Great Barrier Reef dying but denialism adds insult to injury

[eclipsenow]

We can see the effects of the Great Barrier Reef dying right before our eyes, with over 2/3rd's of the reef bleached due to record high ocean temperatures.

But this isn't happening, according to free-market ideologues who let their political opinions warp their minds and worldview on science. Science is 'evil', according to them, and the peer-review process some sort of conspiracy.
But Buzzfeed shows us it's happening.

Meanwhile, the planet keeps cooking, and the GBR just keeps on dying.
Vox shows us in even more detail.

Experts: The Great Barrier Reef cannot be saved

 

[Saucy]

What does Sean Hannity say about this? He's the only true authority figure to go by.

 

[4x4toy]

 

[Zoii]

My generation is frustrated by those with power who still say theres no such thing as climate change and refuse to limit carbon emmission. My generation is betrayed by my parents generation, and the largest living organism on earth (the great barrier reef) is dieing.

 

[eclipsenow]

Hey Toy,
what would you think if every one of Bolt's cronies were known to be suspicious in some area, and not really climate scientists?
This 2 minute piece was compiled in response to BOLT by REAL CLIMATE SCIENTISTS!
(Some crudeness sorry)

 

[Zoii]

Bwahaha.... surely youre not putting up that nutcase as a credible source. If your car breaks down would you ask andrew bolt or one of his cronies for advice.... no you'd go to a recognized expert.... better still to consult lots of experts and derive a concensus. Well we did that with climate change... a consensus from 1000s of experts who actually research the field, but the pathetic excuse for a journalist Andrew Bolt manages to find one dissenting voice and then espouses that the voice discredits the plethora of high value research from 1000s of researchers.

On a personal note... if youre older than 40, my generation and my childrens will be one to care for you when you're old and incontinent. Think about that when you casually cast our future aside re climate change.

 

[Abraxos]

lol Buzzfeed.

Science has become so hip and political these days.

 

[Zoii]

lol Buzzfeed.

Science has become so hip and political these days.

Science was always hip and without it you will be in the dark tonight rubbing two sticks together to cook your dinner.

 

[Abraxos]

Science was always hip and without it you will be in the dark tonight rubbing two sticks together to cook your dinner.

If you mean that Nuclear power plant, yeah thank God for Nuclear power and the use of fossil fuels.

I actually miss the boring science nerds with geeky glasses; at least they were accurate.

 

[Zoii]

If you mean that Nuclear power plant, yeah thank God for Nuclear power and the use of fossil fuels.

I actually miss the boring science nerds with geeky glasses; at least they were accurate.

No they were never boring. They were the ones who studied in class, got good marks and became your boss, whilst ensuring society gained from their expertise. Its time to listen to them again.

 

[eclipsenow]

If you mean that Nuclear power plant, yeah thank God for Nuclear power

I do! Regularly. I'm serious!

Dr James Hansen is *the* climatologist that diagnosed our climate problem. Unfortunately, no one wants to listen to him about the solution. He says believing in 100% RENEWABLES is like believing in the Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy. He's aware of all the 'studies' that say we can do 100% renewables, but still thinks storage is ridiculously expensive and cannot do the job. Hansen warns not to drink sustainable energy Kool-Aid Therefore the world should build 115 reactors a year! Nuclear power paves the only viable path forward on climate change On a reactors-to-GDP ratio the French *already* beat this build rate back in the 1970's under the Mesmer plan. Breeder reactors are coming that will be mass produced on an assembly line. The best thing about breeders? They have passive safety (meaning no human being is required to stop a meltdown), and they EAT NUCLEAR WASTE! They could convert today's nuclear waste into abundant RELIABLE energy. That's a 100,000 year storage problem into 1000 years of clean energy for America and 500 years for the UK with just today's levels of nuclear waste. Dr James Hansen recommends the free book below. http://www.thesciencecouncil.com/pdfs/P4TP4U.pdf

 

[4x4toy]

Bwahaha.... surely youre not putting up that nutcase as a credible source. If your car breaks down would you ask andrew bolt or one of his cronies for advice.... no you'd go to a recognized expert.... better still to consult lots of experts and derive a concensus. Well we did that with climate change... a consensus from 1000s of experts who actually research the field, but the pathetic excuse for a journalist Andrew Bolt manages to find one dissenting voice and then espouses that the voice discredits the plethora of high value research from 1000s of researchers.

On a personal note... if youre older than 40, my generation and my childrens will be one to care for you when you're old and incontinent. Think about that when you casually cast our future aside re climate change.

First you need to study other opinions from scientists not on the agenda 21 and NWO payroll .. Second , I have worked all my life and have taken care of my beautiful wife, we are out of debt . Third my 2 sons, one is head of his companies IT dept and in line for a VP position and my younger son has just began his new job of plant manager , both are under 40 yrs old and assured me that my wife and I will never have to worry about a thing . Forth and most important I fear God, not men and their BS ..

Here's some testimony before a senate committee that should put your mind to rest

 

[eclipsenow]

First you need to study other opinions from scientists not on the agenda 21 and NWO payroll

Many climate scientists are actually committed Christians, and I reject your unfounded conspiracy theory and character assassination of them. Be honest. Let your yes be yes and your no be no. Do you really believe Christian brothers and sisters are conspiring to deceive the world and set up some kind of 'New World Order'? Really? All we need to do is what the French did under the Messmer plan in the 1970's, and we could have cheaper electricity than today. Then there's oil, which EV's and synthetic diesel will solve. Sorry, but no NWO necessary!

.. Second , I have worked all my life and have taken care of my beautiful wife, we are out of debt . Third my 2 sons, one is head of his companies IT dept and in line for a VP position and my younger son has just began his new job of plant manager , both are under 40 yrs old and assured me that my wife and I will never have to worry about a thing .

Good for you all! But that's entirely irrelevant as to the reality of the demonstrable, repeatable physics of CO2 and what it's going to mean for your children and grandchildren.

Forth and most important I fear God, not men and their BS ..

You should fear God and obey him, and be honest about climate change as a result.
You should - out of fear for God - be concerned to protect his world.

You pretend to honour his word while dismissing any concern for trashing his works. Sorry, but that's not on, and defies any love for neighbour.

Here's some testimony before a senate committee that should put your mind to rest

Yeah, like the American Senate is a reliable scientific source! They're creating their own NWO, and there really is a conspiracy against reality in there! I am utterly REVOLTED by the American government's indebtedness to big fossil fuel interests and persecution of climate scientists, attempted cover-ups and general conspiracy against reality. I have collected all manner of demonstrable conspiracies documented by credible journalists. It's just off, and Christians should be ashamed if they perpetuate these fraudulent, anti-science lies.
Denial Machine

 

[PsychoSarah]

1. No one should ever use Buzzfeed as a source for anything but mindless clickbait.
2. Despite the dubious choice of source, it's easy to confirm that many of the coral reefs on this planet are suffering. Proposed causes that I know of are increased acidity of the oceans from CO2 increasing, increased average global temperatures, and industrial toxins contaminating the oceans.

 

[4x4toy]

Many climate scientists are actually committed Christians, and I reject your unfounded conspiracy theory and character assassination of them. Be honest. Let your yes be yes and your no be no. Do you really believe Christian brothers and sisters are conspiring to deceive the world and set up some kind of 'New World Order'? Really? All we need to do is what the French did under the Messmer plan in the 1970's, and we could have cheaper electricity than today. Then there's oil, which EV's and synthetic diesel will solve. Sorry, but no NWO necessary!



Good for you all! But that's entirely irrelevant as to the reality of the demonstrable, repeatable physics of CO2 and what it's going to mean for your children and grandchildren.



You should fear God and obey him, and be honest about climate change as a result.
You should - out of fear for God - be concerned to protect his world.

You pretend to honour his word while dismissing any concern for trashing his works. Sorry, but that's not on, and defies any love for neighbour.


Yeah, like the American Senate is a reliable scientific source! They're creating their own NWO, and there really is a conspiracy against reality in there! I am utterly REVOLTED by the American government's indebtedness to big fossil fuel interests and persecution of climate scientists, attempted cover-ups and general conspiracy against reality. I have collected all manner of demonstrable conspiracies documented by credible journalists. It's just off, and Christians should be ashamed if they perpetuate these fraudulent, anti-science lies.
Denial Machine

Uh, The senate was being showed how NASA and NOAH manipulated established historical data to get their numbers, their money and their suckers ..

 

[eclipsenow]

This is a short history of climate science, and shows that any 'conspiracy' you believe in must span nearly 2 centuries. Just *think* about what you are suggesting! Some world-wide scientific conspiracy started just after the Napoleonic wars, and continued through WW1, WW2, the Cold War, the fall of the Berlin Wall and Soviet Union, the rise of the internet, and continues on today. You must live in a very scary world, and believe in an organisation that dwarfs James Bond's "Spectre". After all, it has convinced every National Academy of Science and reputable university science body on the planet.
From wikipedia:
>>The existence of the greenhouse effect was argued for by Joseph Fourier in 1824. The argument and the evidence was further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838, and reasoned from experimental observations by John Tyndall in 1859.[12] The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896.[13] However, the term "greenhouse" wasn't used to describe the effect by any of these scientists; the term was first used in this way by Nils Gustaf Ekholm in 1901.[14][15]
In 1917 Alexander Graham Bell wrote "[The unchecked burning of fossil fuels] would have a sort of greenhouse effect", and "The net result is the greenhouse becomes a sort of hot-house."[16][17] Bell went on to also advocate the use of alternate energy sources, such as solar energy.[18]<<
Greenhouse effect - Wikipedia

 

[4x4toy]

So believing that normal warming and cooling cycles have always existed makes me wrong ? Then seeing the ridiculous terms of agreements assigning ''carbon tax'' to imo a non existent made up problem ?

 

[Zoii]

First you need to study other opinions from scientists not on the agenda 21 and NWO payroll .. Second , I have worked all my life and have taken care of my beautiful wife, we are out of debt . Third my 2 sons, one is head of his companies IT dept and in line for a VP position and my younger son has just began his new job of plant manager , both are under 40 yrs old and assured me that my wife and I will never have to worry about a thing . Forth and most important I fear God, not men and their BS ..

Here's some testimony before a senate committee that should put your mind to rest

lol OK well done re your own success and congrats to your sons - I mean that sincerely.
My real point though was pointing out that the consensus of those who have actual base knowledge, has been established. The summit of climatologists certainly had extreme views but the extremes were not that climate change isnt occurring, but more on the subsequent impact and timelines.

Now I dont have the expertise, why wouldnt I pay attention to those who do. And why would I ignore the overwhelming consensus in favour of listening to a few extreme views. Surely you can appreciate that.

My whole thrust (albeit I was a bit flippant about it) was my generation and my children's are going to be the ones to face the consequences. Can you blame us for not being happy about the whole "denial" thrust.

PS - Re Dr Eastbrook - out of interest I read some of his climate publications. Although he has never conducted and primary research on the topic he has published numerous systematic reviews and opinion pieces on the topic. I paste an insert.

Based on past recurring climate patterns, the Earth is now near the end of a 30–year warm cycle that began in 1977 and is poised to enter a 30–year cool cycle of about 0.3–0.5 ° C that should continue until about 2040. This is in sharp contrast to the drastic global warming of about 2° C predicted by the IPCC. Past warm/cool cycles suggest a succeeding warm period (2040–2070) may be somewhat warmer than the past 30years, but well below temperatures predicted by the IPCC. The projected cool cycle from 2070 to 2100 would cool climates slightly, so by 2100, the temperature increase above the present would amount to only ~0.5 C (1° F), compared to as much as 6° C (10° F) predicted by the IPCC

So I am aware of his view and am also aware it is outside of the mainstream. So I guess youre happy to accept a view outside of the consensus. Who should I believe. I truly hope Dr Eastbrook is right but the very large consensus says he isn't and if I listen to him the outcome can be catastrophic for my generation and my children's.

One last point - you and I are in lucky countries. The prime ministers of low lying pacific islands are not so lucky. They have been imploring the likes of you and I to act. So now I implore YOU to look up Kiribati, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu... as examples of what is already happening to them.

 

[eclipsenow]

So believing that normal warming and cooling cycles have always existed makes me wrong ? Then seeing the ridiculous terms of agreements assigning ''carbon tax'' to imo a non existent made up problem ?

Believing climate science is a recent endeavour makes you wrong.

Believing that somehow climate scientist's don't know about normal warming and cooling cycles makes you wrong.

Just assuming they've ignored natural forcings makes you wrong: the IPCC papers have analysed all the natural forcings that human science knows of today, and none explain today's warming.

Believing you know better than them makes you wrong.

Being paranoid and overly sensitive about one economic mechanism for fixing climate change makes you wrong.

Believing a carbon tax is the only way we could fix it makes you wrong.

Just asserting "non existent made up problem" without any evidence makes you wrong.

Believing politicians over scientists makes you wrong, and believing a Senate hearing that would invite in Don Easterbrook, a geologist (not climatologist) and well-known outright LIAR makes you wrong. He before 2012, he predicted the earth was COOLING! What a sad little denialist, errant in all his ways, blinded by political worldviews. Every year after 2012 BROKE THE HEAT RECORD.
More on Easterbrook here, if you can stand reading it!

Don Easterbrook's Heartland Distortion of Reality

 

[Zoii]

I see the situation like this. You have a car and notice problems. The mechanic says you need a new radiator or your car will overheat and the engine will be destroyed. You ask 50 mechanics and they all say the same thing.

Finally you talk to a mechanic who says this whole radiator coolant thing is a hoax and you are wasting your money. Those mechanics are just interested in their own jobs.

Now Im not an expert. Who should I trust. From a risk perspective if I do nothing my whole engine will be destroyed. If I decide to replace the radiator yes it will cost me something but my risks will be eliminated.

Whats the worst that can happen by managing CO2 emissions - clean water and clean air is hardly a bad thing and using renewable energy in the long run will be cheaper. If the opponents of climate change are wrong, then the risk of doing nothing will be catastrophic.