Where Is The “Climate Emergency”?

[westwall]

The were not stupid just didn't have a lot of technology. How do you know that they had boats and farmed?


I have a generator and enough money to find me a nice hotet.


Yes.


No, tsunamis are not tied to climate changes.


Scary stuff.

Well, the oldest surviving boat is over 8,000 years old and in the Drents Museum in the Netherlands. It is a well developed little boat, so clearly there was a lot of development prior.

Nice that you have a generator. So do I, how do you get your food. What do you do when your generator fuel runs out. Etc. etc. etc.

Monsoons have been going on for thousands of millenia. You think you can stop that?

No, not scary. Just history. History that shows your concerns are unfounded.

 

[abu afak]

Well, the oldest surviving boat is over 8,000 years old and in the Drents Museum in the Netherlands. It is a well developed little boat, so clearly there was a lot of development prior.

Nice that you have a generator. So do I, how do you get your food. What do you do when your generator fuel runs out. Etc. etc. etc.

Monsoons have been going on for thousands of millenia. You think you can stop that?

No, not scary. Just history. History that shows your concerns are unfounded.

How many "boats" will it take to evacuate the world's coastal cities?

Will Floridians, Gulf, and SE coasters move to Arizona?
Londoners?
Shanghai?

Even in decades of prep it means a giant dislocation unimaginable loss of value for Hundreds of millions.
`

 

[abu afak]

You're doing great -- but dont be so SURE about "what we know". The ice is too recyclable (it's sea ice as opposed to Greenland/Antarctica) to leave great depths to look at ancient ice. It's melts -- it regrows. The OLDEST ice if you can find it is probably less then 20 years in any substantial patch.
You can look back at LAND ice for 10s of thousands. Greenland is MORE reliable for history because Antarctica is a virtual desert, and the yearly ice is extremely thin and you lose time resolution.

So -- 1st earth resource satellites about 1979 saw the ice in the Arctic Sea, We're sure of what happened after,

NASA Climate Chanel youtube.



`

 

[flacaltenn]

Who cares about tiny (and possibly anomalous) ****** "Vanuatu" when GLOBAL sea level is the issue?
AND when we know Average global seal level movement already.

EPA.gov

View attachment 593669
Since 1994 + app 3.5"

Climate Change Indicators: Sea Level | US EPA

This indicator describes how sea level has changed over time. The indicator describes two types of sea level changes: absolute and relative.

www.epa.gov

NEXT clown please.
Maybe next issue please is more fitting at this point.

EDIT:
Note the two (and counting) Dislikes I got from Wetwall and SunsetTommy for absolutely Impeccable and clarifying information.
Not rebuttal of any sort (not even a misleading graph from one of Tommy's denier Blogs), just Dislikes.
`
``

The site that tracks tidal gauges is genuine. Tidal gauges measure SHORELINE effects. I've explained to you before that the oceans are not flat. And you have problems looking at graphs and mentally juggling numeric representations.

If you WERE skilled enough, you'd look at that Vanuatu graph and realize that the Y AXIS is actually HUGE compared to your chart. And that for the 30 years or so shown -- that the shoreline SLevel there had a 10 year mean that BOUNCED UP 100mm (from 6875 to 6975) for 2nd decade and then came down about a 75 mm (6975 to 6900) -- meaning that the graph showed a net change over 20 years (using 10 year avg) of 25 mm. That's a positive rate of ABOUT 1.25mm per year.

But to SHOW THE DYNAMICS of situation and how much decadal DIFFERENCE there is at ONE PLACE ON THE GLOBE -- you need to have a Y axis large enough to show HUGE SWINGS in sea level over YEARLY and DECADAL trends at that location.

In SIMPLETON terms -- not every beach, island, shoreline sea level rise is DOMINATED by the TREND that your graph shows. They all are influenced in UNIQUE WAYS.

So you cannot take that graph of yours that shows a GLOBAL AVERAGE of an UNFLAT ocean system and irregular shorelines and FUCK WITH PEOPLES minds and pretend that any specific location is NOW or in the NEAR future "underwater".

Vanuatu as a island is gonna be LESS influenced by the one SILLY STUPID number for sea level rise than all other places that might be MORE OR LESS effected.

And the idea that Pacific Islands are gonna be the 1st to GO is not science. OR that TODAY the folks are planning evacuations. They're building AIRPORTS for more tourism and trade with our "global warming abatement" GUILT money -- at about only 10 feet above sea level.

 

[westwall]

How many "boats" will it take to evacuate the world's coastal cities?

Will Floridians, Gulf, and SE coasters move to Arizona?
Londoners?
Shanghai?

Even in decades of prep it means a giant dislocation unimaginable loss of value for Hundreds of millions.
`

Really? Why? Do you have any evidence to support your fears?

If so please present it. Not opinion, but measurable data.

 

[westwall]

The site that tracks tidal gauges is genuine. Tidal gauges measure SHORELINE effects. I've explained to you before that the oceans are not flat. And you have problems looking at graphs and mentally juggling numeric representations.

If you WERE skilled enough, you'd look at that Vanuatu graph and realize that the Y AXIS is actually HUGE compared to your chart. And that for the 30 years or so shown -- that the shoreline SLevel there had a 10 year mean that BOUNCED UP 100mm (from 6875 to 6975) for 2nd decade and then came down about a 75 mm (6975 to 6900) -- meaning that the graph showed a net change over 20 years (using 10 year avg) of 25 mm. That's a positive rate of ABOUT 1.25mm per year.

But to SHOW THE DYNAMICS of situation and how much decadal DIFFERENCE there is at ONE PLACE ON THE GLOBE -- you need to have a Y axis large enough to show HUGE SWINGS in sea level over YEARLY and DECADAL trends at that location.

In SIMPLETON terms -- not every beach, island, shoreline sea level rise is DOMINATED by the TREND that your graph shows. They all are influenced in UNIQUE WAYS.

So you cannot take that graph of yours that shows a GLOBAL AVERAGE of an UNFLAT ocean system and irregular shorelines and FUCK WITH PEOPLES minds and pretend that any specific location is NOW or in the NEAR future "underwater".

Vanuatu as a island is gonna be LESS influenced by the one SILLY STUPID number for sea level rise than all other places that might be MORE OR LESS effected.

And the idea that Pacific Islands are gonna be the 1st to GO is not science. OR that TODAY the folks are planning evacuations. They're building AIRPORTS for more tourism and trade with our "global warming abatement" GUILT money -- at about only 10 feet above sea level.

Yup. The Maldives, supposedly soon to be underwater, have spent over a billion dollars building airports for tourists.

If the claims were anything approaching reality no one, and I mean no one, would even think of investing money there.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yup. The Maldives, supposedly soon to be underwater, have spent over a billion dollars building airports for tourists.

If the claims were anything approaching reality no one, and I mean no one, would even think of investing money there.

The major island there is a testament to HOW to destroy an island paradise WITHOUT any Global Warming. Their capitol Male looks like a photo fake.

And WE PAY THEM for "environmental damages"??

As the island conservation groups say -- OVERPOPULATION is the biggest immediate threat to most Pac islands.

 

[abu afak]

The site that tracks tidal gauges is genuine. Tidal gauges measure SHORELINE effects. I've explained to you before that the oceans are not flat. And you have problems looking at graphs and mentally juggling numeric representations.

If you WERE skilled enough, you'd look at that Vanuatu graph and realize that the Y AXIS is actually HUGE compared to your chart. And that for the 30 years or so shown -- that the shoreline SLevel there had a 10 year mean that BOUNCED UP 100mm (from 6875 to 6975) for 2nd decade and then came down about a 75 mm (6975 to 6900) -- meaning that the graph showed a net change over 20 years (using 10 year avg) of 25 mm. That's a positive rate of ABOUT 1.25mm per year.

But to SHOW THE DYNAMICS of situation and how much decadal DIFFERENCE there is at ONE PLACE ON THE GLOBE -- you need to have a Y axis large enough to show HUGE SWINGS in sea level over YEARLY and DECADAL trends at that location.

In SIMPLETON terms -- not every beach, island, shoreline sea level rise is DOMINATED by the TREND that your graph shows. They all are influenced in UNIQUE WAYS.

So you cannot take that graph of yours that shows a GLOBAL AVERAGE of an UNFLAT ocean system and irregular shorelines and FUCK WITH PEOPLES minds and pretend that any specific location is NOW or in the NEAR future "underwater".

Vanuatu as a island is gonna be LESS influenced by the one SILLY STUPID number for sea level rise than all other places that might be MORE OR LESS effected.

And the idea that Pacific Islands are gonna be the 1st to GO is not science. OR that TODAY the folks are planning evacuations. They're building AIRPORTS for more tourism and trade with our "global warming abatement" GUILT money -- at about only 10 feet above sea level.

Exactly... as I said.
Your Vanuatu graph was indeed anomalous and IRRELEVANT.
From only 1994 no less!

Only a completely disingenuous propagandist would post it.... (short and tiny)
and have the nerve to take issue with a 140 year Global one!

And you are right, Sea Level doesn't affect all parts of the planet equally, which is why we need what I posted, a Worldwide 140 year one.
It's estimated any significant more melt will generally effect lower latitudes of the planet more.

Of course, from your past blindingly Whacky posts, we don't have to worry about Sea Level rise since warming stopped since 2008!
ie

Definately NOT "mostly the right". Before GW lost it's scientific momentum, EVERY weather record was not just INSINUATED by the left and the media, it SCREAMED GW multiple times a week. All of that drama has cooled down now since about 2008 and "the hiatus" (look it up -- GW pretty much STOPPED for a 12 year period). And you RARELY get the monthly headline about "NEW STUDY CONFIRMS" anything about GW.

What are you even Doing in this section?
New "studies are/have been constantly coming out."
In fact, more than ever.
All your RW buddies here rail against them daily... unless you're only reading SunsetTommy's WTFUWT cooling posts.

It's one thing to be wrong about warming, another to be living in a cave and missed 13 years of data/News/topical content.

Maybe try the politics section where mere opinion is OK.

`

 

[flacaltenn]

Exactly... as I said.
Your Vanuatu graph was indeed anomalous and IRRELEVANT.
From only 1994 no less!

Only a completely disingenuous propagandist would post it.... (short and tiny)
and have the nerve to take issue with a 140 year Global one!

And you are right, Sea Level doesn't affect all parts of the planet equally, which is why we need what I posted, a Worldwide 140 year one.

It's estimated any significant more melt will generally effect lower latitudes of the planet more.

Of course, from your past blindingly Whacky posts, we don't have to worry about Sea Level rise since it's been cooling since 2008!
ie


What are you even Doing in this section?
New "studies are/have been constantly coming out."
In fact, more than ever.

It's one thing to be wrong about warming, another to be living in a cave and missed 13 years of data/News/topical content.
All your RW buddies here rail against them daily... unless you're only reading SunsetTommy's WTFUWT cooling posts.

Maybe try the politics section where mere opinion is OK.

`

Alert -- The content Below is an ILLEGAL post on USMB.. Somebody PLEASE REPORT IT. LOL...

I've wasted more time trying to GET intelligent discussion from than any sane person ever would. You're a HUGE waste of space with ENORMOUS anger issues and not much background in the subjects you CLAIM to dominate.

Not gonna happen ever again.

 

[abu afak]

Alert -- The content Below is an ILLEGAL post on USMB.. Somebody PLEASE REPORT IT. LOL...

I've wasted more time trying to GET intelligent discussion from than any sane person ever would. You're a HUGE waste of space with ENORMOUS anger issues and not much background in the subjects you CLAIM to dominate.

Not gonna happen ever again.

Illegal How?
You mean "embarrassing" right?
All copied by me.
I reported your post for false charges as instructed.

`

 

[alang1216]

Well, the oldest surviving boat is over 8,000 years old and in the Drents Museum in the Netherlands. It is a well developed little boat, so clearly there was a lot of development prior.

How big a body of water would you want to cross in it?

Monsoons have been going on for thousands of millenia. You think you can stop that?

Not the question. The question is: Is the frequency and intensity of monsoons changing over time?

No, not scary. Just history. History that shows your concerns are unfounded.

So the future of the West holds some serious flood events. You would do nothing I take it while I would prefer to have plan to avoid a future catastrophe.

 

[KissMy]

I can't wait to get cheap solar power & electric vehicles so I can cut all the utility cords. I don't care if the lobby floods in rich peoples condos on the beach. Just stop holding your hands out for more flood insurance subsidies.

The west has major drought so their people will flee to red states, crops fail & forest will burn sending massive amounts of carbon into the air. We need to cut down all the trees & burn them for fuel before the raging forest fires burn them.

Since we have already killed off 70% of the earths wildlife, burning the forest should finally kill off the 30% that remain. I'll just build a greenhouse to grow my own food in winter.

 

[westwall]

How big a body of water would you want to cross in it?


Not the question. The question is: Is the frequency and intensity of monsoons changing over time?


So the future of the West holds some serious flood events. You would do nothing I take it while I would prefer to have plan to avoid a future catastrophe.

As big as it needs to be. I would have no problem crossing the English Channel in a canoe.

The frequency and intensity is LESS than it was in the 1950's. That's why they stop telling you about things in the 1970's and earlier, DOH!

How exactly do you think mankind can do anything about a coming mega storm like that in 1862? Please note, that storm happened LONG before mankind was doing massive polluting. The energy released in that one storm is more than all of the energy that man can create in a decade. There is no way to prevent them from happening. All we can do is mitigate the damage when they do happen.

 

[alang1216]

All we can do is mitigate the damage when they do happen.

Bingo! Of course you can't do that during the storm, you have to prepare before the event. Kind of like planning ahead for sea levels rising. DOH!

 

[westwall]

Bingo! Of course you can't do that during the storm, you have to prepare before the event. Kind of like planning ahead for sea levels rising. DOH!

Your problem is sea levels aren't rising. And mitigation means building up cash reserves to rebuild after a catastrophe, and not allowing people to build in FLOOD PLAINS!

DOH!

 

[Sunsettommy]

Alert -- The content Below is an ILLEGAL post on USMB.. Somebody PLEASE REPORT IT. LOL...

I've wasted more time trying to GET intelligent discussion from than any sane person ever would. You're a HUGE waste of space with ENORMOUS anger issues and not much background in the subjects you CLAIM to dominate.

Not gonna happen ever again.

I use the ignore function A LOT to block such people who are not here to discuss or debate just scream and attack personally.

It is refreshing when the torrential flow of pure trolling ugliness is slowed to a trickle.

 

[alang1216]

Your problem is sea levels aren't rising.

NASA and NOAA disagrees: Sea level continues to rise at a rate of about one-eighth of an inch per year. Given the choice between scientists tasked with studying the data and someone on an internet chat board, the choice of who to believe is pretty easy.

And mitigation means building up cash reserves to rebuild after a catastrophe, and not allowing people to build in FLOOD PLAINS!

I think it is cheaper in the long run to prevent a catastrophe rather than rebuild afterwards. I agree about flood plain and would add barrier islands too.

 

[westwall]

NASA and NOAA disagrees: Sea level continues to rise at a rate of about one-eighth of an inch per year. Given the choice between scientists tasked with studying the data and someone on an internet chat board, the choice of who to believe is pretty easy.


I think it is cheaper in the long run to prevent a catastrophe rather than rebuild afterwards. I agree about flood plain and would add barrier islands too.

And we have pictures from 100 years ago that show no sea level increase, and we have the Maldives, darlings of the "we are going to drown" crowd, investing billions of dollars to make lots of new international airports so they can bring tourists to their island paradise. Not something anyone in their right mind would do if the claims were real. These are a few of the new airports. Please note how there is NO defense against a so called rising ocean.

Hmmm. Maybe all of those sea level rising claims are lies.

These pictures sure convince me they are all bullshit.

"The 5 New Airports in Maldives 2020​

Last night, Transportation Minister Aishath Nahula announced the dates of the openings of new airports in Maldives in 2020.

5 airports are to be opened this year: Funadho Airport, Maavarulu Airport, Madivaru Airport, Hoarafushi Airport and Fares Maathoda Airport.

Funadhoo Airport in Shaviyani Atoll will be opening earliest in January. The runway stretches to 1,200 meters. The first airport in Shaviyani Atoll is developed at a cost of USD 5.742 million.

The 5 New Airports in Maldives 2020

Transport Minister Aishath Nahula announces the dates of airport openings in 2020.

coralglass.media

 

[alang1216]

And we have pictures from 100 years ago that show no sea level increase,

I was not aware, got a link?

"The 5 New Airports in Maldives 2020​

You are welcome to get your climate info from businessmen, I'll stick to the scientists. BTW, how long before these airports pay for themselves?

 

[westwall]

I was not aware, got a link?


You are welcome to get your climate info from businessmen, I'll stick to the scientists. BTW, how long before these airports pay for themselves?

Sure, look up Sunset Cliffs California (San Diego). They have photo's from 100 years ago and just last year. No change. You can do the same with every coastal city out there. They almost all have photo's of the shorelines. Compare them. No change.

Businessmen make decisions based on science. Funny how a supposed geologist (you) don't know that.