Overall sea level has risen 20 cm since 1880. Sea levels don't rise/fall at the same exact rate. What exactly is your point?
Does the 14 foot storm surge at Battery Park during Hurricane Sandy count?
You do know that seal level rises are sporadic at first right?
Quite a bit. Louisiana is losing the equivalent of a football field of land per hour. We've been losing coasts for years. Low-lying and coastal areas of Florida are already in trouble, despite the refusal of some elected officials to even say the words "climate change."How much coast line was lost due to that?
Because of positive feedback loops.Why do you think a rise of 5 times as much will do an infinately bigger level of damage?[/COLOR]
Quite a bit. Louisiana is losing the equivalent of a football field of land per hour. We've been losing coasts for years. Low-lying and coastal areas of Florida are already in trouble, despite the refusal of some elected officials to even say the words "climate change."
Because of positive feedback loops.
Louisiana is loosing ground, but the vast majority is not from sea level rise.Quite a bit. Louisiana is losing the equivalent of a football field of land per hour. We've been losing coasts for years. Low-lying and coastal areas of Florida are already in trouble, despite the refusal of some elected officials to even say the words "climate change."
Because of positive feedback loops.
Uh... No. Louisiana is not "sinking." We're way past "sea defenses."I thought it was that Lousianna was sinking and that building some sea defenses would sort out most of the trouble.
1) FailOnly land that nobody wants is being lost.
Seriously?What the hell are you talking about with positive feedback loops? Nothing is out there to accelerate sea level rise. [/COLOR]
Louisiana is loosing ground, but the vast majority is not from sea level rise.
The Army Corps of Engineers made changes to the flow of the Mississippi River.
There is also a fair amount of subsidence that occurs around things built on the alluvial plain.
Louisiana's loss of ground has an Anthropogenic, just not sea level rise!
As I wrote above:Louisiana is loosing ground, but the vast majority is not from sea level rise.
The Army Corps of Engineers made changes to the flow of the Mississippi River.
There is also a fair amount of subsidence that occurs around things built on the alluvial plain.
Louisiana's loss of ground has an Anthropogenic, just not sea level rise!
The alarmist article I cited was talking specifically about New York City and the pending sea level rise.
Whatever the professional assessment was in 2007, likely it did not include sea levels falling for 7 years!
You have to ask yourself what do you want to believe, the actual empirical data from this year,
or the experts estimates of what the data should be from a decade ago?
For Me, I choose the actual data!
And as I have shown the fall is not some local New York City anomaly, but something affecting
over 200 miles of coastline, from Delaware to Boston, and beyond, as Portland Maine is falling also.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8418150
Yes, much of the River use to flow out of Bayou La fush (sp), the port there all but closed when the Corp change the river in the 30's I think.I once read a fascinating chapter in a book on potential natural disasters. Seems the Mississippi has for a long time sought to flow straight south to the Gulf via Atchafalaya, but the Army Corps of Engineers built the massive Atchafalaya Structure to force the river to continue turning left to New Orleans. But the river is relentless and powerful, so one of these days . . .
NOAA sea level rise is mostly because the land is subsiding, not the sea level rising. The river was diverted because of the flooding in 1920's and to maintain shipping channels.As I wrote above:
Oil & gas exploration is anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 of. Diverting the river is a factor. But so is the increase in sea levels. NOAA has known for years that Louisiana has the highest rate of relative sea level rise of any place in the country, and one of the highest rates anywhere on the planet. (New research: Louisiana coast faces highest rate of sea-level rise worldwide | The Lens)
Stunned by what was then the worst natural disaster in U.S. history, Congress passed the Flood Control Act of 1928, which ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to prevent such a flood from ever happening again. By the mid-1930s, the corps had done its job, putting the river in a straitjacket of levees.
But the project that made the river safe for the communities along the river would eventually squeeze the life out of the delta. The mud walls along the river sealed it off from the landscape sustained by its sediment. Without it, the sinking of land that only occurred during dry cycles would start, and never stop.
It is not that water does not seek it's own level, but sea level is very complicated.Funny thing about water. Water seeks it's own level. If the sea level rises in NYC it will also rise in Japan. The only exception is the effect of the earth's rotation.
What happens in a given location is more akin to weather change than climate change.
It is not that water does not seek it's own level, but sea level is very complicated.
Global average of all the tide stations is a slightly negative number, but that is because the land up north is rebounding (very slowly) to the loss of mile thick glaciers.
In addition many of our coastal area are built on ground that subsidies.
The Satellites should help, but their accuracy is not in the range of measurements we are talking about.
(Satellite accuracy is only 30 mm.)
The errors in any system trying to measure the sea level of the globe would include many types of errors.
To just predict what the high tide will be a specific location could be 12 inches off, based on wind, and other conditions.
While the article does not say anything about mm/yr, they do provide links to where they got their data,
those sites do provide numbers, and they are a bit extreme.
New York City Panel on Climate Change 2015 Report Chapter 2: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Storms - Horton - 2015 - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences - Wiley Online Library
View attachment 67217647
2020's 2 to 10 inches ( 50 to 250 mm)
2050's 8 to 30 inches (200 to 760 mm) ect.
Except that is not at all, other factors are the the oceans are thin 2.2 mile think meniscus on a 5000 mile diameter sphere.Sea level is not complicated. It's the height of the ocean from the center of the earth to the average height, troughs to wave tops of the sea. Global average is slightly negative because sea level is not rising.
In some cases, shore lines are sinking. But that is not because sea is rising, but because islands are sinking.
There is some valid argument that some earth masses are rising as and if land ice melts and the overburden weight is reduced. But that does not change sea level.
The 2020's means sometime in the 2020's, I gave them the benefit of the doubt,Thanks for that (-:
By the 2020s. Does that mean by 2030? 250 mm Thirteen years from now?
That comes to 19 mm/yr or well over three times the current rate.
When is this dramatic acceleration going to begin to happen?
Read my tag line, left-wing liberals have no sense of numbers,
they don't bother to do the math to figure out if what someone
is telling them makes sense or not. The first children's book by
Dr. Seuss, And to Think That I saw it on Mulberry Street was
a lesson in avoiding the telling of tall tales. Our friends on the
left have yet to understand what Theodor Geisel was telling them.
Except that is not at all, other factors are the the oceans are thin 2.2 mile think meniscus on a 5000 mile diameter sphere.
Solar gravity, Lunar gravity, and even planetary gravity combine to form a complicated collection of bulges and warps in the meniscus.
Tides are perhaps one of the longest human observations, and yet almost any tide station in the world will have a
mismatch between the predicted tide and the reported tide.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/stationhome.html?id=8518750
Scroll down to the observation, there is almost always a difference between the prediction and the observation.
This one has a prediction error of 4.8 inches or 120mm.
I suspect NOAA is correct in saying it would take an increase in a 30 year average to mean anything.
There is reams of evidence: mathematical, archaeological and historical; showing how a few degrees C will raise sea levels X feet. Without question Temps are rising. So, the only question is by how many Degrees C and when.Map shows where New York City could flood first from sea level rise - Business Insider
The funny thing about the story is that the Sea Level at Battery Park, has been falling for 7 years.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8518750
The 12 month average peaked in May 02 2010 at 139 mm. since that time,
The sea level has dropped to the April 2017 12 month average of 59 mm, or negative 11 mm per year.
I guess that was not an important datum for their story!
There is reams of evidence: mathematical, archaeological and historical; showing how a few degrees C will raise sea levels X feet. Without question Temps are rising. So, the only question is by how many Degrees C and when.
Ignoring sea level rise is a fool's errand.
Theres nothing wrong with the rate of sea level rise which is well within known natural norms just like everything else to do with AGW alarmism
I don't really care what you think. So, believe what you want.
I require no belief system because the facts work just fine for me :wink:
I don't really care what you think. So, believe what you want.
Apparently you do.
The data suggets that sea levels have been rising since 1850.
You're also completely ignoring the causal factors here, e.g. melting polar ice is increasing sea levels. Even as I type, there's a massive crack forming in an Antarctic that could break off a chunk of ice shelf the size of Delaware.
The idea that sea levels reached a peak in 2009 is, to put it mildly, slightly absurd.
Sure, if you don't bother to read the article.
That claim is based on research done by the Mayor’s Office of Recovery & Resiliency in NYC, released in a preliminary report. The article is basically just citing their research.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?