EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:16 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 8:19 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber ... s=share_fb

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 9:16 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
:lol: good one!

Speaking of sea levels rising, use this to find out at what point you'd be under water:

http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 9:38 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
Fosgate wrote:
:lol: good one!

Speaking of sea levels rising, use this to find out at what point you'd be under water:

http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/


It would be if it were Mississippi rather than North Carolina doing the legislation of nature. :mrgreen: :-

I am reminded of the story of King Cnut ordering the tide out .... and with the same outcome.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:20 am 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:47 am
Posts: 110
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Canute was actually pretty badass, not deluded and was demonstrating that there were some things that he did not have control over.

This just demonstrates that climate skepticism is not just about debate for debate's sake, laws like this do harm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:27 am 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:47 am
Posts: 110
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Debate about climate change is all very well but its a shame the individuals that lobbied for this can't be held accountable for the damage that this will obviously cause.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:56 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
spot1234 wrote:
Canute was actually pretty badass, not deluded and was demonstrating that there were some things that he did not have control over.

This just demonstrates that climate skepticism is not just about debate for debate's sake, laws like this do harm.


Yes, he knew he would not be able to cause the tide to turn, and so do the GOP in NC, but they want to fool the people into thinking they can to prevent the loss of investment in the coast. The problem is the insurance companies are not swayed by this type of thing and will stop any investment that cannot pay the very high premiums or cannot afford to self insure when the insurance companies will not touch it.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 12:01 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
spot1234 wrote:
Debate about climate change is all very well but its a shame the individuals that lobbied for this can't be held accountable for the damage that this will obviously cause.


Yes, a scam supported by legislation when it passes the House.

http://www2.journalnow.com/news/2012/ju ... r-2353298/

“It’s becoming tough on any kind of economic development if we don’t start using common sense in some of this rule-making,” said Sen. Harry Brown, a Republican who represents coastal Jones and Onslow counties.

The bill’s main backer, Republican Sen. David Rouzer of Johnson and Wayne counties, said the more severe prediction of sea-level rise would sink property values, hurt tax revenues and inflate insurance rates. He said that predicting climate eight decades out is folly.

The legislation gives the state Coastal Resources Commission sole responsibility for predicting the rate of sea-level rise to be used as a basis for state and local regulations. The commission’s 15 members are appointed by the governor.

But the legislation also defines how the Coastal Resources Commission is to decide sea-level rates. Specifically, the law says forecasts can be based on historical data only and can’t take into account non-historical factors. The key factor that’s disqualified is the belief that greenhouse gases are causing climate change and speeding up glacier melts.

The push to rollback climate change science came from N.C.-20, a nonprofit that promotes economic development in the 20 coastal counties. The group’s chairman, Tom Thompson, is a Beaufort County economic development director.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:12 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:43 am
Posts: 154
Quote:
Scientists predict an economy-destroying, 39-inch sea level rise, but North Carolina drafts a law to make it eight inches.


First I have seen of such a high 1m sea level rise. Isa this in any scientific paper or just the normal alarmist exageration?

Also it's not that hard to build sea defences. 39 inches will be easy to cope with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:00 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
Tim the Plumber wrote:
Quote:
Scientists predict an economy-destroying, 39-inch sea level rise, but North Carolina drafts a law to make it eight inches.


First I have seen of such a high 1m sea level rise. Isa this in any scientific paper or just the normal alarmist exageration?


Odd. There are several such references if you look.

Image

The report the legislature voted to change.

http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/slr/NC%20Se ... 0Panel.pdf


Quote:
Also it's not that hard to build sea defences. 39 inches will be easy to cope with.


Having 3,375 miles of shoreline, a 39 inch sea level increase would be easy to cope with? :shock:

Not to mention the estuaries which would have to have similar defenses built and all without ever admitting there was an impact since it would affect the economic development of the areas.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:49 am 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:43 am
Posts: 154
Do you have a referance to an actual scientific paper which says that a 1m sea level rise is on the cards?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:32 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Having 3,375 miles of shoreline, a 39 inch sea level increase would be easy to cope with? :shock:


Ahh we wouldn't cover it all. We'd wall off the important places, like we did New Orleans. The rest doesn't matter anyway so any rise is irrelevant. :lolno: #-o

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:20 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
Tim the Plumber wrote:
Do you have a referance to an actual scientific paper which says that a 1m sea level rise is on the cards?


Did you miss the link I posted after the chart to the actual scientific paper the legislature made "illegal" to use. It has the references used in the determination of the rise presented.

http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/slr/NC%20Se ... 0Panel.pdf

A set of sea-level curves is presented in Figure 2, which present scenarios of differing rates of SLR acceleration. The curves are projected to 90 years in the future (2100 AD) and the initial rate of rise is set at 4.27 mm per year (Zervas, 2004). A rise of 0.4 meter (15 inches) is considered a minimum, since this is the amount of rise that will occur given a linear projection with zero acceleration. Various models and observations indicate that accelerated rates of SLR in the future are likely (IPCC, 2007; Rahmstorf, 2007; Pfeffer et al., 2008). In fact, various investigations indicate a two- to four-fold increase in rates of rise over the last century (Church and White, 2006; Rahmstorf, 2007; Kemp et al., 2009).

Rahmstorf (2007) proposed that there is a roughly proportional relationship between global mean near-surface air temperature and global MSL. Rahmstorf’s “method” for projecting future SLR has been adopted by several states and municipalities. The method has produced highly accurate hindcast results, particularly for the thermal expansion component of rise, and predicts a total rise of 0.50 meter to 1.4 meters (20 to 55 inches) by 2100. Rahmstorf cautions that delayed positive feedbacks might result in the method underestimating the contribution from land ice, resulting in total rise of over 1.4 meters. In spite of this caveat, the Science Panel believes that the Rahmstorf method is robust and 1.4 meters a reasonable upper limit for projected rise.

Pfeffer et al (2008) attempted to constrain the upper limit of land ice contribution to sea level by investigating the physical ability of glaciers and ice sheets to discharge into the ocean. The research was intended to provide a basis and methodology for incorporating land ice contributions into calculations of future global MSL. The research concluded that a range of 0.80 meter to 2 meters is a more plausible range than the figures presented by the IPCC. A 2-meter rise is considered very unlikely, but still possible, and could only occur with rapidly accelerated and very high rates of warming and ice sheet melting.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:25 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
Another

http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/Publi ... f_2009.pdf

We propose a simple relationship linking global sea-level variations
on time scales of decades to centuries to global mean
temperature. This relationship is tested on synthetic data from a
global climate model for the past millennium and the next century.
When applied to observed data of sea level and temperature for
1880–2000, and taking into account known anthropogenic hydrologic
contributions to sea level, the correlation is >0.99, explaining
98% of the variance. For future global temperature scenarios of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fourth Assessment
Report, the relationship projects a sea-level rise ranging from 75 to
190 cm for the period 1990–2100.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:32 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20565
Location: Southeastern US
One that touches on the local difference in sea level rise from the average.

http://www.knmi.nl/bibliotheek/knmipubWR/WR2009-05.pdf

This international scientific assessment has been carried out at the request of the
Dutch Delta Committee. The Committee requested that the assessment explore
the high-end climate change scenarios for flood protection of the Netherlands. It
is a state-of–the art scientific assessment of the upper bound values and longer
term projections (for sea level rise up to 2200) of climate induced sea level rise,
changing storm surge conditions and peak discharge of river Rhine. It comprises
a review of recent studies, model projections and expert opinions of more than
20 leading climate scientists from different countries around the North Sea,
Australia and the USA. Although building on the previous IPCC AR4 (2007) and
KNMI (2006) assessments, this report deliberately explores low probability/high
impact scenarios, which will pose significant threats to the safety of people and
infrastructure and capital invested below sea level. According to its high-end
estimates global mean sea level may rise in the range of 0.55 - 1.10 m in 2100
and 1.5 - 3.5 m in 2200, when higher temperature rise scenarios (up to 6 °C by
2100) and increased ice discharge from Antarctica are considered. This would
correspond with local sea levels along the coast of the Netherlands of up to
maximally 1.20 m in 2100 and 4 m in 2200. An increase in peak discharge of
river Rhine of 3 to 19% for 2050 and 6 to 38% for 2100 is foreseen. The storm
regime along the Dutch North Sea coast in terms of maximum surge level will
probably not change significantly in this extreme climate change frame.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:44 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1649
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
and the dutch are already below sea level so they are not going to accept hype... you can be sure they are taking their study seriously.

It is now an established fact that only 10 000 years ago, the global sea level rose a few hundred feet creating the ocean separating Antarctica and Australia (and New Guinea, New Zealand, Tasmania).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group