patrick.net

kt1652 says

As our world becomes warmer and warmer, our seas will continue to rise.

So google me this. How fast are sea levels rising?
If the facts don't match the narrative maybe the narrative is wrong.

kt1652 says

The following literally took me 10 minutes to compose.

Slow typist?

kt1652 says

Global average sea level rose by around 0.17 m (1.7 mm/year) during the 20th century.

So you do know that the rise is not alarming?

Very typical of teabaggers. Dodge the issues, provide no supporting evidence, pick on tangent to deflect on the real issue then of course, personal attacks.
Where is the counter argument sources?
You cant dance around the basis of an argument.
The more extreme teabaggers here have posted,
1) There is no scientific basis for world wide climate change due to global warming.
2) Even if there is warming, it was not caused by fossil fuel burning.
3) If there is rapidly rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere, it is not a problem. Some even say it would be good, plants would love it.
4) It is cooling. Lol
5) Climate’s changed before,
6) Climate scientist are just chasing funding,
7) It is a natural cycle.
...
When you drill down, patnet climate skeptics' common position is we do not need clean energy, as the need to transition out of fossil fuels is a false premise.

I was asked to cite supporting sources for actual ocean level rise. Which I did. Why was this point moved to “No one said they don’t support clean energy.” This statement is 100% false. It is also disingenuous. Many posters in the past had stated exactly they don’t support clean energy. Regardless what your opinion, I was addressing more than you.
In regards to your position that overpopulation is the primary driving issue. That is just myopic. Overpopulation, will directly result in even higher energy usage and CO2 generation, all very predictable as 2nd and 3rd world societies catches up to 1st world standard of living. To focus on “too many people” as the problem is not seeing the big picture. It also offer NO real solution as we cannot wait for a natural reduction of world population. We haven’t even stop accelerating. Besides, there isn’t enough time as the window of opportunity for human kind to stabilize CO2, methane, warming will be long gone. The earth will be in a world of hurt as major adverse trends will multiply, amplify the warming effect. Also known as positive feedback, less ice means even higher rate of warming as human intervention would be futile at that point.
For all I know, you are paid by the Koch Brothers to create FUD. (The exact tactics used by tobacco industry.)
Or you have vested interest in the status quo, maybe you stand to lose a lot of money if the oil industry shrinks.
That is why I have decided it is waste of time to debate, you can have the last word.
www.youtube.com/embed/nbmt_WeNBck?t=2

4 inches a century. woo hoo

Move up the beach a couple feet.

Alarmists are so pathetic they don't believe in science, history, or the American way.

If one wants to talk koch brothers fud there is this guy named dan from Florida that would love to meet YOU!

Intellectually-honest and intellectually-dishonest debate tactics.
Where are your sources for your assertions?
one dishonest tactic after another. Are you are climate scientist, offering expert opinion?
If you are, then lay it down.
Back it up. When you state an opinion, like "the rise of sea level is not alarming", back it with sources.

"The Causal Fallacy is any logical breakdown when identifying a cause."

kt1652 says

Back it up. When you state an opinion, like "the rise of sea level is not alarming", back it with sources.

Back up.
3 to 6 inches of sea rise a century is not alarming.

Back up if your feet are getting wet.

kt1652 says

Are you are climate scientist,

Are you are?

I have been studying climate science since the last coming ice age.

Come back and debate me some more. You might learn something.

The oceans aren't rising
Catastrophically.

The temperature isn't rising
Catastrophically.

The ice isn't melting
Catastrophically.

What is a catastrophe is what has happened to science.

The oceans used to alp the foothills of the Sierra mountians and receded long before men walked the earth-LOLZ Liberals, liberlas!

kt1652 says

I am sure Miami being liberal controlled, j

So why did the Liberal brains in Miami build roads and buildings 3 inches above sea level? Wouldn't intelligent people build buildings out of harm's way, knowing the seas are unpredictable, specially since this is hurricane prone area too?

So now the rest of the country needs to pay for the fucked up errors of the Liberals in Miami? Sounds so Socialist.

Onvacation says

kt1652 says

Are you are climate scientist,

Are you are?

I have been studying climate science since the last coming ice age.

Come back and debate me some more. You might learn something.

In the media age, everybody was famous for 15 minutes. In the Wikipedia age, everybody can be an expert in five minutes. Special bonus: You can edit your own entry to make yourself seem even smarter. - Stephen colbert
Cite some research references, credible, reliable sources.

lostand confused says

The oceans used to alp the foothills of the Sierra mountians and receded long before men walked the earth-LOLZ Liberals, liberlas!

See 5) above. How many years ago was that, what was the rate of change comparible to today?
If the change was given a long enough time frame, we wouldnt be discussing this as a problem would we?

Onvacation says

The oceans aren't rising
Catastrophically.

The temperature isn't rising
Catastrophically.

The ice isn't melting
Catastrophically.

What is a catastrophe is what has happened to science.

Define catastrphoically. Not in my lifetime? 100 years? 200 years? Hope?
Where is your supporting evidence?
Our military planners do not agree with you. See my previous cited source.

kt1652 says

That is why I have decided it is waste of time to debate, you can have the last word.

Just wondering, have you figured out yet if gravitational pull by the moon and sun is man made, which causes global warming and sea level rise? Please show us the science behind that.

Genius, did gravirational forces change?
Keep Talking Out Of Your Derriere.
Wow you can earn an honorable PhD from that
Cite some references.

kt1652 says

Cite some references.

Ha Ha

I didn't post the video stating Miami floods during King tides.

King tides happen when the sun and moon align on the same side of the Earth, and their resulting combined gravitational pull produces tides much higher than normal. Berthier said king tides bring flooding to Miami Beach twice a year, with the fall tide being “more severe” than the spring.

Witness King Tides says on its website that “[King tides] aren’t part of climate change; they are a natural part of tidal cycles.” For reference, Miami receives just under 52 inches of rain a year, according to U.S. climate data.

Miami Beach is roughly three feet above sea level and despite a decline in population from 1990 to 2000, has since rebounded and now has a population of 92,000, according to census.gov data.

As populations increase, the need for industry does as well. That means more water is drawn from the ground for industrial purposes. Add the weight of an increasing population and you have a recipe for subsidence. Water that once filled areas underground is now gone, and the land settles into these new hollow spaces.

Andrew Kiernan, a real estate expert from Franklin Street, makes the point that Miami Beach was built on sand, something that would lend itself to subsidence.

https://dailycaller.com/2016/07/10/miami-is-sinking-but-that-doesnt-mean-sea-levels-are-rising/

How's that for references?

kt1652 says

Global average sea level rose by around 0.17 m (1.7 mm/year) during the 20th century. In Europe rates of sea-level rise (SLR) ranged from - 0.3 mm/year to 2.8 mm/year. Recent results from satellites and tide gauges indicate a higher average rate of global SLR in the past 15 years of about 3.1 mm/year.

Hmmmm, what do we know about that 3.1 mm/year?

Based on a study by the University of Miami:




Holy CRAP!! The sea isn't RISING 3.1 mm/year.. the ground is SINKING -3 mm per year..

http://www.ces.fau.edu/arctic-florida/pdfs/fiaschi-wdowinski.pdf

Son of a Bitch!!!

Coastal Subsidence: Harbinger of Future Flooding?

But it’s important to remember that flood potential reflects the integrated effects of past subsidence, not just the current rate of change (of course the current rate of relative sea level rise is critical for future planning). Several hundred years of slow subsidence from GIA since the towns in this region were first established means that they are now about one half meter lower than their original elevation. And it’s only getting worse.

The other peak in nuisance flooding (32° – 36° N latitude, including parts of South and North Carolina) is more enigmatic. Karegar et al. (2016) suggested that ground water extraction from coastal aquifers over the last few decades is a contributing factor, resulting in modern subsidence rates that are double the rate from geological measurements (averaging over a much longer time) and GIA models.

https://speakingofgeoscience.org/2017/02/22/coastal-subsidence-harbinger-of-future-flooding/

Damn, pulling ground water out faster than the aquifiers can refill the holes is causing the ground to sink. Better call Al Gore....

Not so magical today?
Did you even read your own cited document? I'll do it for you.
"The study attributed the flooding frequency increase to a decadal-scale accelerating rates of SLR. (Sea Level Rise). "
LoL
--
False Dilemma, oversimplication

And guess what also happens? Since all that water is sucked out of the ground and isn't replaced, not only does the ground sink, but all that water ends up running out of the sewer plants, down the rivers, and into the ocean, causing the sea level to rise.

Imagine that.

kt1652 says

"Thei study attributed the flooding frequency increase to a decadal-scle accelerating rates of SLR. (Sea Level Rise). "
LoL

That was already pointed out due to the rise in the population and the increase amount of water pumped from the ground, causing it to sink.... duh...

Read the last few sentences of your post... duh...

Right, that is why the paper cited Reference:

Author's Conclusion: The combined effect of subsidence and SLR (Sea Level Rise) further expose the subsiding areas to higher flooding hazard than the rest of the city.


iow: Sea level rise is real, but building on swamp land is a contributing factor that makes flooding even worse for low lying areas.

n+1>n, Nothing in the paper is contradictory to the established SLR predictions.

Stick to Trump, sjw, politics, if citing the Daily Caller.
====
The Daily Caller has published a number of articles that dispute the scientific consensus on climate change.[16] In 2017, The Daily Caller published a story falsely claiming that a "peer-reviewed study" by "two scientists and a veteran statistician" found that recent years have not been the warmest ever.[17][18] The alleged "study" was a PDF file on a WordPress blog, and was neither peer-reviewed nor published in a scientific journal.[17] Also in 2017, The Daily Caller uncritically published a bogus Daily Mail story which claimed that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) manipulated data to make climate change appear worse; at the same time, legitimate news outlets debunked the Daily Mail story.[19][20][21] Also in 2017, The Daily Caller published a story claiming that a study found no evidence of accelerating temperatures over a 23-year period, which climate scientists described as a misleading story.[16] In 2016, The Daily Caller published a story claiming that climate scientist Michael Mann (director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University) had asserted that data was unnecessary to measure climate change; Mann described the story as "egregiously false".[22] In 2015, The Daily Caller wrote that NOAA "fiddle[d]" with data when the agency published a report concluding that there was no global warming hiatus.[23][24]

What's really surprising was how wasteful the dinosaurs were when driving around in their SUVs and how much coal the cavemen were burning 5 million years ago. Look how high the Global Warming sea levels were 5 million years ago




How many SUVs do you think they were driving to achieve that level of warming from CO2 get that extreme sea level rise? All of Southern Florida was under water. Imagine that. Makes the 3 mm seem like child's play, right?

See 5) above.
Rate of change: (Y1-Y2)/(X1-X2) = m (slope)
Denominator of of 20,000years would be of no concern to anyone.
You can't see that?
The earth survives whether man die from starvation, heat or nuke fallout.
If the timeframe were to be that long, hell, man would have relocated to Mars.

kt1652 says

The earth survives whether man die from starvation, heat or nuke fallout.

What about old age? Does the earth survive if man dies of old age?

Alarmist are so entertaining.

So kt1652, if you think it is getting too hot with all this winters snow, what is the ideal average temperature for man on earth?

Iwog, a former poster here, predicted an ice free arctic ocean by 2022. Al Gore predicted 2013. When do you think the ice will be gone?

Michael "hockey stick" Mann, the guru of global warming, predicted multi degree warming in the first decade of this century. How hot do you think it will get?

So @kt1652 what is your prediction of doom? Flooding? Antarctic melting? Mass wetbulb death?

And when do you expect the doom?

Deniers wanna know.

kt1652 says

Rate of change: (Y1-Y2)/(X1-X2) = m (slope)
Denominator of of 20,000years would be of no concern to anyone.

What???

kt1652 says

NOAA "fiddle[d]" with data when the agency published a report concluding that there was no global warming hiatus.[

Why would NOAA do that?