anyway.
And if we don't change course we're definitely fucked instead of probably mostly fucked. I have a feeling we're going down that route and we'll get to experience how bad it can get, but who knows? Maybe we'all get smart.
posted by Artw at 4:54 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
And if we don't change course we're definitely fucked instead of probably mostly fucked. I have a feeling we're going down that route and we'll get to experience how bad it can get, but who knows? Maybe we'all get smart.
posted by Artw at 4:54 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
"We killed it. I don't doubt that. Adani poised to submit third plan for dredging in Great Barrier Reef .Yup - especially since Adani's Carmichael coal mine, associated rail, & port has just been granted "critical infrastructure" status by (what passes for) a left-wing state government.
The third plan. And all it really needs is some greedy people to say yes. Which will probably happen."
Meanwhile elsewhere, after unprecedented wild storms brought down 23 electricity distribution towers, causing a cascade that tripped safety systems & isolated a whole state to protect the rest of the national grid, the first thing the (right-wing) federal government does is blame that state's reliance on renewable energy…
posted by Pinback at 4:59 PM on October 13, 2016 [7 favorites]
I really dislike climate change fatalism....Still waiting for the world to have a Popeye moment about the real effects of climate change and finally take action.
aka "surely this..."
Thing is, it's such a slow-moving disaster that it will mostly just be apparent in the rear-view mirror. (Grandad, what's a coral reef?) Most of us, self included, won't live to see Florida sink or Manhattan relocated. And anyway most of us first-worlders have the means to avoid the more onerous effects, and will always have first pick of the food supplies.
For the few doubters who acknowledge some harm from climate change, 'adapt' is their distilled wisdom. The climate's always changing; we'll just adapt like we have before. Then their big Lexus SUV pulls out into traffic.
As you see, I'm not so optimistic.
posted by Artful Codger at 5:11 PM on October 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
aka "surely this..."
Thing is, it's such a slow-moving disaster that it will mostly just be apparent in the rear-view mirror. (Grandad, what's a coral reef?) Most of us, self included, won't live to see Florida sink or Manhattan relocated. And anyway most of us first-worlders have the means to avoid the more onerous effects, and will always have first pick of the food supplies.
For the few doubters who acknowledge some harm from climate change, 'adapt' is their distilled wisdom. The climate's always changing; we'll just adapt like we have before. Then their big Lexus SUV pulls out into traffic.
As you see, I'm not so optimistic.
posted by Artful Codger at 5:11 PM on October 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
MrFTBN, from your link:
The need to make extraordinary efforts to preserve fragments of biodiversity like this, independently of the prevailing climate conditions, is exactly the reason to not offhandedly suggest that most of the Great Barrier Reef will survive even the most optimistic, basically deus ex machina scenarios in the IPCC reports where we minimize human activities globally immediately like we're flipping a switch.
(I'm not a scientist or anything, I've just read a couple of sections of the IPCC reports, which are sort of like textbooks tailored for understanding climate change with associated probabilities for various scenarios; so I'm open to be corrected if there's something I'm not taking into account, but I'm pretty sure that most of the GBR surviving is completely unrealistic.)
posted by XMLicious at 5:14 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
If I'm understanding it correctly this is talking about a study exploring the feasibility of an intensive project to artificially protect a small region of the ocean. It's like projects to preserve tiny patches of old growth forest.Sure, "you can effectively offset ocean acidification temporarily on a very small scale," study lead author Rebecca Albright tells the Monitor in an interview. Perhaps this could help small, isolated reefs, but such geoengineering solutions would be impossible on a global scale.
The need to make extraordinary efforts to preserve fragments of biodiversity like this, independently of the prevailing climate conditions, is exactly the reason to not offhandedly suggest that most of the Great Barrier Reef will survive even the most optimistic, basically deus ex machina scenarios in the IPCC reports where we minimize human activities globally immediately like we're flipping a switch.
(I'm not a scientist or anything, I've just read a couple of sections of the IPCC reports, which are sort of like textbooks tailored for understanding climate change with associated probabilities for various scenarios; so I'm open to be corrected if there's something I'm not taking into account, but I'm pretty sure that most of the GBR surviving is completely unrealistic.)
posted by XMLicious at 5:14 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I get what you're saying, MrFTBN, but climate scientists have been building up
from a "hey guys maybe we should" for a couple decades now. It's hard to strike a balance between "We're all gonna die so fuck everything" and "If we don't do something, we're all gonna die, and at this point even if we do many of us will die anyway," especially when no-one listening really cares about anything more than a year away, tops, and the system as a whole actively resists meaningful change.
(Note for smarmy "realists": by "die" above I mean "die earlier and/or in more unpleasant ways due to the effects of climate change." I realize that in the long run we are all dead but as we're stuck with living for a while beforehand I would prefer to do so with as little forced migration, rioting, war, mass starvation, etc. as possible. Call it an irrational bias.)
posted by No-sword at 5:34 PM on October 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
from a "hey guys maybe we should" for a couple decades now. It's hard to strike a balance between "We're all gonna die so fuck everything" and "If we don't do something, we're all gonna die, and at this point even if we do many of us will die anyway," especially when no-one listening really cares about anything more than a year away, tops, and the system as a whole actively resists meaningful change.
(Note for smarmy "realists": by "die" above I mean "die earlier and/or in more unpleasant ways due to the effects of climate change." I realize that in the long run we are all dead but as we're stuck with living for a while beforehand I would prefer to do so with as little forced migration, rioting, war, mass starvation, etc. as possible. Call it an irrational bias.)
posted by No-sword at 5:34 PM on October 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
Most of us, self included, won't live to see Florida sink or Manhattan relocated.
The Northwest Passage in the Canadian Arctic is passable in the summer now, traversed by a cruise ship for the first time in history a couple of months ago. There are already plans to move towns in the US and elsewhere and the capital of Mauritania has regular flooding problems. Here's a link to a quote from a Radio New Zealand story published earlier this year interviewing someone in a town in Kiribati, an island nation in the Western Pacific where sea level is rising most quickly, which was founded in 1980 on dry ground but in the 21st century has been regularly flooded by the highest of high tides.
I don't know about Manhattan because I haven't read about it specifically, but unless you're expecting to pass away soon I think you're likely to see chunks of Florida gone. Last weekend on Fox News here in the US I saw a limited discussion of climate change acknowledging preparations for sea level rise in Florida, and a report on a different channel made the claim that local municipal officials in coastal Florida are all preparing measures to deal with sea level rise regardless of their politics.
Bangladesh is already experiencing a receding coast and salinification of water sources and will lose 70% of its land area with a one-meter sea level rise over late 20th century levels, which in the mid-range scenarios in the 5th IPCC report of 2014 may happen by 2100. So even if you draw a curve rather than a straight line connecting present conditions to 2100 conditions, anyone who's around a few decades from now will see a substantial difference when comparing the maps.
posted by XMLicious at 6:00 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
I've sent the main article to a few people. Several of them essentially tell me, "well it's not really all gone. So we can still see it for a while."
That's not the fucking POINT!
Some people have no sense of the future. Which, I guess, is why this can happen in the first place. Yeah I'm with you, humanity sucks. Maybe when we are gone, after this comes to a head, the Earth will survive with out us. Balance will eventually be restored. Again, without us.
posted by Splunge at 6:08 PM on October 13, 2016 [10 favorites]
That's not the fucking POINT!
Some people have no sense of the future. Which, I guess, is why this can happen in the first place. Yeah I'm with you, humanity sucks. Maybe when we are gone, after this comes to a head, the Earth will survive with out us. Balance will eventually be restored. Again, without us.
posted by Splunge at 6:08 PM on October 13, 2016 [10 favorites]
.
posted by Nancy_LockIsLit_Palmer at 6:20 PM on October 13, 2016
posted by Nancy_LockIsLit_Palmer at 6:20 PM on October 13, 2016
It's not a coincidence that the Russian northern fleet has discovered new islands north of Novaya Zemlya this week. More ocean AND more land! Awesome.
posted by Emperor SnooKloze at 6:40 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Emperor SnooKloze at 6:40 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I still believe in that great, big, beautiful tomorrow, because if I don't I won't be able to function.
That doesn't mean I want to close my eyes to the things that we're going to lose and the things that are going to get worse before it can get better.
I remember as a little kid, being absolutely certain, no question, that the US and USSR were going to drop The Bomb on each other and we kids wouldn't live to see adulthood. The fact that that didn't happen gives me some small core of faith that we can survive the rest. Maybe the loss of the reef will be the thing that inspires enough people and gets us to work to save what's left.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 6:56 PM on October 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
That doesn't mean I want to close my eyes to the things that we're going to lose and the things that are going to get worse before it can get better.
I remember as a little kid, being absolutely certain, no question, that the US and USSR were going to drop The Bomb on each other and we kids wouldn't live to see adulthood. The fact that that didn't happen gives me some small core of faith that we can survive the rest. Maybe the loss of the reef will be the thing that inspires enough people and gets us to work to save what's left.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 6:56 PM on October 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
.
posted by maryrussell at 6:57 PM on October 13, 2016
posted by maryrussell at 6:57 PM on October 13, 2016
I'm sure it's all a fraud perpetrated by climate scientists. Not to worry.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:17 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Thorzdad at 7:17 PM on October 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
.
posted by moonlight on vermont at 7:20 PM on October 13, 2016
posted by moonlight on vermont at 7:20 PM on October 13, 2016
I remember as a little kid, being absolutely certain, no question, that the US and USSR were going to drop The Bomb on each other and we kids wouldn't live to see adulthood. The fact that that didn't happen gives me some small core of faith that we can survive the rest.
Even better, sometime in the last couple of years I found out that the US into the 1970s and the Soviets into the 1980s were experimenting with excavation via detonating nuclear weapons. A proposed use of this in both countries was to blast out massive trenches which would make it possible to redirect the northward-flowing rivers in North America and Asia so as to make them do a U-turn and head back south where they would provide irrigation for farmland in more temperate latitudes. No idea if we told the Canadians about this plan.
So not only did we avoid nuclear armageddon, we also avoided the Arctic already being irradiated and in a drought with a messed-up food chain and ecosystem from missing the biomass and energy the rivers deliver, which climate change would have arrived on top of.
posted by XMLicious at 7:26 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
The actual age of the Great Barrier Reef is complicated, as a scan of the wiki page will tell you. What I thought (and what may or may not be correct) is the continuous life of the coral colonies there is more like 20,000 years.
It is possible, I think, that if we stop this now and stop the emissions and stop the warming, that there will be a flourishing there again. Not in our life time or even in our grandkids' granchildren's lifetimes, but at some point in the future, before geological processes bury it forever, if we give it a space safe it will one day be more than a skeleton.
posted by mark k at 7:51 PM on October 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
It is possible, I think, that if we stop this now and stop the emissions and stop the warming, that there will be a flourishing there again. Not in our life time or even in our grandkids' granchildren's lifetimes, but at some point in the future, before geological processes bury it forever, if we give it a space safe it will one day be more than a skeleton.
posted by mark k at 7:51 PM on October 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Martin, as fabulous as you think the reef is now, it's lost more than half of its coral since
1985. More than half.
Imagine what it was like then.
posted by smoke at 8:01 PM on October 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
1985. More than half.
Imagine what it was like then.
posted by smoke at 8:01 PM on October 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Learning about the Great Barrier Reef as a kid was the genesis of my desire to learn how to scuba dive. It took until 2007 for me get there, and it was my first warm water diving experience after getting certified in the chilly waters of the Pacific Northwest. Diving went on to become a big part of my life for about 5 years — at its best it combined the thrill of flying with the zen of meditation, and connected me with a part of the natural world that was at once familiar and fantastically alien.
Recreational divers generally stay within the top 100 ft. of the water column; that’s less than 1% of the average depth of the ocean, but that tiny fraction is host to an utterly astonishing world of beauty. As a civilian activity, it’s only been something that’s been reasonably accessible since the 1940/50’s.. It’s surreal and profoundly depressing to contemplate how the very idea of recreational scuba diving will probably not last beyond my lifetime — there just won’t be much left to see.
.
posted by kanuck at 11:51 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Recreational divers generally stay within the top 100 ft. of the water column; that’s less than 1% of the average depth of the ocean, but that tiny fraction is host to an utterly astonishing world of beauty. As a civilian activity, it’s only been something that’s been reasonably accessible since the 1940/50’s.. It’s surreal and profoundly depressing to contemplate how the very idea of recreational scuba diving will probably not last beyond my lifetime — there just won’t be much left to see.
.
posted by kanuck at 11:51 PM on October 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
This should be a national scandal, and yet somehow it isn't there are no stories about it on TV. And for the GBR it's vision that gets responses. The state government in Queensland and the Federal Government have managed to avoid any scrutiny over the state of the reef.
posted by awfurby at 12:10 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by awfurby at 12:10 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
Terry Hughes thinks otherwise
This is a tragedy, and I certainly feel betrayed by generations come before me, but we should not write this off. This is a good bit of writing, but this kind of "oh well, we're fucked" approach never helped anyone.
posted by deadbilly at 12:18 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
This is a tragedy, and I certainly feel betrayed by generations come before me, but we should not write this off. This is a good bit of writing, but this kind of "oh well, we're fucked" approach never helped anyone.
posted by deadbilly at 12:18 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
climate scientists have been building up from a "hey guys maybe we should" for a couple decades now.
Climate scientists were talking about the dangers of fossil fuels causing climate change since the 1970s. I remember hearing stuff about it during the big environmentalism push back in the 70s when I was in grade school and the EPA had been founded and rivers and lakes were so polluted that they were catching on fire.
At this point, it's our global commitment to warming (already referenced in this thread) which is going to bite us in the ass. If we'd acted on the ideas that Jimmy Carter was starting to push back when Carter was in office, we'd have staved off much of the worst. But then Reagan tore the solar panels off the White House roof and set the tone for everything that has happened since then.
posted by hippybear at 12:31 AM on October 14, 2016 [9 favorites]
Climate scientists were talking about the dangers of fossil fuels causing climate change since the 1970s. I remember hearing stuff about it during the big environmentalism push back in the 70s when I was in grade school and the EPA had been founded and rivers and lakes were so polluted that they were catching on fire.
At this point, it's our global commitment to warming (already referenced in this thread) which is going to bite us in the ass. If we'd acted on the ideas that Jimmy Carter was starting to push back when Carter was in office, we'd have staved off much of the worst. But then Reagan tore the solar panels off the White House roof and set the tone for everything that has happened since then.
posted by hippybear at 12:31 AM on October 14, 2016 [9 favorites]
.
posted by Ms. Moonlight at 1:21 AM on October 14, 2016
posted by Ms. Moonlight at 1:21 AM on October 14, 2016
Could we recreate it in virtual reality? Perhaps Adani and/or Clive "Dinosaurs" Palmer could fund it (hey, it'd be good PR: "Preserving the Reef for humanity forever, no matter what happens")
And once it's in VR, there's no limit to how much better we could make it. We could end up with a Reef that approaches Trumpian levels of yooooge. All brought to you by that miraculous little black rock, coal.
posted by acb at 1:38 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
And once it's in VR, there's no limit to how much better we could make it. We could end up with a Reef that approaches Trumpian levels of yooooge. All brought to you by that miraculous little black rock, coal.
posted by acb at 1:38 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
Pretty much the only thing that keeps me going any more is the sweet hope that I will see the end of humanity in my lifetime, and that I'll be one of the last, so I can go door to door making sure.
posted by turbid dahlia at 3:22 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by turbid dahlia at 3:22 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
Oh and also the Deadwood movies.
posted by turbid dahlia at 3:23 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by turbid dahlia at 3:23 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
I don't understand this article. Is it saying the entire reef will be dead by the end of 2016? Other sources are saying that currently 35% the coral is dead in some parts of the reef and 5% is dead in other parts.
posted by straight at 3:46 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by straight at 3:46 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's not totally dead by a long shot, straight. The reef is massive - the bits at the top, in the north, have areas that are up to 95% dead, but down the bottom it's more like 5%.
I really hate this talk of the reef being dead, because it weakens resistance to things like the Adani projects and makes it easier to divert funds away from protecting what's left. After all, if it's dead, let's just dredge the fucker! It's all going down anyway? Let's whack a mine on it and sell the bones for lime. It's still hanging on, and we need to focus on preventing what's left from dying.
posted by Jilder at 4:45 AM on October 14, 2016 [4 favorites]
I really hate this talk of the reef being dead, because it weakens resistance to things like the Adani projects and makes it easier to divert funds away from protecting what's left. After all, if it's dead, let's just dredge the fucker! It's all going down anyway? Let's whack a mine on it and sell the bones for lime. It's still hanging on, and we need to focus on preventing what's left from dying.
posted by Jilder at 4:45 AM on October 14, 2016 [4 favorites]
That Guardian article has a quote from one of the scientists saying that if we don't get climate change under control by 2025, it's game over for the reefs.
posted by gt2 at 5:24 AM on October 14, 2016
posted by gt2 at 5:24 AM on October 14, 2016
Comparing straight's link from May with the OP one, I think some of the confusion I've been having has come from the distinction between bleaching and death. From straight's link:
But evidently scientists were on the edge of their seats fearing that the bleaching event of this year would result in widespread death, and what we're seeing in these articles is the confirmation that this year wasn't just a stress on the vitality of the coral but en masse pushed it to the point of death.
Both articles agree that sampling of the northern region indicates a 50% death rate at those latitudes. The source linked to in the WaPo quote above, from the Australian "Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies", said that bleaching extended much further south but the southernmost corals were at that point expected to regain their color (ergo, stop starving and begin photosynthesizing again) within months. But even for the bleached corals that survive WaPo notes,
So on the scale of a lifetime of millions of years or even just 20,000 years, this is the equivalent of the coroner saying "brain death occurred at..." We need to make every effort to ensure that the Great Barrier Reef survives in the way that Henrietta Lacks survives, and that it can perhaps one day be reconstituted in some way in a future amenable climate, but it's too late to save the patient.
posted by XMLicious at 6:01 AM on October 14, 2016 [4 favorites]
Bleaching, though, isn’t the same as coral death. When symbiotic algae leave corals’ bodies and the animals then turn white or “bleach,” they can still bounce back if environmental conditions improve. The Great Barrier Reef has seen major bleaching in some of its sectors — particularly the more isolated northern reef — and the expectation has long been that this event would result in significant coral death, as well.So I guess the 1981 bleaching of ⅔ of the reef didn't lead to enough death to prevent the reef from recovering.
Now some of the first figures confirming that are coming in...
But evidently scientists were on the edge of their seats fearing that the bleaching event of this year would result in widespread death, and what we're seeing in these articles is the confirmation that this year wasn't just a stress on the vitality of the coral but en masse pushed it to the point of death.
Both articles agree that sampling of the northern region indicates a 50% death rate at those latitudes. The source linked to in the WaPo quote above, from the Australian "Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies", said that bleaching extended much further south but the southernmost corals were at that point expected to regain their color (ergo, stop starving and begin photosynthesizing again) within months. But even for the bleached corals that survive WaPo notes,
“Unfortunately, there are islands in the central equatorial Pacific Ocean like Christmas Island where the effects have been even more catastrophic — over 80 percent mortality,” said Mark Eakin, who coordinates the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Coral Reef Watch.and provides the contrast
“It is essential to remember that even those corals still alive have a higher risk of dying from disease and have lost at least a year’s reproductive season and growth,” Eakin continued. “Even the corals that ‘only’ bleach are severely harmed by events like this one.”
He noted that tropical cyclones — what Americans call hurricanes — also kill corals at landfall, but typically over an area of about 50 miles. In contrast, he says, the swath of damage from the bleaching event was “500 miles wide.”The reason to count this year as the tipping point is that
Indeed, the aforementioned statistical analysis suggested that by the year 2034, a March with sea temperatures as warm as in 2016 could happen every other year, as the planet continues to warm.Like, if you were cooking a steak rare from a freshly slaughtered animal (which wouldn't be all that great, but this is an analogy) there could still be living tissue and living blood cells in it, and in the offal and hide and the other pieces of the animal, but you wouldn't say the organism as a whole is still alive.
So on the scale of a lifetime of millions of years or even just 20,000 years, this is the equivalent of the coroner saying "brain death occurred at..." We need to make every effort to ensure that the Great Barrier Reef survives in the way that Henrietta Lacks survives, and that it can perhaps one day be reconstituted in some way in a future amenable climate, but it's too late to save the patient.
posted by XMLicious at 6:01 AM on October 14, 2016 [4 favorites]
Climate change is such a tough problem to tackle. It's unimaginably huge, and serious mitigation demands cooperation and contributions at the highest levels. Sorting your trash and driving a Prius isn't going to put a dent in it. At the same time, climate change is not the end of everything... it's a change (warming), the planet will carry on (give or take some species and an ecological niche or two), and humanity will survive, cos that's what we do.
The average person hears the often dire pronouncements from the IPCC and others, but also the din of denials from well-orchestrated campaigns. It's further complicated by how the perception of the issue has aligned with political beliefs: the left is in support of action; the right is mostly in denial, and this alignment usually overrules rational discussion.
This GBR situation is a good illustration of the dilemma. Scientists are giving the big picture, but as long as dive tours can take Joe Average and his wife to a living part of the GBR, and they see some pretty fishies and stuff, they will not really believe that the reef is at risk.
posted by Artful Codger at 6:11 AM on October 14, 2016
The average person hears the often dire pronouncements from the IPCC and others, but also the din of denials from well-orchestrated campaigns. It's further complicated by how the perception of the issue has aligned with political beliefs: the left is in support of action; the right is mostly in denial, and this alignment usually overrules rational discussion.
This GBR situation is a good illustration of the dilemma. Scientists are giving the big picture, but as long as dive tours can take Joe Average and his wife to a living part of the GBR, and they see some pretty fishies and stuff, they will not really believe that the reef is at risk.
posted by Artful Codger at 6:11 AM on October 14, 2016
This is a good bit of writing, but this kind of "oh well, we're fucked" approach never helped anyone.
But the site got so many clicks for that article!
posted by aught at 6:58 AM on October 14, 2016 [2 favorites]
But the site got so many clicks for that article!
posted by aught at 6:58 AM on October 14, 2016 [2 favorites]
The average person hears the often dire pronouncements from the IPCC and others
Just to be completely crystal clear, the estimates that the IPCC mentions in press releases and puts in the summaries at the top of reports, that get cited in the New York Times, are not the dire predictions. They're the ones that can be put together from the parts of climate science that are fully understood and rigorously established.
As an example of predictions where scientists try to guess about factors that they don't have iron-clad backing for: above I mentioned that the mid-range projections, the ones that get put in the summaries and press releases, include a one-meter sea-level rise by 2100. But the highest estimate I came across when I fully went through the section of the 5th/2014 report was five meters by 2100.
Offhandedly declaring that the worst consequences of climate change will be the loss of "some species and an ecological niche or two" is extremely fucking irresponsible. That's what has already happened along with the Northwest Passage opening up, the decapitation of the Great Barrier Reef we're talking about here, droughts, increased severity of storms, and coastal flooding and loss of coastal fresh water sources all over the world. Many more people are going to die all over the world as a consequence of processes we already see in motion and putting out bullshit "the truth is somewhere in the political middle" misinformation—not even based on a complete understanding of what scientists are actually saying!—is playing accomplice to those deaths.
posted by XMLicious at 7:25 AM on October 14, 2016 [8 favorites]
I know that a few users on a blue website won't resurrect the reef, but how many people, given this news yesterday, took concrete action today to try and make it different? Did you leave your car at home? Rethink that flight to the tropics? Turn down the thermostat?
On my way to work today (by bike -- no, I'm not trying to be holier-than-thou. I have work to do, too) I didn't see any difference. Someone referenced "Children of Men" above. Yesterday should have been like the ceasefire scene when Theo carries the baby through the stunned silence. But today, the killing has resumed.
posted by klanawa at 9:29 AM on October 14, 2016
On my way to work today (by bike -- no, I'm not trying to be holier-than-thou. I have work to do, too) I didn't see any difference. Someone referenced "Children of Men" above. Yesterday should have been like the ceasefire scene when Theo carries the baby through the stunned silence. But today, the killing has resumed.
posted by klanawa at 9:29 AM on October 14, 2016
Also, tomorrow we're supposed to get the STORM OF THE CENTURY. Most of the leaves are still on the trees, but by Monday they won't be. Still, there's a phalanx of men with gas-powered leaf-blowers scouring the quad at the university. We humans... not so clever.
posted by klanawa at 9:43 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by klanawa at 9:43 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
Dead and dying are two very different things.
posted by Fuzzypumper at 11:56 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Fuzzypumper at 11:56 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
"Is the Great Barrier Reef dead?
No. It’s not. We just had a massive bleaching event, but we know from past research that corals are able to recover from the brink of death.
So bleached corals aren’t dead corals?
That’s right. There’s lots of confusion about what bleaching means."
LA Times
posted by soylent00FF00 at 4:12 PM on October 14, 2016
No. It’s not. We just had a massive bleaching event, but we know from past research that corals are able to recover from the brink of death.
So bleached corals aren’t dead corals?
That’s right. There’s lots of confusion about what bleaching means."
LA Times
posted by soylent00FF00 at 4:12 PM on October 14, 2016
soylent00FF00, I just read a good piece of writing about that. You should check it out.
posted by No-sword at 4:56 PM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by No-sword at 4:56 PM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
XMLicious: Offhandedly declaring that the worst consequences of climate change will be the loss of "some species and an ecological niche or two" is extremely fucking irresponsible.
Actually, it was understatement as bitter sarcasm. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
That's what has already happened along with the Northwest Passage opening up, the decapitation of the Great Barrier Reef we're talking about here, droughts, increased severity of storms, and coastal flooding and loss of coastal fresh water sources all over the world. Many more people are going to die all over the world as a consequence of processes we already see in motion and putting out bullshit "the truth is somewhere in the political middle" misinformation—not even based on a complete understanding of what scientists are actually saying!—is playing accomplice to those deaths.
I never said the truth is in the middle, I was pointing out that the political polarization obscures the truth and makes it easy for many, perhaps most people to reject one position or another out of hand. And dialogue will not happen, and the core problems will remain largely untouched.
This is a slow-motion disaster. We have a piss poor record for accurately predicting big social changes. The efforts we should have put into stopping climate change will instead have to go into relocating people and other coping strategies.
That's the best I can envision at this time. If you think weeping and gnashing is the better course of action, by all means carry on.
posted by Artful Codger at 8:01 PM on October 14, 2016
Actually, it was understatement as bitter sarcasm. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
That's what has already happened along with the Northwest Passage opening up, the decapitation of the Great Barrier Reef we're talking about here, droughts, increased severity of storms, and coastal flooding and loss of coastal fresh water sources all over the world. Many more people are going to die all over the world as a consequence of processes we already see in motion and putting out bullshit "the truth is somewhere in the political middle" misinformation—not even based on a complete understanding of what scientists are actually saying!—is playing accomplice to those deaths.
I never said the truth is in the middle, I was pointing out that the political polarization obscures the truth and makes it easy for many, perhaps most people to reject one position or another out of hand. And dialogue will not happen, and the core problems will remain largely untouched.
This is a slow-motion disaster. We have a piss poor record for accurately predicting big social changes. The efforts we should have put into stopping climate change will instead have to go into relocating people and other coping strategies.
That's the best I can envision at this time. If you think weeping and gnashing is the better course of action, by all means carry on.
posted by Artful Codger at 8:01 PM on October 14, 2016
Dude—you started off by claiming that "Most of us, self included, won't live to see Florida sink or Manhattan relocated", but not only will most of us see chunks of Florida disappear, to randomly grab something from the first page of Google results (because I haven't read about New York in depth; I don't know where this lines up with the IPCC analysis as far as likeliness and confidence) here's Scientific American: Sea Level Could Rise 5 Feet in New York City by 2100.
It's not just political polarization that obscures the truth (and really, by not specifying a particular pole, you are implying the truth isn't with the people frantically pointing to the actual things happening in the actual world and the scientists who have successfully predicted these conditions—though without enough severity much of the time: the IPCC predictions get revised upward based on the new available data and research with every combined report every few years) it's also spreading misinformation like this. Relocating people and coping definitely needs to happen, and you are working against that by making these "sarcastic" and "best I can envision" statements minimizing and positioning substantial effects from climate change further in the future than anyone will experience. It's hardly "weeping and gnashing" to say that we have to deal with the coastal flooding and loss of fresh water sources and other things that have already happened and prepare for things like most or all of the Marshall Islands disappearing and Bangladesh, a country with 170 million people presently, losing 70% of its land area, when much of that land loss will happen continuously during our lifetimes and the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren.
If you haven't followed the Bangladesh link above it's the United Nations that has made the film about the consequences of a one-meter sea level rise there, but maybe they're just a "polarized" organization that wouldn't know a humanitarian disaster from their elbow, rather than the main bulwark protecting refugees of all types in much of the world, trying to carry out much of the necessary planning for further climate refugees.
Also BTW: the author of the LA Times piece soylent00FF00 links to mentions that she studies the reefs of the Christmas Islands normally, and the much worse rate of coral death there is also mentioned in the WaPo piece straight links to: more than 80% mortality. The fact that 15% to 20% of her reef survived this one year's events is what she "cling[s] to". She calls her reef "rubble" out of which "will come a reef that may not look exactly like it looked before, but may be better adapted for future temperature change." Emphasis on the "may" be better adapted. She's saying that coral isn't completely extinct yet, so it theoretically might not become extinct in the future; but it sounds like she's having trouble convincing even herself of that.
The persistent and obstinate denialism in the face of at least a third or more of the Great Barrier Reef dying (not just bleaching!) and 80%-85% of other reefs being killed, in this one year alone, is repeatedly reminding me of Monty Python's Black Knight, who as he's getting his every limb severed from his body insists "'Tis but a scratch!" and "It's only a flesh wound!"
posted by XMLicious at 4:31 AM on October 16, 2016 [2 favorites]
It's not just political polarization that obscures the truth (and really, by not specifying a particular pole, you are implying the truth isn't with the people frantically pointing to the actual things happening in the actual world and the scientists who have successfully predicted these conditions—though without enough severity much of the time: the IPCC predictions get revised upward based on the new available data and research with every combined report every few years) it's also spreading misinformation like this. Relocating people and coping definitely needs to happen, and you are working against that by making these "sarcastic" and "best I can envision" statements minimizing and positioning substantial effects from climate change further in the future than anyone will experience. It's hardly "weeping and gnashing" to say that we have to deal with the coastal flooding and loss of fresh water sources and other things that have already happened and prepare for things like most or all of the Marshall Islands disappearing and Bangladesh, a country with 170 million people presently, losing 70% of its land area, when much of that land loss will happen continuously during our lifetimes and the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren.
If you haven't followed the Bangladesh link above it's the United Nations that has made the film about the consequences of a one-meter sea level rise there, but maybe they're just a "polarized" organization that wouldn't know a humanitarian disaster from their elbow, rather than the main bulwark protecting refugees of all types in much of the world, trying to carry out much of the necessary planning for further climate refugees.
Also BTW: the author of the LA Times piece soylent00FF00 links to mentions that she studies the reefs of the Christmas Islands normally, and the much worse rate of coral death there is also mentioned in the WaPo piece straight links to: more than 80% mortality. The fact that 15% to 20% of her reef survived this one year's events is what she "cling[s] to". She calls her reef "rubble" out of which "will come a reef that may not look exactly like it looked before, but may be better adapted for future temperature change." Emphasis on the "may" be better adapted. She's saying that coral isn't completely extinct yet, so it theoretically might not become extinct in the future; but it sounds like she's having trouble convincing even herself of that.
The persistent and obstinate denialism in the face of at least a third or more of the Great Barrier Reef dying (not just bleaching!) and 80%-85% of other reefs being killed, in this one year alone, is repeatedly reminding me of Monty Python's Black Knight, who as he's getting his every limb severed from his body insists "'Tis but a scratch!" and "It's only a flesh wound!"
posted by XMLicious at 4:31 AM on October 16, 2016 [2 favorites]
Click baity Media Network: The coral reef is 100% Dead
scientificamerican.com: Bleaching Hits 93 Percent
Australian government: Great Barrier Reef 22 percent dead
Deliberate exaggeration may have good intentions but can also backfire, if people think there’s nothing that can be done, should we just not do anything and move onto other issues?
posted by Lanark at 5:50 AM on October 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
scientificamerican.com: Bleaching Hits 93 Percent
Australian government: Great Barrier Reef 22 percent dead
Deliberate exaggeration may have good intentions but can also backfire, if people think there’s nothing that can be done, should we just not do anything and move onto other issues?
posted by Lanark at 5:50 AM on October 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
Lanark—see above, and many other comments, about bleaching versus death. The significance is that mass bleaching events in past decades didn't cause death on this scale, 50% of all coral in the northernmost part of the reef as your latter link confirms.
The exaggeration is from people saying this is an unremarkable event. As far as what to do, see discussion above of geoengineering small regions of the ocean to keep the temperature and acidity low enough for some coral to survive. (Obviously dealing with climate change on the whole and trying to moderate its progress, to minimize human casualties and preserve as much biodiversity as possible across all species, is a broader discussion.)
posted by XMLicious at 9:30 AM on October 16, 2016
The exaggeration is from people saying this is an unremarkable event. As far as what to do, see discussion above of geoengineering small regions of the ocean to keep the temperature and acidity low enough for some coral to survive. (Obviously dealing with climate change on the whole and trying to moderate its progress, to minimize human casualties and preserve as much biodiversity as possible across all species, is a broader discussion.)
posted by XMLicious at 9:30 AM on October 16, 2016
Also BTW—once you read the whole article and follow the links the overall 22% death rate in Lanark's second link is the result of an "initial survey" done back in June and another in March about which it says "mortality levels are likely higher than initially recorded".
posted by XMLicious at 10:03 AM on October 16, 2016
posted by XMLicious at 10:03 AM on October 16, 2016
...and really, by not specifying a particular pole, you are implying the truth isn't with the people frantically pointing to the actual things happening in the actual world.
That's not a valid inference. All I was trying to state is that the political polarization around this issue is a serious impediment to dialogue. Not matching your zeal is apparently an impediment to dialogue too.
Point taken re Bangladesh. It is likely too late to halt the sea rise that will affect them; the only remaining option is relocation. You know as well as I how many North Americans will stop driving SUVs to save Bangladesh.
posted by Artful Codger at 2:26 PM on October 16, 2016
That's not a valid inference. All I was trying to state is that the political polarization around this issue is a serious impediment to dialogue. Not matching your zeal is apparently an impediment to dialogue too.
Point taken re Bangladesh. It is likely too late to halt the sea rise that will affect them; the only remaining option is relocation. You know as well as I how many North Americans will stop driving SUVs to save Bangladesh.
posted by Artful Codger at 2:26 PM on October 16, 2016
It's casually spreading dangerously false information, which would then become the basis of any dialogue that might happen, which is an impediment.
Call dealing with the actual facts "zealous" if you want, but when there are essentially free continuously-updated textbooks on the subject and it's no longer a matter of theory alone—but monumental changes that are visible to average members of the public, if they actually look, have already happened in the real world—there is no reason to make up your own version of reality much less spread it to others.
Yeah, most North Americans won't proactively try to save Bangladesh, but all the more reason to not attempt to make them think that Florida is going to look the same for their entire lives, and to try to ensure that when major events like coastlines changing happen they are properly recognized as part of the same thing that's happening in Bangladesh and in the rest of the not-America parts of the world.
posted by XMLicious at 4:13 AM on October 17, 2016
Call dealing with the actual facts "zealous" if you want, but when there are essentially free continuously-updated textbooks on the subject and it's no longer a matter of theory alone—but monumental changes that are visible to average members of the public, if they actually look, have already happened in the real world—there is no reason to make up your own version of reality much less spread it to others.
Yeah, most North Americans won't proactively try to save Bangladesh, but all the more reason to not attempt to make them think that Florida is going to look the same for their entire lives, and to try to ensure that when major events like coastlines changing happen they are properly recognized as part of the same thing that's happening in Bangladesh and in the rest of the not-America parts of the world.
posted by XMLicious at 4:13 AM on October 17, 2016
There is a lovely little illustration, somewhere on the net, depicting the prevalence of various forms of life on earth. The one form that has prevailed throughout, illustrated, as best my memory serves me as the undercurrent to the rest, is micro-organisms, like bacteria, viruses and the like.
At one time, the earth went through a period in which, some couple of billions of years ago, the planet was covered completely in ice, and I seem to recall there was life, albeit bacterial, that survived.
The earth is not dying right now. We humans are enthusiastically urging it to deteriorate as a living space for us, which does not mean it will not support other, more cooperative and symbiotic life forms.
Once this planet shakes us off like a bad case of fleas, all should go back to normal.
To allay everyone's feelings of dread at the prospect of witnessing the end of human meddling in the ecosystem, I suggest searching for, and watching, a two minute animation on YouTube, called, "A case of the humans". Simultaneously hilarious and horrifying, it gave me peace.
Enjoy!
posted by girdyerloins at 6:41 PM on October 17, 2016
At one time, the earth went through a period in which, some couple of billions of years ago, the planet was covered completely in ice, and I seem to recall there was life, albeit bacterial, that survived.
The earth is not dying right now. We humans are enthusiastically urging it to deteriorate as a living space for us, which does not mean it will not support other, more cooperative and symbiotic life forms.
Once this planet shakes us off like a bad case of fleas, all should go back to normal.
To allay everyone's feelings of dread at the prospect of witnessing the end of human meddling in the ecosystem, I suggest searching for, and watching, a two minute animation on YouTube, called, "A case of the humans". Simultaneously hilarious and horrifying, it gave me peace.
Enjoy!
posted by girdyerloins at 6:41 PM on October 17, 2016
Totally not a given that the world will have anything left, or will resume animal life after we're gone. Especially since things like oil rigs and nuclear plants will go kablooey.
posted by agregoli at 9:37 AM on October 18, 2016
posted by agregoli at 9:37 AM on October 18, 2016
In my own U.S. state, I came across the New Hampshire Coastal Adaptation Workgroup's photo contest which they've been running for the past three years getting pictures from photographers on the coast during the highest annual high tides, which happen in October. 2014: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th place, 2015: 1st, 2nd, 3rd
Their site doesn't mention how common this level of flooding was historically, but an affiliated site, the Gulf of Maine King Tides Project, links to a Portland Press Herald (of Portland, Maine) article from a year ago saying
Their site doesn't mention how common this level of flooding was historically, but an affiliated site, the Gulf of Maine King Tides Project, links to a Portland Press Herald (of Portland, Maine) article from a year ago saying
posted by XMLicious at 12:39 PM on October 18, 2016Sea levels rose 7.5 inches in Portland from 1912 to 2011, according to tide gauges in the city. The rate of increase over the past two decades is roughly double that of the previous period.
« Older “Five hundred years of the vulgar tongue” | "And we think 'Ooh, this is it, this is the end.'" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Liquidwolf at 2:03 PM on October 13, 2016 [2 favorites]