patrick.net

If you use electric cars and solar panels, you are part of the solution, not the problem. Like me.

They couldn't be more wrong on Sea level rising. The Ocean does not rise. The Physics are against it. In the even the Surface of Earth has more fresh water than is needed. It runs off to the Ocean. Where the volume the Ocean can contain is at a maximum Depth for the weight and volume of our Oceans. Before it the barrier resistance of the Earth's Crust is breached. Excess water is forced into the Trenches where it is forced down into the crust where it journeys toward the mantle where it is heated up and converted into steam and the Salt from the Ocean is deposited in voids in the crust. The steam as it is forced up through the crust. Cools and and creates aquifers and mountain seepage. Excess water is forced up to the surface as creeks, springs, rivers and lakes. That work their way back to the Ocean to put more pressure on the Ocean floor to force more water into the crust, to deposit more salt, to replenish Aquifers for Nestle to buy world over.

If an Asteroid with as much water as half of the Pacific Ocean were to hit earth I still don't think the Earth would flood from the Ocean up. Perhaps the initial tsunami. But it wouldn't just be the Coastal people swamped. People think they would be safe in Mountain ranges, but whole mountain sides would be washed away in landslides caused by liquefaction and other hydrodynamic forces. Rivers would swell banks everywhere, dry lake beds would be would suddenly appear bigger than ever. Inland towns and cities would be consumed in vast ancient Lakes and Sea beds that had been dry for millions of years. Caves would heave forth a torrent of waterfalls carving the landscape creating new landscapes. All of this loosening and over saturation of the Crust would make it swell. That's right the Ocean still wouldn't rise the earth would swell and dry land would be swamped from inland not from the rising Sea.
Some Large land masses would fragment like the Indonesian Island chain but the earth would be a half a mile thicker all the way around. The Ocean would just rise the amount the new water displaced.
It doesn't work that way.
That's not to say a cataclysm like that wouldn't fuck some shit up because it would. I'm simply showing that even then Ocean doesn't rise and cover everything but Mount Everest if you dumped a half mile of water on the earth.

Because it's really hard to google: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level ...
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/SatelliteData/jason/
"What is the ideal temp for human habitation?"
$ obviously the same as existed during the past 10,000 years during which billions of apes pullulated on the surface of this planet.

Heraclitusstudent says

pullulated on the surface of this planet.

Pollution and overpopulation are real problems.
"Human overpopulation occurs when the ecological footprint of a human population in a specific geographical location exceeds the carrying capacity of the place occupied by that group"
But we are not the cause of the earths temperature. global warming climate change is a fraud. The fact that the alarmists don't answer the questions above, or more likely have not even looked for the answers, tells us that they are ignorant or not interested in the truth.

No such thing as a "wrong question".
Unless u r a member of the 'thought police'...
Onvacation says

"What is the ideal temp for human habitation?"
HEYYOU sez: Wrong question.

Tenpoundbass says

I'm simply showing that even then Ocean doesn't rise and cover everything but Mount Everest if you dumped a half mile of water on the earth.

So what ? Nobody is saying that. They're simply saying many coastal areas that are a very small amount above sea level are going to be in trouble if ACC continues unabated.

Funny this is the age we live in . Every nitwit with an opinion thinks his opinion on a complex scientific question is just as good as a phd at Stanford or MIT.

Wtf ? How did we get here ?

ALso why does it supposedly take so much certainty ? We all know how decisions are made in life. They are often based on risks and probabilities.

Usually the best you can do is assign a probability to a given problem. "This guy probably isn't good for my daughter" or "there's too high of a this car will break down, for me not to make a change, or these bit coins are just too damn high - I better sell.

It the probability of something adverse happening that affects your decision, or occasionally the probability of something working out really well that causes you to go for it. The best we have is probabilities.

So how in the hell can your position be that 99% of scientists are just wrong ? From a probabilistic perspective you should be saying " I know some people have their doubts = but I'm going to go with the experts."

If you won't go with the experts, then you should have reasonable certainty and a proof to back up your reasoning. But at this point I've gone too far. Talkin about proofs with people who think emotion is a proof.

So how in the hell can your position be that 99% of scientists are just wrong

If you won't go with the experts,

You are just wrong, someone lied to you and swallowed it, hook line and sinker.

There is no 99% consensus among the scientists. https://skepticalscience.com/AMS-meteorologists-97-percent.html
The 97% consensus exists among a small number (something around a hundred) of 'experts in the field'. Those experts have been caught lying, on multiple occasions. A fresh example is multiple interviews earlier this year where those experts (such as Mann and Trenberth) claim that climate change has exacerbated hurricanes. But according to NASA, hurricanes (and most other extreme weather events) are down both in severety and frequency.

anon_1bd09 says

There is no 99% consensus among the scientists. https://skepticalscience.com/AMS-meteorologists-97-percent.html
The 97% consensus exists among a small number (something around a hundred) of 'experts in the field'. Those experts have been caught lying, on multiple occasions. A fresh example is multiple interviews earlier this year where those experts (such as Mann and Trenberth) claim that climate change has exacerbated hurricanes. But according to NASA, hurricanes (and most other extreme weather events) are down both in severety and frequency.

Here's what NASA says:

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/11377
Is the frequency of extreme weather events a sign that global warming is gaining pace and exceeding predictions?

Bill Patzert, a scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, says the evidence that extreme weather events have been more frequent in recent years is definitely to the contrary. "The United States has always had extreme weather. We look back on our weather history. It's been punishing: floods, droughts, tornadoes, hurricanes, great forest fires.

"Is global warming happening? No doubt about it. We're living in a warmer world, we're living in a melting world, sea levels are rising. Now, direct evidence of the footprint or the fingerprint of global warming: we're seeing more frequent, more intense, and longer lasting heat waves. As far as hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, floods, and drought, the evidence is definitely not in. The consensus among almost all scientists is that it's a small fingerprint, not a large footprint.

"But what is true is that in this country, in the United States, we live in many areas with great risk to drought, to tornadoes, to hurricanes, and so part of the dialogue is not only extreme weather and global warming, but is the amount of risk we can tolerate. Now looking to the future, global change, global warming - it definitely is accelerating and it will have an impact on extreme weather, but at this point, not much."

And answers to more questions for anyone who really wants to learn:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL_8hVmWnP_O2EkT_3QxqaCv_eSjMfrrIa

anon_08dee says

They're simply saying many coastal areas that are a very small amount above sea level are going to be in trouble if ACC continues unabated.

How much has the sea risen?

anon_08dee says

But at this point I've gone too far. Talkin about proofs with people who think emotion is a proof.

So you have no answers to my questions?

Onvacation says

So you have no answers to my questions?

Questions were answered above. Why do you pretend otherwise?

Example from Hercs links:

Here's what NASA says:

This is not what NASA says. This is what someone says in an interview, an interview he is not going to be held responsible for. It is like a house inspector telling you one thing, and writing down in the report another.

In an official, for the record statement, NASA (and IPCC, and every other organization) are not alarmist at all. You would think the reports are written by different people.

HappyGilmore says

Questions were answered above. Why do you pretend otherwise?

Example from Hercs links:

Finally we are getting somewhere!
Now tell us why 8 inches of sea rise over 140 years is cataclysmic?

Onvacation says

Now tell us why 8 inches of sea rise over 140 years is cataclysmic?

Obviously it's not or else we'd be in a cataclysm.

But there's obviously a trend line there that shows that sea levels are rising, and since a high % of the US population lives on either coast--that's a problem.

anon_08dee says

So what ? Nobody is saying that.

The Sea Level doesn't rise the sponge absorbs the liquid, and coastlines adjust. Also beach reclamation and sand poaching doesn't help endangered coastlines either.

Salt deposits are NOT ancient dry seabeds, they are what's left of the Ocean water after after it is heated up by geothermal pressures.

Onvacation says

#politics

That says it all. Why wouldn't it be #science?

Record cold temperatures are due to global warming-got it.

P N Dr Lo R says

Onvacation says

#politics

That says it all. Why wouldn't it be #science?

I know. Right?
Probably all the money.

anon_08dee says

They're simply saying many coastal areas that are a very small amount above sea level are going to be in trouble if ACC continues unabated.

So, why did these idiots build so close to the water line? Now they want EVERYONE else to bail them out? They must be Democrats.

Onvacation says

anon_08dee says

They're simply saying many coastal areas that are a very small amount above sea level are going to be in trouble if ACC continues unabated.

How much has the sea risen?

How much has the land receded?

Sniper says

8 inches over 140 years?? Ha HA Ha ha Ha Ha Ha

How in the fuck did they launch laser precise Geo survey satellites in the 1800's?

Tenpoundbass says

Sniper says

8 inches over 140 years?? Ha HA Ha ha Ha Ha Ha

How in the fuck did they launch laser precise Geo survey satellites in the 1800's?

I call bullshit that the sea level rose at all in the last 140 years. I use Fort Jefferson as undisputed truth. I keep asking the Global Alarmist why does the satellite imagery of Fort Jefferson match exactly the map from 1880 when it was built. It has the same foot print in the ocean. The whole island is no more than 12 inches above sea level.

Here's a picture from 1898 30 years after it was built.

and here's that same shot from recent times.

Oh my GOD Ya'll look! The actual sea level against the sea wall is the exact same height. but it looks like some sand was reclaimed in the updated recent image. Now we all know they didn't life the foundation of that Fort. They simply made a beach for easy tourist access.

If anything it looks like the sea level has dropped from the 1800's image.

Tenpoundbass says

If anything it looks like the sea level has dropped from the 1800's image.

What if it was the land that dropped and sank and NOT the sea rising?

As humans continue to inhabit coastal and naturally swampy areas, the need to drain surface and subsurface water can cause significant sinking of local land. Subsidence occurs when upper layers of ground shift downward to replace the empty space left after drainage. Many urban areas are subsiding due to withdrawal of ground water or other fluids.

https://www.cstars.miami.edu/cstars-research/subsidence

Tenpoundbass says

Oh my GOD Ya'll look! The actual sea level against the sea wall is the exact same height. but it looks like some sand was reclaimed in the updated recent image. Now we all know they didn't life the foundation of that Fort. They simply made a beach for easy tourist access.

Are you kidding me that you think you can tell the exact height of the water from those two pictures?

Not to mention--were these pictures taken during the same tidal conditions?

HappyGilmore says

Not to mention--were these pictures taken during the same tidal conditions?

Keep grasping you can see the tide line right there on the wall.

HappyGilmore says

Are you kidding me that you think you can tell the exact height of the water from those two pictures?

Yes look the lower windows, the hight of the seawall cap. The tide line there's tons of water level queues.

Tenpoundbass says

Yes look the lower windows, the hight of the seawall cap. The tide line there's tons of water level queues.

The lower windows have obviously changed. The height of them is much different.

HappyGilmore says

The lower windows have obviously changed. The height of them is much different.

Tenpoundbass says

grasping

Onvacation says

Tenpoundbass says

grasping

No, grasping is using two pictures to try to refute 100 years of tidal gauge measurement data.

Tidal guage measurement my ass. Tidal level compared to what the shifting sea floor, the slumping shoreline?
If the sea was rising simply putting dirt on the beach would push the tide back out to the original line. The water should sump over any sand you put on the beach and still reach the A1A in Fort Lauderdale when the Kingtide washed it away in 2012. But that's not what happened, the shore line is right back where it was before the King Tide.

BTW it's called King Tide because it happens several time during every Decade. I remember when I first moved to South Florida in 1986 they just completed replenishing Ft Laud and Dania beach. South beach had that squiggly seawall built many meters from the A1A.

HappyGilmore says

The lower windows have obviously changed. The height of them is much different.

No they haven't! They are the same windows. They were cleaned in the more recent photos the photo in 1898 had been vacant for about 20 years. It had not been turned into a tourist spot yet. So the moss and mold was growing on the red brick discoloring them.
If you click on the photo then zoom in you can see the window sill is discolored on the bottom.

Tenpoundbass says

No they haven't!

Yes, the windows at the top of the picture facing 180 degrees have obviously changed. The size and shape is clearly different even with respect to the other windows.


Tenpoundbass says

Tidal guage measurement my ass. Tidal level compared to what the shifting sea floor, the slumping shoreline?

Here is an explanation on tidal gauge measurements:

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tide-gauge.html

HappyGilmore says

Here is an explanation on tidal gauge measurements:

Yes they are measuring water displacement at the shore. Silt and sediment be damned.

Tenpoundbass says

Yes they are measuring water displacement at the shore. Silt and sediment be damned.

It's not like they have a tape measure to the bottom. Silt and sediment are irrelevant to their measurement.

Well you can deny the Sea is not rising all you want from what ever land locked location you made that assesment from.
But I've been at the same 3 feet above sea level now for the last 30 years and every land mark with in a 300 mile radius that was even just inches above sea level are still exactly where they were then. So no sea rising. In fact two years ago for the first time since I came here in 1987, on July 4th. the beach front was a quarter mile out from where the shorline is supposed to be. I've been told that Hollywood Broadwalk was a mile further out at one time. But it was lost due to erosion not sea rising. The shoreline of all the tributaries are the same level since 1920's when they made and film the Jungle Queen. in the Fort Lauderdale inter coastal. The only thing that has changed the inter coastal waters used to be blue with white sand bottom. Now it's all murky brackish water and the bottom is covered in dead sediment.

We're almost at peak idiocracy...

HappyGilmore says

The lower windows have obviously changed. The height of them is much different.

Really?? Not on my computer?

Someone went in and changed all the brickwork 100 years later? Was that because of a higher $1T annual deficit?