The Progs will DENY SCIENCE when it comes to record snowfalls, that havent happened like this over 100 years.

[ding]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

So I am curious... do you believe you even understand the problem and what should be done about it real terms?

If so, can you tell me how you would solve the problem?

 

[mamooth]

What data we do have in hand only gives us a two foot sea level rise over the next 100 years ... considering we built 45,000 miles of interstate freeways in twenty years, fifty years ago, adding 2 feet to our existing sea walls is trivial ...

How does your plan protect the 99% of the coast that isn't behind a sea wall?

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis

As I child, I noticed that replenishing the sand in front of a sandcastle didn't stop the incoming tide from overrunning it. Your plan doesn't protect the coast at all.

do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

You say that, but the opposite is closer to being true. Your plan is more anti-humanitarian.

The biggest flaw in your reasoning is that you're using a false dichotomy fallacy, by saying "either fossil fuel grid power or nothing". Nobody else says that.

Your plan also leaves all of humanity shivering in the dark when the fossil fuel runs out. It seems to be as anti-human as a plan can get. Are you just counting on a magical tech solution?

 

[alang1216]

So you would deny the poor regions the same benefit you have?

What are you suggesting we do to meet our so-called responsibility?

No. I would provide a mix of high and low technology to assist poor countries in moving away from burning wood or fossil fuels.

 

[alang1216]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

~75 mm or 2.95 in. Which is exactly ~75 mm or 2.95 in of what it would have been if man never existed.

I think you should look again if you think 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island would be submerged by a 1 ft rise in sea level.

As you can see, level changes can be naturally very extreme. Similar changes today would be catastrophic. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SEA LEVEL RISES DUE TO MAN OR NOT!

I never said 1/2 of Brooklyn would be submerged, I said it would disappear. A subtle but important difference.

 

[alang1216]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

So I am curious... do you believe you even understand the problem and what should be done about it real terms?

If so, can you tell me how you would solve the problem?

The first thing we need to do is get our heads out of our butts and face facts. I'd guess there is no simple solution since it is a complex problem. We need to find the low-hanging fruit and continue to explore more dramatic solutions.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Think about it, the industrial revolution was in full swing when Woodrow Wilson(racist who segregated the government) was in office, during that time tons of CO2 was put into the air, the ratio went from 3 parts per million to 4 parts per million(that is 1/1000000) increase as the Progs say, yet we have record snowfall again, so early in the year. The progs had said that snow would disappear and that was 6 years ago, yet here we are once again, proving that "settled science" isnt really settled. Next time you see a Prog give him the 1 finger salute.

Season's first major snowfall breaks record in Minnesota, causes hundreds of crashes and spinouts

The 7.9 inches of snow at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport shattered the previous record for Oct. 20 of 3 inches, and nearly bested the all-time snowiest October day in the Twin Cities.

www.startribune.com

The precipitation tapered off Tuesday night after 7.9 inches of snow at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, shattering the previous record for Oct. 20 of 3 inches, set in 1916, and nearly besting the all-time snowiest October day in the Twin Cities.

There is difference between weather and climate. Look it up. And while you're at it look up glacier retreats. Note that most glaciers have been here since the last ice age.

1973

2006

Oh, yeah, when it is hot outside it is climate, but when it gets really cold, then that is weather...Got it.

 

[ReinyDays]

How does your plan protect the 99% of the coast that isn't behind a sea wall?

Well ... we won't need to protect lands that are worthless ... salt marsh, sand bars, I believe it would be illegal to protect The Everglades NP ... as alang pointed out upthread, we've been do this around the New York City area for 100's of years ... Boston is another good example ... St Augustine another ... these places are worth saving ...

The West Coast is benched up twenty or thirty feet already ... this formed in the early Holocene when sea levels were that much higher ... our problem here is 30 to 60 foot tsunamis, which occur far far more often that any sea level encroachment ... and evidence of a 200 foot tsunami during a full rip earthquake ... a two foot sea level rise is safely ignored along most of the Pacific Coast ...

As I child, I noticed that replenishing the sand in front of a sandcastle didn't stop the incoming tide from overrunning it. Your plan doesn't protect the coast at all.

We've been doing this for many decades ... as someone who comes across as a pro-environmentalist, I'm surprised you've not heard of this controversy ... lawsuits have been filed to stop this practice ... and to date, none have been successful ... if you build your sandcastle (or your home) below the average high tide mark, then no, it won't work ... what did your insurance company say about your claim? ...

You say that, but the opposite is closer to being true. Your plan is more anti-humanitarian.
The biggest flaw in your reasoning is that you're using a false dichotomy fallacy, by saying "either fossil fuel grid power or nothing". Nobody else says that.

You say that, but don't explain why it's anti-humanitarian ... and you're right, no one is advocating bringing electric power to regions without ... "nothing" is the only option being considered right now ... this is Sec. of State John Kerry traveling to Indonesia to scream at them for their carbon pollution, which is just a tiny fraction of the USA's output ... or Greta-girl traveling the world in expensive yachts until she realizing being the only teenage girl on a yacht with rich old guys was making to many trips to the abortion clinic ... at least I'm using BPA hydro- and wind-power to make this post ...

Your plan also leaves all of humanity shivering in the dark when the fossil fuel runs out. It seems to be as anti-human as a plan can get. Are you just counting on a magical tech solution?

You must be mistaking me for someone else ... I've been a big advocate of alternative energy sources here on these boards ... climate change is a hoax, but limited supplies of fossil fuels is a fact ... and we will run out someday ... TODAY we need to start depreciating our Oil Economy ... and with nuclear, we should have started 25 years ago ... we gotta gotta gotta start developing and building nuclear power plants or, yeah, all of humanity will be left in the dark except the 20% who are already in the dark ...

The problem as I see it is that where we install solar/wind/hydro facilities, we just use more energy, and continue to burn fossil fuels ... in this sense I'm a Carter Democrat, his administration advocated both alternate energy sources AND conservation ... so all those hours waiting in line to buy 5 gallons of gas in the 1970's was spent figuring out how to severely reduce my own consumption over the course of my entire adult life ... I'm serious when I say I fill my rig up with gas once a month whether I need to or not ... just this morning I'm trying to decide if 34ºF outside warrants running my gas furnace inside, or am I warm enough wearing an extra set of clothing ... but this has nothing to do with loving the environment, and everything to do with hating on Big Oil ... fuck them fucking bastards ...

It's the RCP4.5 scenario that climate models predict will bring us 2ºC increase over the next 100 years ... why do you think we have enough fossil fuels to burn to bring climate forcing up to 4.5 W/m^2? ...

1] I do have three children, but I did have the sense to stop there ...
2] I strictly limit the miles on my rig ...
3] I abhor airline travel, not just because I need a damn passport to board ...
4] Alas, I eat like an obligate carnivore ... my bad ...

What are your solutions to this problem? ...

 

[ding]

So you would deny the poor regions the same benefit you have?

What are you suggesting we do to meet our so-called responsibility?

No. I would provide a mix of high and low technology to assist poor countries in moving away from burning wood or fossil fuels.

Ok, who pays for it?

 

[ReinyDays]

Oh, yeah, when it is hot outside it is climate, but when it gets really cold, then that is weather...Got it.

No, no, no ... "getting really cold outside" is proof positive of global warming ... or so the Alarmists claim ... I don't understand why, and neither do they ... but that's the current dogma ...

 

[ding]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

~75 mm or 2.95 in. Which is exactly ~75 mm or 2.95 in of what it would have been if man never existed.

I think you should look again if you think 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island would be submerged by a 1 ft rise in sea level.

As you can see, level changes can be naturally very extreme. Similar changes today would be catastrophic. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SEA LEVEL RISES DUE TO MAN OR NOT!

I never said 1/2 of Brooklyn would be submerged, I said it would disappear. A subtle but important difference.

Do you realize how many different mechanisms and drivers there were over this period of time? Can you please try to make an honest argument. Start from this curve here...

 

[westwall]

Of course there's going to be record snowfalls if the record only goes back a very short time. Same thing with record high temperatures and record low temperatures.

They are meaningless.

I wouldn't call them meaningless ... but, yeah, these records get broken all the time ... no reason to tie knots in your knickers ...

This is only a record for that date, October 20th, and there's only been 100 Oct 20ths in the past 100 years ... so a fairly small sample pool, we must take care to attach too much emphasis to the data ... also, the article says this is NOT a record for the month of October ... which means the meteorological conditions that produced this snowfall amount are known to occur, just "random" chance it happen to occur on October 20th rather than October 26th (or wharever) ...

Consider this:

There are about 6,000 weather stations around the world ... each one will have an extreme high temp, and extreme low temp and an extreme precipitation amount ... three extremes times 6,000 gives us 18,000 possible extreme events per day ... for a "hundred year" event (or a 1% chance of occurring), we should average 180 events per day worldwide ... so if this was an average day, there will be 179 other extreme weather reports to be had ...

This data is useful for planning purposes ... if we want to build a factory, and check the climate records ... we might see it rained 42" one day back 45 years ago, so we better make sure our factory can deal with that ... because it will rain 42" again someday, perhaps more ...

Warmer surface temperatures will most definitely allow more water vapor into the atmosphere ... roughly 7% per ºC at usual surface temperatures ... and what goes up must come down, as rain ... and there's every reason to believe considering Arctic Amplification this rainfall will be more widespread and less likely to cause flooding events ... and with a little bit of temperature rise we should only expect floods to be a little less likely ...

There are 6,000 weather stations around the US alone. Climatologists only use 1,500 of them.

Why is that?

 

[ReinyDays]

No. I would provide a mix of high and low technology to assist poor countries in moving away from burning wood or fossil fuels.

Ok, who pays for it?
[/QUOTE]

... and how do you keep desperately poor people from just scrapping out the materials ... a couple hundred feet of overhead wires sells for a year's average wages ... how much does a solar panel fetch in rural Botswana? ...

 

[alang1216]

So you would deny the poor regions the same benefit you have?

What are you suggesting we do to meet our so-called responsibility?

No. I would provide a mix of high and low technology to assist poor countries in moving away from burning wood or fossil fuels.

Ok, who pays for it?

I envision it being all US technology. The US would provide credits that foreign countries could use to buy US goods (e.g., solar panels, nuclear reactors, high efficiency appliances, etc.). Win-win-win.

 

[alang1216]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

~75 mm or 2.95 in. Which is exactly ~75 mm or 2.95 in of what it would have been if man never existed.

I think you should look again if you think 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island would be submerged by a 1 ft rise in sea level.

As you can see, level changes can be naturally very extreme. Similar changes today would be catastrophic. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SEA LEVEL RISES DUE TO MAN OR NOT!

I never said 1/2 of Brooklyn would be submerged, I said it would disappear. A subtle but important difference.

Do you realize how many different mechanisms and drivers there were over this period of time? Can you please try to make an honest argument. Start from this curve here...

View attachment 406020

I would be easier if we just used more recent times:

Maybe you can answer a question, why does it matter what the causes are?

 

[Dagosa]

Think about it, the industrial revolution was in full swing when Woodrow Wilson(racist who segregated the government) was in office, during that time tons of CO2 was put into the air, the ratio went from 3 parts per million to 4 parts per million(that is 1/1000000) increase as the Progs say, yet we have record snowfall again, so early in the year. The progs had said that snow would disappear and that was 6 years ago, yet here we are once again, proving that "settled science" isnt really settled. Next time you see a Prog give him the 1 finger salute.

Season's first major snowfall breaks record in Minnesota, causes hundreds of crashes and spinouts

The 7.9 inches of snow at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport shattered the previous record for Oct. 20 of 3 inches, and nearly bested the all-time snowiest October day in the Twin Cities.

www.startribune.com

The precipitation tapered off Tuesday night after 7.9 inches of snow at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, shattering the previous record for Oct. 20 of 3 inches, set in 1916, and nearly besting the all-time snowiest October day in the Twin Cities.

Snowfall in anyone year has NOTHING to do with long term trends. AAMOF, some of the colder days are too dry to support snow and on many northern areas, there is little relationship. It’s an ill informed post.

 

[alang1216]

No. I would provide a mix of high and low technology to assist poor countries in moving away from burning wood or fossil fuels.

Ok, who pays for it?

... and how do you keep desperately poor people from just scrapping out the materials ... a couple hundred feet of overhead wires sells for a year's average wages ... how much does a solar panel fetch in rural Botswana? ...
[/QUOTE]
No matter how poor you are, you don't rob from yourself. The key is private ownership for things like solar panels.

 

[Dagosa]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

~75 mm or 2.95 in. Which is exactly ~75 mm or 2.95 in of what it would have been if man never existed.

I think you should look again if you think 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island would be submerged by a 1 ft rise in sea level.

As you can see, level changes can be naturally very extreme. Similar changes today would be catastrophic. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SEA LEVEL RISES DUE TO MAN OR NOT!

I never said 1/2 of Brooklyn would be submerged, I said it would disappear. A subtle but important difference.

Do you realize how many different mechanisms and drivers there were over this period of time? Can you please try to make an honest argument. Start from this curve here...

View attachment 406020

I would be easier if we just used more recent times:

Maybe you can answer a question, why does it matter what the causes are?

It matters because the rise has accelerated faster due to man’s activity. A slower rate of change over thousands of years, is no big deal. We adjust easily. That same change over decades is very costly and more damaging to adjust to.

 

[ReinyDays]

I envision it being all US technology. The US would provide credits that foreign countries could use to buy US goods (e.g., solar panels, nuclear reactors, high efficiency appliances, etc.). Win-win-win.

Hello? ... Westinghouse shed it's nuclear reactor division in their recent bankruptcy ... the world will have to seek new reactor vessels from China ...

Walk me through this ... the US gives some foreign country a pile of money so they can buy US goods ... where does this pile of money come from? ... higher taxes so you can run your A/C 24/7? ... building uranium reactors in some of these countries is insane (although I understand thorium reactors can't be weaponized) ...

This is a 1st World solution to a 3rd World problem ... I use $100 bills as scratch paper, to another this is a year's wages ... I know what you see on TV, but TV cameras only work where there's electricity ... there's a fair size chuck of the world where TV cameras won't work ... you seem blissfully unaware of this fact ...

 

[ding]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

So I am curious... do you believe you even understand the problem and what should be done about it real terms?

If so, can you tell me how you would solve the problem?

The first thing we need to do is get our heads out of our butts and face facts. I'd guess there is no simple solution since it is a complex problem. We need to find the low-hanging fruit and continue to explore more dramatic solutions.

The first thing people - who are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist - need to do is to be honest about what the problem is. Something I have yet heard anyone from your "camp" do. The second thing people - who are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist - need to do is to be honest about the solution. Also something I have yet heard anyone from your "camp" do. Now the only reason that I can think of why they haven't done those things is because if they do those things, people like yourself who support solving a problem that doesn't exist would actually start to question what they have been told.

 

[ding]

First, I have no idea how you connect sea level rise to firewood. Do you?

You didn't answer my question ... do you agree we should substantially increase our CO2 emissions for the humanitarian purposes that would serve? ...

Second, you have no background in the dynamics of coastlines like those of the US East Coast. Every inch of sea level rise will act to push the barrier islands inland and flood the coastal plains. A rise of a foot may translate to a mile of lost land (I don't know the exact relationship). That is one mile all along the thousand of miles of US coasts. Sea walls will only be a temporary solution.

That's why we replenish the beach sand there on a regular basis ... we have maps of the coastline from the Revolutionary War ... and we've seen 2 feet sea level rise since then ... and it "may" erode a mile of coastline in a few places, so maybe find out the exact relationship if you're such an expert and coastal erosion ... are you seriously suggesting New York City was two miles removed from the ocean when it was founded? ...

Not a problem on The West Coast ... where mountains meet the sea ...

NYC has been extensively reclaimed from the sea so it's coast is now man-made. I do know that it suffered some major flooding when hit by a hurricane a few years ago, the first I recall. They are now spending billions to secure a small part of the city. Not every city can afford to do that.

Storm surges are typically in the 5 to 10 ft range. You are equating a 3 mm/yr rise in sea level - which has been occurring for the last 6,000 years and before that was occurring at a much greater rate - to surge produced by a hurricane?

Have you even looked at a topographical map of New York to visualize what a one foot rise in sea level actually means?

What has been the rise in the last 25 years?

Looks to me 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island may disappear.

~75 mm or 2.95 in. Which is exactly ~75 mm or 2.95 in of what it would have been if man never existed.

I think you should look again if you think 1/2 of Brooklyn and Long Island would be submerged by a 1 ft rise in sea level.

As you can see, level changes can be naturally very extreme. Similar changes today would be catastrophic. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SEA LEVEL RISES DUE TO MAN OR NOT!

I never said 1/2 of Brooklyn would be submerged, I said it would disappear. A subtle but important difference.

Do you realize how many different mechanisms and drivers there were over this period of time? Can you please try to make an honest argument. Start from this curve here...

View attachment 406020

I would be easier if we just used more recent times:

Maybe you can answer a question, why does it matter what the causes are?

It matters because the rise has accelerated faster due to man’s activity. A slower rate of change over thousands of years, is no big deal. We adjust easily. That same change over decades is very costly and more damaging to adjust to.

Holy shit... another dishonest argument. No, it hasn't dummy. It's been the same rate of rise for the past 6,000 years.