OT: Scientific American on sea level rise.

You mean behind those homes the owners used to be able to drive to?

Rick C.

Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit
Loading thread data ...

Prophesy? Why do you say 3mm per year? Evidence says acceleration.

Reply to
whit3rd

The acceleration is mainly in the transition from tide gage data to satellite data.

Here on the west coast, some studies report about +1.5 mm/year, some show a negative trend. I don't see any sign of acceleration. Sea level rose since the LIA, about 1850.

But it's rocky here, so subsidence is not a big contributor.

But panic and shudder if that makes you happy.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Both claims are false.

Volcanoes are hot pinpoints, not continental; the upwelling of heat from Earth's molten core is the same background level now as it was centuries ago, and occurs everywhere. Antarctic ice isn't melting because of that.

A thousand miles down, it's ALL hot. Twenty miles from the surface, there's enough convection to make a few spots hotter than others. But, not continent-sized spots.

The 'according to NASA' 2015 study is not in agreement with other studies, both before and since. I'm assuming you refer to this one

Note, it makes no prediction of future behavior.

Reply to
whit3rd

The fail-safe assumption would be 'now'. Go with that, you'll be prepared whenever it happens.

Reply to
whit3rd

change-trnd/index.html

CNN=FAKE NEWS. Surely everyone knows that by now?

It's not the least bit surprising that they've conflated climate change, europeans and mass murder. So in addition to spreading false, alarmist propaganda about "greenhouse gases" they've managed to tar europeans in with an absurd claim about ethnic cleansing. In case you hadn't noticed, there is an undeclared war going on against european culture and heritage right now. So 3 out of 3 to good ol' CNN!

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Cursitor Doom

Don't go pointing out the obvious here, John, you know how facts make people like Bill Sloman confused and angry.

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Cursitor Doom

That one under Yellowstone is rather more than a pinpoint! Funny how it hardly gets a mention, though. They can't blame middle class europeans for it!

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Cursitor Doom

Acceleration means long-past behavior is no guide. Rocks are heavy, subsidence IS going to be a problem.

If the 'beaches move a few blocks inland', the cliffs will move next, and then the Oakland bridge (closed while support piers are raised above waterline) will be offline when the Golden Gate is condemned.

You're prepared, I hope.

Reply to
whit3rd

Calderas there are circa 40 miles wide. On a half-meter diameter world globe, it covers about two mm, and I've got knitting needles that size.

Not a true pinpoint, but the volcanoes of Antarctica are not supervolcanoes, either. They're pinpoints on a map.

Reply to
whit3rd

Glacier do slide into the sea, and more snow does make them move faster. That isn't all that is going on, and the complications you seem to be unwilling to think about could make them move a lot faster than they are doing right now.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

People are worried about water damage to those 1000-year old houses.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Sadly for Cursitor Doom's conclusion, there is quite a lot we could do avoi d, or at least minimise, the predictable consequences of anthropogenic glob al warming.

The main one is to burn a lot less fossil carbon for fuel. The simplest wa y of doing that would be to use a whole lot less energy per head, which wou ld have dire economic consequences. The slightly more complicated solution is to get most of the energy we need from renewable sources - mainly wind a nd solar power. These are now as cheap per kilowatt hour as fossil-carbon f ueled energy sources, and another factor of ten expansion in their use will move them down to offering energy at half the cost of fossil-carbon fueled energy sources.

They are intermittent, so you have to put in energy storage systems - batte ries, pumped hydro-power, pumped compressed air - to cover the gaps.

It's all perfectly practical, but the people who are currently making a lot of money out of extracting fossil carbon and selling it for fuel don't wan t this to happen, and spend a lot of money (though nowhere as much as they make) on putting lying propaganda in the kind of news media that Cursitor D oom reads.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

The GG bridge deck is 270 feet above the water.

Sadly, I am prepared for yet more climate change nonsense and hysteria.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

That's what denialist propaganda tells Cursitor Doom to think, and he's a g ullible twit.

Not that Cursitor Doom has any idea what might be wrong it it.

The people who can think critically and investigate for themselves - Cursit or Doom isn't one of them - do find the evidence for anthropogenic global w arming decidedly persuasive - 97% of the world's top 300 climatologists com e to mind.

I can't indentify all ten of the unpersuaded, but the ones I can identify - about half of them - are disagreeign because they dislike the conclusion, rather than the science.

Curious claim. 9/11 happened because the US security authorities ignored th e evidence that ISIS was up to something. Cursitor Doom wants to ignore the evidence that anthropogenic global warming is going on and is going to get a whole lot worse if we don't deal with it, which makes him just one more complacent idiot.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

no

mminent destruction due to global warming do not advocate common sense solu tion to solving the problem. For instance, going all nuclear would be the biggest step forward to eliminate CO2 and yet...nothing. another thing tha t would drastically eliminate CO2 emissions would be to cut all immigration to 1st world countries to prevent more people from burning fossil fuels... .and yet again nothing from the left to discuss this remedy plan. I figure d out along time ago that every proposed solution only advances leftist ide ology, even though a rational person who only wanted to solve CO2 emissions would aggressively embrace ANYTHING that would stop CO2 emissions . Hence Global Warming = HOAX!

Sadly for your logic, anthropogenic global warming isn't a hoax. The same k ind of propaganda machine that discourages people from burning less fossil carbon also discourages them from burning more nuclear fuel.

The fossil carbon extraction industry isn't enthusiastic about any technolo gy that promises to cut their profits, but they spend money of encoruaging a different set of Luddites to minimise that threat to their income.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

te:

to

p

d no

a

imminent destruction due to global warming do not advocate common sense so lution to solving the problem. For instance, going all nuclear would be th e biggest step forward to eliminate CO2 and yet...nothing. another thing t hat would drastically eliminate CO2 emissions would be to cut all immigrati on to 1st world countries to prevent more people from burning fossil fuels. ...and yet again nothing from the left to discuss this remedy plan. I figu red out along time ago that every proposed solution only advances leftist i deology, even though a rational person who only wanted to solve CO2 emissio ns would aggressively embrace ANYTHING that would stop CO2 emissions . Hen ce Global Warming = HOAX!

kind of propaganda machine that discourages people from burning less fossi l carbon also discourages them from burning more nuclear fuel.

logy that promises to cut their profits, but they spend money of encoruagin g a different set of Luddites to minimise that threat to their income.

Those rides in the ambulance to the hospital are so unnecessary. Oil is the gift of God to mankind. without it there we would be lucky to be living a s richly as the Romans. Without fossil fuels there would no wringing of ou r hands about slavery because it would still exist.

Reply to
blocher

ncipient collapse of part of the West Antarctic ice sheet

ens, so it's not all that incipient, but there's about 3.3 metres of sea le vel rise involved.

the ice sheet, and why the relevant lump of ice is going to slide off prett y quickly when it does let go.

ller scale.

rotect coastal infrastructure. It's going to happen sooner than 100 years b ecause the ocean temperature is taking off exponentially. And the ice is no t melting from above, it's melting from below due to water which is floodin g the land under the ice, tending to float it.

And it costs a lot of money to make them higher (and wider in proportion - and they are lot wider than they are high).

The West Antarctic ice sheet is good for about 3.3 metres of sea level rise .

Greenland is good for another six metres or so.

The Dutch Delta plan was very expensive. Dealing with another ten metres of sea level rise will be a lot more expensive, but at least they know how to do it right. Katrina exposed the defects in New Orlean's sea defenses

formatting link

suggests that it is now losing ice mass. The kind of denialist web sites th at John Larkin relies on for his information don't update old reports if th e new data doesn't suit their story.

The mass loss talked about in the Scientific American article was more due to mechanical instability than general melting. Local melting in specific a reas changes the way the ice sheet as a whole moves.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

ote:

e:

he incipient collapse of part of the West Antarctic ice sheet

happens, so it's not all that incipient, but there's about 3.3 metres of se a level rise involved.

der the ice sheet, and why the relevant lump of ice is going to slide off p retty quickly when it does let go.

smaller scale.

to protect coastal infrastructure. It's going to happen sooner than 100 yea rs because the ocean temperature is taking off exponentially. And the ice i s not melting from above, it's melting from below due to water which is flo oding the land under the ice, tending to float it.

s revenge by taking out a few billion people. But land away from the coast s! All hail mother goddess of earth

e. It is recorded the stench of the huge mass of corpses could be smelled worldwide. And that was just millions. When you talk about billions, the sm ell will be overwhelming.

That isn't the way it work. Sea level rise kills people by providing a high er base from which storm surges can get further inland.

You might decide to go bed to try to sleep through a howling gale, and get drowned when a wind-driven storm surge rolls big waves over your house.

This kind of weather is forecasted, and people in threatened low-lying area s do tend to get enough warning to able able to move to higher ground.

John Larkin would probably dismiss that kind of advice as alarmist.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

As if the nuclear generator industry could build anything like that number of nuclear-powered generators.

There isn't a whole lot of it,and it wouldn't make much difference.

People flying places to go on holiday burn a whole lot more fossil carbon.

Most of it already is. Sadly, face-to-face contact is irreplacable.

Identifying which federal employees these might be is feat that every right-wing nitwit thinks that he could manage.

Or get them to cycle to school.

If there were fewer spelling mistakes in your output - we'll skip the logic errors - you'd have a better (if still negligible) chance of being taken seriously.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.