Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

No, I read what you posted and I read the rest of the sentence




And I read the original site.

Well, you would have read the paragraph snippet I C&P'd then. I don't think it could state the area is subject to subsidence any more clearly.

Anyway, tell your Florida friends to be happy and don't worry. Over this side of the big ball we enjoy our big tides



King of all Tides - April - Scribbly Gum - ABC Science Online

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Check the up arrows.


Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides and Currents

Wouldn't it be more accurate for me to head down to the dock six miles away and look at the water level as it is today and compare it to the level it was at thirty years ago. Which is exactly the same? Or, I can head over to Salem Harbor, Gloucester, Marblehead Harbor and see 300-400 year old ocean front houses at the same spot and same height above sea level as they were 400 years ago.

Or, do your cut and paste charts show the ocean levels differing from place to place?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Wouldn't it be more accurate for me to head down to the dock six miles away and look at the water level as it is today and compare it to the level it was at thirty years ago. Which is exactly the same?

Or, do your cut and paste charts show the ocean levels differing from place to place?

Did you bother to look?

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Did you bother to look?

Unlike you Jack, I live near the ocean, and yes... I've been down there hundreds of times and I can truthfully say.... yes, the houses are still there. I also grew up in Southern California within a mile of the coastline and frequently visit my hometown Huntington Beach. I spent hundreds of days at the beach. Same high tide line today as it was thirty years ago. There's been no change. The water is the same distance away from the cliffs as it was when I was ten years old... fifty years ago.

Newport Beach, CA... the pier is still there and the ocean is the same distance from the homes as it was fifty years ago.... Newport harbor... also the same as it was fifty years ago. No change :-(

Another inconvenient truth I guess?

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Check the up arrows.


Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides and Currents

Well, well, well. Not surprised to see this in the fine print of your link...

The mean sea level (MSL) trends measured by tide gauges that are presented on this web site are local relative MSL trends as opposed to the global sea level trend. Tide gauge measurements are made with respect to a local fixed reference level on land; therefore, if there is some long-term vertical land motion occurring at that location, the relative MSL trend measured there is a combination of the global sea level rate and the local vertical land motion.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Did you bother to look?

Newport Beach Pier photos, one taken 1940 and the other in 2015. Yep... the shoreline looks to be in roughly the same spot. Just like it was back in 1965 when I first saw it, and again last November when I last saw it, and where I expect to see it again this April when I see it next.

Another inconvenient truth?

[newhaul]

Remember those of us that live on the salt water don't see what it is doing from decade to decade.
They keep saying that polar sea ice is melting and show line graphs but they don't see the fact that their own graphs show the polar sea ice has been steadily increasing from year to year since 2012 until now. Another inconvienent truth ? ( taking a line from a movie 'the sky is falling the sky is falling' )

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Check the up arrows.


Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides and Currents

That map perfectly illustrated continental tilt and GIA. The northern part of North America rising from glacial rebound and the southern part subsiding in balance.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...o-solid-earth/

"The North American tectonic plate wasn't evenly loaded during that ice age: ice sheets were sitting on what is now Canada and Greenland, while most of today's United States remained ice free. This ice load pushed the mantle out from under Canada and buoyed up the United States. Today, the U.S. side of the North American plate is sinking like the downhill end of a seesaw as the northern side continues to lift."

And before you say it - no, that is on contextomy, quote mining, cherry picking or any other derogatory expression you want to use.

It is the directly relevant section of a page which also contains a lot of information which is not relevant to this point.

[fryewe]

When "climate scientists" do crap like this, they damage their credibility and don't deserve to be believed by non-experts (other than L-E, because...you know...consensus...):

Global Temperature Trend Propaganda Video: Who Needs Peer Review? - Hit & Run : Reason.com

[StuM]

Mann, Trenberth and Santer?
The unholy trinity of the alarmist cult.

I'm not sure whether that video reminds me more of the techniques of SS or of answersingenesis

[Reefmagnet]

I just went all "WTF" when some doofus blurted out that it wasn't temperature they were reading or even radiance it was electrons on a sensor. Sounds like he described a typical transducer to me. Is this what passes for a scientific analysis these days?

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Ribbit]

Originally Posted by StuM

That map perfectly illustrated continental tilt and GIA. The northern part of North America rising from glacial rebound and the southern part subsiding in balance.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...o-solid-earth/

"The North American tectonic plate wasn't evenly loaded during that ice age: ice sheets were sitting on what is now Canada and Greenland, while most of today's United States remained ice free. This ice load pushed the mantle out from under Canada and buoyed up the United States. Today, the U.S. side of the North American plate is sinking like the downhill end of a seesaw as the northern side continues to lift."

And before you say it - no, that is on contextomy, quote mining, cherry picking or any other derogatory expression you want to use.

It is the directly relevant section of a page which also contains a lot of information which is not relevant to this point.

Same thing over here. Northern Britain had a massive ice sheet, so Scotland is rebounding, and SE England is sinking.

Around the 15th Century there was a colossal storm (which hasn't been equalled here since), which drove massive amounts of sand into sand dunes in places like Oxwich Bay, also the far end of that long beach at Crawley Woods, etc., as well as other parts of the coast, leaving extremely vulnerable dune systems. The old shoreline is up to a mile behind that resulting chain of sand dunes (there's very nice salt marsh behind them).

If the sea level had gone up even 4" in the centuries since, those dunes would have been long gone.

I've seen some very early photographs of places like Llangranog on the Cardiganshire coast too (1860's), with a beached coaster having its cargo unloaded at low tide. You could see the tidemarks, and they are in exactly the same places as they are today. This part of Cardiganshire is on the 'hinge point' of the post glacial effects, so isn't vulnerable to rising or sinking land levels.

There's something these 'sea level rising' people don't seem to grasp.

The word 'level' associated with 'sea', and what levels are used for. eta: This will make you laugh, I've even had one of them trying to argue that all the 'missing' sea water, is actually stacked up out of sight over the horizon (he was actually serious!).

Frankly, I've had enough of their unscientific (they certainly don't seem to comprehend what 'Empiricism' means, and the reality that 'consensus' is by definition anti-scientific, is utterly lost on them), irrational, anti-human sentiments (yet they affirm their acceptance of Evolution, but can't seem to accept that human beings are a superb example of precisely that Evolution, but they won't leave well alone, and they just have to keep on interfering and messing things up, with all their efforts only displaying their hostility towards Evolution and their attempts to stop it functioning), plus of course all the deliberately child scaring jibber jabber they insist on trotting out, is enough to make anybody puke.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by fryewe

When "climate scientists" do crap like this, they damage their credibility and don't deserve to be believed by non-experts (other than L-E, because...you know...consensus...):

Global Temperature Trend Propaganda Video: Who Needs Peer Review? - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Do you agree with the author that:

I repeat, once again, that I believe that the balance of the evidence suggests that man-made global warming could become a significant problem for humanity as this century unfolds.

Yes? No?

[Ribbit]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Do you agree with the author that:

I repeat, once again, that I believe that the balance of the evidence suggests that man-made global warming could become a significant problem for humanity as this century unfolds.

Yes? No?

Well it certainly isn't down to CO2.

If what the anti-CO2 brigade says is right, that would mean that CO2 is a perpetual motion machine, and we will never have a shortage of energy for the future. If only . . . .

The reality is that CO2 is an excellent coolant and refrigerant, because it rapidly acquires the mean (it is why it was the coolant chosen for the Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor).

The heat it acquires is already there, it doesn't make it (i.e. a perpetual motion machine), and as soon as it comes in contact with anything cooler, it sheds it. Very efficiently.

To try and get around this obvious obstacle to their pathetic hypothesis (which doesn't have the substance to even make it to a theory), they started spewing out a load of nonsense about 'back radiation'.

Seriously, it's rather nice to have gone quite deaf, at least for the time being, as I don't have to listen to the utter cr4p they spout any longer.

PS. All the evidence is now seriously stacking up behind "It's the Sun, stupid".

[jackdale]

Meanwhile the 70% of the globe' surface called the oceans is warming.

Industrial-era global ocean heat uptake doubles in recent decades

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journ...imate2915.html

Published today.