Gaurdian.co on possible disintegration of reefs by end of century

[Zarathustra2]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/23/worlds-coral-reefs-disintegrate-2100

Interesting article relating to the growing acidity of the seas due to CO2 in the air. Some great pictures as well.

[chrisfowler99]

IMHO, coral has survived much higher CO2 levels in the past and will survive it in the future.

[muddybluewater]

Since the earth has actually been cooling for the last 15 years and all the global warming data has been proven to be fixed I think they will make it. The earth was much warmer in the middle ages and colder in between. Here is a chart that shows the change in sea levels for thousands of years. Our planet changes and life adapts.

[Zarathustra2]

Guys,

Not looking to start a flame war but please read the article before posting a knee-jerk reaction.

The main arguement here doesn't actually have anything to do with global warming. The issue is that, if the current trend over the last century continues, there is going to be a sharp move towards acidity in the worlds oceans. As the PH level changes stony corals will no longer be able to produce calcium carbonate faster than the acid eats it away.

If you do not think this is a problem let me raise the acidity in your aquarium to the projected levels in 10-20 years and we'll see how your corals adapt.

I would also reccomend the article in CORAL magazine on the subject. There is a very serious reason that the US is considering adding 82 species of coral to the endangered species list in the next year. Including many hobbyist corals that are almost extinct in the wild.

[chrisfowler99]

I didn't actually specify it had anything to do with global warming. I read the article and reacted to this statement:

More than 9,000 coral reefs around the world are predicted to disintegrate when atmospheric carbon dioxide levels reach 560 parts per million.

We have had CO2 levels well in excess of this number in the past and the ocean has adapted and survived. Will it change? Very likely. But will it survive? Almost assuredly so, IMHO.

[Zarathustra2]

I agree that we will still have coral. For instance, Mushrooms probably couldn't care less. But I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that we have had CO2 levels well in excess of this before. The only other times have been extinction level events.

Over the last 1000 years...

Over the last 400,000 years.

Notice that we have not gone over 300PPM in the last 400,000 years, until very recently. Also notice that these are two seperate ice core samples. One from the Vostock glacier and the other from the Law Dome. This would mitigate any issues with possibly currupt data.

With the above data I am not sure where we are saying that modern corals have had CO2 levels "much higher than what we have currently seen." The CO2 cycle is a regular and predictable climatology norm over the last several hundred thousands of years and has not popped up above 300PPM in that time. Data prior to that leads to a world that is much much different, one that I do not believe we could live in as humans. (The Jurrasic would be particularly cool but hard to breathe in for instance.)

Muddy, In your chart you start out at THE HEIGHT OF THE LAST ICE AGE!!! Yes, sea levels have risen since the bering straight was a land bridge. Then leveled off until fairly recently. Since the beginning of this century there has been a sharp rise in sea levels of around 20CM when the previous several centuries have been flat. As we are at the top of the current glacial period we should be having a clobal cooling effect as we start into the next ice age over the next 10,000 years. However this pattern seems to have been broken.

To paraphrase the current Coral magazine article. Climatology is a science. Science is not a religion. You cannot just say "I don't believe it" without providing a preponderance of evidence that would refute what the vast majority of experts studying it have come up with. Yet still it moves.

[muddybluewater]

The curent science has been edited. The base line numbers for the US originally had 4500 weather stations being read. There are only 1500 being used to show global warming. A majority of those omited were in colder regions of the US. Russia, Austrailia, japan and others have reported the same discrepancies it the current data. NASA came out last year and filed a report that stated the recent warming trend was due to sun spot activity that has ceased. The original scientist that came up with the global warming theory died before he could retract the theory as not based of facts but just a paid for paper written as only one posibility. His retraction was found on his computer after his death. Science should look at all the facts not use only the ones that keep their funding. Do we need to conserve and preserve our enviroment? Yes. Do we need to destroy our way of life to make the politically conected rich? No. All of the Co2 and global warming "science" is tied together.

Z, this is where I was coming from and what I based my statements. Nothing ment to be personal.