Conclusion

The salinity data we collected in both locations was inconsistent with our hypothesis, as they were inverses! (see data table in previous post). Our research had suggested that with higher tide should have come a higher salinity. We were unable to find a cause for this and suspect it may been a measurement error.
The temperatures in both locations did not vary greatly with the different tides. The measurement at the Spiritual Centre's high tide was slightly lower, but the overall increase in temperature from high tide to low tide was the same at both locations (0.4 degrees) A possible cause for the slightly warmer temperature at the Spiritual Centre location could have been the energy from the marina water treatment which may have been a source of heat.
There was no great variation in the number and size of barnacles with the different heights. Using what we have learned so far in marine science, we predicted that with decrease in height (getting closer to the shoreline) the number and size of barnacles would increase. This prediction was based on the fact that barnacles increase in size and frequency in the intertidal zone as we get closer to the shore because the phytoplankton feed is greater closer to the water which barnacles need to filter feed, along with oxygen and moisture. The different rock surfaces at the two locations did indeed affect the number and size of barnacles. In the area behind the swimming pool, the rocks were darker (black rather than grey), the edges were sharper, and the whole surface was on a sharper vertical than the area by the Spiritual Centre. Barnacles in the area behind the swimming pool were not only much more frequent and much larger, but were more consistently spread, whereas the barnacles by the Spiritual Centre were concentrated in denser colonies and were inconsistently spread. We suspect this size and number variation had to do with adherence and not with a difference in the species of acorn barnacle, though variations of within the acorn barnacle species do exist.

Evaluation and conclusion of salinity

According to Wikipedia, the salinity around Vancouver Island should be between 3.1% to 3.2% in average. However, since we are in the Pedder Bay, where rivers and streams may flow into the ocean and there is also intermingling between the seawater and fresh underground water, the salinity of seawater in the bay should be a little bit lower than that.

We collected the data as 3.00%, 2.51%, 2.43%, 3.03%, which meet our expectations.

However, our expectation for the change of the salinity is that the high tide salinities should be lower than the low tide ones. This is because when there the tide is high, more fresh water should flow into the ocean, so the salinity should be reduced.

The data in the maintenance centre meet our expectation: the low tide salinity was 3.03% and the high tide one was 2.43%; however, in the spiritual centre spot, we got the opposite result.

I think this might be the mistake in labelling them when we measured them.

Or, if we actually had the correct data...

The reason might be because of the streams flowing into different locations varies in different time of the day coincidently, or the organisms might also influence the salinity into the direction unexpected.

The graph of Yuri and Ghazi's data.

They measured the number of barnacles at different heights according to different locations of transects.

The data were list before. The graph is drawn according to the data, the y-axis is the number of the barnacles and x-axis is the number of transects below the starting point( the marked rock)