JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Fish don’t live in the sky

It’s a case of coal shrinking fish. Another remarkable discovery of modern seance.

North Sea, SST, Temperature variations.

There is a six degree variation across the surface of the North Sea but fish are shrinking because the water is warming by 0.05C per year?

Drew Creighton at the Sydney Morning Herald gets excited: Climate Change affects all levels of life. (By crikey, the banality! It would be legendary if a scientist found one form of life on Earth that wasn’t “affected” by temperature, clouds, frost, ice, storms or rain. How low is this bar?)

First a Prof somewhere notices fish are getting smaller:

Professor John Pandolfi of the ARC Centre of Excellence Coral Reef Studies said while the study encompassed all ecosystems, his particular interest was the sea.

But which fish are shrinking exactly — “commercial fish” — could be a clue?

“We’re seeing decreased yields in fisheries, for example in the North Sea commercial fish have undergone reductions in body size, all of them, simultaneously.”

So how do we know this shrinkage is not due to bigger boats and the increased fish-and-chips factor?

He said the study factored in over-fishing and fisheries induced evolution and separated the two results. “This in in response to ocean warming over the last forty years.”

Well that’s alright then. It must be a pretty hot fisheries model to separate the the multifactorial uncontrolled nightmare of predator-prey changes and temperature shifts too-small-to-measure, spread over decades in an ocean where hot and cold water swirls in eddies right next to each other.

How much warming does it take to shrink fish?

The story mentions “one degree of warming since the industrial revolution.” But that’s air temperature, and fish don’t fly much. Creighton doesn’t tell poor SMH readers how much the water itself warmed. Globally we’re talking about a fifth of a degree C over 40 years (plus or minus 0.5C). We can’t even measure something that small with the equipment we use now, let alone the buckets of 40 years ago.

As far as the North Sea itself goes, see the image above, right. There is a six degree normal variation across the surface of the North Sea but panic now, because fish are shrinking due to water warming at two to five hundredths of a degree per year. (A trend estimated by the European Environmental agency).

The miracle is that life on Earth survived meteor strikes, super volcanoes, continental shifts and lived for hundreds of millions of years, but if the oceans warm 0.2 degrees Celsius  “commercial” fish can’t adapt.

Apparently 100% confidence in unverified models is a broad view:

We tried to take a bit of a broader approach and we’re asking what the impact on the biological and ecological processes that sustain life on earth,” He said.

“This very broad view is telling no matter what you look at, freshwater, terrestrial, marine the impacts and responses of organisms are manifest.

No advertising story about the climate religion is complete without meaningless numbers:

They looked at 94 biological processes and found that 77 of them have been being impacted.

At about 82 per cent it is ‘pretty high number’ with just one degree of warming since the industrial revolution.

The study found climate change now affects most biological and ecological processes on earth.

Why not 100%?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (66 votes cast)
Fish don't live in the sky, 9.6 out of 10 based on 66 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/jxw9phl

142 comments to Fish don’t live in the sky

  • #
    PeterPetrum

    “The study found climate change now affects most biological and ecological processes on earth.

    Why not 100%?”

    That was my first thought too – surely the “climate” affects all organisms all of the time. So what.

    This kind of (taxpayer funded) research (?) is just the sort of thing that I hope will be coming to an end when Trump-ism destroys the Green Dream.

    340

  • #

    When I go into warm water, shrinkage is the least of my worries. :)

    200

    • #
      tom0mason

      To which there is only one reply.

      70

    • #
      Yonniestone

      I’d usually say ‘codswallop’ but on second thoughts the literal translation of this is quite cringe worthy.

      110

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Well if you believe the “expert” professor who asserts that if things warm up the fish will get squeezed sort of thingy.I’ve observed “stunting” in closed systems ,like small impoundments where certain freshwater species decrease in size due to overcrowding and subsequent loss of food source. The piece is nonsense as far as I’m concerned and has no scientific basis.

      160

      • #
        Peter C

        The piece is nonsense as far as I’m concerned and has no scientific basis.

        Of course it is nonsense. The alarming thing however is the hubris of these academics who work at a place called the “ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies”.

        190

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Whenever I see the phrase, “Centre of Excellence” for some activity, I assume that “excellence” relates to quality, and “centre” refers to a bell curve.

          Thus, “ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies” literally means that, if there were multiple Coral Reef Studies, some poor, some passably good, and some in the middle, ARC would be somewhere near the centre of that range, when it comes to quality.

          “Centre of Excellence” is just spin, and the output of any organisation that needs to use such propaganda, should be treated with extreme caution.

          140

        • #
          beowulf

          Yes “Centre of Excellence” carries as much clout as “Peoples Democratic Republic of … (insert dictatorship here)”. You instantly know that excellence will be absent in the former to the same degree that democracy is in the latter.

          Any organisation that needs to run about banging its own drum by calling itself grandiose titles immediately identifies itself as the opposite to that which it purports to be.

          I used to work in an agricultural educational institution that styled itself a Centre of Excellence. I left because I was literally ashamed of its lack of excellence.

          90

        • #
          clive

          Do these people realize that they are showing every one how “Stupid”they really are?

          20

    • #
      Speedy

      On entering cold water, however…

      40

  • #
    PeterS

    Wow all this time and money spent to prove fish don’t fly. Amazing!

    170

  • #
    Razor

    The study found climate change now affects most biological and ecological processes on earth.
    The study looked at the world of fish so how does this then prove that nearly all organic life is now proven to be affected. Truely, including the analysis above the claims made are shown to be simply NOT science. the analysis demonstates that the hysteria is growing exponentially. Trump’s rise will see such so called scientists moving further into paranoid delusional hysteria much like the little darlings trapped in their make believe utopian world under Hiliary.

    180

  • #
    Mike

    Big oil and coal is shrinking big time. The size of the fish is shrinking due to the oil and coal industry imploding into its own mega debt footprint… Not looking good for fish in this financial correlation…. Imagine if each fish in the sea had to go to its banker to make payments so that it could merely exist…environmental/economic sci-fi for sure, but if pigs can fly, then fish can probably also fly too.

    “END OF THE U.S. MAJOR OIL INDUSTRY ERA: Big Trouble At ExxonMobil”
    “As we can see, Exxon’s long-term debt has exploded from $6.9 billion in 2013 to $29.5 billion in the first half of 2016. Basically, the company is now borrowing money to repurchase shares or pay dividends. This is not a viable long-term business model.

    And, we are already seeing the negative ramifications of low oil prices as Exxon only repurchased $4 billion of its shares in 2015 versus $35.7 billion back in 2008.

    Investors need to realize the situation in the U.S. major oil industry is in BIG TROUBLE. If the largest oil company in the country is already suffering, what does it say for the rest of the industry??”………
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-12/end-us-major-oil-industry-era-big-trouble-exxonmobil

    43

  • #

    I might also add, if climate change is making fish smaller, is it also making Labradors larger? My two are 50kg+. What about cows: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3884978/Big-Moo-world-s-largest-cow-14-foot-long-190cm-tall.html?

    120

  • #
    ROM

    I would beg to differ from those scientist’s results.
    The actual percentage figure as given and presumably proven and peer reviewed by the Queensland University researchers in their Cartoon Research Division is 97%

    97% is used extensively in whatever alarmist climate research project happens to be passing by.
    It is a very well known “dimensionless quantity number” used very extensively in climate alarmist research without any attribution and is also known as “Cook’s Constant”.

    292

  • #
    Richard Ilfeld

    “Thanks for all the Fish”

    ‘Science’ at the end of the universe.

    130

  • #
    GrahamP

    The fish are obviously eating up the heat, caused by that naughty CO2, which is hiding in the ocean and that is what is making them smaller.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/10/something-to-keep-an-eye-on-the-large-blue-ribbon-of-below-normal-sea-surface-temperatures-in-the-north-pacific/

    80

    • #

      The warmer the water, the bigger the fish in the Tropics. Applies to many Commercial species until the number of boats catching them multiplied too much.
      The Kimberley Trap Fishery reduced numbers of boats due to the catch size and species’ weights becoming measurably lower. A decade later after controls reduced boat numbers, catch effort, and the fish caught now are large again and in big numbers like 25 years ago.
      Spanish Mackerel, the same, when catch effort reduced. The temperatures also increased slightly over the period.
      Warmer waters also encourage breeding efforts along with predators.

      80

    • #
      GrahamP

      Oops, looks like I left off the /sarc

      20

    • #
      Phillip Bratby

      The seasonal temperature change in the North Sea water off the coast of East Anglia is well over 10C. I estimate that to counter a 0.05C average temperature rise, the fish will have to move at least 1km further north.

      50

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Drew Creighton says climate change effects all levels of life;
    So what about the rest of the animal kingdom? And what about the ‘non-commercial fish’? Why wouldn’t they also be shrinking? Some bloody big sharks out there at the moment!
    Without reading Prof. John Bandolfi’s study the conclusion based on skimpy evidence appears to be drawing a rather long bow!
    Just another alarmist ‘red herring’ if you ask me.
    GeoffW

    81

    • #
      Mike

      We need to differentiate between fish that are not subject to the current debt based economic climate and those sovereign fish that are not, the “non-commercial” fish aforementioned. if only we had more ‘economic climate scientists’:(

      If we look at farmed salmon, they are definitely getting bigger and being ‘commercial fish’ are subject to economic climate change.

      From the article: “PCBs – Is Farmed Salmon safe to eat? ”
      “Farmed salmon are “fatter”: Farmed salmon are generally bigger in size and contain more fat than wild salmon. ”
      http://www.healthcastle.com/farmed-salmon.shtml

      30

      • #
        Mike

        Typo correction:

        We need to differentiate between fish that *are (they are indeed) subject to the current debt based economic climate and those sovereign fish that are not,

        21

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        I understand that the local seals are doing pretty well too.
        Cheers,
        D

        20

  • #
    Reed Coray

    The myriad studies being performed by the academic elite definitely prove one thing: Climate change is shrinking the intelligence of our diplomaed professors.

    171

  • #
    RoHa

    If fish don’t live in the sky, why does it sometimes rain fish?

    51

  • #
    ROM
    Professor John Pandolfi of the ARC Centre of Excellence Coral Reef Studies said while the study encompassed all ecosystems, his particular interest was the sea.

    “ARC Centre of Excellence Coral Reef Studies”. / “his particular interest was the sea”

    Perhaps I have missed some vital and subtle clue to some sort of connection between a coral reef research organisation and the sea there somewhere !
    —————
    I assume the most modern means available such as an aerial survey was used for this fish size survey which no doubt like the 85% or what ever of the Great Barrier Reef dying and dead claims from the same ARC outfit a few months ago was done by a comprehensive aerial survey. [ ???? }

    50

  • #
    tom0mason

    Hey Prof
    CORRELATION DOES *NOT* EQUAL CAUSATION!

    So we humans go afishing with great big nets and pull up just about everything down there. Or at least that is what used to happen until the EU noted that their waters were becoming seriously over-fished. Fish stocks had crashed by the 1980s.
    Now in recent times (last 20 years or so) the European regulations have been passed about net structure and sizes allowable in EU waters, and the EU enforcement of these regulations has become better. Smaller net volumes and larger holes in them.
    The outcome of which is that BIG FISH get caught not small fish. Thus big fish are now fewer than they once were in EU waters. We are effectively putting an evolutionary pressure on large fish species to down-size in order to survive in this locality.
    Therefore over time the fish found in these waters tend towards the smaller examples of any species.
    I contend that humans are altering the fish size not the climate!

    110

    • #
      sophocles

      …and the smaller Commercial Fish need to lodge their climate change EFFA’s (Extra Food Funding Applications) with Tom Steyer ASAP.
      Then they might grow bigger.
      :-)

      50

    • #
      Analitik

      I read something similar about WA rock lobsters due to the minimum size limits – smaller lobsters would be more likely to released for more breeding seasons creating a selection pressure.

      40

    • #
      Clyde Spencer

      I had previously read a study that claimed that even sport fishing regulations, which established a minimum size to keep a fish, was putting evolutionary pressure on the fish population to ‘down-size’ to survive. As I recollect, the recommendation was to limit the number of fish caught without regard to size, and to require all fish caught to kept and not released in the hopes of catching a bigger fish.

      As I recollect, the custom of only keeping big fish arose out of the hope that the smaller fish would be given an opportunity to grow larger and therefore the practice would ensure larger fish. The best of intentions often go astray! It is called unintended consequences!

      20

  • #
  • #
    StefanL

    Jo, significant typo:

    ” two to five hundred[th]s of a degree per year.

    40

  • #
    Yonniestone

    “The miracle is that life on Earth survived” This jolted a recall back to Dec 2015 and Jo’s article Life adapts-fish evolve form salt to fresh waster in just fifty years.

    Adapting from salt to fresh water is a measurable evolutionary feat for fish, a water temperature change of 0.2°C is experienced daily by swimming through sunlight sections of water, swimming through a cloud of whale pee would be more of a shock.

    50

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Yonniestone:

      Whale pee causes global warming? Those “scientific” japanese whaling ships are just trying to save the Earth.

      40

    • #
      TdeF

      Yes and the conclusions is that lifeforms have seen it all before. While smart modern humans have existed only for 100,000 years and only 70,000 to 50,000 years out of Africa, the basic model has been around for millions. How many ice ages is that? Before the air conditioner, the solar panels and the Big Mac.

      So we can survive the alleged 0.8C change in an average, less than we face every hour or even changing rooms in a house. For these fish though, the rapid change means that the genetic memory is stored and adaption is extremely rapid as the genes have seen it all before. Fish do not remember their grandparents or further back but their old genes are selected as the environment demands. To the Greens, any interaction between the environment and human selection is abhorrent. Evolution must be stopped!

      I would have thought they could do what animals and fish do, move a few km if they found where they lived was slightly too hot for survival. Still what with changing house prices and public transport, it is hard to move out of the inner city and too far from good coffee.

      110

      • #
        Yonniestone

        The long term catastrophic small change theory just doesn’t add up otherwise from known proven past climate variances nothing would exist now.

        60

        • #
          TdeF

          99% of species which have ever existed have been wiped out. I didn’t do it. Speaking on behalf of my fellow coal burning humans.

          71

  • #

    I’m working on a way to have interglacials without any changes to ocean. There must be some sort of tax or regulation that will stop the rot.

    It’s such a pity that old seaports like Ostia, Ephesus, Deal, Claudian Invasion landing etc now lie so far inland (thanks, stupid global cooling or whatever!) and that one can no longer play Test cricket on Dogger Bank like some eight thousand years ago (thanks, stupid global warming or whatever…and don’t get me started on Bass Strait!)

    It might take many more jet trails to many more COP conferences, but we will eventually find a way to keep everything exactly the same: currents, temps, sea levels, species. Everything will be the way it was, just like when…well, just like whenever!

    110

  • #
    TdeF

    “if the oceans warm 0.2 degrees Celsius (plus or minus 0.5C) “commercial” fish can’t adapt.”

    Atlantic Herring live about 12 years. Cod perhaps 25years. Atlantic Salmon maybe 6 years. The point is that the shorter the lifespan, the more they adapt by selection and the period in question of 55 years means 10 plus generations of salmon. For any given generation the change in temperature would be 0.02 degrees. Besides, these are cold blooded creatures.

    Even then they can regulate their temperatures by swimming at a very slightly different depth, something which is done between feeding and digestion anyway, achieving differences of up to 20 C. They also surf the currents and can choose the temperatures they follow, not having to worry about storms and getting wet.

    So they are being wiped out by 0.2C in an average? Silly idea.

    111

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      TdeF, I bow to your superior knowledge and am sure that you are correct. This being the case it indicates a degree of scientific ineptitude in the ARC Centre of Excellence that surpasses sheer ignorance and indicates the fact that “proving” the mob-held theory of global warming surpasses all reason. When this bubble bursts and funding for such travesties dries up the tears will surpass even those of the current Democrat snowflakes.

      80

    • #
      tom0mason

      TdeF
      “So they are being wiped out by 0.2C in an average? Silly idea.” I wholeheartedly agree!

      Consider over that exact same time period (50 years or so) the EU has been turning the legislative screw on fishing quotas and net size regulation. The vast majority of (commercial edible) fish stay within these EU waters, moving (at most) between Iceland and Spanish waters, as food stocks and water temperature dictate. Other fish types head out to the likes Sargasso Sea to spawn and their progeny return to the EU waters.
      As these various EU regulation became better enforced, the larger fish of all species are culled more efficiently. Leaving the smaller versions of each species in the fish stocks in EU waters to breed. This I contend is the only reason that fish are smaller in EU waters because –
      1. Fishing fleets over the last 50 years have, with improved modern technology, become increasingly effective at finding and catching just the larger fish.

      2. That because of 1. humans are supplying a considerable evolutionary push on fish species, in this large but confined locality of EU waters, to down size to survive.

      20

  • #
    F. Ross

    “The study found climate change now affects most biological and ecological processes on earth.”

    Wasn’t this assertion part of On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin and quite some time ago? Nothing new here.

    91

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    The oceans becoming more acidic which is burning the flesh of the fish making them smaller .
    Where is my grant money ?

    90

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Forgot the sarc tag.

    40

  • #
  • #
    Dave

    Professor John Pandolfi of the ARC Centre of Excellence Coral Reef Studies
    WOW

    In 2012 he studied if Moreton Bay was suitable to grow the soon be extinct corals of the Barrier Reef!

    Due to Climate change of course. Heaps of $ here, imagine the GBR just minutes out of Brisbane!

    Well here is his 2012 Moreton Bay presentation!

    At 4:48 he says “It wasn’t until 400 years ago that … sorry it wasn’t until a couple of hundred years ago….etc” The graph looks like 400 years plus! The bloke is a parasite on the gravy train of global warming dollar wallet!

    91

  • #
    ROM

    Off topic ;

    Pierre Gosselins NoTricksZone blog has another American election related post and the contents are pretty devastating to the even more arrogant than the USA elites, the European elites.

    A few German newsfolk have a very big message for the European elites; Your turn is coming to be chopped to pieces by the citizenry just like has occurred in the USA and with Brexit and with Switzerland’s refusal to allow any more carpet bagging North African “refugees” into Switzerland.

    Critics Call German Elitist Reaction To Trump Victory: “A High Altitude Flight By Arrogance And Disdain”

    Finally, chief editor Markus Somm at the Swiss Basler Zeitung writes how the elitists have in fact become “trapped by the ideology of privilege” and that anyone who views things differently, or suffers under the elitits, is “berated or ignored“. In talk shows guests who maintain other views are almost excluded. And when they are invited, they are hugely outnumbered so that a pile-on results.

    Somm calls the result of the election “shock therapy” for the elitists, and he issues a dire warning for Europe:

    What happened in the USA, where a totally non-tested outsider succeeded in capturing the highest office, this is only the beginning.
    Many countries in the West will soon experience something similar.
    A revolutionary mood has taken over. […] It is hardly a coincidence. Switzerland, Great Britain, Netherlands, the USA: these are countries that are among the oldest democracies of the West.
    The more mature and established the democratic traditions are, the more the people’s resistance comes to surface, and thus the more the elitists tremble.”

    Plus of course, the Canadians walking away in the last few hours from a free trade agreement that has been 8 years in the making with the EU due to one or two small states in Belgium, i.e.; Wallonia refusing to accept the agreement.

    100

    • #
      wert

      Gosselin hits the nail on its head.

      European MSM didn’t even try to hide its open hate on republicans in general and Trump in special. It was pretty much like hate speech. Not that you could not say your position, the problem was the unitary view that Trump is bad, evil, stupid looser. Why is that? What makes a majority of journalists to take sides so strongly? What is wrong seeing good things in Trump and bad things in Clinton?

      Since when did our journalists be educated in left wing schools?

      Because this is a fact, our journalists are far more left than the rest of the people. They imagine themselves as a candle in a dark room, as a propagandist trying to hide inconvenient truth would be more accurate.

      Gore was so good in his inconvenient truth, it is just that it was upside down.

      20

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Seems like modern “science” needs to get back to basics so that BSc graduates actually know what measurement entails.

    At the moment, for me at least, measurement, as performed by modern scientists, invokes images of scientists opening up the belly of a sacrificial goat and assessing the entrails for corroboration of their thesis.

    Politically correct science doesn’t have any real future long term.

    Back to reality.

    Please.

    50

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Studying the entrails of the politically correct would be null as they are proven to have the guts of Easter eggs.

      51

  • #
    Mark M

    Goldfish three-second memory myth busted

    Studies of Australian native species prove fish are intelligent creatures that know how to avoid predators and catch food like any other animal.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-02-19/goldfish-three-second-memory-myth-busted/1046710
    . . .
    The 97% stupid. It hurts.

    51

    • #
      TdeF

      Good experimental science. However memory is selective. Can you remember what you watched on TV last night? Can you remember your PIN number? Memory has categories and it is possible that some things do not matter and that anything associated with food is important. As for looking out the train window, fish would not care much.

      30

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Now that’s science.

      20

  • #
    toorightmate

    If the big ‘uns ain’t biting for Pandolfi, he should change his bait.
    Where do they breed these punks who pose as professors?

    40

    • #
      TdeF

      Climate Change is the gift that keeps giving to people seeking funding. Currently running at $1,000Bn a year, Climate Change is the greatest benefactor for professors who support it. Polar bears, fish, coral polyps. These are the creatures which matter. Not humans.

      51

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Oh, he’ll probably get a good run at that academic site called “The Conversation”. Intellectual sponges and parasites.Practitioners of the mystic arts and such. Perversity .

      30

  • #
    RAH

    I smell something fishy here. But then again that could just be the smell of the whole rotting CAGW scam. You wanna see larger fish? Then don’t over fish.

    40

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    OT but just read some guy in America mortgaged his farm and put one million on Trump to win the presidency just after Donald announced he was going to run .
    The odds at that stage were over 300 to 1 and now he is very happy .

    70

  • #
    Steve

    I don’t know why you are being so hard on the poor professor. He just made a single mistake, the sort any dull-witted undergraduate could make. He mistook correlation for causation. I call it a Coxian blunder.

    50

  • #
    Leo Morgan

    Here’s why I’m sceptical about this:
    In limited cases, warm water has little deleterious effect and may even lead to improved function of the receiving aquatic ecosystem. This phenomenon is seen especially in seasonal waters and is known as thermal enrichment. An extreme case is derived from the aggregational habits of the manatee, which often uses power plant discharge sites during winter. Projections suggest that manatee populations would decline upon the removal of these discharges.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_pollution
    This is the guy’s job. The article I linked to contains stuff new to me. I’d heard of the positive effects, including on plants, cyanobacteria, borers, worms and some fish. maybe the guy’s right. But I’m sceptical.

    20

    • #
      RAH

      What they say about the Manatee is true. Before I became a truck driver I was VP and GM of a small company that provided specialized products and services and coal fired electrical power stations were one of the segments that were in our customer base. Units 1 and 2 at the Crystal River, FL generating complex was one of our prime customers. The larger of the two Combustion Engineering units supplied all the power for Disney World. For a number of years we spent weeks there during their shutdowns installing abrasion resistant ceramic in the coal mill exhausters, fuel piping, and bottom ash systems. Those units, unlike the majority in the country, use salt water which was condensed into fresh water acceptable for the system and the cooled but still warmer than ambient effluent is returned to sea. At the outlet the manatees and other marine life including certain fishes would gather during the colder spells. Fishing there was illegal. BTW the complex kept a fish hatchery on site. Huge cages at the sea water inlets captured the sea life sucked in. The cages would be changed out regularly and the numbers and species of marine life identified and counted. The power company was responsible for replacing what was captured in the cages from their hatchery.

      30

  • #
  • #
  • #
    Ruairi

    That fish in the North Sea would fail,
    To grow as they should grow, to scale,
    Due to temperature rise,
    Is what warmists surmise,
    But to skeptics, a right fishy tale.

    20

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Fish don’t live in the sky

    Yest they do. What about flying fish? ;-)

    How much warming does it take to shrink fish?

    I always thought things expanded and got larger when they got warmer. How do fish get to be an exception? ;-)

    And how much more of this silly science do we have to endure? Surely they will tire of it someday. I hope I can live long enough to see that day but the prospects are looking very dim at the moment.

    30

  • #
    clipe

    From the Warmlist

    fish bigger, fish catches drop, fish downsize, fish deaf, fish feminised, fish get lost, fish head north, fish lopsided, fish shrinking, fish stocks at risk, fish stocks decline.

    30

  • #

    JO or someone here who has read this paper that they have commented on; do you have a link to the paper? thanks

    10

  • #

    found it… seems to be this one

    The broad footprint of climate change from genes to biomes to people DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf7671

    with this abstract

    Most ecological processes now show responses to anthropogenic climate change. In terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, species are changing genetically, physiologically, morphologically, and phenologically and are shifting their distributions, which affects food webs and results in new interactions. Disruptions scale from the gene to the ecosystem and have documented consequences for people, including unpredictable fisheries and crop yields, loss of genetic diversity in wild crop varieties, and increasing impacts of pests and diseases. In addition to the more easily observed changes, such as shifts in flowering phenology, we argue that many hidden dynamics, such as genetic changes, are also taking place. Understanding shifts in ecological processes can guide human adaptation strategies. In addition to reducing greenhouse gases, climate action and policy must therefore focus equally on strategies that safeguard biodiversity and ecosystems.

    it is also similar in theme to this one

    Ecological and methodological drivers of species’ distribution and phenology responses to climate change.

    Brown, CJ, O’Connor, MI, Poloczanska, ES, Schoeman, DS, Buckley, LB, Burrows, MT, Duarte, CM, Halpern, BS, Pandolfi, JM, Parmesan, C and Richardson, AJ (2016). Ecological and methodological drivers of species’ distribution and phenology responses to climate change. Global Change Biology 22(4): 1548-1560.

    20

  • #

    Basically it is a meta-analysis that I can’t imagine any newsgrab ever being able to report with any level of accuracy. It has hundreds of angles and the fish bit that was pulled out is not what the paper is about at all – it is sort of about the title

    The broad footprint of climate change from genes to biomes to people

    I suspect that since Pandolfi is a fisheries physiologist/ecologist, this is the thing he used to prime his press release and the reporter. It is the exemplar he felt he could talk to. Other authors are variously terrestrial (insects, vertebrates etc), aquatic, systems, stats, modellers

    20

    • #
      Raven

      I suspect that since Pandolfi is a fisheries physiologist/ecologist, this is the thing he used to prime his press release and the reporter.

      Sounds reasonable.

      Give a man a fishing rod and he’ll fish for life.
      Give a fisheries physiologist/ecologist a gig at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and he’ll fish for grants in the public purse.

      20

  • #

    Well that’s alright then. It must be a pretty hot fisheries model to separate the the multifactorial uncontrolled nightmare of predator-prey changes and temperature shifts too-small-to-measure, spread over decades in an ocean where hot and cold water swirls in eddies right next to each other.

    Sort of read like you don’t know how it was done and are therefore dismissing it in disbelief. Nah, no serious science commenter would do that. I know you’ve probably read this already

    C. Bellard, C. Bertelsmeier, P. Leadley, W. Thuiller,
    F. Courchamp, Impacts of climate change on the future
    of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 15, 365–377 (2012).
    pmid: 22257223

    11

  • #
    Reed Coray

    I don’t know who supplied the funding for this study, but isn’t it time for crimate change to start shrinking government supplied grant money? Go Trump!

    (yes, the misspelling was deliberate)

    30

  • #
    Philip Mulholland

    Fish don’t live in the sky. – Except in “A Christmas Carol” the 2010 Doctor Who Christmas special. ;-)

    10

  • #
    Tony Brookes

    With most living creatures time is a factor of size. The older the larger. How is it that this question wasn’t answered ?

    10

  • #

    Hate to state the obvious, but the denizens of the deep ocean thermal vent ecosystems actually could care less about [air or water]“temperature, clouds, frost, ice, storms or rain.”

    Other than that – spot on

    20

  • #
    peter

    Jo,
    Your graph is pretty well showing that there has been 3/5 of 5/8 of SFA water temp. rise since 2003 (Argo). So did you see the report on ABC TV this morning that loss of Kelp forests in Australian waters has been due to a 0.6oC rise in water temp. all around Australia over the last 10 years. What? Really? How does this fit in with the global water temps we know about?

    When asked by Joe O’Brien what could be done to stop this loss of Kelp forest, the lady scientist answered (of course) that we had to greatly reduce CO2 emissions (no scientific connection between the two given).

    What is going on here?

    10