patrick.net

Onvacation says

bob2356 says

Google doesnt' work for you guys somehow?

Who does google work for?

Why, the NSA of course.

Patrick says

Who does google work for?

Why, the NSA of course.

I know.
But if you have nothing to hide, why do you need the bill of rights?

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/5-islands-have-disappeared-from-the-solomon-islands-in-the-pacific-ocean-due-to-rising-sea
SYDNEY (AFP) - Five islands have disappeared in the Pacific's Solomon Islands due to rising sea levels and coastal erosion, according to an Australian study that scientists said on Saturday (May 7) could provide valuable insights for future research.
A further six reef islands have been severely eroded in the remote area of the Solomons, the study said, with one experiencing some 10 houses being swept into the sea between 2011 and 2014.
"At least 11 islands across the northern Solomon Islands have either totally disappeared over recent decades or are currently experiencing severe erosion," the study published in Environmental Research Letters said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/368892.stm

Onvacation says

But if you have nothing to hide, why do you need the bill of rights?

So true!

Who needs freedom of speech when we have the mainstream press to tell us what all right-thinking people believe?

The bill of rights just protects Nazis and racists, so we need to get rid of it! Let's start by jailing people for using pronouns which reflect biological reality instead of self-absorbed fantasy. Ah wait, we already have a law which does that in California, SB219. Supreme Court does not seem to be defending the First Amendment, so it is clearly going away.

anon_3b28c says

experiencing severe erosion,"

Question: What causes erosion?

Answer: moving water.

Question: what moves water?

Answer: Wind

anon_dd91d says

where a natural trade wind cycle has caused an extra build-up of water over the last half-century."

Your Science lesson is completed for today!

Hurricanes routinely destroy and form islands. These sand bars barely above sea level are prone to multiple natural forces, and just because they existed a few decades ago does not mean they are entitled to permanent existence and freedom from natural sources of erosion.

I have watched the Pacific Ocean in a few years erode areas along California. That is completely normal, because in Californian, the Pacific Ocean is an erosive force, not a constructive force, and it has nothing to do with Global Warming. The Pacific Coast is slowly eroding at a known rate. Beaches wash away and re-form in a cyclic manner, cliffs crumble, buildings/roads fall off cliffs because they shouldn't have been built there to begin with.

anon_9ece2 says

Question: What causes erosion?

Answer: moving water.

Question: what moves water?

Answer: Wind

Question: What causes more erosion?
Answer: Higher water levels.

Ceffer says

These sand bars barely above sea level are prone to multiple natural forces, and just because they existed a few decades ago does not mean they are entitled to permanent existence and freedom from natural sources of erosion.

Yep, just like humans have existed for only a few moments of the earth's life and are not entitled to permanent existence either.

anon_3b28c says

anon_9ece2 says

Question: What causes erosion?

Answer: moving water.

Question: what moves water?

Answer: Wind

Question: What causes more erosion?
Answer: Higher water levels.

Did ya miss this part?

anon_dd91d says

where a natural trade wind cycle has caused an extra build-up of water over the last half-century."

Note: extra build-up of water means there are "Higher water levels".

Does that help?

anon_5df70 says

Did ya miss this part?

Please don't post about the commenter.

But, no I didn't miss that. You know what else causes an extra build up of water? Ice that used to be over land melting.

Ceffer says

Hurricanes routinely destroy and form islands. These sand bars barely above sea level are prone to multiple natural forces, and just because they existed a few decades ago does not mean they are entitled to permanent existence and freedom from natural sources of erosion.

Don't get me started on Coral Reefs. Those things have been around for hundreds of millions of years and yet the alarmists pretend coral reefs themselves will go extinct over a few degrees F in average warming when they've survived countless ice ages and "hot ages".

TwoScoopsPlissken says

the alarmists

Fewer of those each year the temp and sea doesn't rise.
For you few alarmists left, instead of scaring children with stories of wetbulb death and drowning, encourage them with stories of humans overcoming nature.

anon_8f378 says

anon_5df70 says

Did ya miss this part?

But, no I didn't miss that. You know what else causes an extra build up of water? Ice that used to be over land melting.

How much did the water rise up because of the wind versus how much did the water rise because of that melting ice?

anon_def08 says

How much did the water rise up because of the wind versus how much did the water rise because of that melting ice?

The Settled Science can't answer this.

But the safest course is to PANIC!!!

TwoScoopsPlissken says

The Settled Science can't answer this.

But the safest course is to PANIC!!!

Yes, let's commit trillions of dollars over the next century to MAYBE not do very much. That sounds like a logical course of action.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

anon_def08 says

How much did the water rise up because of the wind versus how much did the water rise because of that melting ice?

The Settled Science can't answer this.

That's a serious question I would like the alarmists to answer.

I've seen the effect of wind blowing water and how high it can rise, sometimes by multiple feet. I haven't seen a measurable rise in water due to melting ice.

NYC still isn't underwater, so somehow there seems to be a disconnect with this whole ice melt = underwater hoax?

TwoScoopsPlissken says

The Settled Science can't answer this.

But the safest course is to PANIC!!!

Actually the safest course is to make the changes that we can make to reduce CO2 emissions and stop as much of the warming as we can.

Not sure who is panicking. I haven't seen any riots over climate change--did I miss them?

All I see are rational people showing potential outcomes if current trends don't change.

I can't see neutrons therefore they must not exist.

anon_def08 says

I haven't seen a measurable rise in water due to melting ice.

And you trust your eyes over actual scientific measurements?

Idiocracy.

anon_8f378 says

And you trust your eyes over actual scientific measurements?

Proxies aren't direct measurements. Ice Core Samples are Proxies, as are Tree Rings.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

Proxies aren't direct measurements. Ice Core Samples are Proxies, as are Tree Rings.

Sea levels aren't.

anon_8f378 says

All I see are rational people showing potential outcomes if current trends don't change.

So, what is the trend?
It seems the temperature has not changed much over the last 50 years. 2017 is cooler than 2015.
The scam is being exposed by nature.

anon_8f378 says

anon_def08 says

I haven't seen a measurable rise in water due to melting ice.

And you trust your eyes over actual scientific measurements?

Idiocracy.

Yes

40 years, the sea level hasn't changed at the same places I've gone to.

How's that?

anon_7e933 says

Yes

40 years, the sea level hasn't changed at the same places I've gone to.

How's that?

My guess is your eyes are unable to tell the change as it's small compared to the changes due to tidal forces.

Cool, another climate change thread. Is this like some sort of fetish for a lot of you? Bringing up a topic that you know you're not going to change anyone's mind on? This goes for both sides of this black hole argument.

Until this stops: http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ you can reduce carbon or whatever anyone thinks is causing a problem in this world and it really won't matter at some point in the future. Call it Malthusian or whatever, but the hockey stick in that link is probably more important than any other data line.

If it takes 200 years, 2,000 years, 20,000 years, I'm not sure what difference it makes taking a line from Hillary. Without population controls/limits, this all ends rather nasty. Not necessarily extinction, but massive population losses will need to occur at some point to keep us humans going.

anon_8f378 says

anon_7e933 says

Yes

40 years, the sea level hasn't changed at the same places I've gone to.

How's that?

My guess is your eyes are unable to tell the change as it's small

"My guess" is that the sea level change is so small, that's why it can't be seen. Thanks for admitting that the hoax about sea level change is just that, a hoax by the alarmists, and so small, it's unmeasurable.

Is NYC underwater yet?

anon_8f378 says

compared to the changes due to tidal forces.

Who said anything about tidal changes? Further up the thread it made references to changes in water levels due to wind, and the erosion that came from it, not tidal changes.

anon_8f378 says

Sea levels aren't.

Sea Levels have been rising ever since the last ice age ended.

The prediction models have been way off. The actual measurements show not much happening, as a global average.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html

anon_10ddb says

Who said anything about tidal changes?

I did. If you're trying to measure sea change with the naked eye, you have to account for tidal forces. Not sure how one would be able to do this.

Which is why we have scientists who actually use tools to measure sea level and don't rely on their eyes.

anon_8f378 says

Which is why we have scientists who actually use tools to measure sea level and don't rely on their eyes.

Exactly. And their direct observations are contrary to the computer models. See the Telegraph article for more.

anon_8f378 says

anon_10ddb says

Who said anything about tidal changes?

I did.

Great, so now we can add wind, causing higher water along with tidal changes, which caused the erosion and disappearance of those islands.

Makes perfect sense, thanks for clarifying that.

The Alarmists aren't going to be happy though, how can they blame the disappearing islands on melting ice? Their narrative was just wrecked, again.

anon_ce856 says

reat, so now we can add wind, causing higher water along with tidal changes, which caused the erosion and disappearance of those islands.

Makes perfect sense, thanks for clarifying that.

The Alarmists aren't going to be happy though, how can they blame the disappearing islands on melting ice? Their narrative was just wrecked, again.

I don't think you are understanding the point. It's not that tidal forces have changed over time. It's that in order to measure a difference in sea levels, you have to have a baseline to measure against. But the baseline sea level changes due to tidal forces so you and your naked eye will never know what the baseline is that you are measuring against, and will never be able to tell if it has risen or fallen.

It's global warming! It's evaporating the ocean!!!

anon_8f378 says

I don't think you are understanding the point. It's not that tidal forces have changed over time. It's that in order to measure a difference in sea levels, you have to have a baseline to measure against. But the baseline sea level changes due to tidal forces so you and your naked eye will never know what the baseline is that you are measuring against, and will never be able to tell if it has risen or fallen.

Do you suppose that since science can measure gravity waves from a billion light years away they just might be able to figure out how to compensate for tides in their measurements of sea levels?