Discussion > "UK climate change sceptics group is stronger than ever"
Now, now, Minty, such sarcasm from such a learned and erudite person as yourself is very unbecoming (but funny!). One well known “new fact” is that, if we increase CO2 enough, we will no longer need the Sun for heat! 😂 🤣 Patent applications are already in for the brilliant new CO2 ovens, where all you need to do is put your chicken in, close the door, inject the CO2 and – hey presto! – with the CO2 reflecting all the heat back into the bird, your chicken ends up as cooked as your books! Yep, “science” is certainly getting less and less believable.
Even if the rate of sea level rise doubled, it would take 500 years to reach the property.So, despite the warnings of islands being lost and coastal nations being inundated, and ports being under 40 feet of water (according to one US admiral), you admit that the rate of sea level rise is not going to be catastrophic, then, Mr...umm... Stoat? Phew! That is a relief! Oh, and by the way, having facts pointed out that you do not like, be they about persons or organisations, is not ad hominem, no matter how caustic the delivery.
Radical Rodent
A 2 metre rise in sea level would leave the Obama property high and dry, but devastate Bangladesh, submerge several low lying islands, inundate New York and Singapore, and create an estimated 187 million refugees.
Such a rise in the coming decades is unlikely, but does lie within the 90% uncertainty bounds for a high emission scenario.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/23/11195
Phil Clarke
AK - see the paper especially Fig 3. The recent trend in cosmic ray flux is of the opposite sign needed for it to be a cause of GW.
Which was the point of the paper.
Phil Clarke
A 2 metre rise in sea level would leave the Obama property high and dry…Well, the house, anyway; much of the property would be submerged. Perhaps you are not fully aware of what is meant by the term, “property”…
… but devastate Bangladesh, submerge several low lying islands…Maybe. But Bangladesh and most of the “threatened” islands are continuing to actually grow in area. I suspect that Singapore is not too concerned (they will just redouble their land-reclamation activities), and many might consider the prospect of New York (and London) getting inundated quite an attractive proposition. The much sought-after “climate refugees” still remain non-existent, and will probably be so for a long, long time – until, perhaps, they are fleeing the encroaching glaciers.
Ice sheet contributions to future sea-level rise from structured expert judgmentPerhaps I will read that paper, but from reading the title, I have a feeling I already know what my opinion of it will be.
Radical Rodent
Oh, dear. I’ve just read the “Significance” section… I’ll give this one a miss, thank you.
Radical Rodent
Clarky where have you been? Not to worry, some clown, also calling themselves Phil, continued to amuse us.
AK
Phil (either one), a property only a few metres above sea level is not necessarily "high and dry" as you so blithely conclude. Try examining video footage of the effect of recent storms upon coastal defences. Flooding and structural damage are not uncommon. Obama could indeed be at risk.
AK
Phil Clarke:
"The Obamas' house is actually set back from the coast at an elevation of more than 3m (10ft). Even if the rate of sea level rise doubled, it would take 500 years to reach the property."
Interesting. I look forward to you calling out the climate hysterics who disagree with you:
"Climate change: Global sea level rise could be bigger than expected
By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48337629
"Scientists believe that global sea levels could rise far more than predicted, due to accelerating melting in Greenland and Antarctica.
The long-held view has been that the world's seas would rise by a maximum of just under a metre by 2100.
This new study, based on expert opinions, projects that the real level may be around double that figure....
n the researchers' view, if emissions continue on the current trajectory then the world's seas would be very likely to rise by between 62cm and 238cm by 2100....."
"A Terrifying Sea-Level Prediction Now Looks Far Less Likely
But experts warn that our overall picture of sea-level rise looks far scarier today than it did even five years ago."
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/sea-level-rise-may-not-become-catastrophic-until-after-2100/579478/
"Their short-term revisions also barely change their long-term forecast of West Antarctic disintegration. If emissions keep rising, they warn that global sea level could rise by more than 26 feet by 2300."
"New elevation data triple estimates of global vulnerability to sea-level rise and coastal flooding"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12808-z
"Driven by climate change, global mean sea level rose 11–16 cm in the twentieth century. Even with sharp, immediate cuts to carbon emissions, it could rise another 0.5 m this century. Under higher emissions scenarios, twenty-first century rise may approach or in the extremes exceed 2 m in the case of early-onset Antarctic ice sheet instability".
I could easily keep going. There's loads more in similar vein, and the BBC and the Guardian push it at us on a regular basis. I'm so relieved to learn from Phil that they're wrong.
Mark Hodgson
Mark,
Which part of the word 'If' is giving you the problem?
Phil Clarke
Perhaps that depends upon what your definition of "If" is, Mr Clarke...
Radical Rodent
Which part of the word 'If' is giving you the problem?
Mar 12, 2020 at 9:25 PM Phil Clarke
How many of the failed predictions of Hockey Teamsters are now too embarrassing for you to admit?
golf charlie
"Amazing !!!!!! Sun's output diminishes yet Earth's temperature increases. The wonders of climate science never fail to astound/amuse.
Mar 12, 2020 at 11:50 AM AK"
I think the Sun should be taxed, and funding of Climate Scientists should be limited to the funds collected. Elon Musk can be appointed as the UN's debt collector.
golf charlie
Phil, I understand "if", but the headline writers and the grant grubbers and the climate hysterics don't.
It's good to see your scepticism kicking in!
Mark Hodgson
Which Phil Clarke is commenting is important to know.
Perhaps Iantanyrallt will explain to us underslept mortals how to spot the good Phil from his evil twin. Is it a medication issue a la Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde ?
Heather
Sleepless
The Phylovirus that has infected so many of these discussion sites has announced that we are 100% immune if we forgo our climate "falsehoods". A case of the cure being worse than the disease?
AK
I think this excellent discussion should be more visible to newcomers to the Bishop Hill site.
p.s. TinyCO2: I have been only sleeping 2 hours a night for some weeks and the community here has helped me overcome a severe injury by providing me, albeit incidentally, As I said before I find your comments pithy and very well informed. Perhaps we can combine in the Phil Clarke biography. The draft biography I have produced says, in full: Phil Clarke: Troll.
Ian
Iantanyrallt
Amazing !!!!!! Sun's output diminishes yet Earth's temperature increases. The wonders of climate science never fail to astound/amuse.
"Cosmic rays may rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present" Golly, modern cosmic rays have lost their oomph". Unbelievable science !!!