Ocean acidifcation .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

[quote... I'm sure the scientists could explain it quite well, but what are you quoting it to demonstrate? ...

I took no position. My first citation of the scientific paper was intended to amplify the Science Daily article (based on that paper) linked by ImaginaryNumber, thinking it might further inform the interested reader.

I agree about the importance of a clear & informative Abstract, and often quote them, myself. Unfortunately, newhaul chose to imply that the introductory sentence represents the authors’ state of ignorance; stating that they learned nothing from their work, and know nothing. I believe that to be an unfair misrepresentation of the study (47% = 0), and the authors’ knowledge. Also believing that newhaul is too intelligent to fully believe that, I must also believe he was being intellectually dishonest.
Hence my frustration.[/QUOTE]

the entire abstract stated that they don't actually know much 41% is not even to the minimum evidentiary point to say inconclusive . That requires at least 60% proof .

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by newhaul

suggest you back your assertions with verifiable facts just like the rest of us do

In other words post links to your references

It’s my day off, I come here for fun and relaxation (and to learn a bit )

See publication link below, get a feel for specialism! What’s yours?

https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/vi...058546F84.html

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by Exile

Interesting article, and written so even I understood.

I'm waiting for Puddleduck to explain in equally clear language why it's all wrong.

No no it’s good. Couple of enthusiastic claims but ok on the whole!

[Marc1]

Yes, I know!
And you forgot to mention that he suffers from tinia and a lot of BO. Not to mention that his niece's boyfriend is a trainspotter.

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by GordMay

[quote... I'm sure the scientists could explain it quite well, but what are you quoting it to demonstrate? ...

I took no position. My first citation of the scientific paper was intended to amplify the Science Daily article (based on that paper) linked by ImaginaryNumber, thinking it might further inform the interested reader.

I agree about the importance of a clear & informative Abstract, and often quote them, myself. Unfortunately, newhaul chose to imply that the introductory sentence represents the authors’ state of ignorance; stating that they learned nothing from their work, and know nothing. I believe that to be an unfair misrepresentation of the study (47% = 0), and the authors’ knowledge. Also believing that newhaul is too intelligent to fully believe that, I must also believe he was being intellectually dishonest.
Hence my frustration.[/QUOTE]

Exactly my problem with Ridds. See his last JCU publications.

“Need for quality control”

“Problems with policy science”

Subtle digs clearly lost on the casual uninformed readers

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Puddleduck

Here we go again!



Please Mr expert let’s go back to basics, define “they”. Coral reefs, corals or Porites? Which one you talking about exactly?



Big Hint... which species out of the hundreds of coral sp. does your false idol worship? If you can be ass’ed to re-read the paper bear in mind ‘rate of change’, it’s mentioned and is important!



Better still why? Answer these and I’ll know your legit, I don’t expect you too.





How you getting on with your sea bass home work?



Hint key word search...



Sea bass



Olfactory



Reproduction (this bits important for species survival not just grant acceptance!)

Speaking of experts. Have you come up with your own esteemed dead GBR numbers yet?

[Reefmagnet]

I see Stone Island got a mention, and in conjunction with the climate crisis challenge I thought I'd post this picture I took last week. It's taken from the Bowen jetty and that tip of land in the foreground to the left is the southern end of Stone Island.

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Speaking of experts. Have you come up with your own esteemed dead GBR numbers yet?

Not really sure what you’re asking but if you’re talking about different coral species then yes. Like Ridd, I’d agree that half a dozen coral species show evidence of being able to adapt to a certain degree of environmental change (depending on rate)

Where we differ is our fundamental definition of a coral reef!

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by newhaul

They say they can explain 41% which means they can't explain it . 59% natural unknown just in fancy terminology

41% of what exactly?

What’s it?

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Puddleduck

Not really sure what you’re asking but if you’re talking about different coral species then yes. Like Ridd, I’d agree that half a dozen coral species show evidence of being able to adapt to a certain degree of environmental change (depending on rate)

Where we differ is our fundamental definition of a coral reef!

1. Of course not. The classic BS answer when the real one is FIIK.



2. Most likely because you're a UK based theorist who thinks the below is representative of a typical reef system and that sprouting copious binomial nomenclatures somehow makes you better then the rest of us.

So do tell us all. What's the purpose of your GBR visit this coming cyclone season?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Puddleduck

41% of what exactly?

What’s it?

read the article and report back

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

So do tell us all. What's the purpose of your GBR visit this coming cyclone season?

Bass sniffing!

Any news on that homework? Always quick to have an opinion but never an answer.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Puddleduck

Bass sniffing!

Any news on that homework? Always quite to have an opinion but never an answer.

Actually, I've been thinking about what you've written.



If someone in the UK can be a tropical reef coral expert, there's no reason I can't be a European Bass expert. Where do I sign up? Google or DuckDuckGo?

[Puddleduck]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Actually, I've been thinking about what you've written.

If someone in the UK can be a tropical reef coral expert, there's no reason I can't be a European Bass expert. Where do I sign up? Google or DuckDuckGo?

No you go for it billie Elliot, sign up Wherever you like. 28 years should do it! Maybe then we can talk fish hormones...

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Puddleduck

No you go for it billie Elliot, sign up Wherever you like. 28 years should do it! Maybe then we can talk fish hormones...

Fish hormones, aye? I'm a fast learner. I reckon I could knock it over in 27.