Sea rises, island disappears

[Midnight Marauder]

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

You IGNORE others' sources.

You are so deeply in the tank for this religion and for the far-left of politics you continue to spew this nonsense even after THEY HAVE ADMITTED THEY ARE LYING AND MANIPULATED DATA!!!

This shows you care not about science at all.

It also shows you're dishonest, even with yourself.

 

[Old Rocks]

Poor ol' dumbass Middie, cannot accept that all of the people that he was exulting about getting caught cheating on data have now been exonerated.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://hot-topic.co.nz/jones-and-cru-exonerated-by-parliamentary-inquiry/

Jones and CRU exonerated by parliamentary inquiry
by Gareth on March 31, 2010

The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report into the disclosure of climate data by the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia has just been released [PDF, via DeSmogBlog], and it clears Phil Jones and the CRU on all charges. From the press release:

The focus on Professor Jones and CRU has been largely misplaced. On the accusations relating to Professor Jones’s refusal to share raw data and computer codes, the Committee considers that his actions were in line with common practice in the climate science community but that those practices need to change.

On the much cited phrases in the leaked e-mails—”trick” and “hiding the decline”—the Committee considers that they were colloquial terms used in private e-mails and the balance of evidence is that they were not part of a systematic attempt to mislead.

Insofar as the Committee was able to consider accusations of dishonesty against CRU, the Committee considers that there is no case to answer.

 

[Old Rocks]

Michael Mann Exonerated - Michael Mann News

Michael Mann Exonerated
Rabett Run - 15th Mar 2010

1"The remaining question relates to whether Dr. Mann's conduct eroded public trust in the integrity of Climate Change Science and Climate scientists. Because different branches of Science have different cultures, the committee—comprised solely of administrators—didn't feel it had the standing to pass judgment. "Unfortunately, Climate contrarians are already misrepresenting this finding to foster doubt regarding the strong scientific consensus on Climate Change. These baseless attacks...

 

[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

....

A blog. You are clueless.

Oh my, here we go again. The referance within the blog was two articles, one in Science, the other in Nature, both peer reviewed journals.

So, you continue to lie about this whole subject. You are a liar, Si Modo. I do not believe for a minute that you are a scientist. All your silly allusions to logic are nothing but obfuscation. You are a politically driven hack.

 

[gslack]

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.

Oh my, here we go again. The referance within the blog was two articles, one in Science, the other in Nature, both peer reviewed journals.

So, you continue to lie about this whole subject. You are a liar, Si Modo. I do not believe for a minute that you are a scientist. All your silly allusions to logic are nothing but obfuscation. You are a politically driven hack.

oldsocks you realize I left this asinine tread alone because it was completely silly... FIrst the entire premise is a lie.

My first clue came when the OP pointed to a non-functioning link. In fact the site said it was no longer there. Which means it was older than your mathematically challenged mind can grasp.

my second clue came when the second link to a supposed other article by the same poster led to the exact same error page saying the same thing. yeah retarded to say the least.

My next clue came when someone posted the real story behind the OP. The fact is the island just appeared after a storm in the 70's... Not exactly a stable and rock solid bit of evidence that the seas are rising now is it?

And you in your infinite wisdom show up like clockwork to try and save the thread by posting your charts you can't understand and citing facts and figures that have no real bearing on the OP and you don't grasp anyway. You don't care if the poster was an imbecile and the OP was nonsense, its a pro AGW thread and you must defend it.... LOL tool

 

[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.

Oh my, here we go again. The referance within the blog was two articles, one in Science, the other in Nature, both peer reviewed journals.

So, you continue to lie about this whole subject. You are a liar, Si Modo. I do not believe for a minute that you are a scientist. All your silly allusions to logic are nothing but obfuscation. You are a politically driven hack.

Yes. It's a blog. YOU did not post and analyse yourself, the two peer-reviewed articles only mentioned in the blog. YOU parroted a blog. YOU either cannot think for yourself and analyse the science for yourself or you are too lazy to do so.

Blogs are not science.

Moron.

 

[saveliberty]

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.

Oh my, here we go again. The referance within the blog was two articles, one in Science, the other in Nature, both peer reviewed journals.

So, you continue to lie about this whole subject. You are a liar, Si Modo. I do not believe for a minute that you are a scientist. All your silly allusions to logic are nothing but obfuscation. You are a politically driven hack.

Nature and Science are peer reviewed.

They are like saying Time and Newsweek are peer reviewed you buffoon. Next thing you know someone at the UN will quote them in a report. No, that would be ridiculous. No wait, it happened.

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

Uh huh...over 2,000 scientists the world over are political hacks. Gotcha.

 

[MaggieMae]

So that's what happened to the Island on Lost.

Crap. You beat me to it. GOD I'LL BE GLAD WHEN THAT SHOW IS DONE!!!

I'll be sad, as there isn't a show out there right now with as much mystery as lost to fill the void

Oh please. I've followed all the interviews of the writers and they admit that they have dragged in people who have NOTHING to do with ANY of the story lines just because they like their presence as actors, so they designed a storyline around them. Remind me to ask you when the show is over how all of those people really WERE integrated by some weird concept of something that sounds like six degrees of separation. "Lost" started to lose me after Year Three when they all landed back in LA. Then I got REALLY *lost* when the Island slipped into time dimensions and all these new faces appeared like we're supposed to know who they are and what connection they had to anything.

As for other shows with a good mystery, I'm enjoying Flash Forward (although it also needs to be closely followed). But at least the scientific phenomena which they're getting close to solving in the drama series isn't some bizarre event that is conceptionally impossible.

[Sorry for the off-topic rant...]

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

You? ^^

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

I don't have my panties in a twist. I just thought it was an interesting story, and probably what you say is true. But it sure does bring out The Hoaxers. Shocking.

 

[MaggieMae]

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?

Selective reading. How unusual. I prefer to stick to NOAA's thousands of pages of analysis. But of course that's a gubmit agency, so not to be believed.

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

It doesn't do any good. The opinions are politically-based, period. If Al Gore hadn't written that book, no one would be questioning global warming. If someone with no political credentials had written it, the information therein might have been questioned, might have had serious debate among the scientific community, but would not have generated a whole new issue-oriented business for scientific wannabe bloggers on the right.

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

As far as I can tell, from any of your postings I've read, all you do is call people names and accuse them of being idiots because they "don't understand your logical thoughts." Said logic being omitted, however.

 

[gslack]

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?

Selective reading. How unusual. I prefer to stick to NOAA's thousands of pages of analysis. But of course that's a gubmit agency, so not to be believed.

Well Battlefield Earth was over 1100 pages but I knew it was fiction and the author was a recluse who made up a silly religion for wealthy people. Oh and he wore a cravat in 1985, and that's a sure fire sign of someone playing the "distinguished writer" even when he is alone....

The point being, even a self absorbed jerk can create compelling fiction... Or more pointedly, even a scientist or team of them can give a false impression of data. As we have seen already....

 

[MaggieMae]

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.”

But but but...is that study "peer reviewed"??

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

But but but blogs are more apt to be "peer reviewed," no?

Also, it's fine for one of your ilk to post from blogsites, but no one else. Got it.

 

[Zoom-boing]

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.

You? ^^

No, you whining. I think this photo captures you when some thread of yours got moved . . .

 

[gslack]

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.

But but but blogs are more apt to be "peer reviewed," no?

Also, it's fine for one of your ilk to post from blogsites, but no one else. Got it.

Thats not what he was pointing out.... He was pointing out that oldsocks pretends he posts from peer reviewed science journals and all his garbage about science, is usually coming from an environmental blog and his understandings of it come from their interpretations and not from any real scientific knowledge or expertise. The fact is he usually doesn't even understand a third of what he throws up here. All he knows is somehow it looks like it supports the pro-AGW argument, and thats all he needs to try and BS his way through it. He has been caught red-handed not understanding what he puts up here several times just in my short time as a member here.