I wonder how sea life manages to outrun El Niño and La Niña ENSO events without being cooked in place? These have far greater temperature variability in shorter time spans than “climate change”.
Similar movement rates needed for animals and plants on land and in the oceans
Escaping climate change: one if by land, two if by sea? No, according to recent results.
Credit and Larger Version
One if by land, two if by sea?
Results of a study published this week in the journal Science show how fast animal and plant populations would need to move to keep up with recent climate change effects in the ocean and on land.
Willis did some analysis here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/06/uncertain-about-uncertainty/
All this, while ignoring the real threat to the great barrier Reef. Work on dredging a harbour for LNG refineries at Gladstone, with 6 more proposed for the great Barrier Reef heritage area are a massive threat, and dying fish and mammals are turning up in increasing numbers in the surrounding Gladstone area, and all the government and their own scientists can see is…everythings OK.
More harbours are proposed around Australia, including a hotly protested one at James Price Point near Broome, where whale calving, turtle nesting and rare snub-fin dolphins will be threatened, not forgetting the world class fossilized dinosaur footprints.
Scientists like these above need to be laughed at, mocked and humiliated for this rubbish instead of looking at real problems.
Congratulations to Anthony Watts for keeping us informed about crazies like these.
- Dr. Jennifer Marohasy begs to differ:
- Dredging a Harbor Won?t Destroy the Great Barrier Reef
- It’s not just Gladstone, but didn’t 4 Corners on ABC say 6 more were to built along the Queensland Heritage region.
The Great Barrier Reef is one of the great natural wonders of the world. Not that I believe them necessarily, there have been plenty of examples of the ABC being loose with the facts…