View Single Post
Old 10-22-2018, 01:12 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,256
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
(post shortened)

My excuse? I firmly believe that global warming is occurring. OTOH, I find the IPCC and UN efforts, and your OP, to be unconvincing.

Has the MMCO2IE side finally settled on the expected level of sea rise after all of the glaciers, and poles, have melted? Is it 0.5m? 1m? 2m? 20m? With all of the "science" currently available, something like that would be both easy to prove, and to sell.
Explained and linked to this before, many times in the past:
With a hundred fifty cubic miles of this ice melting every year, basic physics tells us that this will cause sea levels to rise and basic physics also tells us that as water warms up it expands.

So on top of the rise due to ice melt researchers say sea levels will also rise because of thermal expansion. There are two ways to calculate this: one is to estimate how much ice will melt and how much the oceans will expand for a given rise in temperature and that gives us a figure of between 0.8 and 2 meters by the end of the century depending on how much co2 is pumped into the atmosphere. Another way of estimating it is to see how much sea levels rose in the past for a given rise in temperature and that gives a similar range: between 1 and 2 meters by the end of this century.

0.8 meters, the low end of the estimates, may not sound like much; it's about 3 feet. But it's enough to submerge large areas of coastline including parts of coastal cities like Miami, New York, Calcutta and Tokyo. Hong Kong, Bangkok, New Orleans, Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Two meters, the high end of the scale, is over 6 feet.

Still the urban myths persist and who better to demonstrate them than our old friend 1000 Frawley who calls my reporting on sea-level rise "misleading tosh". "Potties claim of a 100 centimeter rise, that's a meter by 2100, is pure fiction based on IPCC alarmism". Well, first of all, of course this isn't my claim. I'm just doing what I always do in my videos which is to report what's published in the scientific literature. Secondly, I don't use the IPCC as a source...
Mind you, many of those projections have the caveat that they depend also on what would happen if an acceleration on the rate of melting of the cap ice was observed; as it is being observed, that low end is not what we are going to get.

And yes, a lot of that cap ice is still in Greenland, and is still melting a lot now, regardless of where it is located on a map.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 10-22-2018 at 01:13 PM.