NOT SO GREEN | Fooled, by fools

Home Forums Politics NOT SO GREEN | Fooled, by fools

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #846222

    CO2isPlantFood
    Participant

    WA Tide Gauge

    Its now been 28 years since the conjecture of these early sea level rise climate alarmist claims was presented to Congress. However the latest updated NOAA coastal tide gauge measurement data shows locations likely to experience only inches of sea level rise by mid century ( not one to four feet as climate alarmists speculated to Congress in 1998 ) with that increase consistent with long standing and unchanging rates of sea level rise measured at these coastal locations. This location along with all other U.S. coastal locations show no sea level rise acceleration.

    WA State Example

    NOAA Data

    1988

    #846226

    Smitty
    Participant

    Hey, didn’t you hear? This is the warmest year ever……..
    ………………………………………since 1880.

    #846251

    CO2isPlantFood
    Participant

    Smitty drops by to discuss sea level rise …. oh, wait – he has nothing !

    Well, as a matter of current climate science, yes, the Earth has been warming.

    In part, the planet warms as a recovery event from the recent little ice age.

    In part, the planet warms as a result of the two most recent El Nino episodes.

    And, let us not forget those ” climate forcings ” the dreaded IPCC wrings their hands over.

    Now Smitty, perhaps you can cite current science with respect to what part in all of this the ” human footprint ” may be responsible for ?

    IF it is the warmest year ever, can you consider what the margin of error in your wild statement might be ? NASA / NOAA have, however these are the sort of additional details they like to bury in their fine print.

    You ARE referencing data from the USHCRN, aren’t you Smitty ?

    Smitty ?

    #846310

    JTB
    Participant

    Hey Plant Food, my reading of the NOAA map indicates you are mistaken in your comment about no increase in the rate of sea level rise anywhere on the coastal USA.

    And of course, we’re concerned with more than the USA in considering climate change and sea level rise, or at least many of us are.

    It’s also interesting to note how the researchers factor in geological variations in assessing tidal sea level changes over time.
    US tides and currents trends

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by JTB.
    #846312

    Smitty
    Participant

    I’m on your side, bud.

    Was (attempting) to make fun of all the “warmest year EVER” hype we always hear. The small footnotes at the very bottom always say “since 1880” which in earth time is one second.

    #846321

    CO2isPlantFood
    Participant

    JTB needs a redo on reading skills. Did he NOT notice that the word ” acceleration ” is in BOLD ? ?

    Just maybe the rise, measured in millimeters, is NOT Accelerating !

    #846322

    CO2isPlantFood
    Participant

    Smitty, welcome back !

    Yes, the warmists like to crow about the warmest ( month, year, decade ) since that 1800’s date, they seem to conveniently misplace what has been going on in the Earths history over the past 100 million years.

    Your on the correct side of current climate science – you must not be a graduate of Seattle public schools !

    #846337

    JTB
    Participant

    Silly me, I thought rate of rise and acceleration were different ways of expressing the same thing

    #846479

    CO2isPlantFood
    Participant

    your comment speaks for itself !

    #846633

    dhg
    Participant

    If thousands of experts and thousands of obvious examples don’t convince you global warming is real, there is nothing that will. People who are bent on burning all the oil in the ground are diminishing due to age. So, rage on, but don’t expect applause for stewardship.

    #846789

    CO2isPlantFood
    Participant

    Well, well, well, a typical response from one of the eco facists.

    Instead of speaking to the presented current science, on sea level rise, dhg throws out the usual blather about thousands of experts and thousands of obvious ….

    Name just one of your experts and also cite this experts current ‘ science ‘ ?

    State just one of your obvious examples and again, cite the current science behind your otherwise empty talking point ?

    Stewardship ? You must be joking, right ?

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.