• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alarmist once again struggle to explain a failed prediction

Lol, not all of it, just some of it, lol.

By 2100, large swaths of coastal land in Florida will be permanently submerged. In the shorter term, rising seas will increase the frequency and severity of coastal flooding. Statewide, three feet of flooding puts at risk: Future sea level depends on greenhouse gas emissions and atmospheric / oceanic processes.

As of now Florida is getting bigger. Eighty years from now who knows. It’s been much bigger it’s been much smaller as ocean level does what everything on earth does. Changes.
 
Dude starts a thread laughing at the attempt to explain away yet another failed alarmist prediction.
So you're claiming the data they presented is false?
 
Sorry I just enjoy watching alarmist squirm as one predicted catastrophe after another fails. Ski resorts are going to close then it keeps snowing as usual. “ Well that’s because “. Beaches will vanish under the ocean and instead they grow. “ Well that’s because “. You guys are nothing if not fun to watch.

The report's from FoxNews/Pravda

According to the Associated Press, snowpack in the West has decreased by about 20% in the last 100 years, which means snowmaking has become more and more important to the ski industry.

With environmental concerns, including the ongoing droughts, ski resorts are investing in more efficient snowmaking machines amid questions about whether snowmaking is a wise use of energy and water, AP reported.

"There are impacts. They're regrettable. We’d rather not have to make snow," Auden Schendler, senior vice president of sustainability at Aspen Skiing Co. in Colorado, told AP. "But our regional economy and the economies of all ski towns depend on your ski resort operating. And so this is a necessary evil."
 
As of now Florida is getting bigger. Eighty years from now who knows. It’s been much bigger it’s been much smaller as ocean level does what everything on earth does. Changes.
True, it's getting bigger. But there's the big picture. Florida doesn't live in a bubble and what happens across the nation and around the world will affect it. No way to know the extent until the changes begin but it's always better to forecast and plan ahead for the worst than laugh at projections and deny that nothing bad is going to happen. Miami floods now, more people are moving there and building there and the flooding isn't going away. That doesn't seem like a recipe for success to me.
 
The headline says "despite rising sea levels." That's the important part! Jeez.
Right? I mean...beaches TOTALLY grow when sea levels rise! It's a thing. Also, it gets warmer the higher up in altitude you go and if you jump out of a crashing airplane before you hit the ground it's only a short fall and you'll live.
 
From the article which some didn't read, or didn't understand, or couldn't see through their confirmation bias.

What's more, sea level rise is getting faster. The IPCC found it rose 1.3 millimeters per year during 1901–1971, 1.9mm per year during 1971–2006, and 3.7mm per year during 2006–2018.

This increase in sea level may drive a loss of sediment to the beach that current positive sediment budgets can no longer offset. This could trigger erosion in beaches presently growing.

So it's important coastlines presently growing aren't seen as evidence that sea level rise does not drive coastal erosion. Nor that such coasts are free from future erosion risk.

If we continue to leave them alone, the risk of future hazardous erosion under climate change is low. If, however, we place people and infrastructure too close to the shoreline and disrupt coastal sediment budgets, we will increase our future climate risk.

Florida:

I think what is most interesting about the IPCC's comments on sea level is the lack of well documented information in the past.
I will use the tide station near Miami as an example
NOAA 8723214 Virginia Key has been about 3 mm per year since 1932, the rate of increase has not changed like they claimed.
There are dozens of sites that show much the same, no strong inflection in the rise of sea level.
1652099470455.png
This is not to say the sea level is not raising, only that the claimed acceleration, is not visible on the very accurate tide gauges.
 
No one ever predicted Florida would be gone by 2022. Thread is idiocy.
Strawman. The OP did not make that claim. Your response is idiotic.
 
Here's what's gonna happen and it's already started.

The right is going to be on a mission to start conversations about any and everything as long as it's not related to taking a woman's privacy away.

Watch closely. It will continue thru every election.
 
I think what is most interesting about the IPCC's comments on sea level is the lack of well documented information in the past.
I will use the tide station near Miami as an example
NOAA 8723214 Virginia Key has been about 3 mm per year since 1932, the rate of increase has not changed like they claimed.
There are dozens of sites that show much the same, no strong inflection in the rise of sea level.
View attachment 67389716
This is not to say the sea level is not raising, only that the claimed acceleration, is not visible on the very accurate tide gauges.
What’s interesting is how alarmist are so myopic when it comes to sea level. They think the one and only cause is melting ice. They block out the fact that continents are on the move, islands rise and fall, under sea volcanoes erupt forming new islands etc etc. As all these events and many more displace sea water and cause oceans to rise and fall. Anyone saying 100% of sea level change is from melting ice is exposing how ignorant they truly are.
 
Last edited:
Anyone saying 100% of sea level change is from melting ice is exposing how ignorant they truly are.
What is myopic and showing ignorance is those who deny change is happening and want to dicker about the causes. At this point arguing over why it's happening is cutting off nose to spite face. Preparations need to be made and ameliorative efforts enacted to change what can be changed and stop what can be stopped in order to avoid the displacement of millions of people and the ensuring disruptions to daily lives that will occur and are occurring now.
 
What is myopic and showing ignorance is those who deny change is happening and want to dicker about the causes. At this point arguing over why it's happening is cutting off nose to spite face. Preparations need to be made and ameliorative efforts enacted to change what can be changed and stop what can be stopped in order to avoid the displacement of millions of people and the ensuring disruptions to daily lives that will occur and are occurring now.
The sea level has been raising for nearly 12,000 years, of course we need to prepare for it, but we do need to understand the causes
and which we can affect and which not. The curves of sea level rise and CO2 level, do not appear related, beyond they are both raising.
CO2 has seen a sharp spike in increase while the sea level rise is the places with long term records is nearly constant.
The text for the Virginia Key station says this,

The relative sea level trend is 3.0 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence
interval of +/- 0.21 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from
1931 to 2021 which is equivalent to a change of 0.98 feet in 100 years.​

So about 1 foot a century, we have to keep in mind that our fight against sea level has been an ongoing one.
near the turn of the 1900's Seattle and Galveston were both raised to keep them from flooding.
A large area of Galveston was raised some 13 feet, while portions of Seattle were raised up to 28 feet.
 
What is myopic and showing ignorance is those who deny change is happening and want to dicker about the causes.
What is wrong with pointing out AGW isn't the only cause?
At this point arguing over why it's happening is cutting off nose to spite face. Preparations need to be made and ameliorative efforts enacted to change what can be changed and stop what can be stopped in order to avoid the displacement of millions of people and the ensuring disruptions to daily lives that will occur and are occurring now.
Yes, the sky is falling...
 
The oceans are rising. We're halfway to creating a haiku.
But the question is valid if we can do anything about the ocean raising.
We also have to consider the rate of the rise, the US west coast for example has minimal sea level rise.
NOAA 9414290 San Francisco, California

1897 to 2021 which is equivalent to a change of 0.65 feet in 100 years.​

New York City has a higher level of rise, but also has a plan to protect the lower city, and build some parks.


 
Dude starts a thread saying nobody can explain an observation while literally posting the explanation for it.

that's how shitty the trolls are here
 
that's how shitty the trolls are here
The fact that they explained it is, apparently, evidence that it can't be explained? I'm not really sure. Whatever it is, it's hilarious.
 
Preparations need to be made and ameliorative efforts enacted to change what can be changed and stop what can be stopped in order to avoid the displacement of millions of people and the ensuring disruptions to daily lives that will occur and are occurring now.
What leads you to this conclusion anyway? We are constantly changing our landscape already. Replacing buildings as they get destroyed, or just remove them to build better.

Any contribution we may have on sea level rise isn't going to accelerate this fast enough to matter. How many times do you think a building will be replaced on a plot of land over a couple hundred years?

Then... To displace "millions," you are speaking of some pretty spectacular changes. I challenge you to read up on thermal expansion. Utilizing the average depth of the oceans, calculate how much extra heat needs to be added to the ocean for each millimeter of increase. Also do the calculations as to how many gigatons of sheet ice have to melt, and at what heat cost, per millimeter.

One easy number is for ice melt to increase sea level by 1 millimeter, we need an ice balance loss of 361 gigatons. One gigaton per million square kilometers of ocean.

If the ocean rises by 1 ft/100 years, then is it a problem to add a few inches of soil every time we rebuild?
 
Strawman. The OP did not make that claim. Your response is idiotic.

No, the strawman is the moronic OP. In typical idiot fashion, it pretends some random opinion represents scientific consensus. It revels in ignorance and calls all those without education to join in the idiocy. One such joining of idiocy was the claim that Florida should, now, be under water. Descending to that level of idiocy is to be expected when the OP is so moronic.

-MSc International Environmental Science

Now, perhaps we should discuss your previous threads in which all of this was explained to you. Remember the "beaches are not shrinking!" thread? But you continue to spam idiotic threads. You spam the most moronic climate denier crap you can find. You have been for years. This has all been explained to you a dozen times that I've seen. So let's not act all innocent.

This is your routine. It's moronic. You do it all the time.

Your climate threads should be in the Conspiracy Theory Sub-forum. They are stupid and they make the forum look ridiculous. You don't know anything about any science, do you.


Cue the clowns.
 
Last edited:
We also have to consider the rate of the rise, the US west coast for example has minimal sea level rise.
We are living with continual warnings of the "big one", possible within my lifetime, that has the potential to turn my town, which is 118 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, into ocean front property.

Climate change is also affecting which parts of the planet will be habitable, which parts will be capable of agriculture, and where fresh water will be available. Those factors are not in alignment across the board to accommodate habitation. Rainforest destruction will affect the Hadley Cells which will affect global air circulation which will cause the current American bread basket to turn to desert and arable land will be pushed north into Canada. The 6th great extinction currently underway is another factor. Birds and insects necessary to our survival are dying in droves. Fisheries are and have collapsed. We are at-risk from so many things natural and human made that I doubt we'll be able to outrun or fix it all.
 
Climate change is also affecting which parts of the planet will be habitable, which parts will be capable of agriculture, and where fresh water will be available.
How do you know? Can you show me a peer reviewed paper making such a claim? All I see is pundits lying about what the papers actually say.
Those factors are not in alignment across the board to accommodate habitation. Rainforest destruction will affect the Hadley Cells which will affect global air circulation which will cause the current American bread basket to turn to desert and arable land will be pushed north into Canada.
Wow...

Link please.
The 6th great extinction currently underway is another factor. Birds and insects necessary to our survival are dying in droves. Fisheries are and have collapsed. We are at-risk from so many things natural and human made that I doubt we'll be able to outrun or fix it all.
The sky is falling...
 
We are living with continual warnings of the "big one", possible within my lifetime, that has the potential to turn my town, which is 118 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, into ocean front property.

Climate change is also affecting which parts of the planet will be habitable, which parts will be capable of agriculture, and where fresh water will be available. Those factors are not in alignment across the board to accommodate habitation. Rainforest destruction will affect the Hadley Cells which will affect global air circulation which will cause the current American bread basket to turn to desert and arable land will be pushed north into Canada. The 6th great extinction currently underway is another factor. Birds and insects necessary to our survival are dying in droves. Fisheries are and have collapsed. We are at-risk from so many things natural and human made that I doubt we'll be able to outrun or fix it all.
(Earthquakes and climate change have almost nothing to do with one another!)

Based on hypothetical assumptions that combine a high CO2 climate sensitivity with a high emission scenario.
We should be better stewards of our planet, but we also have to understand the limitations.
Within the framework of Human caused climate change, is this idea that by regulating CO2 we can somehow
slow the sea level rise. Remember when Obama said,

“this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal ..."​

From the data it appears that the sea level rise largely ignores the CO2 level, (which tool a steep increase after 1960).

1652120634448.png
The reality is that our climate is not that sensitive to added CO2, and future emissions are likely not going to hit 1370 ppm by year 2100.
Our climate models, simulate an event that can never happen, and then state the results are accurate. (ECS is an abrupt doubling of the CO2 level).

I am not saying that we should not work towards a sustainable energy future, but that we should do so base on
technology capable of meeting existing demands.
 
@Lord of Planar Most times I include links when I feel I'm speaking to someone who won't dismiss all evidence requested. This isn't one of those times. Look up the science yourself.
 
Back
Top Bottom