New climate study raises alarm for Asian Megacities

[ozimoron]

Scientists looked at sea levels 125,000 years in the past. And the results are terrifying

 

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/scientists-looked-at-sea-levels-125-000-years-in-the-past-and-the-results-are-terrifying/2fvlasudj?/?cid=news:search:gg:en:nacadigital:dsa:prog&gclid=Cj0KCQiApKagBhC1ARIsAFc7Mc6GuSxfCAfGyZQapv46HHslmVQ7nlRdv_ydV7xcC6B5kf8ZEZu1QBsaAniTEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

[placeholder]

11 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Yes

So it's more drivel. Got it.

[placeholder]

20 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

To say that it's not the end of the world is not to say it isn't a problem. 

 

And where, in the scienitific literature including the IPCC reports is it claimed that human caused climate change is bringing about the end of the world?

 

On 3/9/2023 at 9:18 AM, KhunLA said:

More silliness from the doom & gloom, distraction, we need your tax dollars to save you, politicians/elite.

 

3.4mm per year X 77 year = 262mm = 26cm 

We're all doomed, IF it happens.

 

We''re <4 kms from the surf @ 23.7m above sea level

so we still won't be beachfront ... krap 

https://sealevel.nasa.gov/faq/8/is-the-rate-of-sea-level-rise-increasing/#:~:text=Yes.,(3.4 millimeters) per year.

 

With that info:

Beachfront property for sale ...

... in 6,970 years, so buy in for savings.

 

Wow, we really gat a bargain at ฿76k for 1/4 rai ????

Worth millions in 7k years 

First off, what you didn't note was that rate of sea level rise is increasing.

 

"And during this satellite period, 1993 to present, emerging indications suggest the mean (average) rate of global mean sea-level rise has increased – from about 0.1 inches (2.5 millimeters) to 0.13 inches (3.4 millimeters). Further measurements in coming years, by the Sentinel-6/Michael Freilich satellite, the Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) satellite, and others, will help establish the rate of increase more precisely."

https://sealevel.nasa.gov/faq/8/is-the-rate-of-sea-level-rise-increasing/#:~:text=Yes.,(3.4 millimeters) per year.

 

And you also don't take account of the increasing attrition of the Antarctic ice shelf which is still holding back massive glaciers that dwarf those of Greenland

Volume loss from Antarctic ice shelves is accelerating

Using 18 years of continuous satellite radar altimeter observations, we have computed decadal-scale changes in ice-shelf thickness around the Antarctic continent. Overall, average ice-shelf volume change accelerated from negligible loss at 25 ± 64 cubic kilometers per year for 1994–2003 to rapid loss of 310 ± 74 cubic kilometers per year for 2003–2012. West Antarctic losses increased by ~70% in the past decade, and earlier volume gain by East Antarctic ice shelves ceased.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaa0940

[placeholder]

20 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

He also bought a beachfront property in Hawaii that is already having major problems with erosion.

As far as what I can find on the internet, there is a risk of the property causing erosion, but not that erosion has occurred yet. And like all such posts singling out such people, what does it matter what rich people do with their money? What's that got to do with science? 

[placeholder]

20 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Leftist hysteria notwithstanding, what might that solution be?  

Well, can you please cite what scientific sources qualify as "leftist hysteria" The IPCC has warned of severe consequences if average global temperatures rise higher than 1.5 degrees centigrade above the pre-industrial revolution base. Is that what you call "leftist hysteria"?

[placeholder]

19 hours ago, CALSinCM said:

The billionaires driving this insanity have beachfront properties globally.

If the sea levels were expected to rise significantly?  You would not be able to insure your beach-front property no less acquire title insurance on the property.  And yet?  Billionaires, Millionaires, and their government clones who do their bidding have - beach-front properties and properties in the low-lying areas they we are being expressly told are going to be flooded.

If a city like Bangkok was going to be under water in the next 20, 30, 50, 100 years - there would be a MASS Exodus. 

But there isn't.

If there was really a existential threat of sea level rises, the insurance companies would be first in line to shut down all forms of insurance for these properties. You would see all the cities near the coasts literally discriminate as businesses, private entities, as well as public entities would not be able to insure their properties.  And yet?  No problem

Hello? Wake up clones.

What nonsense. Insurance rates are rising for coastal properties,

 

For Many On Coast, Climate Crisis Means Rising Insurance Rates

Risk Rating 2.0 does not include future sea-level rise projections, but it does incorporate data from the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Army Corps of Engineers, which, in practice, should make the rating system adaptive to future conditions.

Premiums are based on the risk at present and will be re-evaluated annually “in order to respond if and when the nature of flood risk changes,” according to Norman. As flood risk increases or decreases in regions across the country, ratings and premiums will adjust.

https://ecori.org/2021-9-27-for-many-on-the-coast-climate-crisis-means-rising-insurance-rates/

 

And maybe you know of property insurers who offer policies that last 20 or 30 years. I haven't seen any evidence of that.

What's more, I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the USA flood insurance rates are heavily subsidized by the government:

Government-subsidized flood insurance premiums are about half of full-risk price

https://publicintegrity.org/environment/government-subsidized-flood-insurance-premiums-are-about-half-of-full-risk-price/

 

[KhunLA]

17 minutes ago, placeholder said:

First off, what you didn't note was that rate of sea level rise is increasing.

 

"And during this satellite period, 1993 to present, emerging indications suggest the mean (average) rate of global mean sea-level rise has increased – from about 0.1 inches (2.5 millimeters) to 0.13 inches (3.4 millimeters). Further measurements in coming years, by the Sentinel-6/Michael Freilich satellite, the Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) satellite, and others, will help establish the rate of increase more precisely."

https://sealevel.nasa.gov/faq/8/is-the-rate-of-sea-level-rise-increasing/#:~:text=Yes.,(3.4 millimeters) per year.

 

And you also don't take account of the increasing attrition of the Antarctic ice shelf which is still holding back massive glaciers that dwarf those of Greenland

Volume loss from Antarctic ice shelves is accelerating

Using 18 years of continuous satellite radar altimeter observations, we have computed decadal-scale changes in ice-shelf thickness around the Antarctic continent. Overall, average ice-shelf volume change accelerated from negligible loss at 25 ± 64 cubic kilometers per year for 1994–2003 to rapid loss of 310 ± 74 cubic kilometers per year for 2003–2012. West Antarctic losses increased by ~70% in the past decade, and earlier volume gain by East Antarctic ice shelves ceased.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaa0940

Actually you didn't note that I did, and used the exact same figure, 3.4mm as you and the report used.

 

And the ice caps melting, I ignore any reference to that, as told by Noble Prize winner & scientist, they were supposed to be melted already.  So much for science prediction, along with many other doom & gloom scenarios that never happened.

 

Seas rising, is about the least of the humans problems, since easily avoidable.   Don't build near, if so ... som naa na.

[placeholder]

17 hours ago, tuktuktuk said:

The problem with articles like this one is that they imply we can change our ways today, right the ship, return to normal temperatures and avert the oncoming changes before 2100.  The truth is it's already far too late for that to happen.  Even if the entire planet went net zero today it would take two to three hundred years before we would return to pre-industrial greenhouse gas levels.  A reduction in global temperatures could follow that.  How soon will the planet be net zero?

 

The best thing we could do is to prepare for the inevitable.  We can migrate from coastal areas and adapt to higher temperatures.  It's quite apparent that ancient civilizations did that over and over.  I'm afraid we'll use all the investment that requires on a fruitless attempt to convert to a low carbon but high cost energy scheme.  It won't matter much to me.  I've only got 20 or 30 years left.

It may be too late to stop the rise above 1.5 degrees centigrade. But that doesn't mean it's too late to stop the rise to 2 degrees or to 2.5 degrees. The projected rate of damage increases geometrically the the higher it goes.

And your contention about low carbon energy sources being high cost is way way outdated. Renewables are already mostly cheaper than coal, even when coal was cheap before the spike in 2022. And they are now very competitive with natural gas.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 3/9/2023 at 1:18 PM, jacko45k said:

Hasn't this been known for some time..... particularly Bangkok, Dhaka, Jakarta, happening outside Asia too, Lagos, Venice....

Apparently some of them are sinking because too much water is pumped out from under them.

Anyway, if not for the embankment and the big pumps, Bkk might be permanently flooded already.

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Good question, which I'll try to answer.

 

The answer is found in the history of past changes in climate, which the alarmists can't be bothered to investigate because it's so much easier to accept what the mainstream media reports and/or what so-called scientific authorities, who are actually political activists, report.

 

For example, whenever there is an extreme weather event, whether flood, drought, hurricane, or heatwave, how often have you heard on the news that it is the worst event since records began, or it is unprecedented?

 

If you search for the actual, real, historical records on the internet, you'll usually find that the extreme weather event is not the worst on record, as reported, and is sometimes even the 6th, 7th or 8th worst on record.

 

However, the mainstream media does not want to report the facts if they go against the alarmist agenda and propoganda. Bad news sells better than good news.

 

Regarding sea level rise, it's generally accepted in the sciences of Geology, that around 20,000 years ago, at the end of the last Glacial Maximum, sea levels were at least 120 metres lower than they are today. Some studies report 130 metres lower.

 

Those who are able to do basic maths should be able to calculate that a 120 metre rise over 20,000 years is an average rise of 6mm per year. However, for most of the time since the industrial revolution began, sea level were rising very slowly, at a rate of 1 to 2mm per year. Currently, the rate is estimated to be around 3mm per year, just half of the avarge rate over the past 20,000 years. How very alarming! ????

 

The attached graph of past sea level rise is from the following site.
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth107/node/1506

 

 

This has got to be one of the most blatantly disingenuous comments I've ever seen posted. You compute your average by using 20 thousand years as your denominator. But 90% of the rise occurred over about 7000 years as rising temperatures accelerated the melting of the glaciers.  During that time the average rate of increase was 15mm per year or 1.5 centimeters. And from about 3000 years ago until some time after the advent of the industrial revolution, sea levels were quite stable. As was the global temperature average.  Only in the last 100 years or so has the rise resumed at a much higher pace. What's more , the rate of increase is getting higher.

[KhunLA]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyway, if not for the embankment and the big pumps, Bkk might be permanently flooded already.

Yep ... a heavy rain at high tide, and their future is in their face.  Poor city planning and zoning enforcement/corruption.   Live for today mentality.

[placeholder]

15 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Actually you didn't note that I did, and used the exact same figure, 3.4mm as you and the report used.

 

And the ice caps melting, I ignore any reference to that, as told by Noble Prize winner & scientist, they were supposed to be melted already.  So much for science prediction, along with many other doom & gloom scenarios that never happened.

 

Seas rising, is about the least of the humans problems, since easily avoidable.   Don't build near, if so ... som naa na.

What you still don't note is that the rate if sea level rise is increasing.

As for your claim that "as told by Noble Prize winner and scientist, they were supposed to be melted already", I'm calling B.S. on that. And even if there was such a person, and I can find no evidence that he or she exists, that would be an extreme minority position. But please, if you have such evidence, provide a link to it.

[Rimmer]

Some troll and unattributed claims removed, also replies

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

What you still don't note is that the rate if sea level rise is increasing.

As for your claim that "as told by Noble Prize winner and scientist, they were supposed to be melted already", I'm calling B.S. on that. And even if there was such a person, and I can find no evidence that he or she exists, that would be an extreme minority position. But please, if you have such evidence, provide a link to it.

Nobel 2007 Al Gore/IPCC .... ring any bells.

 

Al's silly documentary (that's a stretch) even won a couple Oscars ..????

Edited March 10, 2023 by KhunLA

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Nobel 2007 Al Gore/IPCC .... ring any bells.

I didn't know Al Gore was a "Noble Prize winner and scientist"

In what peer-reviewed journals did he publish his research?

 

[ThailandRyan]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I didn't know Al Gore was a "Noble Prize winner and scientist"

In what peer-reviewed journals did he publish his research?

 

Didn't AL Gore say he also invented the internet?

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

I didn't know Al Gore was a "Noble Prize winner and scientist"

In what peer-reviewed journals did he publish his research

You really have a problem with reading comprehension.

 

You missed my '3.4mm' in my reply.

 

Missed my 'Al Gore/IPCC' ... you should google & read before replying, as the answers are right there.

 

"The IPCC does not conduct its own original research but undertakes systematic reviews all relevant scientific publications with the help of thousands of volunteer scientists and other experts" - wiki

 

How anyone can not remember that farce is amazing.

[KhunLA]

5 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Didn't AL Gore say he also invented the internet?

Yea ... that was a bit of a stretch of almost a truth, from his POV ????

 

During Clinton administration (AL was VP), they did pass legislature that did help, extremely, the development of the internet.

 

I love his self into on this vid @43 sec:

"Hi, I'm Al Gore, I used to be the next president"

 

Edited March 10, 2023 by KhunLA

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Didn't AL Gore say he also invented the internet?

No.  

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/

[placeholder]

8 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

You really have a problem with reading comprehension.

 

You missed my '3.4mm' in my reply.

 

Missed my 'Al Gore/IPCC' ... you should google & read before replying, as the answers are right there.

 

"The IPCC does not conduct its own original research but undertakes systematic reviews all relevant scientific publications with the help of thousands of volunteer scientists and other experts" - wiki

 

How anyone can not remember that farce is amazing.

Unfortunately, I can't go back and check your original comment because due to an act a moderator,  lots of B.S. posts have been deleted. Including yours.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

You really have a problem with reading comprehension.

 

You missed my '3.4mm' in my reply.

 

Missed my 'Al Gore/IPCC' ... you should google & read before replying, as the answers are right there.

 

"The IPCC does not conduct its own original research but undertakes systematic reviews all relevant scientific publications with the help of thousands of volunteer scientists and other experts" - wiki

 

How anyone can not remember that farce is amazing.

I don't know how to get through to you why your 3.4mm reference doesn't work as a projection.  according to that article the rate is increasing. So it won't be 3.4 mm i the future  but your projection uses 3.4mm. 

[h90]

2012 Bangkok will be submerged...that was sure in 2000

[h90]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

No.  

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/

he talks a lot nonsense of 600.000 Hiroshima bombs and boiling sea.....

[KhunLA]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Unfortunately, I can't go back and check your original comment because due to an act a moderator,  lots of B.S. posts have been deleted. Including yours.

Actually still there, since you 'quoted' it, in your reply.

 

Ah yes, deleted, and as I stated, someone, why many of don't partake in many conversations.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Edited March 10, 2023 by KhunLA

[ThailandRyan]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

No.  

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/

Better check again.  These are his exact words.  I is the effective word, so technically he did claim he created the internet, just not in the way folks understand and believe. 

 

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki

Al Gore and information technology - Wikipedia

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, h90 said:

2012 Bangkok will be submerged...that was sure in 2000

You got a link for that? Or was  that also a rumor? Or just an outright falsehood?

 

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Actually still there, since you 'quoted' it, in your reply.

 

Ah yes, deleted, and as I stated, someone, why many of don't partake in many conversations.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I didn't quote your original statement which didn't specify. But why is Al Gore's opinion even relevant. The IPCC, composed mainly of scientist/reviewers has published reviews of a huge amount of climatological research repeatedly. Those are the expert judgments worth paying attention to. Citing non-scientists opinions, or the hypocritical behavior of wealthy individuals has no bearing on the science. They're just transparent attempts at deflection.

[h90]

31 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You got a link for that? Or was  that also a rumor? Or just an outright falsehood?

 

Al Gore said so...I don't have a link but I remember it...Bangkok+lots of islands were mentioned.....

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, h90 said:

Al Gore said so...I don't have a link but I remember it...Bangkok+lots of islands were mentioned.....

Well, even if he did say it, who cares? He's not a scientist. If that's what he said, his remarks don't reflect the opinion of the huge majority of climatologists. Certainly they don't reflect the consensus of the IPCC. So what's your point?

[h90]

13 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, even if he did say it, who cares? He's not a scientist. If that's what he said, his remarks don't reflect the opinion of the huge majority of climatologists. Certainly they don't reflect the consensus of the IPCC. So what's your point?

I think he is very influential...it is him who started that all. It is the politicians who change the public opinions not climatologists. When I turn on the TV (if I would have one) I see Al Gore, Greta Thunberg, lots of Green Party people, etc...I don't see any climatologists.