Comments for Ocean expected to rise 5 feet along coastlines »
Posted By altnrg 9 months, 1 week ago in Science & TechnologyDriven by global warming, the ocean is expected to rise nearly 5 feet along California's coastline by the end of the century, hitting San Francisco Bay the hardest of all, according to a state study released Wednesday.
Read Full Story at sfgate.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 125
-
67%
myfairlady9 months, 1 week ago
-
70%
Ciera-Marie9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Would you tell this to the citizens of Tuvalu? They've been begging the UN to help them Their country is sinking so badly they've been pleading for years to the Australian government to accept all of their citizens. They're not the only country in the Paciific that is experiencing it.
Reply
Here is just of thounsands of links. Yet this is "fear based crap."
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,2444...-
18%
Wolfie20079 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
C/M
Reply
Here's an advertisement for tourism on Tuvalu Island. If it's sinking so quickly then why advertise for tourists?
Btw, islands created from atolls all have the problem of the ocean's force continually battering the atolls over time it breaks down and undermines the coral structures and sometime they get wiped out when the coral is so weakened it can no longer hold back the sea. This has nothing to do with global warming and more to do with Tuvalu getting dollars and attention from the UN.
http://www.tuvaluislands.com/-
93%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If it is sinking, why advertise for tourists?
Reply
Why shouldn't they be trying to keep their tourism industry as long as they can?
Your tourist brochure is not much of an argument against a science study,
Wolf.
I guess it is kinda something.
Well, sorta in a way.
Kinda.
-
-
-
88%
engineer9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't know about you, but if you go to any un biased website which has been tracking the average temperature of the earth, it has been increasing at an much faster rate than later on. Nobel scientists say there is global warming caused by man. Get with the program. I have no idea what your iobject is in denial. The reason I didn't put down links is because even sites like NOAA you would say were left wing
Reply-
100%
engineer9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This story was today from the a Conference of Scientists (worldwide in Copenhagen)
Reply
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/03/13/world-fa...-
93%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Again you come to us with your scientists , engineer!
Reply
As if we did not already know that the vast majority of scientists have
stated that man-made global climate change is occuring.
The mere accumulation of vast expert agreement coupled with exhaustive
field tests and refined testing from diferent branches of science,
is insuficient .
Do you think that can rival someone saying 'Al Gore is a fat alarmist' ?
It is not enough to have proof, engineer;
you must also proove that you have proof.
And then you must proove that .-
-
100%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The definition of God will include all superlatives that involve the quality of goodness.
Reply
God is, by definition, Strongest, Kindest, Smartest, etc.
'To Exist' is a quality of goodness, in that it is good to exist and bad to not exist.
Therefore Existence is a required part of the definition of God.
Ergo: God exists. -
-
-
-
-
-
90%
UnusualSuspect9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This topic is going to be one of the things people in 200 - 300 years will be looking back at us and wondering why in the hell were we so stupid to not do anything when we had the chance...
Reply
I'm sure if NASA discovered a meteor 100 miles long was flying its way towards earth, and it was projected that it would hit in the middle of the US (red state area, by the way), the same people who are laughing now would be the first to say "DO SOMETHING, YOU FU**ING GOVERNMENT". You know they would..."SAVE US, SAVE US" would be their mantra...and they'd be the first to complain when they found out nothing could be done...
It's always easier to put it off on the next generation...let them deal with it...right?-
fiftynineComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
29%
Pecossam9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
altnrg,
Reply
Natural, geological warming, as the Earth has undergone throughout its history. NOT MAN MADE. Either get a rocket ship and transport yourself to another planet, or prepare for it as best you can. When 12DEC2012, the Planet Nibiru, and The ANNUNAKI arrive, global warming will be the LEAST of Mankind's worries.
You're the victim of an "INCONVIENIENT, SCREWED-UP AL GORE".-
70%
Goppy9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Pecossam ... I appreciate your eagerness to discount any impact of 6.6 BILLION humans - extracting contents of the earth and burning it into the atmosphere!
Reply
In fact, I TOTALLY approve of ALL my fellow Christian Conservative's nay-saying comments on Global Warming!
In fact, if these Hardline Hard-Asses had embraced the science of Climate Change - I would have seen it as an "End Times" harbinger.
I mean - Conservative Minded People in America have chosen the WRONG side of every important issue of the past 50 years!
Personally, I think that's why they exude such bitterness - as when Pecossam heaping ridicule on Al Gore ... and 4thchance ridiculing Scientists ... and the science ... surrounding Climate Change.
I think I would be a totally embittered fellow, should I be wrong on EVERY issue related to change in my entire lifetime.
Of course, it may SEEM like a good thing to 'dig in one's heels' and pretend that everyone ELSE is the nut-case - - - but of course - - - that only works if the nuts are in the MINORITY ... --- ... like the minority that continue to claim George W. Bush was a 'Good' President.
No ... Hardline, Christian Conservative, Modern Republicans have been on the WRONG side of EVERY pivotal issue for a long ..... looooong time.
People who are now Modern Conservatives ALSO thought these issues were wrong ... stupid ... and fruity ...
- Civil Rights
- Voting Rights
- Equal Rights for Women
- That Women Should be Allowed to Wear Pants
- Women Working out of the Home
- Peace in Vietnam
- Environmentalism
- Recycling
- Women's Reproductive Rights
... and more recently ...
- Trimming our Defense Budget
- Peace in Iraq
- Equal Rights for Homosexuals
See ... it's just in the Conservative's DNA to oppose ANY change.
It's like ... the person who says ... in 1865 ... "We've had slaves in this nation for 150 years ... them thar Libbies up north just want to muck things up for us with their 'elitist' edjamacation." ...
...
Is the same person who says ... in 2005 ... "We've been burning fossil fuels for 150 years ... them Libbies up north just want to muck things up for us with their 'elitist' so-called junk skience and edjamacation."
See?
This has been repeated since our nation was founded - and it's going to be repeated for a THOUSAND times as we move forward through each succeeding generation.
The Hardine Right will continue to fullfill their role as an ANCHOR to progress - and the Progressives will continue to push progress along.
As a Centrist - it's great fun to watch.
• • • • • • • • • •
Nevertheless ... I STILL ♥ my fellow Christian Conservatives!
☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺-
-
25%
4thchance9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Look, even Al Gore has changed his terminology to describe Global Warming, he's now calling it CLIMATE CHANGE, Climate Change doesn't really describe Global warming as well as (Global Warming) describes "Global Warming." EVEN the GREAT Al Gore Knows his days are numbered for using the term Global warming. That's why he pulled this fast one and changed his terminology for it, to "Climate Change". Ya see, the words Global Warming hits the nail right on the head for what Al claims is/was going on. Global warming means just that, GLOBAL WARMING, there's no better way to describe (Global warming) then using the words (Global warming) So tell us then, why did Al Gore stop using the best term to describe (Global warming) if he still believes we are in a (Global warming) trend. Even Al knows the climate is returning to a cooling trend, that's why he stopped using the term GLOBAL WARMING. I rest my case.
Reply-
-
79%
bluetexasvalley9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gore -- and many others -- stopped using the term "global warming" because of people like you who can't be bothered to read up on the subject so as to understand its many manisfestations.
Reply
If you were truly educated on the subject, you'd understand that the temporary cooling, and even the blizzards, are part of the general warming trend. Try reading about how the cold water from the glacier melts affect the ocean water and the gulfstream that ordinarily warms the continents.
You seem to delight in being the posterboy for "Ignorance is bliss".-
14%
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You do remember that part of the U.S was covered in ice many many years ago? Global Warming must have melted that ice as well. I have researched this subject and scientists cannot prove or disprove that global warming exists. Just the other day there was a scientist from Australia saying that "climate change" is what causes different weather patterns not people. And there was a scientist from the U.K saying that our carbon emissions are contributing to the weather. Who knows? NOONE.
Reply-
-
-
89%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nahh, I look on both sides of an argument.
Reply
For example, I am pro-nuclear technology.
I prefer to keep the death penalty.
I often disagree with my fellow liberals.
But it takes a lot of personal research to disagree with the majority of
experts in a scientific field. .
Publish your research!
It would be worth a Nobel.
And if you put it on Propeller we could all get famous!-
-
89%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh I get that.
Reply
They could all be wrong.
But since they are experts and they are the majority , and they have had time to observe and test, - they could not easily be wrong.
If someone publishes a valid reason to suspect they are wrong, - then I
intend to write a very firm letter to the IPCC.
But so far, all we have is that:
Al Gore is fat;
Micheal Moore is fat;
Venice has always been sinking;
ice in a glass melts without raising the water level;
and the clincher: if it were true then liberals would take advantage of it .
That refutation needs more peer review, in my opinion.-
40%
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They maybe the majority that believes global warming exists, but there is another majority of experts that don't believe global warming exists or is caused by humans. For example Dr. Theodor Landscheidt.
Reply
I never said anything about Moore or Gore. I don't like them, but not because of those reasons. They say one thing but do another and were supposed to follow? You know Gore's carbon footprint? Or how about that Moore is a member of the NRA only to exploit Heston in Bowling for Columbine.-
-
Neutral
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are those who can believe their theory is true and can back it up with the evidence they found. And then there are those that can prove that it doesn't exist and back it up with the evidence they've found. So, yes, there can be two majorities whether you like it or not. Global warming is ********, and used to scare you. Just wait till our energy costs go up this year, thanks Obama.
Reply-
0%
CRYMTYPHON9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Whether my energy costs go up or not, is irrelevant to whether a particular science
Reply
theory is true or false.
Whether Obama is president or not, has nothing to do with modeling the capture of
heat by atmospheric gasses.
Most importantly, given any 1 question, there can be only 1 majority view of that
question.
You are making reality up as you go along; but that is not science.
Heck, that isn't even sanity.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
43%
slate9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Much larger profit stream if you call it Climate Change, then every thing is covered, whether, it's weather, or the temps rise or fall.
Reply
Hey Al how about me buying some of those carbon credits that don't remove anything from the air? For the planet's sake.
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Pecossam9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Goppy,
Reply
Sorry, but I an not a Member of the Republican Party, in fact I'm registered as an Independent. I am CONSERVATIVE and proudly so. In so far as "Conservative Minded People being on the wrong side of the things you enumerated, need I remind you that it was that GRAND KEAGLE
As far as global warming goes, when you and the other GORITES have learned how to control volcanoes, the heat fluctuation of the Earth's Core, and the SUN (for even Mars and other planets are WARMING, ask NASA), PLEASE let us know. Until then the lilliputian efforts of you and others of a like mind to effect Earth's climate one way or the other can only be ascribed to a strange mixture of IGNORANCE, ARROGANCE, and a BIG DASH of GULLIBILITY.
As for you being a "Christian Conservative", PLEASE stop your act, for you are not what you purport to be, it is getting boring, and at best you're a provocateur. -
-
-
-
39%
4thchance9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NEWS FLASH
Reply
global warming, there is NO global warming, not any more.
We're now entering back into a global cooling trend. The entire world over the last 2 years are reporting some of the longest and coldest winter weather they have had in decades. You people are very confused to say we are still in a global warming trend. Just step outside, most all of American is having a very long and exceptionally cold winter. Last year too. The polar icecaps are returning and growing back at record speed.
You just watch and see what the environmentalists will be saying in a few years from now, when they finally realize they can no longer hang onto their BS global warming crap.
Once we get well set into the global cooling trend that we are now entering, the environmentalists will turn around and start saying this...
GLOBAL "COOLING" is the direct result of MANS POLLUTION.
Wana bet me?-
prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned9 Replies
-
-
-
36%
buckncindykill9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We've also heard that wealthy nations owe poor nations no less than $85 billion a year to help poor people cope with global warming and those rising oceans.
Reply
The share to be paid by the taxpayers of the United States? That would be $40 billion a year ... for starters. We can certainly look for that figure to increase every single year, and any reluctance on the part of the United States to continually up the ante will be blasted as evidence that we just don't care about poor people.
Wait until the summer when it gets hotter (btw, it's supposed to). The rising ocean levels fever will really start to kick in.
Why? Obama is in office, that's why.-
79%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The action of CO2 in our atmosphere acting as a heat-trap for sunlight,
Reply
- does not care a rip about Barack Hussein Obama, Al Gore, Buckncindykill, or
even Crymtyphon.
Scientific facts are non-political.
The vast majority of climate scientists agree that global climate change due to the greenhouse gases produced by human beings - is true
.They offer peer-reviewed studies and field work observations,
a large work from many disciplines that correlate into a convincing consensus.
Science does not care about your politics.
If you decide the majority of scientists are wrong about something that has now been
reviewed and studied so completely,
- you must give us a better argument than 'Obama is in office, that's why'.-
100%
alakazam9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
At this point the only thing that will probably reverse it is a significant volcanic eruption...the damage is already done.
Reply
We could take steps to slow it down...we may also need the fuel to keep warm then.
Conserve against the day Yellowstone goes.
Acting foolishly may have more than one serious consequence.
:)
-
-
-
43%
4thchance9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yep, when they use the term "Climate Change" in place of "Global Warming"
Reply
then every time the CLIMATE CHANGES from a warming trend to a cooling trend and back again, then they will be 100% correct. Because the climate is always changing!
The funning things is, there are millions of people who are willing buy their BS!-
100%
Beau78909 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We live within a relatively narrow range of temperatures. And the causes of meteorological conditions are extremely complex--meteorologists at NOAA use supercomputers to predict weather patterns. A change in the climate of one area affects the climates of others, which in turn still affect others, in a continuous feedback loop.
Reply
Climate change is a more exact term than global warming to describe the effect of greenhouse gases on the environment--while some areas will heat, others will cool; while some will dry up, others will flood...and not in equal proportions.
Scientists expect more variation in temperatures within shorter time spans as a result of greenhouse gases, creating different environmental conditions than we're used to, which will make it harder for humans to survive here.
This is the effect you'll be able to see within our lifetime.
-
-
-
84%
Dionys9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"No factual evidence to support this claim whatsoever."
Reply
Except all the facts and thousands upon thousands of published scientific articles based in empiric fact as reviewed by peers.
"All the hype for nothing but a "consensus" among scientist."
Yeah. Because true science is when all the scientists are saying different things.-
14%
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ever heard of solar activity? Research that and see how that could effect the climate.
Reply
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
"The dominant causal factor, meant here, is the anthropogenic greenhouse effect. However, there is no convincing evidence that this is an outstanding factor that clearly dominates all other factors which could have an influence on climate. The results presented here indicate clearly that the sun’s varying activity is at least a non-negligible factor and probably the really dominant one."
"All these predictions have turned out to be untenable. It is accepted that global temperature has risen by 0.5° C in the last hundred years. Yet during the last fifty years the temperature has remained approximately at the same level, even though 70% of the anthropgenic carbon dioxide contribution was injected into the atmosphere during this time. From 1940 to 1970 the temperature fell, and according to satellitite data available since 1979, which are in good accord with balloon data [27], the trend in the lower troposphere has remained at -0.06° C per decade. The IPCC prediction made in 1992 proved so exaggerated that it had to be adjusted to reality three years later by reducing the rise range to 1° - 3.5° C by 2100. As to sea level rise, the IPCC meanwhile acknowledges (in accordance with a consensus in the specialized literature [3]) that sea level has risen by merely 18 cm in the last hundred years. According to M. Baltuck et al. [3] it is very probable that the rising sea level is due to natural causes and not to man’s contribution to the greenhouse effect."
-
-
-
-
24%
simonsez9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The claims of these idiots get more bizarre every day. Even the GW sheep are beginning to question their credibility.
Reply
The only source of new (additional) water is greenland and anartica. They would have to be melting at incredible rates and that is not happening nor is it going to happen.-
81%
Ciera-Marie9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You know I replied to your comments on the Antartica thread, with links to back myself up, about the rising sea levels. About Countires in the Pacific who have lost islands due to rising sea levels, Tuvaluvians who can't drink their fresh water because it's containmenated by salt water. I know you didn't bother to read the links because your reply was "what's my point?" My point then as now is really quite simple.
Reply
How can you ignore their pleas? How can you ignore what they are experience first hand and say the sea isn't rising?
-
-
79%
Ciera-Marie9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
City of Venice is also sinking. Tuvalu is sinking as I mentioned above. So is the island nation of Guam (US Terriority and we still have bases there. BTW I've met vets who are citizens of Guam.), Palau, American Samoa, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, to name a few.
Reply
BTW the Island nation of Kiribati formerly known as the Gilbert Islans, have seen first hand two of their islands sink due to rising sea levels. All 100,000 thousand of their citizens are sinking refuge elsewhere. They are witnessing rising sea levels frist hand. So no, it's not fear based. It's reality.-
29%
Wolfie20079 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
C/M
Reply
Venice has been sinking since it was constructed and to say it's because of global warming is disingenuous. Go check it out.
I did a search on Kiribati and never found anything about global warming but did find a lot of tourism advertisements.
-
-
24%
Wolfie20079 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The head globule warming/climate change scientist recently said that globule warming was real and made made but carbon offsets and cap and trade were just scams. Seems like globule warming without new taxes would just take all the fun out it for most politicians so I don't think they're going to pay any attention to this guy any longer.
Reply -
72%
pokydoke9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Where do you deniers of global warming get your information from? Every reliable source I check states that it is a very real problem and if we don't start cutting green house gases the situation will soon be irreversible. No one even knows what the full ramifications are but they are not good for us or other creatures. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/03/12/irrever...
Reply-
92%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The true political animal, does not 'get its information' from anyone or anywhere.
Reply
It confirms what it hears outside of itself, with what it knows ought to be true.
This is how creationism, reaganomics, the Bush Doctrine and the conservative view of Global Warming work.
(It is also how I do the crossword puzzle but that is slightly diferent because I occasionaly am right).-
88%
pokydoke9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CRYM,
Reply
Thanks but I already knew that. I was hoping that they might stop and think but I guess that's too much to ask. My Brother has his doctorate in environmental sciences and is neck deep in trying to get green house gas emissions reduced worldwide. He also spends some time in Africa working with farmers developing crops that survive in high temps and dryer conditions. Even if global warming is naturally occurring at this time we are only making it worse and happen faster and the effects lasting longer. To deny it is pure folly.
-
-
-
-
56%
PainGoddess9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why do you think the space admin. is trying to find us another place to live?
Reply
Our planet may be uninhabitable at least on the surface in a few hundred years.
Flooding may be the least of our problems once overcrowding and disease take over.
BTW in the 70's it was Planetary cooling that got our attention.
The planet has gone through many cycles of warming and cooling and extinctions.
This may be just one of those. And the gasses from us are helping it along faster. -
40%
Mr_Sir9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is interesting to note where the funding for this latest "study" came from: "Pacific Institute, a nonprofit research group in Oakland, and was paid for by the California Energy Commission, Caltrans and the state Ocean Protection Council." And guess where all that rising water will head to?? Why, California, of course! Do they really think the pacific ocean will "bulge up" at that one single point? When you put a cup of water into a full swimming pool, it does not leave a single bulge on the other side of the pool. Instead the entire pool level will rise... by a height too small to measure. All oceans are connected. 5 feet might not seem much, but when you spread an additional "5 foot layer" of water over the entire Pacific, Atlantic, Indian, Antartic and North Sea oceans, you're looking at a staggering amount of water beyond description. Beyond what Greenland could ever supply by the continual growth and retreat of it's ever changing ice layer. Here's a thought: If sea levels rise that high, then many areas globaly will have water creeping inland. This will dramatically increase the surface area on the oceans. More surface area means the seas are more susceptible to evaporation, threatening to lower sea levels world wide. This will cloud up the skies more, blocking warmth from the sun. More vapour in atmosphere and lower temperature will cause increased snowfall and more rapid glacier advancement. More snow and ice, lower temperatures, lowering oceans, advancing glaciers... all caused by ummm... "global warming". Lets see them dream up some doomsday announcements about that!
Reply-
-
33%
simonsez9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are absolutely right on Mr. Sir.
Reply
Very very few people seem capable of analyzing a statement to it's ultimate conclusion. There is not enough new (additional) water on the planet to raise the ocean level by such an amount, but they read it on the web, so it must be true.
The ONLY scenario that could cause water levels to move that high would be for more land to pop up decreasing the land mass of the oceans thereby raising the level to a new high.
As you say, more heat causes more cooling on the planet. -
83%
Beau78909 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Mr_Sir, when moisture evaporates and "clouds up" the atmosphere, creating cooling, that same moisture then condenses, creating rain or snow. What you're talking about will cause a global redistribution of precipitation to various places on the planet, not cooling or warming.
Reply
This will cause some areas to become wetter and others dryer than we're used to. Less consistency and increased climate change will create massive migrations of people and animals and new areas of Earth becoming uninhabitable.
-
-
-
-
-
33%
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's a study
Reply
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm -
jimdozeComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
-
-
82%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Michael Moore:
Reply
american filmmaker who first came to prominence with a humorous documentary
"Roger and Me", wherein he tries to chase down a CEO to ask him
basic questions about workers and the American car industry.
Notable also for the film "Farenheit 911" which criticized the Iraq war as unnessesary
and mocked its causes, including the lack of WMD;
a position most of the American people adopted as the war continued.
His more recent work "Sicko" looks at the health care plight of Americans who do have health insurance and why the system is broken for them also
He seems to be focused on all the problems that conservatives have told us to ignore,
Commadore.
Is there something you don't want us thinking about?
-
-
-
80%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And there you have it !
Reply
Those ivory tower egghead scientists never thought of ice in a glass!
Maybe because the ice they are talking about is above sea level ; for now.
And it is true! secret! historical fact that the people of venice build their houses higher every year since its founding in the 5th century. They say it takes weeks to go to
the basement of an ordinary house.
Of course, people say a lot of idiot stuff.-
20%
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are other factors of why Venice is sinking... the plates are shifting and the sediment in the soil is too soft from erosion causing buildings to sink into the ground.
Reply
http://www.mmdtkw.org/VVenice.html-
-
-
-
40%
krystaleahs9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I didn't reject any conclustion. Just because geologists, climatologists, and ocean scientists may agree, I don't have too. That's why I don't believe the hype of global warming. I believe there are other explainations. An example of why I used this link was to show that although the author said global warming could be the culprit of Venice, natural factors exist as well.
Reply-
80%
CRYMTYPHON9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's nice.
Reply
I am sure many other things are going wrong for venice too, since it never rains but
it pours except in Southern California.
Howsomeever, you do seem to be saying you don't reject the conclusion of climate scientists that the ocean levels are rising and will rise more because of global climate change, - you just don't believe the hype of the conclusion.
I am good with that.
I have way no more further questions your honor the witness will please stand down.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
canadianrancher579 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
All this talking about ice melting and oceans rising has got me thinking that maybe things are changing, but maybe they are changing back to normal. Lets say we go way back to when the earth was really warm and humid, wouldn't that mean that the oceans were at a very high level at that time since there likely wasn't a lot of ice caps around. Now a great big comet smacks into the earth and stirs up a lot of dust and just about everything else and blocks out the sun which causes cooling and since cool air holds less moisture than warm air we get snowfall which gives us the ice age, then the dust settles out and the world begins a long term warming trend. As the world warms the ice melts and the oceans start to rise, after a long enough period they flooded areas of the world, maybe the flood of the Bible. I am left with one question and that one question is when all the ice is gone and the earth continues to warm will water levels go down as more water ends up in the atmosphere because of the higher temperatures.
Reply
Just in case anyone wonders where all this nonsense is coming from I've had a really long hard day, but it could be something to think about.-
100%
alakazam9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Antarctica may have been free of Ice a lot more recently than we imagine.
Reply
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-533.jpg
-
-
33%
fjgalt9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's one report about the lack of rising sea levels. The Maldives were mentioned in Al Gore's scare film where he said they would disappear from rising sea levels. Only in computer models. Real-world data say the Maldives will be around for a long time. Places like Venice are when land sinks, not oceans rising.
Reply
I read where the temperature of Antarctica now, in its summer, is -40F. Since ice melts at 32F, it would take a rise in temperature of 72F for the ice to melt. Even the wildest fears of global warming proponents don't predict that.
XVI INQUA Congress
Paper No. 93-14
Presentation Time: 1:30 PM-4:30 PM
THE MALDIVES SEA LEVEL PROJECT. II: PAST-PRESENT-FUTURE
MÖRNER, Nils-Axel, Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm Univ, Stockholm S-10691 Sweden, morner@pog.su.se.
The Maldives have a uniquely position in sea level research (as discussed in Integrated Coastal Zone Management, No. 1, 2000, p. 17-20). In the last decade, they have attracted special attention because, in the IPCC-scenario, the Maldives would be condemned to become flooded in the next 50-100 years. Our research data do not lend support to any such flooding scenario, however. On the contrary, we find no signs of any on-going sea level rise. Our results comes from visits to numerous islands including extensive work on Hulhudoo and Guidhoo in the north, in Viligili and Loshfuchi (the site of “the reef woman”) in the middle, and in Addu in the south. This includes coring, levelling, sampling and dating (35 C14-dates). Present sea level was reached at about 4500 BP. In the last 4000 years, sea level oscillated around the present in the last 4000 years. At 3900 BP, there was a short and sharp sea level high-stand at about +1.2 m. For the last millennium, a detailed sea level record is established: +0 m 1000-800 BP, +60 cm 800-300 BP, 0 to just below 0 in the 18th century AD, +30 cm 1790-1970 AD, fall to 0 in ~1970 up to today. At about 1970, sea level fell by 20-30 cm (presumably due to increased evaporation). This is recorded in storm level, high-tide level, mean sea level and in lake and lagoon levels (from the north to the south). In the last decade, there are no signs of any rise in sea level. Hence, we are able to free the islands from the condemnation to become flooded in the 21st century.
Co-authored with the Maldives Project Team Members. -
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.