The scientists who keep making predictions of doom and gloom about the fate of the Great Barrier Reef unless Australia unilaterally slashes its economic wrists.
Why do they have any credibility at all when every, single one of their previous predictions about the reef have been hopelessly wrong?
THE Great Barrier Reef has only a 50 per cent chance of survival if global CO2 emissions are not reduced at least 25 per cent by 2020, a coalition of Australia's top reef and climate scientists said today.90 percent. How would they know? It's impossible for them to know that. Impossible.
The 13 scientists said even deeper cuts of up to 90 per cent by 2050 would necessary if the reef was to survive future coral bleaching and coral death caused by rising ocean temperatures.
"We've seen the evidence with our own eyes. Climate change is already impacting the Great Barrier Reef," Terry Hughes, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, said in a briefing to MPs.Bullcrap. There is no evidence that the Great Barrier Reef is being impacted by anything remotely resembling the negative affects of climate change - affects, it should be noted, that won't actually be noticeable for 40-50 years and that's ONLY if the predictions of the hitherto useless IPCC climate models are correct.
Australia is one of the world's biggest CO2 emitters per capita, but has only pledged to cut its emissions by five per cent from 2000 levels by 2020. The Government said it would go further with a 25 per cent cut, if a tough international climate agreement is reached at UN climate talks in Copenhagen in December, but this is looking increasingly unlikely with legally binding targets now off the agenda.Why bring out the per capita statement when it's immaterial to the argument? China ADDS Australia's output every 3-4 months. We can cut our emissions by 100% and have zero effect.
"This is our Great Barrier Reef. If Australia doesn't show leadership by reducing emissions to save the reef, who will?" asked scientist Ken Baldwin.Why would any country - and I assume they mean India, China, Brazil and Russia etc - take any notice of Australia 'showing leadership' when Europe has had a carbon trading scheme for a number of years, thus 'showing leadership', that NO COUNTRY HAS TAKEN ANY NOTICE OF??? These people are truly zealots.
But the Government is struggling to have a hostile Senate pass its planned emissions trading scheme. A final vote is expected next week.
The World Heritage-protected Great Barrier Reef sprawls for more than 345,000 square km off Australia's east coast and can be seen from space. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has concluded that the Great Barrier Reef could be "functionally extinct" within decades, with deadly coral bleaching likely to be an annual occurrence by 2030.
Bleaching occurs when the tiny plant-like coral organisms die, often because of higher temperatures, and leave behind only a white limestone reef skeleton.Predictions of bleaching have the same record as climate models - nil, nada, zero, zilch, none.
The Australian scientists said more than 100 nations had endorsed a goal of limiting average global warming to no more than two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures, but even that rise would endanger coral reefs.Are they saying that if we pass an ETS that it will protect the $5.4 billion? Making travel, accommodation, food and everything else will somehow protect this income? Have they done a projection on what the revenue will fall to if an ETS is implemented? If not then why not? It should be easy for them given they calculated that we need to cut emissions by 90% by 2050.
They said global warming was already threatening the economic value of the Great Barrier Reef which contributes $5.4 billion to the economy each year from fishing, recreation and tourism.
These people are seriously the pits and an embarrassment to real scientists.