Sea rises, island disappears

[frazzledgear]

An uninhabited island in the Bay of Bengal, which had long been claimed by both India and
Bangladesh, completely disappeared when it was submerged by the rising sea level which ended the dispute over ownership.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia...r-Disputed-island-disappears-under-rising-sea.

Except for the fact rising seas did not cause this island to disappear - this is a perfect example of why we all need to increase the shrillness of the hysteria surrounding global warming. Let's PRETEND global warming did this anyway!

In fact this island had been ERODED by pounding surf for eons and like so many other islands through the eons, was finally worn down enough to be reclaimed by the ocean. For ONE specific reason. You first have to know how islands are born and die to understand why this island disappeared - and evidently you haven't a clue.

This is EXACTLY what will ABSOLUTELY happen to ANY island once the volcanic activity that initially created them dies out for good. When that happens, the death sentence of that island has been handed down on it and the only question is when it will happen. Not if. Islands require recurrent volcanic activity to replace what is being constantly eroded by the sea. Without it the end is inevitable. There are many islands with zero volcanic activity any more. At some point they WILL disappear -while still others will end up being formed by other underwater volcanoes. Nothing new going on here whatsoever, much less anything worth getting your panties in a twist.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Magpie continues to ignore Del's informative post and link. Wonder why?

Could Magpie be just a useless fucking troll, as I have always surmised?

Yes, yes it could. Bit of a whiner too.

Ah yes, it's always amusing when someone is accused of being a "troll" only because s/he spends some time presenting opposite opinions. Too bad you children can't come up with more accurate chacterizations, but that would mean learning to crawl out of your cribs and take in the entire room for a change. Seems all you can do is "whine" that yes, there are indeed tens of millions who think YOUR ideas are not always RIGHT.

 

[frazzledgear]

Sea levels rising twice as fast as predicted - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

Sea levels are predicted to rise twice as fast as was forecast by the United Nations only two years ago, threatening hundreds of millions of people with catastrophe, scientists said yesterday in a dramatic new warning about climate change. Rapidly melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are likely to push up sea levels by a metre or more by 2100, swamping coastal cities and obliterating the living space of 600 million people who live in deltas, low-lying areas and small island states.


Low-lying countries with increasing populations, such as Bangladesh, Burma and Egypt, could see large parts of their surface areas vanish. Experts in Bangladesh estimate that a one-metre rise in sea levels would swamp 17 per cent of the country's land mass. Pacific islands such as Tuvalu, where 12,000 people live just a few feet above sea level, and the Maldives, would face complete obliteration.

Even Britain could face real challenges in lower-lying areas along the east coast, from Lincolnshire to the Thames estuary, with a much greater risk of catastrophic "storm surges" such as the great flood of 1953 that killed 307 people.

Rising seas with increasing Arctic and Antarctic sea ice levels? Wow that global warming is real magician.

IPCC gate Du Jour – Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50% Watts Up With That? Antarctic sea ice growth underestimated by UN by 50%. What is interesting is the fact Antarctic sea ice has been increasing in the last 20 years, not decreasing -and the IPCC has only acknowledged HALF as much as it has really been increasing. How can that be when we all know scientists are gods and the IPCC is the Holy Oracle beyond questioning?

An Inconvenient Truth: The Ice Cap Is Growing - Water Cooler - Washington Times An Inconvenient Truth: The Ice Cap Has Been Growing And its been growing and INCREASING every year since 2007.

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis Cold snap causes increased growth spurt. It was already growing larger every year for years now but the cold resulted in an even faster rate of growth. Now just IMAGINE how shrill the hysterics would be if a warm snap had increased the rate of disappearance. Except the ice levels are INCREASING and the fact temperatures got COLDER, it resulted in a faster rate of INCREASE -this fits right in with the global warming hysteria somewhere, right?

 

[saveliberty]

Actually there is a source to back it up. It seems only fititng to play hot-cold. Your warm, really warm.

Except that your "source" is so convoluted only a lab scientist could understand it, or maybe Glenn Beck can do better with one of his little circle charts.

I guess you could just boil it down to the last part where it says the sea level is dropping at a rate of 1mm per year currently.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Magpie continues to ignore Del's informative post and link. Wonder why?

Could Magpie be just a useless fucking troll, as I have always surmised?

Yes, yes it could. Bit of a whiner too.

Ah yes, it's always amusing when someone is accused of being a "troll" only because s/he spends some time presenting opposite opinions.

That's not what happened at all, fucking liar.

What happened was, you IGNORED del's post completely. because it blew your idiotic premise totally out of the water. Just continued with your debunked blather.

That is called TROLLING and is dishonest.

NO ONE calls you a troll for presenting differing opinions. It doesn't fit the definition, idiot.

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually there is a source to back it up. It seems only fititng to play hot-cold. Your warm, really warm.

Except that your "source" is so convoluted only a lab scientist could understand it, ....

Then maybe the political hacks should quit soiling the science and keep out of it.

Well yes. It would be nice to see Watts, Inhofe, and the Republican Party butt out and let the real scientists handle it.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

let the real scientists handle it.

Old Crocks' definition of "real scientists" is limited only to those who are AGW faithful.

 

[Old Rocks]

Sea levels rising twice as fast as predicted - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

Sea levels are predicted to rise twice as fast as was forecast by the United Nations only two years ago, threatening hundreds of millions of people with catastrophe, scientists said yesterday in a dramatic new warning about climate change. Rapidly melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are likely to push up sea levels by a metre or more by 2100, swamping coastal cities and obliterating the living space of 600 million people who live in deltas, low-lying areas and small island states.


Low-lying countries with increasing populations, such as Bangladesh, Burma and Egypt, could see large parts of their surface areas vanish. Experts in Bangladesh estimate that a one-metre rise in sea levels would swamp 17 per cent of the country's land mass. Pacific islands such as Tuvalu, where 12,000 people live just a few feet above sea level, and the Maldives, would face complete obliteration.

Even Britain could face real challenges in lower-lying areas along the east coast, from Lincolnshire to the Thames estuary, with a much greater risk of catastrophic "storm surges" such as the great flood of 1953 that killed 307 people.

Rising seas with increasing Arctic and Antarctic sea ice levels? Wow that global warming is real magician.

IPCC gate Du Jour – Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50% Watts Up With That? Antarctic sea ice growth underestimated by UN by 50%. What is interesting is the fact Antarctic sea ice has been increasing in the last 20 years, not decreasing -and the IPCC has only acknowledged HALF as much as it has really been increasing. How can that be when we all know scientists are gods and the IPCC is the Holy Oracle beyond questioning?

An Inconvenient Truth: The Ice Cap Is Growing - Water Cooler - Washington Times An Inconvenient Truth: The Ice Cap Has Been Growing And its been growing and INCREASING every year since 2007.

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis Cold snap causes increased growth spurt. It was already growing larger every year for years now but the cold resulted in an even faster rate of growth. Now just IMAGINE how shrill the hysterics would be if a warm snap had increased the rate of disappearance. Except the ice levels are INCREASING and the fact temperatures got COLDER, it resulted in a faster rate of INCREASE -this fits right in with the global warming hysteria somewhere, right?

Except, of course, that this is all complete crap.

Yes, the Artic Sea Ice covers more area than it has in a long time. However, by volume, the ice has diminished every year since 2005. And this years rapid increase came with March, which means thin ice that will not last long.

As far as the total sea ice is concerned, that two is on the decline, with normal variation. Here is where you can see a chart of that decrease.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

 

[Si modo]

Except that your "source" is so convoluted only a lab scientist could understand it, ....

Then maybe the political hacks should quit soiling the science and keep out of it.

Well yes. It would be nice to see Watts, Inhofe, and the Republican Party butt out and let the real scientists handle it.

I have no problem with that. Now, will you butt out because we all know you are no scientist? Few scientists are as incapable of thinking logically as you.

 

[Old Rocks]

let the real scientists handle it.

Old Crocks' definition of "real scientists" is limited only to those who are AGW faithful.

Yes, kind of like all the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major universities. But ol' Middie has Limpbaugh, Watts, and the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine on his side

 

[Midnight Marauder]

let the real scientists handle it.

Old Crocks' definition of "real scientists" is limited only to those who are AGW faithful.

Yes, kind of like all the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major universities. But ol' Middie has Limpbaugh, Watts, and the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine on his side

As soon as you see me citing or quoting any of those, you are no longer simply lying.

MY sources are scientists, every bit as qualified and experienced as the puppets you parrot are, except you dismiss them as heretics.

They don't believe in AGW the religion! They believe in science.

 

[Old Rocks]

Your sources? Since when have you posted sources? All I see is yap-yap. Just like Si Modo.

 

[Old Rocks]

Then maybe the political hacks should quit soiling the science and keep out of it.

Well yes. It would be nice to see Watts, Inhofe, and the Republican Party butt out and let the real scientists handle it.

I have no problem with that. Now, will you butt out because we all know you are no scientist? Few scientists are as incapable of thinking logically as you.

I post quite often from peer reviewed journals, have posted lectures on videos from real scientific presentations for viewing, and posted articles from NASA, NOAA, and the USGS.
Now present equal evidence supporting your point of view.

 

[Si modo]

Well yes. It would be nice to see Watts, Inhofe, and the Republican Party butt out and let the real scientists handle it.

I have no problem with that. Now, will you butt out because we all know you are no scientist? Few scientists are as incapable of thinking logically as you.

I post quite often from peer reviewed journals, have posted lectures on videos from real scientific presentations for viewing, and posted articles from NASA, NOAA, and the USGS.
Now present equal evidence supporting your point of view.

I have, and I am not the subject.

However, my point is that few scientists are as incapable of logical thought as you are.

Need I quote your complaint of your incapability to understand my posts when I point out your consistent logical fallacies? Any scientist would cringe at your amateurish posing.

 

[Old Rocks]

I see, it is illogical that post articles from real scientists on a scientific subject. Ah yes, I can really see your logic.

 

[Si modo]

I see, it is illogical that post articles from real scientists on a scientific subject. Ah yes, I can really see your logic.

No, but this strawman of yours is illogical, as are your red herring and ad hominem in your previous post.

You are target-rich in logical fallacies and you consitently use them, thus your lack of logic.

And, if you want to talk science, post scientific articles. What you posted above is not even peer-reviewed. I only do peer-reviewed.

 

[Old Rocks]

You can look up these two studies in Nature and Science.

Stunning new sea level rise research, Part 1: “Most likely” 0.8 to 2.0 meters by 2100 Climate Progress

September 5, 2008
Two major new studies, in Nature and Science, sharply increase the projected sea level rise (SLR) by 2100. This post discusses the Science study, “Kinematic Constraints on Glacier Contributions to 21st-Century Sea-Level Rise” (subs req’d), which concludes:

On the basis of calculations presented here, we suggest that an improved estimate of the range of SLR to 2100 including increased ice dynamics lies between 0.8 and 2.0 m.

… these values give a context and starting point for refinements in SLR forecasts on the basis of clearly defined assumptions and offer a more plausible range of estimates than those neglecting the dominant ice dynamics term.

Scientific analysis is finally catching up to scientific observation. In 2001, the IPCC projected that neither Greenland nor Antarctica would lose significant mass by 2100. The IPCC made the same basic projection again in 2007. Yet both ice sheets already are. As Penn State climatologist Richard Alley said in March 2006, the ice sheets appear to be shrinking “100 years ahead of schedule.”

 

[Old Rocks]

Access : Rapid sea-level rise and reef back-stepping at the close of the last interglacial highstand : Nature

Nature 458, 881-884 (16 April 2009) | doi:10.1038/nature07933; Received 8 October 2008; Accepted 23 February 2009


Rapid sea-level rise and reef back-stepping at the close of the last interglacial highstand
Paul Blanchon1, Anton Eisenhauer2, Jan Fietzke2 & Volker Liebetrau2

Institute of Marine & Limnological Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico, AP1152, Cancun, 77500 Quintana Roo, Mexico
Leibniz Institute of Marine Science, IFM-GEOMAR, Wischhofstrasse 1–3, 24148 Kiel, Germany
Correspondence to: Paul Blanchon1 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to P.B. (Email: [email protected]).


Top of pageAbstractWidespread evidence of a +4–6-m sea-level highstand during the last interglacial period (Marine Isotope Stage 5e) has led to warnings that modern ice sheets will deteriorate owing to global warming and initiate a rise of similar magnitude by ad 2100 (ref. 1). The rate of this projected rise is based on ice-sheet melting simulations and downplays discoveries of more rapid ice loss2, 3. Knowing the rate at which sea level reached its highstand during the last interglacial period is fundamental in assessing if such rapid ice-loss processes could lead to future catastrophic sea-level rise. The best direct record of sea level during this highstand comes from well-dated fossil reefs in stable areas4, 5, 6. However, this record lacks both reef-crest development up to the full highstand elevation, as inferred7 from widespread intertidal indicators at +6 m, and a detailed chronology, owing to the difficulty of replicating U-series ages on submillennial timescales8. Here we present a complete reef-crest sequence for the last interglacial highstand and its U-series chronology from the stable northeast Yucatán peninsula, Mexico. We find that reef development during the highstand was punctuated by reef-crest demise at +3 m and back-stepping to +6 m. The abrupt demise of the lower-reef crest, but continuous accretion between the lower-lagoonal unit and the upper-reef crest, allows us to infer that this back-stepping occurred on an ecological timescale and was triggered by a 2–3-m jump in sea level. Using strictly reliable 230Th ages of corals from the upper-reef crest, and improved stratigraphic screening of coral ages from other stable sites, we constrain this jump to have occurred 121 kyr ago and conclude that it supports an episode of ice-sheet instability during the terminal phase of the last interglacial period.

 

[saveliberty]

Go to post thirty. The sea level is droping since 2004. 1mm per year. More crap from the faithers shown for the junk science it is.

 

[Si modo]

You can look up these two studies in Nature and Science.

Stunning new sea level rise research, Part 1: “Most likely” 0.8 to 2.0 meters by 2100 Climate Progress

....

A blog. You are clueless.