Bangkok, Gulf Of Thailand Shoreline Likely Under Water In 50 Years

[george]

Bangkok, Gulf of Thailand shoreline likely under water in 50 years: Academics

BANGKOK: -- An academic warned that the rising sea level resulting from global warming and land subsidence could threaten five Gulf of Thailand coastal provinces with being under water in 50 years, causing economic losses of up to Bt3 trillion.

Speaking at a seminar on planning to cope with climate change in relation to water resources management and flood prevention, Dr. Sutat Weesakul, an academic from the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), said severe climate change is causing the sea level to rise by three millimetres annually.

Although that number itself seems quite small, when combined with land subsidence in coastal provinces of 20 millimetres per annum--particularly in Samut Sakorn which faces subsidence of 40 millimetres every year--the areas would be severely impacted by flooding.

Bangkok is also an at-risk area as it is low-lying at an average of 1.20 metres above sea level.

It was forecast that the sea level would rise by one metre within the next 50 years, with an economic loss of Bt3 trillion. The provinces which will be seriously flooded including Bangkok, Samut Prakan, Samut Sakhon, Samut Songkhram, and Chachoengsao, as well as large expanses of southern Songkhla province, which has a wide area of wetlands.

According to the academic, ongoing climate change has affected northern Bangkok’s Don Mueang and Rangsit areas so that they have higher rainfall, especially in the beginning of the wet season or at the end of summer.

He urged the agencies concerned to be prepared to respond to the situation.

-- TNA 2009-11-17

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[grapetable]

only if you believe in global warming..........which I notice they dont call it that any more so they call it climate change............and the earths temp has cooled since 2003..........all very confusing.............who to believe?

[mccw]

only if you believe in global warming..........which I notice they dont call it that any more so they call it climate change............and the earths temp has cooled since 2003..........all very confusing.............who to believe?

climate change is undeniable, but debatable to its causes. However, for what ever reason the ice caps and glacies are melting and sea levels are rising and its sensible to get ready, build sea defenses, etc. It will probably take a few disasters for politicians to pull thier fingers out. Could be a nice little earner for some one though, all that construction contracts to dish out.

[teatree]

A world expert on sea-levels wants to tell the people of the Maldives they are not in danger of being inundated

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columni...orry-stunt.html

[ballzafire]

Actually, we're experiencing global cooling at the moment, due to extremely low sunspot activity.

The truth of the matter is that earth's climate is ALWAYS changing! Always has, always will. But don't tell that to the IPCC signatories or pseudo-scientists/crack climatologists. They might lose their "climate change" funding if they spoke the truth...

All these shrill warnings being published are designed to brain-wash you into thinking you need to be taxed for your CO2 usage, and therefore global gov't is needed to collect the tax. That's the essence of the scam.

This excellent video sums it up nicely:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.viddler.com/explore/micheleforan/videos/2/

[RickBradford]

Bits of these provinces may well go under water, but it will be from subsidence (40mm/year) not from sea level rises (3mm/year, perhaps).

The biggest problem is that it is impossible to convince climate-change bed-wetters that they are worried about nothing, because they believe it through childlike faith, not science. It makes them feel good to pretend they are saving the planet, you see.

[phetaroi]

climate change is undeniable, but debatable to its causes. However, for what ever reason the ice caps and glacies are melting and sea levels are rising and its sensible to get ready, build sea defenses, etc. It will probably take a few disasters for politicians to pull thier fingers out. Could be a nice little earner for some one though, all that construction contracts to dish out.

Back in the 1970s when I was getting my degree in the Geosciences, one of the professors said that we would be moving further into an interglacial period and global warming...not because of man...just because that was the part of the cycle we were naturally in. I'm quite sure man has speeded things up a bit. But nature can change things, too. Mount Saint Helens is just one of the volcanic eruptions that slightly lowered global temperatures.

[phetaroi]

Actually, we're experiencing global cooling at the moment, due to extremely low sunspot activity.

The truth of the matter is that earth's climate is ALWAYS changing! Always has, always will. But don't tell that to the IPCC signatories or pseudo-scientists/crack climatologists. They might lose their "climate change" funding if they spoke the truth...

All these shrill warnings being published are designed to brain-wash you into thinking you need to be taxed for your CO2 usage, and therefore global gov't is needed to collect the tax. That's the essence of the scam.

This excellent video sums it up nicely:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.viddler.com/explore/micheleforan/videos/2/

While this is being debated, the vast majority of knowledgeable scientists are still convinced we are moving further toward global warnings. I can only assume you are a fan of FOX News and Sarah Palin.

[ballzafire]

Bits of these provinces may well go under water, but it will be from subsidence (40mm/year) not from sea level rises (3mm/year, perhaps). The biggest problem is that it is impossible to convince climate-change bed-wetters that they are worried about nothing, because they believe it through childlike faith, not science. It makes them feel good to pretend they are saving the planet, you see.

Well put.

Stick around. We need more level-headed people like yourself to help enlighten the brain-washed masses...

[zzaa09]

Actually, we're experiencing global cooling at the moment, due to extremely low sunspot activity.

The truth of the matter is that earth's climate is ALWAYS changing! Always has, always will. But don't tell that to the IPCC signatories or pseudo-scientists/crack climatologists. They might lose their "climate change" funding if they spoke the truth...

All these shrill warnings being published are designed to brain-wash you into thinking you need to be taxed for your CO2 usage, and therefore global gov't is needed to collect the tax. That's the essence of the scam.

This excellent video sums it up nicely:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.viddler.com/explore/micheleforan/videos/2/

Information and disinformation is rather big business.

[ballzafire]

Actually, we're experiencing global cooling at the moment, due to extremely low sunspot activity. The truth of the matter is that earth's climate is ALWAYS changing! Always has, always will. But don't tell that to the IPCC signatories or pseudo-scientists/crack climatologists. They might lose their "climate change" funding if they spoke the truth... All these shrill warnings being published are designed to brain-wash you into thinking you need to be taxed for your CO2 usage, and therefore global gov't is needed to collect the tax. That's the essence of the scam. This excellent video sums it up nicely: The Great Global Warming Swindle http://www.viddler.com/explore/micheleforan/videos/2/

While this is being debated, the vast majority of knowledgeable scientists are still convinced we are moving further toward global warnings. I can only assume you are a fan of FOX News and Sarah Palin.

Just watch the video. It'll cause "the scales to fall from thine eyes".....

[Orac]

As usual the figures here are being thrown around without making a great deal of sense - as has been pointed out already they suggest that subsidence is a far more significant problem than sea level rising and are almost of different levels of magnitude.

Also how a rise in sea level of 3mm a year becomes 1 metre in 50 years needs explaining too.

[rjj04]

Bits of these provinces may well go under water, but it will be from subsidence (40mm/year) not from sea level rises (3mm/year, perhaps).

The biggest problem is that it is impossible to convince climate-change bed-wetters that they are worried about nothing, because they believe it through childlike faith, not science. It makes them feel good to pretend they are saving the planet, you see.

Hmmm, I am just a little curious, are you a climatologist? Or a meteorologist? I am not so I can not say much with confidence about this subject. I understand that most climatologists are employed by governments and might therefore be politically malleable to some extent. But most scientists, in my opinion care about discovering the truth more than playing politics. The fact remains, that a very large majority of climatologists believe the Earth is warming (long term) and that it is to a large extent due to human activity. So, who are we to disagree with the science if we are not trained on it? It is like me trying to tell a molecular biologist that the theory of evolution is bunk. Although, climatology is a an attempt to understand a chaotic system, so, they might indeed have it wrong... just do not think I can say anything like "they believe it through childlike faith, not science", and I believe most lay people are in the same boat! I can't write a climate model, can you? Yet your guess is more plausible than a trained scientists? Hmmm

[teatree]

Actually, we're experiencing global cooling at the moment, due to extremely low sunspot activity.

The truth of the matter is that earth's climate is ALWAYS changing! Always has, always will. But don't tell that to the IPCC signatories or pseudo-scientists/crack climatologists. They might lose their "climate change" funding if they spoke the truth...

All these shrill warnings being published are designed to brain-wash you into thinking you need to be taxed for your CO2 usage, and therefore global gov't is needed to collect the tax. That's the essence of the scam.

This excellent video sums it up nicely:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.viddler.com/explore/micheleforan/videos/2/

While this is being debated, the vast majority of knowledgeable scientists are still convinced we are moving further toward global warnings. I can only assume you are a fan of FOX News and Sarah Palin.

You're going to have to do better than stooping to association fallacies. How about coming up with an argument as to why you think he is wrong?

[RickBradford]

... a very large majority of climatologists believe the Earth is warming (long term) and that it is to a large extent due to human activity

That is plain wrong.

However, a very large majority of ignorant politicians have decided to believe it, for reasons related to their own personal power and glory.

Hence the recent comment by a person called Baroness Amos, the UK's new High Commissioner to Australia: ""In the UK there is a degree of political consensus about what in broad terms needs to be done about climate change … Australia should move on."

She says that because British politicians have decided that global warming is real, Australian scientists should abandon their research on climate-related matters.

That is typical of the narcissistic, wonderful-me, contra-factual approach of the climate change bed-wetters.

Fortunately, Australians are not that easily silenced.

[Jingthing]

I recently saw a film stating that 99 percent of scientists (they didn't specify what type of scientists, no not the Al Gore thingie) accept the mainstream theories of man made climate change being a threat to our planet. Do you reckon that statistic is correct? If so, sorry, I am not a scientist and never will be, but I defer to the experts in cases like this where there is an OVERWHELMING agreement on the science. As far as I can tell the most vocal opposition to this mainstream science are pro business/pro growth types who feel that profits for the rich elites and unregulated "freedom" of human activity always trumps survival issues for the masses. In other words, based on ideology and politics, NOT science.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Jingthing

[rjj04]

... a very large majority of climatologists believe the Earth is warming (long term) and that it is to a large extent due to human activity

That is plain wrong.

However, a very large majority of ignorant politicians have decided to believe it, for reasons related to their own personal power and glory.

Hence the recent comment by a person called Baroness Amos, the UK's new High Commissioner to Australia: ""In the UK there is a degree of political consensus about what in broad terms needs to be done about climate change … Australia should move on."

She says that because British politicians have decided that global warming is real, Australian scientists should abandon their research on climate-related matters.

That is typical of the narcissistic, wonderful-me, contra-factual approach of the climate change bed-wetters.

Fortunately, Australians are not that easily silenced.

I just wanted to make sure I had my data correct so I did a search...

stripped from Wikipedia...

"Since 2001, 32 national science academies have come together to issue joint declarations confirming anthropogenic global warming, and urging the nations of the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The signatories of these statements have been the national science academies of Australia,"...

and this....

"

Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies

In 2008, the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS) issued a policy statement on climate change:

Global climate change is real and measurable. Since the start of the 20th century, the global mean surface temperature of the Earth has increased by more than 0.7°C and the rate of warming has been largest in the last 30 years. Key vulnerabilities arising from climate change include water resources, food supply, health, coastal settlements, biodiversity and some key ecosystems such as coral reefs and alpine regions. As the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases increases, impacts become more severe and widespread. To reduce the global net economic, environmental and social losses in the face of these impacts, the policy objective must remain squarely focused on returning greenhouse gas concentrations to near pre-industrial levels through the reduction of emissions. The spatial and temporal fingerprint of warming can be traced to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, which are a direct result of burning fossil fuels, broad-scale deforestation and other human activity.^[27"

"

It seems "your" scientists are on-board as well. An Australian scientist is different than a scientist from another country how? Science is science, you must do research, publish, have your work peer reviewed, etc etc.. It has nothing to do with where the scientist is from.

You refused to state if you were qualified, as in being trained in climatology, to make a scientific statement of fact on the subject. Therefore I will assume you are not.

Global government, conspiracy theory stuff... with what the bankers are doing now... almost anything is possible... but... certainly doesn't make the science of global warming change. International bankers can't change the scientific opinion of the vast majority of climatologists, despite their money.. like the Catholic Church with all its power could not deny science in the end Whatever ulterior motives these people have, it does not change the scientific opinion on global warming.

My personal take though is, that it is a chaotic system, and the models are still far from perfect. But you have to work with what you have, unless you can make it better yourself.

[phetaroi]

You're going to have to do better than stooping to association fallacies. How about coming up with an argument as to why you think he is wrong?

You gotta be kidding me. Okay, do a Google on global warming and you start reading the 33.1 million entries and see what the vast majority of scientists believe. But, if I must, what's happening to glacial trends, just as one example. Go up into Glacier National Park in the U.S. or the Canadian Rockies. You look at the terminal glacial moraines and see how they're being uncovered faster and faster...I did. Hiked places I visited in 1960, 1980, and 2008, and the front of the glaciers have receded nearly a mile...and not just one glacier. Athabasca Glacier, Crowfoot Glacier (which no longer even looks like a crow's foot), and many more. Or, if you like, look at the spread of jellyfish further and further north as the water trends warmer. Or...well, enough.

Association fallacies? Are you honestly telling me that FOX News does not have more coverage of the naysayers of climate change than the other networks? Are you telling me that Sarah Palin has not advocated "drilling our way out of the energy crisis" and said repeatedly that climate change is not man-made?

[teatree]

There is no such thing as a consensus. You are not going to be told this on BBC or CNN, but a growing number of scientists are rejecting the man made global warming claim.

[craigt3365]

If you do any sort of "global" travel, you will see how much the earth has changed recently. I flew over the Amazon in Bolivia recently. I was shocked as to how much land is under development/farming. Way over 50%. Entire mountains have been cleared...heck, entire mountain ranges have been cleared. I was in shock.

I also recently returned from Patagonia and a trip around Cape Horn. Visited dozens of glaciers, did some serious ice trekking on 3 of them. I saw pics from the guides showing the glaciers just 5 years ago. One, in Torres del Paine, has receded well over 1km in 5 years. He showed me where they started ice trekking 6 months earlier. It was 100 meters away from where we started. Same was true of my recent hike up Kilimanjaro. We all know what is happening there. But what we don't know is that when that glacier is gone, as it will soon be, the local people will be without a reliable water supply. Horrible for them...

When you see all this, you know something is happening. Impossible to deny, but hard to identify the culprit. But for sure, glaciers are melting...and I have to believe the incredible increase in the human population has something to do with it....we are for sure ruining our beautiful planet.

[teatree]

You're going to have to do better than stooping to association fallacies. How about coming up with an argument as to why you think he is wrong?

You gotta be kidding me. Okay, do a Google on global warming and you start reading the 33.1 million entries and see what the vast majority of scientists believe. But, if I must, what's happening to glacial trends, just as one example. Go up into Glacier National Park in the U.S. or the Canadian Rockies. You look at the terminal glacial moraines and see how they're being uncovered faster and faster...I did. Hiked places I visited in 1960, 1980, and 2008, and the front of the glaciers have receded nearly a mile...and not just one glacier. Athabasca Glacier, Crowfoot Glacier (which no longer even looks like a crow's foot), and many more. Or, if you like, look at the spread of jellyfish further and further north as the water trends warmer. Or...well, enough.

Association fallacies? Are you honestly telling me that FOX News does not have more coverage of the naysayers of climate change than the other networks? Are you telling me that Sarah Palin has not advocated "drilling our way out of the energy crisis" and said repeatedly that climate change is not man-made?

Okay, now you are using a 'straw man' argument.

I did not say that the climate hasn't changed - it is ALWAYS changing. What is happening now is nothing out of the ordinary.

Fox news and Palin are indeed skeptical on AGW but that does not mean that everyone else who is also skeptical is automatically a supporter of either of them. You were trying to discredit all who are skeptical by making them guilty by association with FOX news and Palin, who can both easily be laughed of as right wing nutbags.

[ScubaBuddha]

The flood waters won't be near as deep as the climate change deniers BS.

[AleG]

If you do any sort of "global" travel, you will see how much the earth has changed recently. I flew over the Amazon in Bolivia recently. I was shocked as to how much land is under development/farming. Way over 50%. Entire mountains have been cleared...heck, entire mountain ranges have been cleared. I was in shock.

I also recently returned from Patagonia and a trip around Cape Horn. Visited dozens of glaciers, did some serious ice trekking on 3 of them. I saw pics from the guides showing the glaciers just 5 years ago. One, in Torres del Paine, has receded well over 1km in 5 years. He showed me where they started ice trekking 6 months earlier. It was 100 meters away from where we started. Same was true of my recent hike up Kilimanjaro. We all know what is happening there. But what we don't know is that when that glacier is gone, as it will soon be, the local people will be without a reliable water supply. Horrible for them...

When you see all this, you know something is happening. Impossible to deny, but hard to identify the culprit. But for sure, glaciers are melting...and I have to believe the incredible increase in the human population has something to do with it....we are for sure ruining our beautiful planet.

What are you going to believe?, your own lying eyes or the unreprochable hot air from the "nothing to see here!" punditry?

[craigt3365]

not sure I understand that...

[ballzafire]

The flood waters won't be near as deep as the climate change deniers BS.

May I reiterate that it's best to watch the video first and then you can state your argument with confidence.

Again, nobody's denying climate change. It is a natural process that IS occurring but that is independent of human behavior.

But the "human-induced global warming" argument -- in the face of definitive evidence presented in the video -- has NO basis in scientific fact, and the burden of proof to the contrary now rests with its supporters.

And that does NOT means using the numbers of the brain-washed masses as "proof" that your argument is valid. It means disproving the nearly 1-to-1 correlation of the "sun variability -> climate variability" relationship -- which you cannot do...

Edited November 17, 2009 by ballzafire

[Thongkorn]

I don't believe it one bit . i live on the east coast of Britain , in parts only 6 inches above sea level, I have lived there all my life ,55 years, The sea level has not risen one inch, So what about all these ice bergs melting and making the sea level rise . I for one do not believe that Global warming is to blame , i just think its a big con , Its just a cycle of the earth warming up then cooling , in fact the earth is now cooling down.

[craigt3365]

If the earth is cooling down, why are the glaciers melting? That is an undeniable fact...it is happening all over the world. Agree that the cause is up for great debate, but they are melting....

[Thongkorn]

If the earth is cooling down, why are the glaciers melting? That is an undeniable fact...it is happening all over the world. Agree that the cause is up for great debate, but they are melting....

Yes I agree with you about ice melting . its just a natural cycle as it has happened many times in the long past. The atmosphere is heating up not the earth ,

[RAZZELL]

I've watched that video...great film IMHO.

Simple fact is...some modern scientists and politicians are looking at climate change to push their own research or marxist political agenda.

These "up's" and "down's" are just "blips" in the 4+ billion year history of this planet.

RAZZ

[craigt3365]

Thongkorn: Sounds like a great explanation.

And yes, that film was pretty darn good...long...but good. Climate change has become way too political...for both the politicians and the wacko's. Another bandwagon to jump on....