Climate Change and Rising Sea Levels

I don't think anyone predicted the rain we have been having here in Alabama. It usually rains this time of year but this is ridiculous. It has been raining off and on (more than 3 days a week) since the begining of January. This will be the first time that anyone can remember that we will have to cut grass in February. That is if it ever quits raining.

It is getting on everyones nerves...I think the Gulf sea level is decreasing.....its all falling on us!!!

I am worried about my animals...mud everywhere...

 

What was the cause? It hasn't humans that caused it or the use of fossil fuels. So what is your point?

 

I think it is the current Federal Government that doesn't understand that climate change and current weather trends are not the same. Historically it is a proven fact that out current climate has existed many times through no fault of the human race or its use of fossil fuels. Instead, science has shown that there has always been changes in the climate and they those changes have taken predictable paths. None in the past caused by humans or any species on earth. We need to spend our money to research and establish ways to deal with inevitable changes rather than taxing those that provide us energy or those that consume it.

 

so because humans never caused climate change in the past we can't now?

no, not dealing with the real cost now is less expensive than dealing with the cost of damage later, the estimated cost of CC damage is staggering, corporate energy taxes will be miniscule in comparison...if we do not get off the fossil fuel addiction there will be no later, we'll be heading toward a mass extinction if aren't already...

 

If they are not the same thing what are they? Define climate then.....

The whole thing about orbital variance and solar forcing just passed you by didn't it? See if you LOOKED at that graph you will see where those things match up however they are NOT happening now - CO2 is rising yes, but it is human caused

 

Gol dang it, wyly! The deniers could win this whole debate thingy if you warmists weren´t so dag-nabbed logical!

 

No: because climate always changed independently of human inputs in the past, it is still changing independently of human inputs now.

 

So what is causing the change if man is not

 

You should look to what caused the past changes in the climate cycle. It has been documented and studied. The Climate has gone through many changes. There have been many glacial cycles before man, before the industrial revolution. I am not prepared to provide you a scientifically proven response to question. And, the majority of recent studies cannot answer your question. There are many theories, hypothesizes but not one study provides scientific fact that we have altered the climate to any significance or that changing our behavior will have any significant effect. Not one study or research project using computer generated models.

 

No ignoring the inevitable and continuing to rebuilding at sea level, closest to the shores, failing to build barriers, retaining walls and the like, failing to require all homeowners and business pay for flood, hurricane and tornado insurance coverage to help pay for the disasters caused by the weather is what is wrong.

Look, the planet has a long history and therefore so does its weather and climate. We are still deemed to be in a pre-glacial age. Volcanos below the oceans, on land have the biggest potential for changing our climate and causing serious destruction.

If we don't start to prepare for what history has proven will eventually occur again, no matter what we do to attempt to stop it, the earth and its population will be total vulnerable.
We are suppose to be advanced, knowledgeable and have proven to be able to overcome the disasters thrown at us.

So if we can fly to the moon, invent electric, television, computers, the WWW; we surely should be able to develop ways to combat future weather conditions that 200 years ago we would have been able to survive.

 

How dumb do you think scientists are that they have not investigated those drivers of climate change and come to the conclusion that NONE are operating right now

 

And who is going to pay for all of that? Especially since we are talking BILLIONS of people living in affected areas

Love to see you prove THAT bit of bull

If you read the Stern Review you will see that an economist has taken time to calculate what all that will cost and guess what?

IT is cheaper to stop polluting the planet with all the CO2 we have been pumping out

 

How dumb are you that you think THOSE Scientists that have investigated the past Climate Cycles believe we can alter inevitable cycles? I know of no Scientific Study either paid for by public funding or independent organizations that have determined past influences on changes of our climate in the past do not having any influence in the minimal changes we have experienced over the last decade. "operating now"? You mean things like volcanic eruptions, sun flares, magnetic forces? Exactly what drivers do you speak of? Because the human driver could not have had an impact until beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the 1700's. 300 years ago.

And here is just one researchers comments, note it is authored by a NOAA Lab.:

1. Has Global Warming Affected Atlantic Hurricane Activity?

Now I would like you to tell me what humans must do specially to make a significant effect to reduce the temperate of the oceans and air? And if we make those changes by what number can we expect to lower the ocean and air temperature over the next 20 years? Or, if you don't like that question, how many years will it take to stop rising temperatures? And then how many years to lower temperatures?

I will be surprised if you find any study that indicates that we can have any real significant effect on stopping the rise in temperatures or lower temperatures if we make the changes the Government is requesting. In fact based on the research I have read, reducing our use of fossil fuels and protecting our forests and reforestation over the next 1000 years will have a minimal effect on changing our climate and reducing temperatures.

So when they say we can have a positive effect, I guess they are right. But they usually fail to say that the effect will be minimal and virtually insignificant.

 

The key word in the above statement is we. How are we going to combat climate change if we can not even agree it is happening and no one wants to foot the bill?

 

Maaaate! BACTERIA have altered not just the climate but the composition of the atmosphere in the past - google up "archean period" and cyanobacteria

Just because YOU have not seen such a study does not mean one does not exist particularly since you do not seem to have the base knowledge consistent with doing that form of research and reading

I have posted this before but I know you dismissed it - still the science is valid



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

SIMPLE explanation - the orbit of the earth wobbles sometimes it is a little closer to the sun sometimes a little further and these wobbles correlate with the ice cores from the Vostok lake which track the ice ages

You mean you have not even heard of climate drivers - and you are stating categorically that humans have no effect??? Shhheeesh! that is like claiming you know how to cure cancer but do not know what the kidneys do.......

Drivers are the things that trigger climate change - the climate is funny that way it does not wake up one morning and just decide to change it has to have a reason or a driver

Yeeerrrrrssss all I can say is that that is apropos of nothing

83 million barrels of oil per day - plus coal plus concrete production plus deforestation all equal a hell of an impact on the CO2 levels

Not quite 1000 years but yes CO2 will stay in the atmosphere for a while and we will be feeling the effects for a while - does that mean we should do nothing about mitigation?

Have you every heard of "tipping points" ??

 

you fail to see the big picture...band-aid solutions don't prevent the problem and are more expensive than prevention...and in the end your band-aids will fail as they cannot protect the ecology which we are part of...

 

Correct, to a degree.

Global warming theory in a nutshell: The average temperature of the Earth is increasing, and human activities are accelerating the warming.

Of course, there are other causes as well. Temperatures have always fluctuated. It's just that this is the first time there have been seven billion humans to be affected by the change and to help that change along.

 

In that case, you haven't been reading the scientific literature. Here's a sampling of those who do in fact show exactly what you missed because it wasn't on FOX news:

Tett et. al. 2000: "Over the the last half-century greenhouse gases warm with climate ... with natural forcings causing an estimated cooling trend.

Stone et. al. 2007: "... temperature difference of the 1996–2005 decade relative to the 1940–49 decade can be attributed to greenhouse gas emissions, with a partially offsetting cooling from sulfate emissions and little contribution from natural sources."

Huber & Knutti 2011: "Expressed as a fraction of the total warming, greenhouse gases contributed 166% [partially offset by aerosols] ... The natural forcing since 1950 is near zero."

By way of contrast, I know of no peer-reviewed study by anyone, anywhere in the world, that shows late 20th century warming was primarily caused by natural forcings. Do you?

Once again, you haven't been keeping up with the literature.

IPCC 2007: "Many impacts can be reduced, delayed or avoided by mitigation. Mitigation efforts and investments over the next two to three decades will have a large impact on opportunities to achieve lower stabilisation levels. Delayed emission reductions significantly constrain the opportunities to achieve lower stabilisation levels and increase the risk of more severe climate change impacts. "

Citation please?

 

Have you been able to sell this idea to the Chinese and Indians yet? Shanghai, Hong Kong, Canton, Mumbai and Calcutta sit right at sea level and theoretically could be flooded.

The Chinese are the world's No. 1 emitters and have been for a couple years now. The Indians are coming on fast as are the Brazilians.

As I recall, the Chinese told the Warmers to pound sand.

 

The Chinese are losing 3,600 kilometers squared every year because of the growth of the Gobi desert. The climate and desertification will convince the Chinese. We don't have to. They will be the ones pounding sand.

And as my Mother used to say..."If everybody jumped off a cliff would you follow?"

 

Except that China is leading the world in renewable energy investment so..................

 

"...China is leading the world in renewable energy investment so................."

Taxcutter says:
Their wind and solar stuff doesn't work any better than anybody else's, so all you can say is that China leads the world in throwing their money down the wind and solar rathole.

 

I don't know about that electric solar fencing is very affordable as are solar pond pumps and if you check out some of the hobby farm mags out there many solar systems used to heat and cool houses are very affordable if you install them yourself.

Some people just don't take "it won't work" as an answer.

 

Awesome.

I bought a piece of property just off the coast. If the sea rises, I'll have ocean-front property!

 

They are also leading the world in energy storage