Sea level may rise, so does land elevations

[Robert W]

And there's the inevitable weirdass political rant.

You care nothing about the science, and you know nothing about the science. You're merely parroting what your political cult told you.

Meanwhile, here on the rational side, we just talk about science, without bringing politics into it. Because we can.

How are your insults supposed to create an atmosphere leading to conversation?

 

[Captain Caveman]

Don't worry. You always run when your BS is ripped apart, so nobody expected better of you.


I wrote two whole posts answering that. Like I said, I just can't dumb it down any further.

On the plus side, you already had zero credibility, so you can't go any lower there.

You're a climate alarmist, the experts on the planet, all knowing. You make statements and claims, you obviously know all the processes, mechanisms, and details in order to make a "climate fact". So in your assessment, to what percentage does plate tectonics, and more importantly, specific events such as the 2011 Japanese earthquake have on the likes of co2 and sea rise? Canada is rising, what impact is that having?

All we get is little girly squeals that it's melting ice, but everything else is ignored.

If you want to make a climate claim, then at least know what you're on about. What did the climate "fake" scientists determine what the earthquake's impact had on sea level?

 

[EMH]

until the next ice age.

You are a hopelessly lost parrot of fudged fraud bullshit until you get the definition of ICE AGE right...

Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

What is an ICE AGE? Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Robert W]

And there's the inevitable weirdass political rant.

You care nothing about the science, and you know nothing about the science. You're merely parroting what your political cult told you.

Meanwhile, here on the rational side, we just talk about science, without bringing politics into it. Because we can.

What do you know about science? Your cult has tried to teach you science yet failed.

 

[mamooth]

So in your assessment, to what percentage does plate tectonics, and more importantly, specific events such as the 2011 Japanese earthquake have on the likes of co2 and sea rise?

The earthquake, no effect on sea levels Too small an area, and the uplift in one area is counteracted by sinking elsewhere. And no effect on CO2 levels, as there's no mechanims for it to affect CO2 levels.

Plate tectonics, it's way too slow to have any effect on sea level or CO2 levels at any time scale that's less than geological. It can't explain the current fast changes in either.

Canada is rising, what impact is that having?

None. First, it's too slow to be noticeable. And second, other areas are sinking. There's a finite amount of mantle material, and it's incompressible, like play-doh. If it's pushed up in one spot, it has to go down in another.

All we get is little girly squeals that it's melting ice, but everything else is ignored.

What evidence do you have that everything else is ignored? Sounds like a conspiracy theory.

A factor does reduce sea level rise a bit is the ongoing deepening of the ocean basins. After an ice age ends, the oceans get deeper. That puts more pressure on the ocean bottoms, so the bottom sinks enough to reduce sea level by about 0.5 mm / year.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Don't worry. You always run when your BS is ripped apart, so nobody expected better of you.


I wrote two whole posts answering that. Like I said, I just can't dumb it down any further.

On the plus side, you already had zero credibility, so you can't go any lower there.

 

[westwall]

Do tell us more about the land rising. How does that work? Everyone really wants to know.

You do undestand that most of the world is not a coral atoll, right?

And that coral atolls are not rising as fast as sea level? While some coral atolls increased in size, that's mainly due to land restoration efforts (such as by China in the south China sea), and not by natural processes.

It's called "Isostatic Rebound".

Look it up.

 

[EMH]

View attachment 1026122

mamooo is a great example of "affirmative action in science."

 

[mamooth]

Captain Cavemean, I keep answering your questions directly, and in reply ... you keep crying and running. You've done so three times now, pissing yourself and running in front of the whole board.

We get it. You know nothing about the topic, and you're too gutless to admit it. There's no need to keep hammering on that point.

Since you're plainly a political hack troll, there's no point in wasting any more time on you. I gladly educate honest people, but so few deniers are honest.

 

[mamooth]

It's called "Isostatic Rebound".

Coral atolls are experiencing isostatic rebound?

You're losing it, "geologist".

The "geologist" also didn't know that any isostatic rebound is accompanied by isostatic sinking somewhere else.

This is basic stuff, and all deniers faceplant at it.

 

[westwall]

Coral atolls are experiencing isostatic rebound?

You're losing it, "geologist".

The "geologist" also didn't know that any isostatic rebound is accompanied by isostatic sinking somewhere else.

This is basic stuff, and all deniers faceplant at it.

Yeah, the oceanic crust underneath them is rebounding from the ice age you ignorant twat.

 

[ding]

Yeah, the oceanic crust underneath them is rebounding from the ice age you ignorant twat.

She tried to tell me the earth was supposed to be slowly cooling and then when I showed her the IPCC's radiative forcing components that refuted what she said, she said they didn't include orbital forcing. No shit because the earth wasn't slowly cooling. She'll say anything to dismiss her defeats.

 

[westwall]

She tried to tell me the earth was supposed to be slowly cooling and then when I showed her the IPCC's radiative forcing components that refuted what she said, she said they didn't include orbital forcing. No shit because the earth wasn't slowly cooling. She'll say anything to dismiss her defeats.

She is a class A moron.

 

[EMH]

Yeah, the oceanic crust underneath them is rebounding from the ice age you ignorant twat.

You cannot even define ice age correctly...

 

[EMH]

She is a class A moron.

and so are you.

 

[ding]

You cannot even define ice age correctly...

It's you who doesn't understand that the ice age began 3-5 million years ago and has not ended. You confuse glacial periods with ice ages.

 

[EMH]

It's you who doesn't understand that the ice age began 3-5 million years ago and has not ended. You confuse glacial periods with ice ages.

You and the Co2 FRAUd do not understand ICE AGE...

Apparently we really need a "debate" over the term ICE AGE because y'all are all wrong...

What is an ICE AGE? Most apparently still believe it is a terrifying horror movie event where Earth all at once freezes up. The data has never supported such a scenario. Since 2010, there has been a massive effort to re-write Earth climate history into a series of rapid "glaciations" and ice...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[westwall]

and so are you.

Ahhhh poor little anti science freak has a butthurt going on.....

 

[westwall]

You cannot even define ice age correctly...

Yeah, yours is soooooooo correct...

 

[mamooth]

Yeah, the oceanic crust underneath them is rebounding from the ice age you ignorant twat.

So, Westwall the "geologist" is telling out that the coral atolls in the South Pacific are experiencing isostatic rebound.

Due, apparently, to the glaciers that recently covered them melting out.

Sweet Jeebus, he really is senile.