That climate change threatens the extinction of coral reefs is among the least well-founded but most persistent assertions made by climate alarmists.
In truth, scientists have previously had no clear population count of how many individual corals and coral species existed worldwide.
However, new research described in an article on Phys.org, titled “Half a trillion corals: World-first coral count prompts rethink of extinction risks,” places the number of corals in the Pacific Ocean alone at more than half a trillion. There are likely trillions more worldwide.
The scientists involved in the research say the sheer number of corals and coral species means the risk of extinction due to climate change is vastly lower than previously claimed.
“In the Pacific, we estimate there are roughly half a trillion corals,’ said the study lead author, Dr. Andy Dietzel from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University,” writes Phys.org.
“This is about the same number of trees in the Amazon, or birds in the world.”
“Dr. Dietzel said the eight most common coral species in the region each have a population size greater than the 7.8 billion people on Earth,” says Phys.org, continuing, “The findings suggest that while a local loss of coral can be devastating to coral reefs, the global extinction risk of most coral species is lower than previously estimated.”
This research exposes the fact that although the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) lists 80 coral species to have an elevated extinction risk, 12 of those species have estimated population sizes of more than one billion colonies.
“As an example, the finger-coral, Porites nigrescens, ranks amongst the ten most abundant species we examined. It’s also not considered to be highly susceptible to coral bleaching—yet it is currently listed by IUCN as vulnerable to global extinction,” Professor Sean Connolly, a co-author of the study told Phys.org.
The first corals arose during Cambrian about 535 million years ago and the number and type of corals increased dramatically more than 400 million years ago, coming into existence when global temperatures and carbon dioxide concentrations were much higher than at present.
Coral has proved adaptable, expanding their range and evolving and thriving through periods of higher and lower temperatures than the earth is either currently experiencing or reasonably expected to experience in the foreseeable future.
As discussed in Climate at a Glance: Coral Reefs, corals thrive in warm water, not cold water, and recent warming has allowed coral to expand their range poleward, while still thriving near the equator.
Previous posts on Climate Realism, for example, here, here, here, and here, show local conditions, like runoff from beachfront development and agriculture, not warmer temperatures or ocean acidification, pose the biggest threat to coral reefs.
But even these threats are highly localized and often temporary, with many coral reefs recovering within a few seasons after bleaching events.
Despite recent bleaching events, data shows Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is far from being destroyed. One of the scientists interviewed by Phys.org told the publication,
“[w]e counted an average of 30 corals per square meter of reef habitat. This translates into tens of billions of corals on the Great Barrier Reef—even after recent losses.”
Also, research cited in a recent Climate Realism post shows that many of the coral colonies making up the Great Barrier Reef that have suffered bleaching, have subsequently recovered, or are in the process of doing so.
The available evidence is clear, globally coral reefs are numerous and are not seriously threatened with extinction by modest warming.
Read more at Climate Realism
The real coral tragedy here is how the coral are being used to sell the climate agenda.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/12/08/history-of-coral-reefs/
On the subject of agriculture, Dr Peter Ridd has said, “Firstly, there aren’t excess nutrients” on the Great Barrier Reef and that crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks on Australia’s northwest coast and in the middle of the Pacific Ocean where there is no agriculture is more confirmation that “the link between nutrients from farms and the crown-of-thorns starfish is almost non-existent.”
I can personally accept that agriculture is more of a threat to the GBR than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is, only because the latter threat is zero while the former is theoretically possible.
However, I cannot agree with the use of deflection involving farming in this article. As a Victorian, I witnessed mountain cattlemen saying that forestry was more of a threat to the state’s High Country when their way of life was threatened by greenies some decades ago.
This is despite small towns in the area often relying on both industries for their survival. The upshot is, of course, that the mountain cattlemen lost and logging is dead and soon to be buried.
One should not point to potential victims of eco-zealotry, however harmless one may think that pointing is.
The green guillotine works one slice at a time.
Years ago coral pieces were sold as souvenirs to Great Barrier Reef tourists. It wasn’t a great thing to do, but it wasn’t damaging the World’s largest chain of coral reefs much at all.
Once that stopped, along came the crown of thorns killing the coral extinction claims. That was followed by the agricultural nutrient and sediment flowing down the river claims.
Now it’s fossil fuels in ships or coral bleaching because it’s too hot. Or coral drowning as the sea level rises.
The constant in all this are the zealous ones – certain scientists, all environmental groups and almost all of the Media blaming humanity (meaning other people) for what is natural or does not constitute much of a threat, if any.
The same concepts in this article apply beyond the subject of coral reefs. Anyone who can think, which seems to exclude climate alarmists, knows that all species we have today are here because they survived warmer conditions in the past. The last interglacial period was eight degrees C warmer than today. Coral, polar bears, and all other animals of today survived. That doesn’t mean some species are not legitimately threatened. However, look to loss of habit and over hunting for the causes, not climate change.
Climate change is nothing more than a political idea writ large, and like all other political it is fraught with lies and misrepresentation. In a just world we would be asking the benefactors to return the trillions spent on it.