I am sorry that are incapable of grasping these facts. When you say 'Sargassum has changed', you are incorrect, and that is directly refuted in the article. What has changed is the flow of nutrients to the Sargassum, and pointedly, not the temperature of the ocean. That is what is relevant to climate change. Whether you like or not, whether you realize it or not, those are the facts.

The article proves that AGW is not happening, and the scientists reporting the circumstances surrounding the massive blooms have looked at why this has happened. Amongst the things they found are that AGW is not happening. The statement of Hu is that 'This is ultimately related to climate change.'

You have managed to contradict Hu, and claim it is I failing to comprehend.

If you read the article carefully and compare my statements about it to the actual statements in the article, your claim I have not understood will become clearly false, and you will gain understanding, if you are capable of it. While I wish you could, and would, do so, what I wish doesn't matter, because you will do you. That's not on my shoulders, and you might reflect on that as you consider your insults. If you care whether what you say is the truth, you will.