A real-world example of the cost of climate change

[WHAMPOM]

Picking one city that's sinking and trying to use it as an example of what everyone is facing is disingenuous to say the least. Even so, there is real chance that the sea levels will continue to rise. What's the solution?

What part of the use of the word "example" do you not understand?

 

[KB]

All cities including Norfolk have continued to grow, reducing green space and natural buffers while increasing impervious surfaces like roads and parking lots. I believe this is a more likely cause of localized flooding than global warming and sea rise.

 

[boomerang]

All cities including Norfolk have continued to grow, reducing green space and natural buffers while increasing impervious surfaces like roads and parking lots. I believe this is a more likely cause of localized flooding than global warming and sea rise.

Oh, no. Worldwide sea rise is currently focused in Norfolk VA. Norfolk was chosen in a study of some sorts. I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere.

 

[Jaskalas]

It's super easy. All we need to do is capture 200 years worth of unchecked CO2 emissions.

Capturing CO2 is a terrible idea. If we managed to bring it down low enough, we'd eliminate all plant life on the surface.

 

[Stewox]

Man Made Climate Change = Biggest Hoax Ever

Geoengineering (chemtrails) = Conspiracy Fact



Didn't you know? Global Warming was renamed to Climate Change, because they can make covery story for "change" easier than just warming that's because their agenda has been exposed too much.

What's wrong with "change" itself - because there are weather cycles all the time, the moon and the sun being the biggest influence, there is a 11 year sun cycle, there are moon cycles, and there could be a bigger 50 year cycle or a 100 year one we don't yet know about, there could be a solar system cycle, and a galactic cycle, who the hell knows.

So it's not only broken in it's basics, it's broken it's it's content, because we have the hard proof, and all the commercials and discovery channel shows pushing is all based on nonsense.

Number 1 Website on Solar Weather Affecting Planetary Weather
http://www.weatheraction.com/ - Piers Corbyn

Interviews:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoI5wMNWOjs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llBcH6H820E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eSBTDq6BgY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akjdM0Fwtiw

Capturing CO2 is a terrible idea. If we managed to bring it down low enough, we'd eliminate all plant life on the surface.

Population Control - http://youtu.be/ZNyo0Gu7064?t=5s

http://nsnbc.me/2013/05/08/bill-gates-polio-vaccine-program-caused-47500-cases-of-paralysis-death/
http://www.infowars.com/bill-gates-and-47500-cases-of-paralysis/

It's all connected ... :ninja:

Not only they falsified data, they also flipped around the fact that when temperature increases CO2 follows.

 

[fskimospy]

So in your world ice is expected to melt instantaneously?

I'll be sure to let icebergs know that they're doing it wrong.

I'm saying that your posts are showing that you don't understand the science behind it.

Can you provide me with some peer reviewed papers that say a level of 400ppm will inexorably lead to the sea level rise you described?

 

[Paul98]

Though I don't know if I would say this is much of an example of climate change I think I get your point. This is what we will see in the future if climate change continues as predicted.

 

[Stewox]

Oh I forgot ... Which means, everyone that keeps discussing climate change like a real thing is wasting his time.

I'm saying that your posts are showing that you don't understand the science behind it.

Can you provide me with some peer reviewed papers that say a level of 400ppm will inexorably lead to the sea level rise you described?

Or maybe that your posts are showing you're buying into a lie.

Sometimes it only takes a stroll to the mainstream news http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...tists-bowing-financial-pressure-sponsors.html

 

[fskimospy]

Oh I forgot ... Which means, everyone that keeps discussing climate change like a real thing is wasting his time.




Or maybe that your posts are showing you're buying into a lie.

Sometimes it only takes a stroll to the mainstream news http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...tists-bowing-financial-pressure-sponsors.html

You have to remember that you appear to be fairly seriously mentally ill. This is probably affecting your ability to process information.

I strongly suggest you educate yourself as well as seek professional psychiatric evaluation.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy

 

[michal1980]

This exactly. It's also why you should rob banks and beat the elderly, because rapists and murderers exist. And so long as there's someone else out there doing something worse than you, nothing you do bad should matter or the consequences considered. More proof of why michal is a brilliant philosopher.

Umm. I'm not saying those countries will be doing something worse then us.

I'm saying that if those countries approach even 50% of the per capita energy use that we do unless its all zero emissions. The USA impact on CO2 emissions is irrelevant. Their growth will dwarf any cuts we make.

So while those countries grow using cheap energy. We will be making our energy more expensive. Making our workers more expensive. Which will do nothing but help export more jobs from the USA.

 

[rudder]

So how is it just Norfolk and not other cities on the east coast? Or are you trying to push an agenda by leaving out pertinent information? I will have to cancel my trip to the outer banks this summer is the sea level is rising that much.

 

[werepossum]

If my goal was to honestly demonstrate the horrors of global warming, I probably wouldn't choose a low lying coastal city that's sinking nearly half a meter a century and try asserting that global warming is the main reason it's flooding more.

 

[Paul98]

If my goal was to honestly demonstrate the horrors of global warming, I probably wouldn't choose a low lying coastal city that's sinking nearly half a meter a century and try asserting that global warming is the main reason it's flooding more.

Why not, even if the reason for the problems isn't global warming. This show's some of the effects of what a rising ocean will be like.

 

[glenn1]

Norfolk, VA is now seeing high tides that rise higher than at any other time in the history of the city:



Climate change isn't the only contributor to Norfolk's seal-level-rise woes. Changes in the behavior of the Gulf Stream have magnified the climate-change-induced sea-level rise and a Norfolk's sinking landmass has exacerbated the problem. But climate change is the basic problem, and Norfolk is particularly vulnerable.

You can read the full story yourself. Norfolk is just a taste of what coastal areas in the U.S. and the rest of the world will increasingly face in the coming decades. These are the REAL costs of "doing nothing" about climate change. Of "waiting to get more information." Of "it's just a hoax."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-norfolk-evidence-of-climate-change-is-in-the-streets-at-high-tide/2014/05/31/fe3ae860-e71f-11e3-8f90-73e071f3d637_story.html?hpid=z2

You guys should take a different approach to getting SUVs banned since "climate change" doesn't seem to be working.

 

[Jaskalas]

I'm saying that your posts are showing that you don't understand the science behind it.

Can you provide me with some peer reviewed papers that say a level of 400ppm will inexorably lead to the sea level rise you described?

6.3.2 What Does the Record of the Mid-Pliocene Show?
- estimated to be between 360 to 400 ppm
- sea level was at least 15 to 25 m above modern levels

Oh, and then there's this... Forget CO2, our interglacial alone probably means 6-9 more meters of sea level rise. When they speculate West Antarctica collapsed... sort of like the scare stories of today.
Hrmm... :hmm:

Ice Volume and Sea Level During the Last Interglacial

 

[werepossum]

Why not, even if the reason for the problems isn't global warming. This show's some of the effects of what a rising ocean will be like.

That would be a valid point. Claiming that in Norfolk's increasingly worse flooding climate change is the basic problem is NOT a valid point. In general, lying to people who know you are lying to them does not enhance one's credibility in predicting the future.

 

[Paratus]

Capturing CO2 is a terrible idea. If we managed to bring it down low enough, we'd eliminate all plant life on the surface.

Making CO2 is a terrible idea. If we make it high enough we'd eliminate all human life on the surface.

 

[Jaskalas]

Making CO2 is a terrible idea. If we make it high enough we'd eliminate all human life on the surface.

Pray tell, how much would that require?

At 220ppm plants slow down.
At 150ppm we'd reach an ELE.

Earth has previously seen 1,000 - 2,000ppm with Dinosaurs, and ~6,000 ppm in more ancient times. Do you think we could burn enough fossil fuels for 3,200ppm? That is my estimation for 1C of man-made warming, based on 0.3C per doubling.

 

[Paratus]

Pray tell, how much would that require?

At 220ppm plants slow down.
At 150ppm we'd reach an ELE.

Earth has previously seen 1,000 - 2,000ppm with Dinosaurs, and ~6,000 ppm in more ancient times. Do you think we could burn enough fossil fuels for 3,200ppm? That is my estimation for 1C of man-made warming, based on 0.3C per doubling.

At 100000 PPM you pass out and die in about 10min. It's nonsensical, but just as much as your original comment about removing all the CO2.

Maybe it's just that in my line of work we have hardware and group responsible for keeping CO2 in check so our folks don't die.

But even if your convinced no amount of exhaust is bad for you please don't put your head in a plastic bag.

 

[GaiaHunter]

At 100000 PPM you pass out and die in about 10min. It's nonsensical, but just as much as your original comment about removing all the CO2.

Maybe it's just that in my line of work we have hardware and group responsible for keeping CO2 in check so our folks don't die.

But even if your convinced no amount of exhaust is bad for you please don't put your head in a plastic bag.

Why are we talking about CO2 concentrations 3 orders of magnitude higher than current and 2 orders of magnitude higher than historical highest in a news article that is simply WRONG and sensationalist. (and it seems to me someone with a plastic head around their head will die a bit earlier than 10 minutes due to lack of oxygen).

Norfolk problems have nothing to do with climate change and all about its location.

It looks like we are back a few thousands years in human history, when the only way to explain events was gods and now the only way to explain something is man made CO2.

 

[PokerGuy]

Oh, teh noes, a sinking city by the ocean in the middle of three rivers is facing more flooding! Quick, someone give the Gorons more money, that will surely fix it!

More typical alarmist drivel without providing a feasible workable solution, other than handing more money and power to government and leftist groups, along with damaging the US economy. Sorry guys, no sale.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Here's an interesting article from 4 years ago.

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/12/study-sinking-land-not-rising-seas-bigger-worry

Study: Sinking land, not rising seas, a bigger worry

First, the good news: Sea levels around the Chesapeake Bay are not rising as quickly as other places in the world - actually, they are moving about half as fast as the global average.

Now, the bad news: Coastal lands around the Bay are sinking more rapidly than elsewhere around the planet, especially in Hampton Roads.

 

[dphantom]

All cities including Norfolk have continued to grow, reducing green space and natural buffers while increasing impervious surfaces like roads and parking lots. I believe this is a more likely cause of localized flooding than global warming and sea rise.

This +1

 

[Newell Steamer]

Solution: dump all that water into the ground, collect all the gas (while washing away all those pesky fossils as well,..), save humanity.

Fracking, And You Mother Fuckers Were Against It.

 

[MagickMan]

You have to remember that you appear to be fairly seriously mentally ill. This is probably affecting your ability to process information.

I strongly suggest you educate yourself as well as seek professional psychiatric evaluation.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy

That's what you have? There are actually 2 good points made; one that climate science data was proven to be tampered with as early as 1996, and two, that climatologists along with gov't officials bullied and threatened opponents and falsified and destroyed information.

However, after all that, we're supposed to simply trust these same individuals later when new "facts" (based on the previously falsified information) emerge? Obviously shit is going on, but there's no one that can be trusted to give an unbiased evaluation.