So - how do you see climate change effects Thailand?

[JensenZ]

5 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

For those living near the sea level too. Until 2041 they will have to build a huge, nearly 7 centimeters high dam to survive.

Just exploring your earlier statements:

 

"Between 1901 and 2010 the sea level rose in average 1.7 MILLIMETERS a year.

Between 1993 and 2010 it was 3.2 MILLIMETERS/year.

In 2018 it was scaring 3.7 MILLIMETERS."

 

Apparently the only way to determine sea level "accurately" is to use the NASA Jason 3 satellite and to within 1 inch or so.

 

Any measurements in the milimeter range are guestimates, and you've included a date range from 1901. There is absolutely no way scientists would have had any clue how to do this back then.

 

I wouldn't worry about it. Someone is trying to blind you with (pseudo) science, a common ploy in the climate change debate.

 

 

 

 

[JustAnotherHun]

What the hell should I do more to mark my post as ironic.

I write millimeters in caps, i call a 7 centimeters high dam "huge".

Maybe I should mention that the "sinking islands of Tuvalu" got biger?

[JensenZ]

On 11/13/2021 at 8:15 AM, blackprince said:

Actually, the terminology is "anthropomorphic climate change" but "anthropomorphic" is an even rarer word than "anthropological", especially for people who are unfamiliar with the issues, which obviously includes the overwhelming majority of deniers.

 

That's why I call it "man made climate change", after all it has been largely men, acutally largely white men, responsible for the man made climate disasters that are already with us.

 

I've posted uncontestable evidence from NASA confirming man made climate change a couple of times on other threads in the last couple of weeks. I assume that even the vast majority of deniers would accept that NASA is not part part of a global conspiracy.

I have no idea what you posted somewhere else and why should I? Don't be lazy... How about you post your incontrovertible evidence here so I can have a crack at denying it. I'll do my best.

[ozimoron]

37 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

It is not proper to make such statements without references to the source of your data. It could be a politically motivated statement to help further Green policies. If you cannot back up your statement, it's nothing more than what Greta Thunberg constantly utters "blah blah blah".

This exact claim went unchallenged on the most popular political program in Australia just tonight. Anybody who isn't aware that the US is still the highest per capita major nation is living under a rock. Seriously, it's been widely known for many years.

 

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

[Nojohndoe]

On 11/12/2021 at 8:35 PM, BritManToo said:

I don't think anything has changed or will change.

Fires, floods and storms have always happened and always will happen.

The sea levels won't change (in our or our children's lifetimes).

 

If there were a chance of imminent and sudden change the banks wouldn't still be lending 30 year mortgages on sea front properties, and world leaders wouldn't still be buying beachfront properties. The money says no change!

 

And even if there were changes it would be entirely natural and humanity would have no way of altering what will happen.

Are you serious? Money interests have no long term consideration. 30 year mortgages on any property are based on  capacity to service rather than the longevity of viable occupation. Same money interests will provide insurances which will likely never be paid on in the event of "acts of  nature or Deity of choice".

My interpretation of the effects of climate change is that while a rise in sea levels will start to significantly impact some coastal areas within 20 years more importantly the degradation of polar ice caps will continue to change weather patterns and the impact of that will continue to threaten viable food production in many areas within 10 years.

There is a compounding effect attributable to rising population dependent on living space incrementally encroaching on agricultural land at the same time  such land is also becoming stressed by poor management practices that focus on profitability ahead of sustainability coupled with negative impact of climatic shifts and variations .

I would agree that altering the outcome  is  beyond the capacity of humanity to alter already regardless of any debate as to natural cause or assistance in the acceleration of.

The sad aspect is that historic human nature will prevail in ignorance of greed and inevitably experience a blow that it saw coming !

 

 

 

 

 

[ozimoron]

27 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

What the hell should I do more to mark my post as ironic.

I write millimeters in caps, i call a 7 centimeters high dam "huge".

Maybe I should mention that the "sinking islands of Tuvalu" got biger?

Cherry picking Tuvalu is lying by  omission. If you know enough about sea level rise to know that Tuvalu is gaining in size you must also be aware that isn't the complete picture or even representative of the problem.

 

Quote

Between 1994 and 2014, according to Dr Albert's research, the Solomons experienced sea level rises averaging 7-10mm per year.

Meanwhile, between 1993 and 2018, the global average was 3.2mm per year.

While Tuvalu recorded a total rise of 15cm over four decades, the Solomons managed that in just two.

Dr Albert said that in parts of the Solomons, rising seas had combined with wave exposure to cause "dramatic coastal erosion leading to recession of coastlines and in some cases the loss of entire islands".

His research has shown that some of the Solomons' uninhabited reef islands, similar in structure to those in Tuvalu, had completely disappeared due to erosion.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-19/fact-check-is-the-island-nation-tuvalu-growing/10627318

[JensenZ]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

This exact claim went unchallenged on the most popular political program in Australia just tonight. Anybody who isn't aware that the US is still the highest per capita major nation is living under a rock. Seriously, it's been widely known for many years.

 

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

Thank you. Actually, it's the per capita statistic that you're grasping at. I think total emissions is more important than per capita, and the Chinese are unlikely to comply with climate change nazi's requests. Do you believe Chineses statistics? I don't. I ignore them. Have a look at the ridiculously low numbers China has given for Covid infections and deaths. In that nation it is all CCP propoganda.

 

I have a fairly low carbon footprint myself. I sparingly use a motorcycle for transport. I haven't owned a car in nearly 20 years.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by JensenZ

[Nojohndoe]

16 hours ago, bangkokbonecollector said:

Isn't New Zealand rising because it is a Volcanic area or on the edge of a plate (I am not an expert), much like Hawaii. I think places like New Zealand and Hawaii will actually get bigger.

Perhaps so but as locations  on the volcanic ring of fire the potential that a rise may not be a desirable !

[JustAnotherHun]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Cherry picking Tuvalu is lying by  omission. If you know enough about sea level rise to know that Tuvalu is gaining in size you must also be aware that isn't the complete picture or even representative of the problem.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-19/fact-check-is-the-island-nation-tuvalu-growing/10627318

It's not me who's cherry picking. Tuvalu was used for years by the climate hysterics to proof the already current dangers of rising sea levels.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

It's not me who's cherry picking. Tuvalu was used for years by the climate hysterics to proof the already current dangers of rising sea levels.

They ignored the rest of the Pacific, is that what you're suggesting? Stop clinging to memes.

Edited November 14, 2021 by ozimoron

[JustAnotherHun]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Stop clinging to memes.

Wrong adressee

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Wrong adressee

Correct address, occupants out to lunch. Anecdotal evidence that a single island went against the trend is disingenuous. You quoted Tuvalu to bash anyone who points out the truth that rising oceans are real and are a major problem.

Tuvalu is often cited by the deniers to claim that sea level rises aren't happening or aren't a problem. That's the meme and you have subscribed to it.

Edited November 14, 2021 by ozimoron

[JustAnotherHun]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You quoted Tuvalu to bash anyone who points out the truth that rising oceans are real and are a major problem.

 

As I told already, I quoted Tuvalu, because it was used by the hysterics for years. Not long ago, it was used by the German Green Party as a proof it would be nessesery to accept "climate refugees" from there.

 

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

As I told already, I quoted Tuvalu, because it was used by the hysterics for years. Not long ago, it was used by the German Green Party as a proof it would be nessesery to accept "climate refugees" from there.

 

So what's your wider point? That the "hysterics" are wrong? Deniers are fond of dealing on absolutism to "prove" that the wider picture is wrong. It's like coronavirus, if a vaccine doesn't stop all infections they claim it doesn't work to stop infections. It's exactly the same game plan. Surely you understand that Tuvalu is the exception and is not representative of the wider picture. Don't you?

[bangkokbonecollector]

41 minutes ago, Nojohndoe said:

Perhaps so but as locations  on the volcanic ring of fire the potential that a rise may not be a desirable !

Well that's sorted then, I am buying land in the Himalayas.

[JustAnotherHun]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Surely you understand that Tuvalu is the exception and is not representative of the wider picture. Don't you?

The example Tuvalu was widely used by the hysterics to "proof" their Armageddon.

They were wrong? How unfair to name that.

Come on, let's take an intercontinental flight to Glasgow to fight and join  the thousands who went there by planes to demand changes to "safe the climate".

Because if we don't, we all will suffer by rising sea levels of less than 3 millimeters per year.

Should we have a look at all those appocalyptical predictions of the last 50 years? It's quite funny.

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

The example Tuvalu was widely used by the hysterics to "proof" their Armageddon.

They were wrong? How unfair to name that.

Come on, let's take an intercontinental flight to Glasgow to fight and join  the thousands who went there by planes to demand changes to "safe the climate".

Because if we don't, we all will suffer by rising sea levels of less than 3 millimeters per year.

Should we have a look at all those appocalyptical predictions of the last 50 years? It's quite funny.

Hilarious to the willfully ignorant I imagine. Maybe you should read the article I linked above and this one, among others.

 

Quote

When sea levels rise as rapidly as they have been, even a small increase can have devastating effects on coastal habitats farther inland, it can cause destructive erosion, wetland flooding, aquifer and agricultural soil contamination with salt, and lost habitat for fish, birds, and plants.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/sea-level-rise-1

[bokningar]

9 hours ago, Stargeezr said:

Oh and bokningar, were you talking about the extra, 

cold temperatures in the Antarctic this last year as maybe making some new ice form in that region, which

may slightly balance the melt of the Arctic this Summer?       Sorry the climate change folk, may not want

to see any reason to talk without panic in their voices.  There is also snow fall in the Arctic during the Winters

  but I guess not enough to balance the Summer melt of the glaciers

The glaciers on the poles are not in any danger at all. The polar regions have very short summers and long cold winters. When the world is getting warmer the air will get more moist in it. And it will come down as increased snowfall over the poles. The glaciers on the alps and so on might melt. But the glaciers on the poles, no one have to stay sleepless over.

 

The big problem that no one is talking abut is the increase of the population. We get a bit short of 100 million more people every year on this planet. 

Turn all aid into condoms and other kinds of birth control. Maybe education of women as well. That seams to reduce number of kids.

[BTB1977]

Climate change reminds me of the story Chicken Little. The sky is falling,  the sky is falling!!!!!!!! LOL

[3NUMBAS]

watch the world under water on the smithsonian channel which shows the effects of 50 feet to 100 feet increase on todays sea levels..its catastrophic with london dead and gone..dams galore will need to be built

[JustAnotherHun]

47 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

watch the world under water on the smithsonian channel which shows the effects of 50 feet to 100 feet increase on todays sea levels..its catastrophic with london dead and gone..dams galore will need to be built

By fast rising sea levels of about 3 millimeters/year, it may take a couple of weeks until we reach 50 feet.

[Thunglom]

On 11/12/2021 at 1:55 PM, zzaa09 said:

Simply, much ado about nothing. 

Yet, the whole climate change thing is terribly profitable - in one form or another - for numerous circles.

Yes - so proud of how those plucky little oil companies have stood up to those money-gabbing scientists.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Thunglom

[Thunglom]

in the OP Iasked about how people thought it would effect Thailand.

Let's take one thing for a start - MMCC is real and demonstrable - if you don't believe that you are not capable of taking part in the discussion.

 

 

It has been shown that those most affected by MMCC are the poorer nations and also in the tropics.

Thailand faces threats on multiple fronts.

Firstly the rising sea levels don't need to be much - you realise of course that the sea level isn't the same all around the globe at any one time and rises can be exacerbated by other factors too...... Thailand's problem will be the amount of valuable low-lying land - this is why Thailand was built on - slow moving rivers, deltas and look plains.

These plains are home to a huge portion of the Thai population, industry and of course the coastal tourist industry. Tourism and Industrial works combined comprise of over half the country's economy. (remember the flooding of the Honda factory a few years back?)  

Combine the rises with the extra water in the atmosphere and Thailand is gonna wet harsher and heavier storms, more floods and drier dry periods - leading to problems in the rice producing raw - Thailand is on of the worlds biggest exporters of rice.

 

I think it's safe to safe that Thailand's authorities are not repaid for any of this......it has been shown that many in the government are essentially climate change deniers as show by their scant regard for ecology in the country and obsession with developing ceap industry. The ae now beginning to give a bit of verbal acquiescence to the topic but there is little sign of any true believers.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Thunglom

[Thunglom]

for those still fixating on sea-levels - Global sea level rose by a total of more than 120 metres as the vast ice sheets of the last Ice Age melted back. This melt-back lasted from about 19,000 to about 6,000 years ago, meaning that the average rate of sea-level rise was roughly 1 metre per century.

 

the difference now is the speed at which changes are happening, and the processes causing them.

[bunnydrops]

On 11/13/2021 at 1:39 AM, khunPer said:

I dont expect much change from how climate has always slightly changed in periodes during centuries and millenniums. We are heading towards a little warmer period after a colder dip some hundred years ago, just like the climate was heading toward a little warmer period in Medieval ages, and before that in the Roman era.

 

Don't forget that Greenland was called "green land" for a reason, the Vikings that settled up there could grow crops.

 

One major problem is that many more people have settled in low level areas during the past few hundred years - the coastal populations have for example increased many-fold compared with the overall population increase - and that might of course create flooding of living-hood and homes for relative more people than in earlier times.

I read that a little differently. It was named Greenland as naming Iceland didn't work out so good at getting people to settle there.

[JustAnotherHun]

10 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

the difference now is the speed at which changes are happening

Currently the sea level rushes with a speed of about 3 millimeters a year.

And by the way: Nobody knows how much of the 3 millimeters is man-made. 

[Thunglom]

22 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Currently the sea level rushes with a speed of about 3 millimeters a year.

And by the way: Nobody knows how much of the 3 millimeters is man-made. 

Another one stat wonder! - this from the Royal Society

 with the best estimate of the rate of global-average rise over the last decade being 3.6 mm per year (0.14 inches per year). The rate of sea level rise has increased since measurements using altimetry from space were started in 1992; the dominant factor in global-average sea level rise since 1970 is human-caused warming. The overall observed rise since 1902 is about 16 cm (6 inches)

 

the significant word being "increased"

Edited November 14, 2021 by Thunglom

[JustAnotherHun]

1 minute ago, Thunglom said:

Another one stat wonder!

 

Another nonsenes answer. The 3 mm you can find in plenty of studies, even your own links.

Mai pen rai. You can't fix hysteria.

[swissie]

Folks, it's not what we believe or not believe. Physics does not accommodate individual wishes of "earthlings" and their re-interpretations of physics.

We could terminate this climate discussion overnight if some of us would bother to dive into the realms of physics:

- Like: What effect does CO2 have, once in the atmosphere? What does it do? Answer to be found in any basic physics-handbook. That's all we need. Forget the Internet playground of pseudo-scientists.

Massive volcanic activity can throw a lot of CO2 into the air. Last time: Tamboro-Eruption in Indonesia in 1815. Since then, no major natural addition of CO2 has taken place. So, where does all the CO2 come from?  We have been producing it and still are!

Again: We could terminate this climate discussion overnight if some of us would bother to dive into the realms of physics.

Of course,  staunch CO2/COVID 19 "deniers" will even deny Einsteins E=mc2 formula. Claiming that the universe is held together by invisible rubber strings. (Made in China, of course).

 

[CartagenaWarlock]

On 11/12/2021 at 4:33 AM, clokwise said:

Bangladesh and India, who will not be warmly welcomed, to put it mildly.

India does not border Thailand so refugees from India are irrelevant. Migration? May be? But still I doubt a large scale migration to Thailand. India's eye is on America. That is where they will go and shine and earn double the income of European-American. 

Edited November 14, 2021 by CartagenaWarlock