Sea-level rise claims five islands in Solomons: study

[SSDD]

Link?

I can't tell you how tickled I am at the quotes of mine you've chosen for your sig. Keep em up.

well I'll agree you don't debate using facts. We know this and you're right it is a great signature.

That sig digs him in the ass every time he sees it....it describes climate science to a T and he hates that he ever admitted it.

 

[mamooth]

Do you remember what year that was? hahahaahahahahaaha, how come it is still coming out of the ocean? Pacific Ocean that is.

That's the USS Utah memorial. And here's a 1976 photo showing the wreck significantly higher above the surface.

Of course, because you don't know the state of the tides, you can't simply compare photos and declare the wreck is sinking below the surface. However, it does show you have failed to prove your case that the wreck isn't doing so, and hence it doesn't back your conspiracy theory.

Keep trying. You look so funny when you do.

 

[jc456]

Do you remember what year that was? hahahaahahahahaaha, how come it is still coming out of the ocean? Pacific Ocean that is.

That's the USS Utah memorial. And here's a 1976 photo showing the wreck significantly higher above the surface.

Of course, because you don't know the state of the tides, you can't simply compare photos and declare the wreck is sinking below the surface. However, it does show you have failed to prove your case that the wreck isn't doing so, and hence it doesn't back your conspiracy theory.

Keep trying. You look so funny when you do.

funny, you can't tell how high out of the water my photo is. The fact that it is still out of the water after 70 years means that there is no significant sea level rise. And you are correct, depending on the tide. It's still out of the water.

 

[mamooth]

The fact that it is still out of the water after 70 years means that there is no significant sea level rise.

Someone who is not a complete moron would note that if the object still pokes out of the water, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that sea level hasn't risen _enough_ to cover that object.

A first grader could literally have told you that. You're literally worse at science and logic than an average first grader.

 

[jc456]

The fact that it is still out of the water after 70 years means that there is no significant sea level rise.

Someone who is not a complete moron would note that if the object still pokes out of the water, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that sea level hasn't risen _enough_ to cover that object.

A first grader could literally have told you that. You're literally worse at science and logic than an average first grader.

and a kindergarten kid can tell that if something is still sticking out of the water after 70 years knows that the thousands of articles of surging sea levels is bs.

 

[IsaacNewton]

You have to ignore the people that deny this is happening. They are scared children, let them hide under the blanky.

The adults of the world have to act, and that requires ignoring the ignorant.

 

[jc456]

Who exactly are you referring to?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Do you remember what year that was? hahahaahahahahaaha, how come it is still coming out of the ocean? Pacific Ocean that is.

That's the USS Utah memorial. And here's a 1976 photo showing the wreck significantly higher above the surface.

Of course, because you don't know the state of the tides, you can't simply compare photos and declare the wreck is sinking below the surface. However, it does show you have failed to prove your case that the wreck isn't doing so, and hence it doesn't back your conspiracy theory.

Keep trying. You look so funny when you do.

The concept of tides is beyond the grasp of understanding for the moonbat anti science left.

 

[Markle]

The fact that it is still out of the water after 70 years means that there is no significant sea level rise.

Someone who is not a complete moron would note that if the object still pokes out of the water, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that sea level hasn't risen _enough_ to cover that object.

A first grader could literally have told you that. You're literally worse at science and logic than an average first grader.

Of course, a first grader could have told us that if an object is till poking out of the water, over three-quarters of a century later, the sea level has not risen. You seem to be forgetting that you are dealing with Progressives. I'm being facetious but the point is valid.

You should be cautious, though. We all know how the TRUTH and FACTS affect Progressives. They get dizzy, disoriented and then they start falling down in the streets not unlike cordwood.

 

[SSDD]

co2, the biggest control knob, richard alley - Yahoo Search Results Yahoo Search Results
Dr. Richard Alley, at the annual AGU Conferance.

You really are a hoot rocks...that idiot video was back when the supposed climate sensitivity to CO2 was what?....4 degrees...6 degrees...now it is down to barely a degree on its way to zero where it belongs...

 

[Crick]

Looks like 3 to me

By Rebecca Lindsey - frequency_distribution1.png on: Climate Q&A : Blogs. Earth Observatory, part of the EOS Project Science Office, located at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=22389856

 

[SSDD]

Looks like 3 to me

By Rebecca Lindsey - frequency_distribution1.png on: Climate Q&A : Blogs. Earth Observatory, part of the EOS Project Science Office, located at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=22389856

More simulations and models....goody...got any observed, measured, quantified data that supports the claim?...I mean, the atmosphere is an observable, measurable, quantifiable entity is it not....as are the forces that drive it....why do you rely entirely on models which have been failing spectacularly for decades?

 

[Crick]

Tell you what: you explain to the world's scientists how they OUGHT to be calculating climate sensitivity and as soon as you've got them convinced, they can produce some new numbers.

PS, that graph is based on an ENORMOUS amount of real data.

 

[SSDD]

Tell you what: you explain to the world's scientists how they OUGHT to be calculating climate sensitivity and as soon as you've got them convinced, they can produce some new numbers.

PS, that graph is based on an ENORMOUS amount of real data.

Actually crick, it is based on absolutely zero observed, measured, quantified data gathered out in the observable, measurable, quantifiable atmosphere...

And the world's climate scientists aren't interested in observable, measurable, quantifiable data because it doesn't support the AGW narrative....which is why everything that comes out of climate pseudoscience is the product of failing computer models.

 

[Crick]

Either you don't know what the fuck you're talking about or you're lying or both. I find the last most likely.

If you think models are made from thin air, you're more stupid than even I had imagined. You need to start listening to the rest of the world, cause that little voice in your head is a fool

 

[Old Rocks]

Sea-level rise claims five islands in Solomons: study
May 7, 2016

At least 11 islands across the northern Solomon Islands have either totally disappeared over recent decades or are currently experiencing severe erosion, an Australian study shows

Five islands have disappeared in the Pacific's Solomon Islands due to rising sea levels and coastal erosion, according to an Australian study that 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.

"Shoreline recession at two sites has destroyed villages that have existed since at least 1935, leading to community relocations."


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-05-sea-level-islands-solomons.html#jCp

Read more at the link....


Anyways, this is strong evidence that our oceans are in fact raising...Another piece of evidence is that a tidal gauge near New york has seen sea level raise of nearly 1 foot in the past 100 years and LA has lost a shit tone of land...So is it all a hoax? I don't think so.

Hilarious. Here we go again where the ocean rises in one location but not nearby.

What is much funnier (and very pathetic) is the fact that you can't point to any place "nearby" on the Pacific Ocean where the sea levels are not rising just as fast, you lying, deceitful, anti-science troll.

How about the tide gauge that has been in place right there since 1994 which didn't show the rapid sea level rise....the one that was ignored and left out of the study in favor of only the short term data which showed only the positive phase of the inter-annual, decadal and multi-decadal oscillations? Look to the long term gauge and no such rapid sea level rise is evident...

Links, to something other than your ass.

 

[Fenton Lum]

The Right has a very cavalier attitude about the environment. Witness James Watt, Reagan's Sec. of the interior, who was in favor of logging in National Parks, because the Biblical predicted End Times were upon us, anyway. The more things change, the more they stay the same...

cavalier? Seriously? excuse me while I laugh. Why don't you post up some evidence to support the doom and gloom nature of CO2. I've been waiting three years in here and still nothing. How is that cavalier? please, explain your statement.

If you werereally interested you would drill down into the research for yourself instead of looking for a google off of corporate media interpretations of the data.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Tell you what: you explain to the world's scientists how they OUGHT to be calculating climate sensitivity and as soon as you've got them convinced, they can produce some new numbers.

PS, that graph is based on an ENORMOUS amount of real data.

I'm still waiting to hear how many dozens of feet the ocean has risen to cover these islands. Why is this basic information so allusive?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Sea-level rise claims five islands in Solomons: study
May 7, 2016

At least 11 islands across the northern Solomon Islands have either totally disappeared over recent decades or are currently experiencing severe erosion, an Australian study shows

Five islands have disappeared in the Pacific's Solomon Islands due to rising sea levels and coastal erosion, according to an Australian study that 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.

"Shoreline recession at two sites has destroyed villages that have existed since at least 1935, leading to community relocations."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-05-sea-level-islands-solomons.html#jCp

Read more at the link....


Anyways, this is strong evidence that our oceans are in fact raising...Another piece of evidence is that a tidal gauge near New york has seen sea level raise of nearly 1 foot in the past 100 years and LA has lost a shit tone of land...So is it all a hoax? I don't think so.

Do you ever read what you link to?

"The limited research that has been conducted to date on the responses of reef islands in the western Pacific indicates that islands are highly dynamic, with coastal erosion and inundation threa- tening infrastructure, resulting generally from extreme events, human armouring of shorelines (e.g. seawalls) or inappropriate planning and development rather than sea-level rise alone."

 

[Vandalshandle]

Ok. Here it is:

Surging Seas: Sea level rise analysis by Climate Central

The sea level has increased 8 inches since 1880.

Now, while I go have lunch, you can post that these figures are fake. To save time later, I will just go ahead and tell you now that this is the reason that most of us do not even bother to give you data anymore. You will then post that all rising sea level data is fake, and I will ignore your comments from that point.

Climate Central? ha ha ha ha ha.

Ok, here it is. now, it is time for you to shift gears and start posting about SPECTR's evil conspiracy to falsify climate data, and how NASA is in business to release fake science data;

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence

And here is a list of 18 major scientific associations that agree that climate is changing due to man's activities:

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus