AT: Global Warming (Coral Reefs)
Multiple factors allow reefs to recover from stress
International Union for Conservation of Nature 9 (Jan 9, http://www.iucn.org/cccr/resilience_to_climate_change/) LL
Resilience - A promising paradigm Even though climate change and coral bleaching pose a serious threat to the future survival of coral reefs, there is still hope that these ecosystems will be able to survive increased SSTs. Some coral reefs are able to withstand stresses to a greater degree (are more resistant) while other coral reefs are able to recover from bleaching events more rapidly (are more resilient) depending on a number of oceanographic, ecological and physiological factors. The principles of resistance and resilience are emerging as a promising paradigm to aid the management of coral reefs in the face of climate change, and give hope in the face of adversity. The figure below illustrates the stages in the coral bleaching process where it is possible for a coral or coral reef to survive the disturbance. It illustrates four main processes that can allow a coral reef to survive: protection, resistance, tolerance and resilience. Protection Oceanographic and other environmental factors that create pockets of reduced or non-stressful conditions where ecosystems are protected from disturbances (Salm et al, 2001). A coral reef can be protected against increased SSTs or light levels and therefore against bleaching by local upwelling, fast water flow, shading and screening. Resistance The ability of an organism or ecosystem to withstand disturbance without undergoing a phase shift or losing neither structure nor function (Odum, 1989). For example a coral reef’s ability to withstand bleaching and mortality. Coral morphology, different zooxanthellae clades and coral acclimatisation can all influence a coral reef's resistance to bleaching. Tolerance The ability of an organism to absorb a disturbance and not suffer mortality (Obura, 2006). For example, a coral’s ability to bleach, and then recover its zooxanthellae to become healthy again. Resilience The ability of a system to absorb or recover from disturbance and change, while maintaining its functions and services (Adapted from Carpenter et al, 2001). For example a coral reef’s ability to recover from a bleaching event. Factors that can improve a coral reef's resilience to a mass bleaching event include good species and functional diversity, good connectivity to larval sources, appropriate substrates for larval settlement and protection from other anthropogenic impacts.
AT: Global Warming (Oceans Scenario)
New data proves- oceans cooling.
Young 11- 21 (2k8)(Gregory, Dr. Gregory Young is a neuroscientist and physicist, a doctoral graduate of the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. He is currently involved with a privately funded think-tank engaged in experimental biophysical research., “Global Warming? Bring it On!”, http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/global_warming_bring_it_on.html)
(3) As recently presented in American Thinker, Lord Monckton competently summarizes for us that many of the highly publicized AGW "facts" are simple documented anomalies of natural climate cycling -- designedly misrepresented for the cause of AGW.
To wit: The Oceans are not catastrophically rising nor are they warming. In fact, the oceans have been cooling since 2003. The Snows of Kilimanjaro are not melting but ablating because of friction due to a cooling atmosphere and natural cooling trends. The world's 160,000 glaciers are not suddenly receding, but appear to be re-advancing, including those ice shelves in Antarctic and the polar ice sheets, all of which cycle regularly in ice mass. Lord Monckton, a science-journalist, provides even more evidence here.
AT: Global Warming Causes Wars
No link between warming and war.
Tol & Wagner ’08 [Richard & Sebastian, Economic & social Research Institute for Coastal Research, Jan 15, “Climate Change and Violent Conflict in Europe over the Last Millennium,” http://www.fnu.zmaw.de/fileadmin/fnu-files/publication/working-papers/climatewarwp.pdf]
In this paper, we study the relationship between climate change and violent conflict over the past millennium in Europe. Our results do not show a clear-cut picture: We present some evidence that abnormally cold periods were abnormally violent, as do Zhang et al. (2006). However, we also show that this evidence is not particularly robust. If one has strong priors that climate change causes conflict, our results provide confirmation. However, if one has strong priors that there is no link, our results do not overthrow such doubt. If anything, cold implies violence, and this effect is much weaker in the modern world than it was in mediaeval times. This implies that future global warming is not likely to lead to (civil) war between (within) European countries. Should anyone ever seriously have believed that, this paper does put that idea to rest.
Many examples disprove the warming results in conflict.
Salehyan ’07 [Idean, Assistant Professor of Political Science at UNT, “The New Myth About Climate Change: Corrupt, tyrannical governments-not changes in the Earth’s climate-will be to blame for the coming resource wars,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3922]
First, aside from a few anecdotes, there is little systematic empirical evidence that resource scarcity and changing environmental conditions lead to conflict. In fact, several studies have shown that an abundance of natural resources is more likely to contribute to conflict. Moreover, even as the planet has warmed, the number of civil wars and insurgencies has decreased dramatically. Data collected by researchers at Uppsala University and the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo shows a steep decline in the number of armed conflicts around the world. Between 1989 and 2002, some 100 armed conflicts came to an end, including the wars in Mozambique, Nicaragua, and Cambodia. If global warming causes conflict, we should not be witnessing this downward trend. Furthermore, if famine and drought led to the crisis in Darfur, why have scores of environmental catastrophes failed to set off armed conflict elsewhere? For instance, the U.N. World Food Programme warns that 5 million people in Malawi have been experiencing chronic food shortages for several years. But famine-wracked Malawi has yet to experience a major civil war. Similarly, the Asian tsunami in 2004 killed hundreds of thousands of people, generated millions of environmental refugees, and led to severe shortages of shelter, food, clean water, and electricity. Yet the tsunami, one of the most extreme catastrophes in recent history, did not lead to an outbreak of resource wars. Clearly then, there is much more to armed conflict than resource scarcity and natural disasters.
Share with your friends: |