The Cult of Climastrology doomsayers and computer models have continuously overestimated sea rise. By a lot. They constantly were nowhere near what the actual measurements showed. Such as the 20th Century sea rise being exactly average for what sea rise has been over the last 7,000-8,000 years, which is 6-8 inches per century. Which means that a warm period should be well above the average, since a cool period will be way below, potentially even negative. So….
It's a climate scam rule: Even if it's better than we thought, it's worse than we thought. https://t.co/5PhbSa6cGg
— Tom Nelson (@TomANelson) February 7, 2019
You really do not have to get beyond the headline and subhead to see the Doom, but we will anyhow
Most dire projection of sea-level rise is a little less likely, reports say
New analysis of Antarctica’s melting glaciers refines our understanding of climate change, while risks of global impacts remain significant.
It’s not exactly news that Greenland and Antarctica are shedding ice at record rates.
But in 2016, an eyebrow-raising idea ricocheted through the scientific community: It was possible, the authors said, that a warmer planet could push the towering ice cliffs at the fringes of the Antarctic ice sheet to essentially self-destruct, collapsing like a set of dominoes.
But two new pieces of research, published Wednesday in Nature, suggest a more measured retreat is likely in the coming decades. Both studies revise the estimates of just how much sea levels will rise by 2100 downward, suggesting that Antarctica could contribute somewhere between about three to 16 inches to the world’s oceans under the “worst case†scenarios.
Adding that to the other components that make up sea level rise—how the ocean expands as it warms (which will likely add about 10 inches), the melt from mountain glaciers (about six inches), and changes to the amount of water stored in lakes and rivers on land (one and a half inches), and the total is still a daunting number somewhere between just under two- to over three- foot range.
So, probably about a foot and a half, which would be what is expected during a Holocene warm period. Even though there has been no acceleration of sea rise increase, just a continuation of what we saw during the 20th Century. Also missing is an proof that what Nat Geo is discussing is mostly/solely of anthropogenic causation.
That is in no way a get-out-of-jail-free card, say the authors of both studies. It’s still an enormous amount of extra water that could slosh up onto coasts, enough to debilitate cities from Boston to Shanghai. But the most drastic impacts of sea-level rise, they say, are likely to kick in only after the turn of the century, giving communities around the world more time to adapt.
So, since their predictions for this century haven’t been panning out, they’re pushing them out past 2100. Huh.
What’s more, changes to the ice sheets in both Greenland and Antarctica could also trigger planet-wide shifts in temperature, ocean circulation, and many other parts of the climate system, says says Nick Golledge, a climate scientist at the Antarctic Research Center of the University of Victoria, Wellington, and the lead author of one of the studies.
“The sea-level estimates maybe aren’t as bad as we thought, but the climate predictions are worse,†says Golledge.
Worse!!!!! But, still no proof that this anything but a normal warm period.
So scientists looked to the past, to periods like the Pliocene, about 3.4 million years ago, or the Last Interglacial, about 120 thousand years ago—periods when the planet was as warm or warmer than today. They tested whether their models matched up with what we knew about how the ice sheets melted and how high sea levels rose at those times in the past.
So, what caused the warming back then? And why is it different from now? Oh, right, we’re just supposed to Believe. Have faith.
To recap, a 2016 study suggested the ice sheets might add more to sea level rise than previous thought. Two subsequent studies said, “Not so much.”
That’s the way science progresses.
Aside: Did you realize that 2018 was only the fourth warmest year on record, trailing 2015, 2016 and 2017, meaning the Earth is cooling!! Pause II!! You heard it here first.
Nignorant is incorrect as usual but, hey it’s nignorant.
Is NASA lying?
Anyway, although it’s a close call on 2015 (depending on the dataset) 2016 and 2017 were both warmer than 2018, and all were much warmer than any previously recorded year.
You could look it up.
We understand you don’t trust the NYT, much preferring the Gateway Pudendum, but here’s a nice summary to help with your whignorance.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/06/climate/fourth-hottest-year.html
Are you sure. Since a whistleblower said NOAA which keeps track of the temperatures said NOAA was cooking the books to make it look warmer and then when their data was subpoena’d by congress their data was magically lost just like HRC’s emails.
Of course its warmer when a couple hundred scientists on the dole and being paid by the deep state which wants a world government is in charge of the temperature data and WONT SHOW ANYONE THE DATA…
They just say believe us.
Yeah AGW is a scam. Where I live its been pretty chilly and lots of snow. In fact its been that way for quite a while.
But, but the global temps can be averaged to a thousandth of a degree, you silly deniers.
The NYT and nignorant say so.
StillAlive: Are you sure?
Yes. You’re back to denying it’s even warming?
StillAlive: Since a whistleblower said NOAA which keeps track of the temperatures said NOAA was cooking the books to make it look warmer and then when their data was subpoena’d by congress their data was magically lost just like HRC’s emails.
That’s false. NOAA refused to provide internal communications, which are generally kept confidential to promote frank discourse among scientists. The data which was the basis of the study at issue was provided. Karl et al., Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus, Science 2015.
StillAlive: Of course its warmer when a couple hundred scientists on the dole and being paid by the deep state which wants a world government is in charge of the temperature data and WONT SHOW ANYONE THE DATA…
There are multiple, independent data-sets showing the same warming trend, including data collected on the surface, atmosphere, oceans, and space.
So NOAA broke FOIA regulations?
And you wonder why people don’t have trust on this?
gitarcarver: So NOAA broke FOIA regulations?
There’s an exemption for “inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters”. The courts try to strike a balance between the public interest and the institutional interest in allowing frank discourse among scientists. The Congress could have pressed the issue, but they didn’t, presumably because their case is weak.
In any case, the original claim was false, that the data was being withheld. Anyone who wants to check the results can do so.
There’s an exemption for “inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or lettersâ€.
Nice try, but no.
The exemption you are claiming has specific parameters, one of which has to be met is that the memos would not generally be made available to people outside of a lawsuit.
Clearly that is not the case here.
Whether Congress pushed the issue or not still doesn’t make it right. Furthermore, other agencies claiming the same exemption have been smacked down by the courts.
NOAA conspired to block the FOIA and then says “trust us.”
Not happening.
If iy’s still run by the dullards Zippy installed, yeah, they’re lying.
“Is NASA lyingâ€. Maybe not in this case, but just momumentally stupid. https://realclimatescience.com/2019/02/basic-physics-at-nasa/
There are multiple independent data sets that show the same warming….â€. Not really..https://realclimatescience.com/2017/09/the-global-temperature-record-is-a-complete-fake/
Jl: Not really.
You don’t consider surface station, ocean heat content, and satellite observations to be independent data-sets? Of course they are.
Not exactly.
Science finds out WHY it won’t be as much.
Just doing a CYA when you’ve been caught before doesn’t count.
Did you realize that 2018 was only the fourth warmest year on record, trailing 2015, 2016 and 2017, meaning the Earth is cooling!! Pause II!! You heard it here first.
Go back a few million years, Spielberg. It’s been cooling quite a while.
PS Where was the Harvey? the last couple of days. The sight of all those Klanswomen led by Pelosi Galore scare him?
Actually it’s been cooling the past 5000 years, but has shot up the past 100 and a half or so.
Humans weren’t around millions of years ago. Human cities are only a few thousand years old. Our coastal megalopolis’s (megalopoli?) are only hundreds of years old.
It’s been warming rapidly the past 100+ years.
It’s not the current warming that’s the problem but it’s the totally man-madeup future warming or something.
“100 years†Wait- so you’re including pre-industrial, low CO2 as part of your “warming rapidly†mantra you always regurgitate? Interesting
Really? 5000 years.
They had Im Ho Tep taking temperature readings when he wasn’t building pyramids?
It’s been warming rapidly the past 100+ years.
But that’s because they’ve cooked the books. That always heats up a room.
That’s not progress, that’s confusion.
Which is why the climate scam is such a joke.
Did you realize that 2018 was only the fourth warmest year on record, trailing 2015, 2016 and 2017, meaning the Earth is cooling
According to whom? Since we know the books are cooked, and we only have 160 years to go by, that’s not much of a perspective.
So their predictions didn’t pan out therefore they create newer, better, more urgent predictions. It’s like dealing with children.
“Our computer model projections were off, but we still believe our computer model projections…â€
But they were consistent with all the other projections that were off, deniosaur.
Deniers: We didn’t believe earlier computer models but we believe these new ones.
Scientists, including climate scientists, are not a monolith. The 2016 “idea” that is being discussed (but curiously, never with a citation) was not described by the same scientists who published the Nature papers.
That is exactly how science works. Models, hypotheses, conclusions are proposed and then tested by others. Is it messy? You betcha!
If climate science was a monolithic scam or hoax, why would “they” allow the papers to be published yesterday in Nature, the most relevant scientific journal we have? Wouldn’t “they” continue to push “the tidal waves are coming” and “doom”?
Of course they are.
Lefties must all tow the party line or they will be shunned.
That is exactly how science works. Models, hypotheses, conclusions are proposed and then tested by others
IOW If at first you don’t succeed, lie, lie again. Missed the word, proof, in that little explanation.
If climate science was a monolithic scam or hoax, why would “they†allow the papers to be published yesterday in Nature, the most relevant scientific journal we have?
How many Lefties write for it?
“That’s exactly how science works….models, hypotheses are proposed and tested by others …is it messy? You betcha!†Another good one from you know who. But that’s not how it’s been going in real life- the doomers have been saying for a long time “the science is settledâ€, which is exactly the opposite of what the professor said. Self-awareness is a good quality to have, J
Rarely is science (as in theories) “settled”, but we reach levels of confidence in many. Gravity is “settled” science, although we still have much to learn about the “how”. As with all scientific theories further observation/experiment is ongoing. We still need to understand more about ocean currents, climate sensitivity, polar vortices, coral reefs, clathrates, permafrost and on and on.
The “settled” science is that the Earth is warming from CO2 we humans add to the atmosphere. But as with all scientific theories further observation/experiment is ongoing. We still need to understand more about ocean currents, climate sensitivity, polar vortices, coral reefs, clathrates, permafrost and on and on.
Ergo the theory of gravity equals the theory of man made-up global warming and/or vice versa.
Logical nignorance.
Elwood you amaze me. I’d bet that you fuse to admit the biological fact that a baby in the womb is a human being and I bet you don’t believe that because then you’d have to admit killing him is murder, but you believe in some ridiculous theory, not fact, that man is so powerful he’s changing the climate and I’d also bet you fail to see what you consider “science” is just your politics.
That’s just crazy talk, denioppotamus.
We appreciate the fact that many Americans think embryos and fetuses are people. Personally, I wish we had no abortions in America. None.
At what point in the womb does the embryo/fetus become a person? And why does nature “kill” so many of them. Many an embryo, zygote, blastula, morula and gastrula are lost down the toilet or on sanitary napkins unknown to the woman. Would you strain the toilet contents to save “lives”?
Would you allow abortions to save the life of a woman? Would you force a 13 yr old to give birth to her father’s child? (There are more abortions for 14 and under girls than for full-term women).
It is a fact that the Earth is warming and a fact that humans are adding gigatons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year. It’s a fact that CO2 absorbs electromagnetic energy in the infrared range. These facts and many others led to the theory that human-produced CO2 is causing the Earth to warm.
I love it! Idiot Rodent wants us to believe global whatever is real and then kills Albert Gore The Living Redwood’s only real argument that the science IS settled.
Gravity is “settled†science, although we still have much to learn about the “howâ€.
So it’s not really settled.
Back in the twentieth century, when I was living in the Old Dominion, a fellow contacted me, wanting me to pour a concrete slab for an addition. The city of Hampton would not grandfather his house, the floor slab of which was at around 7’6″ above sea level, and insisted that the addition had to meet code, at 9′ above sea level. (My own house had a finished floor about 12′ above sea level.)
I declined the job, primarily because it would have required cutting into his roof and interior ceiling to come up the two risers into the addition.
The 9 foot standard was a reasonable one, but even at 7’6″, this guy’s home wouldn’t be flooded by the projected sea level rise.
William Teach: So, probably about a foot and a half, which would be what is expected during a Holocene warm period. Even though there has been no acceleration of sea rise increase, just a continuation of what we saw during the 20th Century.
Total sea level rise would be 2-3 feet. Here’s a map of Florida showing a 1 meter rise.
William Teach: Also missing is an proof that what Nat Geo is discussing is mostly/solely of anthropogenic causation.
The paper does discuss the relationship between CO2 and Antarctic melt; however, showing anthropic causation is not the primary purpose of the paper, anthropic causation already having been scientifically well-established.
Here’s another manmade-up map.
I happen to live on the east coast of Florida, just below the Kennedy Space Center. The Atlantic is 300 feet from my home.
This same map was used by the local government on a discussion / town meeting on “sustainability.”
People from FIT, UF, USF, and other local colleges had come to this talk after witnessing the same talk in other municipalities.
They walked up to the map and put an actual elevation map from FEMA over top of that map and it wasn’t even close. They then put up the flood plain maps from FEMA showing storm surge of 6 feet. Once again, the maps were not close and the map from the “sustainability” group had been grossly exaggerated.
Immediately after that, the chair of the meeting said that no one could question AGW in this meeting even though the meeting was on the alleged effects of AGW.
See. The “debate is over”.
gitarcarver: They walked up to the map and put an actual elevation map from FEMA over top of that map and it wasn’t even close.
We just checked NOAA’s high-tide flooding viewer, and it is reasonably consistent with the limited resolution from Weiss & Overpeck above. You may want to post something a bit more substantial.
Ya see the kiddiez were there and you were not, denier.
And your point? Flood plain data is not the same as “high tide.”
For example, in Cocoa Beach, there are buildings within the flood plain as defined by FEMA but non get flooded every day by “high tides.”
You may want to try something more substantial.
Except, of course, that is not the resolution that was used in the meetings. The maps were actually printed and at least five feet long.
You may want to try something more substantial.
Yea, but they were reasonably consistent with that other bullshit.
Substantial too.
gitarcarver: For example, in Cocoa Beach, there are buildings within the flood plain as defined by FEMA but non get flooded every day by “high tides.â€
That’s right. The maps don’t measure the same thing. What is your point then?
So that’s a bit more substantial for you kiddiez?
Or not.
Except, of course, it hasn’t.
What would prove to you that the warming results from human generated CO2?
Some facts:
CO2 absorbs infrared radiation (IR).
The amount of IR leaving the Earth correlates inversely with CO2 levels in the troposphere.
The wavelengths of IR reduced in the stratosphere are the ones absorbed by CO2.
The stratosphere is cooling.
The Earth (troposphere) is warming.
The increase of atmospheric CO2 is from fossil fuel burning.
The warming is not trivial, microscopic, tiny or miniscule but is likely the warmest the Earth has been during the entire Holocene.
The CO2 levels are the highest in 1,000,000 years.
The Sun has not been warming.
Earth orbital variations are not the cause.
Cosmic rays are not the cause.
Undersea volcanoes are not the cause.
There is no such thing as magic. And even “natural phenomena have a cause.
So what is causing the Earth to warm?
What evidence would “prove” that the Earth is warming from human-generated CO2?
We’ve been down this path before. It is clear that you are so desperate that you are not resorting to being a sockpuppet.
Sorry, I don’t engage in discussions with sockpuppets, supporters or murder, or rapists.
gitarcarver:
Yet, you do… until the going gets tough. LOL. You’re the one with the restraining orders, not me. 1000 ft from any school, right?
Re: sockpuppet
Is gitarcarver your real name, sockpuppet?
All kinds of other possible reasons, but you knew that. By the way, didn’t you ask somewhere else if NASA lies? Take a look at the 2 graphs in this link where they removed pre-1950 warming, which of course if left in wouldn’t do their “ hockey stick†any favors. http://notrickszone.com/2017/11/09/new-paper-most-modern-warming-including-for-recent-decades-is-due-to-solar-forcing-not-co2/
No citations, though.
Tough to buy on your word alone, Alvina.
So do you also deny the theory of gravity too? What proof do you need that gravity is real? The evidence is overwhelming.
Funny, J. Of course it’s not overwhelming, otherwise there’d be no contradictory data out there, but there’s tons of it. http://notrickszone.com/2018/12/27/92-new-papers-link-solar-forcing-to-climate-some-predict-a-solar-induced-global-cooling-by-2030/
Not nignorant.
Jl: http://notrickszone.com/2018/12/27/92-new-papers-link-solar-forcing-to-climate-some-predict-a-solar-induced-global-cooling-by-2030/
Per the author: “Solar forcing would provide only about one-fourth as much warming, if the solar trend persists over the same period. Solar forcing could be significant, but not dominant.”
So your own cited authority rejects your conclusion.
LOL. Youse guys are devouring each other.
Hmmm..Except that there’s about 92 papers linked…
j,
We’ve been down this road before. Few of the papers that Pierre Gosselin “abstracts” say what he says they say. But at least Gosselin went to college.
Previously, we’ve picked some of your cited articles at random and proven that point.
Gosselin is a dedicated denier whose work exaggerates the conclusions from scientific articles.
You might be better served to read the articles yourself.
We understand the right’s feelings/beliefs that there’s a grand conspiracy for communists/socialists/libs/Dems to create a One World Order, using global warming as the crucible. Unfortunately for you there is little evidence to support your conspiracy.
jl: Except that there’s about 92 papers linked…
We took the first paper and showed it doesn’t say what you think it says. The rest is just a Gish Gallop.
Actually you didn’t.
The evidence for AGW is a scam. The entire scientific process is controlled by a few hundred scientists all paid to find global warming. They peer review each other and put forth their data which can never be analyzed by the general scientific populace. We need to trust them.
The AGW scientists are scam artists being paid obscene amounts of money by people like George Soros and others to find the earth is in peril.
Danger will robinson, were all gonna die in 12 years. Yet the democrats do nothing. Not even the democrats believe in AGW. They simply give lip service to it to get votes. The left needs to split into the progressive wing and the neo-conservative wing and then we would get some action on AGW.
SA: They simply give lip service to it to get votes.
Has global warming been an effective vote-getter? Really?
SA: Yet the democrats do nothing.
Just stop.
Wasn’t it the GOP who blocked the 2010 Climate bill, sponsored by Dems?
Wasn’t it tRump who is deconstructing all of President Obama’s executive actions on climate, since the GOP blocked all legislation?
Wasn’t tRump who pulled the US out of international agreements on climate?
SA: The AGW scientists are scam artists being paid obscene amounts of money by people like George Soros
Another right wing conspiracy. How much do you think climate scientists make? Any evidence that they are receiving under the table payments from billions to support the totalitarian New World Order.
Here’s the gov’t listing for scientist pay (Ph.D.s with experience), likely for NASA, NOAA, EPA etc:
GS-12: $63,600 to $82,680
GS-13: $75,628 to $98,317
GS-14: $89,370 to $116,181
GS-15: $105,123 to $136,659
Not bad by middle class standards but not stockbroker, lobbyist or real estate tycoon money.
Zippy hired a lot of them in 8 years.
Has global warming been an effective vote-getter? Really?
Among dead Democrats.
Latest poll.
Most Americans now worry about climate change—and want to fix it
New polls show recent disasters and personal experience have raised and widened global warming worries, but researchers warn of a huge gap between awareness and an adequate response.
OMG were all gonna die according to the national geographic.
Global Warming Concerns Rise Among Americans in New Poll
“I’ve never seen jumps in some of the key indicators like this,†the lead researcher said.
OMG were all gonna die according to the NEW YORK TIMES.
Americans’ climate change concerns surge to record levels, poll shows
Total of 72% polled now say global warming is personally important to them, Yale said, as 73% accept it is happening
OMG were all gonna die according to the batshit left Guardian.
AND NOW FOR THE REAL NEWS.
New Gallup Poll: Americans do not even mention global warming as a problem – 36 ‘problems’ cited, but not climate
by the way Gallup rates trump at 37 percent. So its not like they are in the tank for Republicans.
Let not your heart grow weary. The democrats dont even believe in AGW. And AOC just released her green new deal with will cost America about 750 trillion dollars since she wants to replace all the current buildings with new energy efficient ones…..LOLOLOL. It must be lonely being a whacko AGW looney toon.
We appreciate the fact that many Americans think embryos and fetuses are people. Personally, I wish we had no abortions in America.
Your little voices are as big a bunch of hypocrites as you, Matilda.
And I have yet to hear of a woman who said, “Honey, feel my tummy. The fetus/embryo just kicked.
We understand the right’s feelings/beliefs that there’s a grand conspiracy for communists/socialists/libs/Dems to create a One World Order, using global warming as the crucible. Unfortunately for you there is little evidence to support your conspiracy.
Maybe your little voices could find a few who weren’t hard core Lefties.
Yet, you do… until the going gets tough. LOL. You’re the one with the restraining orders, not me. 1000 ft from any school, right?
I thought Teach had a rule about all that. You better watch it, Harvey, or you’ll lose your happy home.
We appreciate the fact that many Americans think embryos and fetuses are people. Personally, I wish we had no abortions in America. None.
At what point in the womb does the embryo/fetus become a person? And why does nature “kill†so many of them. Many an embryo, zygote, blastula, morula and gastrula are lost down the toilet or on sanitary napkins unknown to the woman. Would you strain the toilet contents to save “lives�
Would you allow abortions to save the life of a woman? Would you force a 13 yr old to give birth to her father’s child? (There are more abortions for 14 and under girls than for full-term women).
Roger Rabbit and his little voices confuse artificial, man-made processes with those of nature. Science was never his long suit.
And abortions to save the mother are rare.
It is a fact that the Earth is warming and a fact that humans are adding gigatons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year. It’s a fact that CO2 absorbs electromagnetic energy in the infrared range. These facts and many others led to the theory that human-produced CO2 is causing the Earth to warm.
Idina never heard of photosynthesis, of course.
We’re beginning to think you’re not a human but just a random sentence generator, likely of Russian origin.
Let’s say you get your totalitarian way and can imprison a poor woman for getting an abortion a month into her pregnancy. How do you know that “nature” wouldn’t have taken the conceptus a week or month later?
Since abortions to save the mother are rare, you would force her to deliver and die? Why do you hate women?
I’m called a n*gger, a rapist and pedophile by drowningpuppies and his master, gitarcarver, nearly on a daily basis, so I should worry that I’M violating the rules?
Are your feelings hurt, little one?
Guess you aren’t rude and crude and call others vile names. No one called you a nigger, a rapist, and a pedophile nearly on a daily basis, little drama queen.
Overreact much? How’s the Mud Shark?
ICYMI, people aren’t supposed to dredge up other people’s pasts, especially when it’s on your say-so.
We’re beginning to think you’re not a human but just a random sentence generator, likely of Russian origin.
That’s your thing. And I notice you can’t even answer what I say. You have to quote from the Alan Colmes songbook.
Let’s say you get your totalitarian way and can imprison a poor woman for getting an abortion a month into her pregnancy. How do you know that “nature†wouldn’t have taken the conceptus a week or month latter?
The word is baby, and, since we have no crystal ball, we have no reason to believe it would be miscarried unless medical science indicates otherwise.
And why does the Left hate babies and mothers? Is it because most of the women who have babies aren’t Leftists?
Is it because those women will have several children?
Is it because those babies will be raised in a Conservative environment so that all your vote fraud will be unable to stop the true winner?
Since abortions to save the mother are rare, you would force her to deliver and die? Why do you hate women?
They’re rare because obstetrics is not as hit-and-miss anymore.