US coasts sea level rise 10 to 12 inches by 2050

[Van Der Beek]

Originally Posted by ikebartlett

We are still coming out of an ice age, the ice is still melting. Chicago raised its whole City a century ago because of flooding, we’ll deal with it. If you’re worried about it then don’t buy waterfront property.

They have too much ego invested into the lie but are for the time being comfortable enough with it still, it's why they keep double down and get increasingly combative, strident and accusatory.

Very much like all the other "environmental" grifters out there. Buy into our dogma or else....

Yes, we are still coming out of an ice age, most definitely. I linked to a video I am pretty sure they didn't bother watching.
https://ihavenotv.com/killer-floods-nova-pbs

Suffice it to say we had even more ice in the past, the melting of that ice created floods.


Addendum.
It's like Santa Clause. Children are told he exist (by authority figures mind you) only to later grow up coming into awareness that he doesn't exist. Yet they still want to believe.

[rsementi]

Don’t worry about PREDICTIONS of sea level rising!
I’d be way more conecerned with the legislators who believe it is a future catastrophe. They will pass unnecessary laws that will not help but only further violations of our rights.
Just remember, NOT ONE prediction from any of the so called “leading climate experts” have ever come true! NOT ONE!
Remember the so called documentary “Inconvenient Truth? I do. NONE of the catastrophes that Al Gore PREDICTED in his climate alarmist ever came true. And he refuses to debate anyone who challenges his predictions. He just answers with “The science is settled”.
The science is not settled. Most of what is published everyday are predictions. There’s no consensus of scientists, there’s only facts that can be validated or not. Even Obama’s climate scientist, Steven Koonin, just published a book with a long title that starts with “Unsettled”, based on his due diligence of studying ALL of the annual IPCC scientific studies from over the past decades. The bottom line conclusions based on FACTS, not predictions: that over the past 100+ years, global warming has been very mild, less than one degree Celsius. Sea levels are rising very slowly and are not a threat in the long term. None of the computer models include the most important factor: human ingenuity. We know how to deal with sea flooding. We already have proven technology in the Netherlands. After reading Koonin’s book, plus the book by Alex Epstein “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels”, I no longer worry about the climate changing over the next 100 years.
First came the predictions for global cooling. Didn’t happen. Then came predictions of global warming by 5,, 10 degrees or higher. Didn’t happen. Now the use the blanket terms: climate change. Of course the climate changes!! And don’t be fooled by the headlines of “record breaking heat” or record breaking hurricanes, or tornados or any extreme weather phenomenon. Read the source data not the “recaps” or “summaries”..

I find that most sailors I meet are truly scientists themselves. Relying on real facts to control and navigate the boat. Read those two books and let your inner scientist soak in the facts.

[ron17571]

People can create polls and write articles to support whatever agenda they have. You can usually follow the money to see the truth.
The GW liars have done much damage to believing the opinion of scientists like how doctors appear to have sold themselves to pharmaceutical companies over common sense and their patients' lives.

[Skua]

I have been going to the same coastal area, my entire life. Using my own observational data, I have noticed NO change in the sea level. The tides are no higher, now, than they where in 1979. In fact in many areas, the beaches are now 2x or more in width than they were in the 60's. Easily verifiable with satellite imaging going all the way back to the mid 70's. Does this mean there isn't a problem or is there? Dunno, but what I do know, is the loudest voices of this hysteria, are all buying houses on the coast, or in the case of B. Obama, literally on the beach.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by rsementi

Read those two books and let your inner scientist soak in the facts.

The problem is finding and relying on just one or two books that happen to agree with you.

Both those books are problematic, btw:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...e-badly-wrong/

https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/review-t...l-fuels-really

Real scientists look at ALL the facts, not just the opinions of a few authors who agree with you.

[Van Der Beek]

Originally Posted by rsementi

Don’t worry about PREDICTIONS of sea level rising!
I’d be way more conecerned with the legislators who believe it is a future catastrophe. They will pass unnecessary laws that will not help but only further violations of our rights.
Just remember, NOT ONE prediction from any of the so called “leading climate experts” have ever come true! NOT ONE!
Remember the so called documentary “Inconvenient Truth? I do. NONE of the catastrophes that Al Gore PREDICTED in his climate alarmist ever came true. And he refuses to debate anyone who challenges his predictions. He just answers with “The science is settled”.
The science is not settled. Most of what is published everyday are predictions. There’s no consensus of scientists, there’s only facts that can be validated or not. Even Obama’s climate scientist, Steven Koonin, just published a book with a long title that starts with “Unsettled”, based on his due diligence of studying ALL of the annual IPCC scientific studies from over the past decades. The bottom line conclusions based on FACTS, not predictions: that over the past 100+ years, global warming has been very mild, less than one degree Celsius. Sea levels are rising very slowly and are not a threat in the long term. None of the computer models include the most important factor: human ingenuity. We know how to deal with sea flooding. We already have proven technology in the Netherlands. After reading Koonin’s book, plus the book by Alex Epstein “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels”, I no longer worry about the climate changing over the next 100 years.
First came the predictions for global cooling. Didn’t happen. Then came predictions of global warming by 5,, 10 degrees or higher. Didn’t happen. Now the use the blanket terms: climate change. Of course the climate changes!! And don’t be fooled by the headlines of “record breaking heat” or record breaking hurricanes, or tornados or any extreme weather phenomenon. Read the source data not the “recaps” or “summaries”..

I find that most sailors I meet are truly scientists themselves. Relying on real facts to control and navigate the boat. Read those two books and let your inner scientist soak in the facts.

Demonstrates right there It's about politics not the environment. It's a dead giveaway.

People are slow to catch up but they eventually will, you just have to be patient and accept there's going to be stragglers.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by ron17571

People can create polls and write articles to support whatever agenda they have. You can usually follow the money to see the truth.

ROFL!!! Let's see -
All US Government funding in 2017 for Climate Science $13B
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-223

Exxon Mobil profit 2017 $19.7B
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-223

That is only one oil company. Ignores all other oil companies. Ignores coal mining companies, natural gas drillers, pipeline distributors, on and on and on it goes.

So if you believe what you say and can follow a logical train of thought, you would conclude that it is the fossil fuel industry money that is distorting the agenda.
But no, just another pathetic, flimsy argument by a denier shot down without even trying very hard.
Seriously?

Originally Posted by ron17571

The GW liars have done much damage to believing the opinion of scientists.

If your mirror is broken, I'll spring for a new one for you!

[donradcliffe]

I was skeptical of the title of this thread because I have been in the same harbor for 50 years, and my mark one eyeball tells me I can maybe see a one or two inch change in the sea level, but it is masked by changes from tide and wind.

So I decided to do a little "scientific" research. I downloaded the attached tide gauge readings from NOAA, which covers over 80 years of observations at nearby Alameda.

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sl...tml?id=9414750

I can only hope that no one has fiddled with the data, but the note that "the average seasonal cycle has been removed" does not inspire confidence.

Note that the sea level in alameda has risen by less than 3 inches in the last 80 years.

Note that there is NO acceleration of sea level rise in the last 10 or 20 years.

I am familiar with how our government works. NOAA employs scientists, but they report to politicians. The politicians want studies that support their agendas. The scientist that says "sea levels will rise by 10 to 12 inches in the next 28 years" gets a promotion. The scientist that says "history doesn't support this prediction" gets fired. The other scientists get the message.

I call BS on the title of this thread.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by lestersails

ROFL!!! Let's see -
All US Government funding in 2017 for Climate Science $13B
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-223

Exxon Mobil profit 2017 $19.7B
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-223

That is only one oil company. Ignores all other oil companies. Ignores coal mining companies, natural gas drillers, pipeline distributors, on and on and on it goes.

You left out subsidies to the fossil-fuel industries, which still are more than the subsidies to renewables.






But apparently some money shouldn't be followed. It's just too inconvenient.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

I call BS on the title of this thread.

I call that post riotously hilarious!
Do you also do quantum mechanics research?
Neurosurgery research?

Please - enlighten us further!

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You left out subsidies to the fossil-fuel industries, which still are more than the subsidies to renewables.






But apparently some money shouldn't be followed. It's just too inconvenient.

Thanks Lake Effect that is a very important point. That sacred cow shall not be gored! Seriously, these people would fail high school forensics with their debating tactics.

[rsementi]

Absolutely correct. A bunch of dishonest climate catastrophists.

[rsementi]

You are absolutely right...and it is so funny that you reminded me of the fact that Obama live on the beach...a guess he is not worried about sea level rising since his climate scientist, Steven Koonin, just published a book called "unsettled" - as n the science is NOT settled.

[rsementi]

NOAA also lied about temperature history. They literally moved observation points and they omit data. Tony Heller's YT videos proves this to be true. He compares the raw data to the "released" data.

[fuzzywuzzy]

For the naysayers...in order to be confident there won't be multiple problems from climate change, you have to either a.) think there's no difference in the amount of CO2 and methane produced over the earth's history, (which means you really don't know any history at all) or, that it somehow has no real impact on the greenhouse effect (which is why the earth is habitable in the first place) and b.) the poles really aren't melting, and even if they are, the additional water contained in the ice isn't going anywhere.

Seems to me that there's plenty of evidence that humans are causing global warming that has NEVER occurred in the earth's history - far more evidence than there is that cigarettes are harmful or lead in gasoline is dangerous for human health, and yet people who wholeheartedly believe that, will refuse to believe the data being produced in multiple universities around the world regarding climate change. They can't actually name the folks generating "paranoia", or some kind of conspiracy, but they'll buy into it, since they simply don't want to change their lifestyles. Or, they want a world in which government doesn't get involved in people's lives, and therefore will simply not believe the scientific consensus on any major problem that the private sector can't deal with effectively. We've seen this with Covid - people will believe any source of info, no matter how questionable, as long as that source says they don't have to wear a mask or get vaccinated. People have a real hard time escaping their set of beliefs, even when presented with overwhelming evidence of something.

Sea level may not rise everywhere 12", but it's pretty clear in some areas the water levels are rising. In my old home in NJ, we could see a visual record of floods after the house was first built in the late 1800's in the basement; however, the 1st floor was the original wood. In the 1970's the water got pretty close to the top of the basement, but went no higher...2011 and last year, the first floor was covered. A hotter world, without the poles is going to be a mess, but this is not impossible to correct People need to change their habits, but governments need to do a lot more hat they're currently doing.