[Newsbot]

Title: Sea level rise underestimated, say B.C. scientists
Category: Environmental
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2012-02-20 18:35:25
Canadian

[JohnHenley]

Never trust big money/governement funded science.

Too much agenda and too little rigour.

[BartSimpson]

$1:

"One of the most famous atmospheric scientists, James Hansen, is arguing we could be facing five-metre higher sea levels by the end of the century, and he's not a flake, he's a very renowned scientist," said Clague.

That means that sea level has to rise over FIFTEEN FEET in the next eighty-eight years for this to be true. So we should see a rise of at least, what? a foot or so by 2020?

Yeah, watch for that NOT to happen.

Meanwhile these pukes want 'drastic' action. What's that mean? What exactly can Canada do all on its own to STOP global warming?

Oh, and since we're calling for drastic action what's that mean when countries like Russia, China, India, Brazil, and Indonesia refuse to go along with the plan? Economic sanctions? UN occupation troops? What about a full-on invasion?

Ultimately these people are just fooling themselves with this drivel because the reality of the world is that no one cares.

By that I mean even if it were true no one would care. Brazil is not going to stop its economic development for the benefit of some relatively well-off people in Vancouver.

[Freakinoldguy]

Finally I'll have that Ocean Front property I always dream't about..........provided I live about another 50 years of so.

[PluggyRug]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

$1:

"One of the most famous atmospheric scientists, James Hansen, is arguing we could be facing five-metre higher sea levels by the end of the century, and he's not a flake, he's a very renowned scientist," said Clague.

That means that sea level has to rise over FIFTEEN FEET in the next eighty-eight years for this to be true. So we should see a rise of at least, what? a foot or so by 2020?

Yeah, watch for that NOT to happen.

Meanwhile these pukes want 'drastic' action. What's that mean? What exactly can Canada do all on its own to STOP global warming?

Oh, and since we're calling for drastic action what's that mean when countries like Russia, China, India, Brazil, and Indonesia refuse to go along with the plan? Economic sanctions? UN occupation troops? What about a full-on invasion?

Ultimately these people are just fooling themselves with this drivel because the reality of the world is that no one cares.

By that I mean even if it were true no one would care. Brazil is not going to stop its economic development for the benefit of some relatively well-off people in Vancouver.

I'd like to know where all that water comes from, certainly not this planet.

[FieryVulpine]

So does that mean I should expect a tsunami coming in from the Rockies?

[eureka]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

$1:

"One of the most famous atmospheric scientists, James Hansen, is arguing we could be facing five-metre higher sea levels by the end of the century, and he's not a flake, he's a very renowned scientist," said Clague.

"That means that sea level has to rise over FIFTEEN FEET in the next eighty-eight years for this to be true. So we should see a rise of at least, what? a foot or so by 2020?

Meanwhile these pukes want 'drastic' action. What's that mean? What exactly can Canada do all on its own to STOP global warming?

Ultimately these people are just fooling themselves with this drivel because the reality of the world is that no one cares."

Sea level does not work that way. So far, virtually all the rise that has taken place is due to thermal expansion. That is. warming waters The rate of rise over the past decade is double that of the previous as some ice melt begins to feed in.

As the Greenland Icecap and the Antarctic melt accelerates as it is doin, and reaches a temperature where it flows into the oceans instead of refreezing that rate will rise dramatically. That will happen before you have many more birthdays.

The high estimates so far have been up to two metres by the end of the century. But, it is now broadly agree that the temperature is rising faster and ice melt occurring at a greater rate. That five metres may not be very far off.

What Canada can do is join the reat of the world in taking action. At this time, it is alone in the world in withdrawing from all international efforts.

Brazil will indeed not stop its economic development. It will continue to be the country that is doing amongst the best in developing and in attacking its emissions.

Only three countries in the world have a higher rating than Brazil in that. Only five countries - of those that have measurable emissions - rank lower than Canada.

Brazil's total emissions are less han half Canada's. With about five times the population!

[andyt]

JohnHenley JohnHenley:

Never trust big money/governement funded science.

Too much agenda and too little rigour.

You're right. Only trust the guys working out of their mother's basement.

[Bruce_E_T]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Ultimately these people are just fooling themselves with this drivel because the reality of the world is that no one cares.

It looks like the push for economic growth generally over rides concern for the environment pretty well on a global basis.
Alarmism seems to be a trademark of these people. Given that no one seems to understand how climate actually works or can agree on data its easy to dream up some strange speculations. If you are talking serious rises in Ocean levels you are going to need solid evidence in order to get anyone to move on it.

[raydan]

andyt andyt:

JohnHenley JohnHenley:

Never trust big money/governement funded science.

Too much agenda and too little rigour.

You're right. Only trust the guys working out of their mother's basement.

Eureka?

[FieryVulpine]

raydan raydan:

andyt andyt:

You're right. Only trust the guys working out of their mother's basement.

Eureka?

*rimshot*

[Gunnair]

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

raydan raydan:

andyt andyt:

You're right. Only trust the guys working out of their mother's basement.

Eureka?

*rimshot*

[eureka]

If CO2 levels were stabilized at their present levels, the Planet is already committed to about 1 degree of further warming. That cannot be stopped. That would produce sea level rise of about five times the amount that has already occurred through thermal expansion alone.

It might, but it is uncertain, trigger ice melt that would increase that greatly. Possibly bringing it to that half to one metre rise that was in the IPCC's scenarios earlier before it became clear that we are not going to stabilize emissions in time.

[BartSimpson]

eureka eureka:

If CO2 levels were stabilized at their present levels, the Planet is already committed to about 1 degree of further warming.

Nonsense. CO2 has gone up 11% in the past 20 years and temperatures are declining, much to the chagrin of the AGW cultists.

CO2 is not a cause of increased warming and the proof for this is that, simply, it's getting colder while the CO2 increases.

Have fun explaining that away.

[eureka]

You should get yourself up to date, Bart. It is two years since that silly, and duplicitous, claim of eleven years without warming was made. Are you seriously still trying to pick 1998 as the culmination of a trend when the cherrypicking of an anomalous spike caused by an unusually stron El Nino was responsible?

On top of that, 1998 was not evn the hottest year when the claim was made. 2005 was hotter; 2007 was hotter; and 2010 has now proved to be hotter still. And those came without the El Nino effect.

Apart from that, you are not stupid, though you seem to be intent on posing as such. It is not possible for CO2 to increase and temperatures not to follow. That is an ironclad Law of Physics. No scientist disputes that. Only a few PR men for the denial industry do.