xxx coral

“They do seem to have a really tight echo chamber aspect about that paper…”
I’m not on tenterhooks, though I’ll be interested to see what Evan Jones comes up with. I was amazed though that after all their studies over the years, that Anthony is currently shocked to find that a fairly large fraction are not reporting at all.

  A global absolute temperature is something one should not try to measure. I argue this often, eg about USHCN. It’s concisely expressed in this GISS FAQ (near the end).

What McKitrick’s paper never deals with is that what is published is the average anomaly, which is something different, and perfectly calculable.


The hot water temperature that drove the devastating bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef this year was made 175 times more likely by human-caused climate change, and could be normal in just 18 years.
The scientists said they took the unusual step of releasing the work prior to peer-review, because the methods used to reach the findings are now accepted in the climate science community and the alarming results needed to be released as quickly as possible”.
Note –“We are confident in the results because these kind of attribution studies are well established”
But they also said
“Coral reefs have had a crucial role in shaping the ecosys-tems that have dominated tropical oceans over the past 200 million years.coral reefs are critical to the survival of tropical marine ecosystems ”
Look at the big picture. Coral reefs have existed for 200 million years according to this article and one could imagine have existed for a billion years The earliest life forms, stromatolites are 3.5 billion years old and similar life style to corals.
The sea gets hotter in Queensland it becomes more tropical in Sydney, the corals move down the coast. When they spawn the coral can travel 50 to 100 kilometers in days .
Getting hotter in one locale does not stop them moving and adapting. Never has.
The current reef has only been there 10,000 years doe to sea level rise.
Coral reefs are a 90 billion dollar source of income in the Caribbean, 1 Billion in Australia, tourism alone, they are an essential source of protein for many millions of the worlds poorer societies.
This article focuses on damage only at one spot and not on benefits and natural mitigation that also occur elsewhere.

ATTP Sorry to give that impression
dikranmarsupial said
angech wrote “Causality is not that straightforward a concept to define,” A little disagreement in the ranks.”
If you think I am going to rise to the bait after the display of disingenuous behaviour on the other thread (the most charitable interpretation of which is that you aren’t even honest with yourself), you are mistaken. Especially if you are going to employ a ruse as transparent as “A little disagreement in the ranks”.
Dikran, I remember playing Bridge in Melbourne 30 years ago, novices [still] from the country. In a prolonged bidding scenario by the other side I put my 4th pass on the next row of lines down instead of the fourth square on the top line.
” Director! “This person is giving information to his partner.”
I had no clue.
A similar episode in high school 13 year old when the teacher asked “”Anyone else have anything to say?
A visit to the headmaster for a caning left Mr Disingenuous a little wiser to the ways of the world.
I apologize, did not realize I was using a ruse I am truly naive at times.

ucia (Comment #150385)

The “” just show up as “”. But
&;ltblockquote>wrapped around stuff&;lt/blockquote>
tells your browser add a break, indent and do whatever magic makes stuff stand out as quoted material. When the quote is long, this makes it clearer that material is quoted.

So it should look like this

wrapped around stuff

It’s not always necessary, but sometimes it’s useful.This is an argument, Willard.
“Have I stopped being a contrarian” variety so complex.
The bad cough is an early symptom not sign of lung cancer.
It is also a symptom of over a thousand different problems not lung cancer at all.
The doctors recommendation to stop smoking will not reduce the risk at all if you already have lung cancer. You may as well keep on smoking , particularly, if you enjoy it. Though I would recommend surgery and radiotherapy
Analogies are fine to a point.
They have to be similar, not just look the same and even then they may differ remarkably in outcome.For example.A bad cough could be a response to the ACE 1 medication you are on for blood pressure treatment, Stopping your blood pressure treatment [the cough proves it is effective by the way!] will increase your risk of a stroke or heart attack and you will die before you ever get old enough to have lung cancer.

to answer No, It is not an analogy at all.
One either has cancer or not.
That is bad news but not preventable
You may have early signs of lung disease.
These are proven  attributions to smoking.
Two possible responses:
(1) Take the expert opinions advice, which is backed up by piles of research and evidence, that stopping smoking will greatly reduce my risk of lung cancer.

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Both of you appear to be indulging in a bit of mathematical juggling.
I think I get your point that a trend over a time period where the previous point is at the same level as the last point will give a trend of zero for that time period.
Whereas a shorter or longer time interval, in this particular case, will show a different and increasing trend.
If, as you assert, this leads to him making an erroneous assumption in the long term trend you can call him out but you will have to stop making assertions about short term trends.
And most of the patterns that people are talking about are short term trends.
For instance, in your example there is a decreasing acceleration from 1999 to 2002 just as there is a an increasing acceleration from 2002 to 2015.
Since sea level was lower in the past there will always be a positive trend on any slightly longer time span you choose. How can one talk about acceleration or deceleration in the short term without using short term time spans which bring up the problem you mention.
Good that you use a skeptics chosen graphs to illustrate your point but when talking about Florida tidal levels and south Florida already being a serious problem are we ignoring other issues relevant to sea levels there?
Would we have the same problem all over America or are there tidal gauges showing falling levels elsewhere.
Are there current related erosion problems.
Is there more rebound occurring.
Should you mention caveats or do they get in the way of the maths.

angech says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

I’ve been trying to get some Very Serious People [They face no punishment, ridicule, or loss of status for incorrect predictions or mistaken opinions, as long as the predictions and opinions were mainstream when they were made] to understand that NOT knowing how short is the problem.
Keep going Brandon, I face the same problem the other way.
Buckets of people with brains and mathematics here but probability and its application seems to be a difficult area, particularly in relation to time of event occurrence.
For instance if I was to mistakenly opine [in your view] that the world will not warm more than 2 degrees C for a million years and I was right your idea of taking precautions would fly out the window.
Or to put it in your correct “short” terms.
If the sea level is to rise by a meter every 5 years we had better get cracking.
5 years too short??
Some people insist scientifically on 25 years [Hansen].
too short.
Are you a century man or a 3 hundred years man?
I would guess the latter but you would have to put up some strenuous arguments.
It has slowly come up a very long way since the last ice age.
Meanwhile the ocean takes tens of thousands of years to accumulate heat hence it is impossible for the atmosphere to overheat in the short term.
The temperature of the ocean only needs a slight change to produce sea level rise over a thousand years and is a lot quicker than degree changes in sea temp, without which one cannot have degree changes in atmospheric temp.
[With all the usual caveats obviously required here* I will list them as people bring them up]