@#12 close enough to be statistically significant and continue to receive millions in government money.

They have a nice racket going on there.

 

But Moderators have responsibility. That defeats the purpose of failing upward. You move 'em up to get them out of the way of the people who do the real work.

 

If I were disbursing funds, every incorrect prediction would reduce the following years funding. An error of that magnitude, I would direct th to the various online funding sources.

 

Want a real threat? Promote him to Moderator!

​

 

A millimeter here a milliliter there and pretty soon you have an inch.
By the way it's mm per year, not by 2100.
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html
Wonder where the water went?
The ocean.

Wonder why it melted.
Warmer. Not so hard.

 

Yes, "warmer" is correct.

It is the WHY which is causing the contention.
There is no concrete data for how much ice melt occurs in between ice-ages.
We only have guesses. We KNOW the extent of glacial incursion during the peak of a cold period by geological evidence, but no such evidence exists for the limit of glacial recession between ice-ages. It may be common for Greenland to lose almost all of its ice, but the periodicity is a few 10's of THOUSANDS of years.
We've got a few hundred years of weather data and even less on the sun cycles.
It all guess work and fear mongering. We really don't know what the natural weather cycles are over the long term of the millenia.

 

I think it's a blessing.

 

Yes, "warmer" is correct.

It is the WHY which is causing the contention.
There is no concrete data for how much ice melt occurs in between ice-ages.
We only have guesses. We KNOW the extent of glacial incursion during the peak of a cold period by geological evidence, but no such evidence exists for the limit of glacial recession between ice-ages. It may be common for Greenland to lose almost all of its ice, but the periodicity is a few 10's of THOUSANDS of years.
We've got a few hundred years of weather data and even less on the sun cycles.
It all guess work and fear mongering. We really don't know what the natural weather cycles are over the long term of the millenia.

Last time we had an ice age nobody lived in New York or Miami Beach.

 

And?

 

Wonder where the water went?
The ocean.

Wonder why it melted.
Warmer. Not so hard.

We know where it went. Antartica. Colder. You're right. Not so hard.

http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

I know, I know, we're not supposed to notice the Antarctic ice because it's meaningless to the global ice balance. Riiiight.

 

Antarctica had zero population so whatever happens there doesn't affect humanity.

They are NOT part of this geosphere we call the global earth.

 

We know where it went. Antartica. Colder. You're right. Not so hard.

http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

I know, I know, we're not supposed to notice the Antarctic ice because it's meaningless to the global ice balance. Riiiight.

“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
I guess every little bit helps.

 

I think it's a blessing.

You might as well enjoy it you paid about $500 for sandy.

 

There is no concrete data for how much ice melt occurs in between ice-ages.

Geological data says otherwise. It's extremely well studied and documented subject in Geological and past(real) Climate science professions.

Ancient coastlines are found all over the planet that are way above what they are now. Just in the last ~15,000 years the sea levels have varied from ~300 feet below present to over 33 feet above present.

We know that in the last 15,000 years—the generally-accepted era of human occupancy of North American coastlines—sea level has varied from more than 100 meters below to as high as 10 meters above the present sea level. Much of this change is the result of climate. When North America was gripped in an Ice Age, water was confined to vast glacial systems resting atop land masses. As the climate warmed, glaciers melted, literally over-filling the oceans and causing the sea level to rise. Other processes affect shorelines as well. “Isostatic rebound” represents the movement of land masses in response to the massive weight of continental glaciers. As glaciers melt and sea level rises, the land rises slightly, unburdened by the ice load.

One of countless links to said data. http://www.ti.com/lit/an/snva419c/snva419c.pdf

Going further back into prehistoric timeframes sea levels have also been way higher than that ~33+ foot level as well.
Possibly 300 - 400+ feet over present.
http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/Courses/5225/ency/Chapter10/Ency_Oceans/Sea_Level_Variations.pdf

All said and done we really don't have much to b!tch about at the present.

 

But Moderators have responsibility. That defeats the purpose of failing upward. You move 'em up to get them out of the way of the people who do the real work.

Admin/site ownership would be fine. Sure 2 - 3 members would be kicked out permanently but the stupid LED from mains topic and a few others would be open for discussion! Wins for everyone as I see it!

 

I know, I know, we're not supposed to notice the Antarctic ice because it's meaningless to the global ice balance. Riiiight.

I think that's on the lines of that glacier that melted back to 'where it was a few thousand years ago revealing artifacts lost in WW1'.

I can't find the link to that BS story any more, it was on MSN news front page a few years back, but the real ones (without the skewed AGW BS bias) are worth a read to anyone who likes world history.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ww1...rome..69i57.9536j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

I see several things in that article that make me think "we are still just guessing"

There is, -difficult to determine with accuracy.
Still on the first page, - this technique does have uncertainty.

We need about 10,000 years worth of observation to really "know for sure".

Get back to me when we get it.

 

Non-News for today?
Considering whether this belongs in Global Warming, Weather, or deserves a Thread of it's own.
Not a Thread, because it's a non-event.
Not Weather because it isn't changing anything.
Must be Global Warming.

Earth's Atmospheric Oxygen Levels Continue Long Slide
"Atmospheric oxygen levels have declined over the past 1 million years"
"It is not even known if atmospheric oxygen levels varied or remained steady over the past 1 million years."
"previous research has found that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have not, on average, changed over the past 800,000 years"

http://www.livescience.com/56219-earth-atmospheric-oxygen-levels-declining.html

This useless absence of information could be a new cash flow opportunity for unemployed "scientists".

 

This useless absence of information could be a new cash flow opportunity for unemployed "scientists".

And some political critter will jump on this as an opportunity for their constituents to have some cash flow with him at the centerpiece for bringing home the bacon.

Remember, they want to regulate cow flatulence ... http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/28/w...ate-cow-flatulence-as-part-of-climate-agenda/

and this does not surprise me at all California governor backs rule on cow and landfill emissions. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...48d604-7e98-11e6-ad0e-ab0d12c779b1_story.html

I guess there will be an "additional" tax on beans in the future, to combat human emissions.

 

There goes the money!
"By 2100, sea levels could be up to 50 inches higher than today in New York, a scenario that has prompted the city to pledge billions of dollars."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-city-emissions-sea-level-rise-climate-change

I'm betting that the people who own buildings less than 4 feet above sea level will be dead in 174 years...but they can start paying now!