Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (70413)	6/4/2016 2:33:18 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86352

Expert: Scientists exaggerated coral bleaching story Anthony Watts / 12 hours ago June 3, 2016 Cam Jones writes via Tips and notes: This is a biggie. What makes it a biggie is that the Head of the Government-run department is speaking out against intentionally biased claims of climate change induced destruction of the Great Barrier Reef Great Barrier Reef: scientists ‘exaggerated’ coral bleaching By Graham Lloyd -The Australian There is growing scientific conflict over bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Picture: Tourism Queensland Activist scientists and lobby groups have distorted surveys, maps and data to misrepresent the extent and impact of coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef, according to the chairman of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Russell Reichelt. A full survey of the reef released yesterday by the authority and the Australian Institute of Marine Science said 75 per cent of the reef would escape unscathed. Dr Reichelt said the vast bulk of bleaching damage was confined to the far northern section off Cape York, which had the best prospect of recovery due to the lack of onshore development and high water quality. The report emerged as Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten traded political fire on the reef’s future this week at the halfway point of the election campaign. As Labor announced $500 million towards protecting the reef, the Opposition Leader said: “We will invest in direct environmental management. We will invest in science and research. We will invest in proper reef management.’’ He said if Australia did not spend the money on the reef, “it is in serious danger of being irreparably damaged. If we do not act, our children will rightly ask us why didn’t we.’’ … The political debate and the release of the authority’s survey results highlights a growing conflict between the lead Barrier Reef agency and the National Coral Bleaching Taskforce headed by Terry Hughes. Dr Reichelt said the authority had withdrawn from a joint announcement on coral bleaching with Professor Hughes this week “because we didn’t think it told the whole story”. The taskforce said mass bleaching had killed 35 per cent of corals on the northern and central Great Barrier Reef. Dr Reichelt said maps accompanying the research had been misleading, exaggerating the impact. “I don’t know whether it was a deliberate sleight of hand or lack of geographic knowledge but it certainly suits the purpose of the people who sent it out,” he said. “This is a frightening enough story with the facts, you don’t need to dress them up. We don’t want to be seen as saying there is no problem out there but we do want people to understand there is a lot of the reef that is unscathed.” Dr Reichelt said there had been widespread misinterpretation of how much of the reef had died. “We’ve seen headlines stating that 93 per cent of the reef is practically dead,” he said. “We’ve also seen reports that 35 per cent, or even 50 per cent, of the entire reef is now gone. “However, based on our combined results so far, the overall mortality rate is 22 per cent — and about 85 per cent of that die-off has occurred in the far north between the tip of Cape York and just north of Lizard Island, 250km north of Cairns. Seventy-five per cent of the reef will come out in a few months time as recovered.” Former climate change commissioner Tim Flannery described diving on the Great Barrier Reef near Port Douglas recently as “one of the saddest days of my life” … Dr Reichelt said Dr Flannery’s language had been “dramatic” and “theatrical” and his prognosis, although of concern, was “speculative”. Dr Reichelt also rejected reports, based on leaked draft documents, that improving water quality would cost $16 billion. He said the interim report had been rejected by a board of which he was member and “taken totally out of context” in media reports. Full story here https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/03/expert-scientists-exaggerated-coral-bleaching-story/ Jeff says: June 3, 2016 at 9:38 pm Gross exaggeration from the “National Coral Bleaching Taskforce ” No surprise there. I assumed all along this was the case. PiperPaul says: June 4, 2016 at 3:44 am Hey, they’re just engaged in job preservation tactics, career protection strategies. As are, I suspect, far too many taxpayer-paid people.