Jump to content

Unprecedented sea level rise in Sydney harbor over the last 140 years due to massive climate change!
 

Unprecedented sea level rise in Sydney harbor over the last 140 years due to massive climate change!


Photo Information for Unprecedented sea level rise in Sydney harbor over the last 140 years due to massive climate change!


Recommended Comments

Ooops. Sydney is one of 6 harbors worldwide where the average sea level is being measured over time. I guess in 140 years …. nothing much has changed?

The Maldives and Marshalls? Plate tectonics, the land is subsiding. The sea isn’t rising, as it would have to be everywhere, but those island chains are simply subsiding.

OH!! The Obamas… Right!! Ummm… they just bought a multi-million dollar mansion in Martha’s vineyard - 6 feet above high tide. They’re really sweating sea level rise, obviously!

Good ol Al Gore his own self bought a house on Malibu Beach. He’s sweating sea level rise, too! Where’d he get the money for that house, anyway?

Every catastrophic event forecasted to happen in 10 years, for the past 40 years, has failed to materialize. Every. One. Remember the polar ice caps that would have been melted in 10 years, - well Climate change research ship trapped in polar ice. Yep, the midsummer ice, the LOW point in total ice at the North Pole trapped the research ship barely halfway to the North Pole. They had to abandon the ship!

Study: Earth’s Orbit Causes Global Warming Today And Climate Change 1.4 Billion Years Ago

But … but … but CO2 - it’s increasing in concentration. It’s a greenhouse gas!! No, it’s not. (1) CO2 is a trailing indicator - the oceans release dissolved CO2 as they warm, not as a cause of warming but as a result of warming. It makes using CO2 as a predictive value totally worthless. (2) Current CO2 levels are at about 300–400 PPM. Greenhouse growers will seal off their greenhouses and INCREASE CO2 to about 1500 PPM, and get on average a 30% increase in yield. Yep, quintuple the current CO2 concentration and crops will be around 30% more plentiful. Managing CO2 in Your Grow Space . Can you imagine what 30% more crops could mean for the increasing world population?

So how are all the climate models so far off? They predicted CO2 changes very accurately! Simply CO2 is not nearly the greenhouse gas they assumed it to be. A greenhouse gas, like water vapor, reflects Earth’s heat back to the surface. CO2’s reflectivity maxes out in about 100 meters. The real reflectivity is a fraction the value the model’s assume. Further the models can’t account for cloud cover, so don’t account for it accurately. Clouds reflect the sun’s heat back into space. They didn’t know how to predict it, and badly misjudged it. Between CO2 NOT trapping heat, and clouds reflecting far more of it back into space, warming has just not happened anything like the forecasts.

Is the climate changing? Sure. It has been changing forever, and forever will. But can we change the Earth’s rotation around the sun? Give me a break.

Just ask those intrepid ice pioneers bravely going to the pole expecting open water….

That’s why the verbiage today is “climate change” , not “global warming”, anymore. Did you catch that change? In the 1950’s and ’60s it was global cooling - the upcoming ice age…. Ooops, that didn’t happen either, did it?

Pesky real facts, not supposition, not hyperbole, not GREED, keeps rearing its face, putting paid to these hoaxes.

You’re being played. You should be ashamed of yourself for being taken in so easily.

Share this comment


Link to comment
9 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

I guess in 140 years …. nothing much has changed?

I found an article in a newspaper from 1837 that linked tobacco to cancer. And this was a newspaper from Charlotte North Carolina, already one of the best known states for growing tobacco. 140 years later there were articles from "experts" that claimed that tobacco caused no definite health risks. Doctors with "big tobacco" money behind them were willing to lie about the risks of tobacco, even though evidence continued to pile up for 140 years.

I think that's how many are going to look back on these articles. "Big oil" put money behind fake science and there were slick attempts to hide the climate risks of global warming. But even more effective has been the ability to turn the conversation away from science and exploit a political, bipartisan divide in the United States where 50 percent of people believe the other 50 percent are lying.

There are always those who will exaggerate any event to make it seem more dramatic. So I would expect some truth and some lying from both sides. I think that even the local weatherman will always be under pressure to exaggerate the next snowstorm in my state because drama creates ratings, and might clear groceries off the shelf, or snowshovels and generators from Home Depot and Lowe's.

But I wouldn't be fooled by the idea that plate tectonics is the cause of flooding in Florida, for example. Nor should anyone be fooled by the idea, even though it appears to be common sense, that all water will level out all over the world, so that flooding will occur evenly.  I have a friend who is a surveyor who is getting more work than ever before resurveying waterfront properties in Florida and elsewhere.

Share this comment


Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    61,680
    Total Topics
    114,524
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,507
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    AliciaBarbosa
    Newest Member
    AliciaBarbosa
    Joined




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.