Chasing Coral Documentary

Just watched it last night myself. Excellent documentary. I have a lobster diving trip scheduled for August in Marathon, haven't been in a couple of years. It should be interesting to see the current condition of the reefs knowing what they used to look like.
 
Same here watched it and was an eye opener, I found it more saddening that the United States was not on the list of countries that are helping to combat this, only a few states and cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
my thoughts is that coral bleaching has been occurring since long before man walked the earth, and will continue no matter what we do. They recover from changes eventually, if they didn't they would have died out long ago.

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/02/11/a-2000-year-global-temperature-record/

1816 was known as the year without summer, when Mount Tambora erupted and dropped global temperatures -.4 to -.7C(right now nasa puts us at .99C above norm), causing crops to fail globally and mass famine. I'm sure with reduced sunlight and abrupt change in temps the corals bleached then too.. 2 thousand years ago we were even hotter than we are now...

but.. the media will have you focused on the past 50-100 years exclusively, as if that were of any significance on a geological scale...
 
Last edited:
my thoughts is that coral bleaching has been occurring since long before man walked the earth, and will continue no matter what we do. They recover from changes eventually, if they didn't they would have died out long ago.

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/02/11/a-2000-year-global-temperature-record/

1816 was known as the year without summer, when Mount Tambora erupted and dropped global temperatures -.4 to -.7C(right now nasa puts us at .99C above norm), causing crops to fail globally and mass famine. I'm sure with reduced sunlight and abrupt change in temps the corals bleached then too.. 2 thousand years ago we were even hotter than we are now...

but.. the media will have you focused on the past 50 years exclusively, as if that were of any significance on a geological scale...

there is a difference between bleaching and dead, watch the doco you may learn something.... the issue is not that the corals are bleaching its the back to back relentless bleaching that causing them to die....once dead there is no recovery...
 
Yeah, there is recovery.. just like how new corals have overgrown dead corals in the past. that is what the great barrier reef is made up of, coral skeletons... This isn't the first major change in global temperatures, and this isn't even close to the warmest we've been in the past 10,000 years. they say the current formation is only 6,000 to 8,000 years old, but in that time the temps have been much higher and much colder, and at an even more rapid pace at times than our current run up on temp.
 
I like documentaries, but take them with a grain of salt, since most are funded by those with agendas and those agendas influence the objectivity.

I was disappointed that they casually mentioned that nearby colonies under identical condition were not showing any signs of stress. They also made no mention that the same species can survive under a wide variety of conditions - but not the same colony within a species - in other words, a species can adapt, but the individual colony, not so much.

I get that they were making a point about global warming, so they went for the heartbreak guy who cried in lieu of why most reefs were not stressing and what Mishri points out.


I am not a climate denier, I merely know Mother Nature can be cruel - as we went from thinking forest fires were bad, and now understand they are essential to rejuvenation.


Sad, yes. But I suspect something will come along and start grazing on that algae and some planula will eventually settle.
 
very good documentary, nice to see Netflix investing in such things. Whether this is part of a natural cycle or not, recoverable or not, it's still painful to see. especially when there is no denying we are largely to blame.
 
Yeah, there is recovery.. just like how new corals have overgrown dead corals in the past. that is what the great barrier reef is made up of, coral skeletons... This isn't the first major change in global temperatures, and this isn't even close to the warmest we've been in the past 10,000 years. they say the current formation is only 6,000 to 8,000 years old, but in that time the temps have been much higher and much colder, and at an even more rapid pace at times than our current run up on temp.

it never recovers 100% so every time a bleaching event happens they come back 80% etc over 50 years that's a huge reduction in coral coverage.... the reefs are dying no question about it...
 
I like documentaries, but take them with a grain of salt, since most are funded by those with agendas and those agendas influence the objectivity.

I was disappointed that they casually mentioned that nearby colonies under identical condition were not showing any signs of stress. They also made no mention that the same species can survive under a wide variety of conditions - but not the same colony within a species - in other words, a species can adapt, but the individual colony, not so much.

I get that they were making a point about global warming, so they went for the heartbreak guy who cried in lieu of why most reefs were not stressing and what Mishri points out.


I am not a climate denier, I merely know Mother Nature can be cruel - as we went from thinking forest fires were bad, and now understand they are essential to rejuvenation.


Sad, yes. But I suspect something will come along and start grazing on that algae and some planula will eventually settle.

the pristine patch of reef they were diving on at the end of the doco appears to be gilby reef, a reef we dive on regularly sadly that reef is all but dead due to this years event...
 
also scientists are just starting to understand the gravity of the situation for instance there is an opinion being formed that corals are responsible for a huge percentage of oxygen production, just how much is whats being looked at...
 
didn't the documentary mention the corals devolving some sort of sun screen to combat the high temps.

that is a guess at best, and even if accurate it is believed to be a last ditch attempt at survival before succumbing to death.... as long as ten years ago I was telling people all those lovely pastel sps were in fact heat stressed and on the verge of death, nobody believed me....
 
I am not a climate denier, I merely know Mother Nature can be cruel - as we went from thinking forest fires were bad, and now understand they are essential to rejuvenation.
.

yeah neither am I, we know the climate has varied greatly historically, from ice ages to just the past 2,000 years we've seen great changes in global temps. sometimes much higher, sometimes much lower. I also know/agree that co2 is a green house gas. I think the media and groups are whipping people into a frenzy about it with very little understanding of geoligical timescales and how we have been warming since the last little ice age from 1400-1800 when temps were -1C cooler, it began warming then the volcano went off and sent it right back down... scientists don't even know what started the last ice age, but they believe it was decreased solar activity. But people have convinced everyone that co2 is to blame.. when it only comprises 2% of all green house gases in our atmosphere...

Geological_Timescale.jpg


water vapor is 60% of our greenhouse gases.. and scientists aren't sure whether more water vapor would actually cool or heat the earth.. (because evaporation is a cooling effect)..... so.. more heat = more evaporation = more water vapor had the original climate models predicting we'd be 5C warmer than we are... it appears it doesn't have that kind of impact with it's added cooling...

A lot of people like to just repeat what some documentary or one particular scientist out there says.. when there isn't a consensus... 97% of scientists don't believe man is a significant contributor to global warming. A study of climate papers found that around 55% of them stated a position on whether or not man could influence the climate.. -and we clearly can, Phoenix, AZ was lifted from a desert to an arid climate from all of the lawns/golf courses/watering they do there, allowing all sorts of things to live that require a moister climate.... that is a localized climate though. so the study didn't differentiate between local or global climate, it didn't say whether it was a minor or major impact.. but 55% of papers had a position and of those 97% said man had an impact on some form of climate... There was a recent survey of climate scientists that pegs the number that 43% believe that man - through co2- is the primary driver of our climate, and 57% believe other factors are more significant. And both sides of ridiculous extreme examples on why their positions must be correct.. where it's likely somewhere in the middle.. some impact.. unknown how much.. best to minimize it...


-I just like to research and know as much as I can before taking to heart what someone tells me.. I guess it's the skepticism my dad always told me to hold.. never trust what someone in power is telling you....That includes the government and wealthy, and talking heads working for them. carbon credits is a $176 billion/yr business. solar panels is a $350 billion/yr business, wind is quite a bit less, $17 billion, the us government spends 100 billion on climate change credits... And we've spent $94 million on fusion research - the clean nuclear energy.... china and france seem to be getting close.. so.. who is making money here? Who is really bettering our future? Solar/Wind will never meet our energy needs... no matter how much they built. Carbon credits? are those offsets really working?

-Nuclear fusion and hydrogen cars should be our future goals.. yet.. a lot of people are making a lot of money on 1/10th measures... luckily gm, toyota, honda are pushing the hydrogen powered vehicle frontier, and another 10-15 years we'll be there. let's focus our money and time and effort on our real goals here, 0 emission and enough energy to meet our future needs. and I think our current temp situation is a combination of factors, solar activity, lack of large volcanic eruptions in over 20 years, and co2... where we could be sitting at some pretty cool temps in a few years with a massive volcanic eruption or 2 and a decrease in solar activity.. and if that doesn't happen, I for one welcome our reptilian overlords who will thrive in the new climate... while mammals shrink.... and ocean life will continue.. and either new corals or better adapted corals will move in and ocean life will continue... and some islanders might want to head for higher ground... and we'll have longer growing seasons and faster plant growth up to 900-1200ppm co2.... so if food prices aren't low enough yet.. get ready for practically free food... (we have a huge glut of grain/corn/etc right now if you haven't been watching...)
 
Last edited:
Just watched it last night myself. Excellent documentary. I have a lobster diving trip scheduled for August in Marathon, haven't been in a couple of years. It should be interesting to see the current condition of the reefs knowing what they used to look like.



Please take pics and share them here! Have fun!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
yeah neither am I, we know the climate has varied greatly historically, from ice ages to just the past 2,000 years we've seen great changes in global temps. sometimes much higher, sometimes much lower. I also know/agree that co2 is a green house gas. I think the media and groups are whipping people into a frenzy about it with very little understanding of geoligical timescales and how we have been warming since the last little ice age from 1400-1800 when temps were -1C cooler, it began warming then the volcano went off and sent it right back down... scientists don't even know what started the last ice age, but they believe it was decreased solar activity. But people have convinced everyone that co2 is to blame.. when it only comprises 2% of all green house gases in our atmosphere...

Geological_Timescale.jpg


water vapor is 60% of our greenhouse gases.. and scientists aren't sure whether more water vapor would actually cool or heat the earth.. (because evaporation is a cooling effect)..... so.. more heat = more evaporation = more water vapor had the original climate models predicting we'd be 5C warmer than we are... it appears it doesn't have that kind of impact with it's added cooling...

A lot of people like to just repeat what some documentary or one particular scientist out there says.. when there isn't a consensus... 97% of scientists don't believe man is a significant contributor to global warming. A study of climate papers found that around 55% of them stated a position on whether or not man could influence the climate.. -and we clearly can, Phoenix, AZ was lifted from a desert to an arid climate from all of the lawns/golf courses/watering they do there, allowing all sorts of things to live that require a moister climate.... that is a localized climate though. so the study didn't differentiate between local or global climate, it didn't say whether it was a minor or major impact.. but 55% of papers had a position and of those 97% said man had an impact on some form of climate... There was a recent survey of climate scientists that pegs the number that 43% believe that man - through co2- is the primary driver of our climate, and 57% believe other factors are more significant. And both sides of ridiculous extreme examples on why their positions must be correct.. where it's likely somewhere in the middle.. some impact.. unknown how much.. best to minimize it...


-I just like to research and know as much as I can before taking to heart what someone tells me.. I guess it's the skepticism my dad always told me to hold.. never trust what someone in power is telling you....That includes the government and wealthy, and talking heads working for them. carbon credits is a $176 billion/yr business. solar panels is a $350 billion/yr business, wind is quite a bit less, $17 billion, the us government spends 100 billion on climate change credits... And we've spent $94 million on fusion research - the clean nuclear energy.... china and france seem to be getting close.. so.. who is making money here? Who is really bettering our future? Solar/Wind will never meet our energy needs... no matter how much they built. Carbon credits? are those offsets really working?

-Nuclear fusion and hydrogen cars should be our future goals.. yet.. a lot of people are making a lot of money on 1/10th measures... luckily gm, toyota, honda are pushing the hydrogen powered vehicle frontier, and another 10-15 years we'll be there. let's focus our money and time and effort on our real goals here, 0 emission and enough energy to meet our future needs. and I think our current temp situation is a combination of factors, solar activity, lack of large volcanic eruptions in over 20 years, and co2... where we could be sitting at some pretty cool temps in a few years with a massive volcanic eruption or 2 and a decrease in solar activity.. and if that doesn't happen, I for one welcome our reptilian overlords who will thrive in the new climate... while mammals shrink.... and ocean life will continue.. and either new corals or better adapted corals will move in and ocean life will continue... and some islanders might want to head for higher ground... and we'll have longer growing seasons and faster plant growth up to 900-1200ppm co2.... so if food prices aren't low enough yet.. get ready for practically free food... (we have a huge glut of grain/corn/etc right now if you haven't been watching...)



Lots of interesting points here. I really hope you're right because it would be great for corals to adapt and thrive again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top