Global Warming debate

[Sihouette]

I will tell you what I've observed about the global warming issue.

The beach near my home now sports a low tide mark where the high tide mark was just two short years ago. One used to have to walk quite a distance from the parking lot to the breakers. Now, they're handily very nearby, much to the distress of the parking lot owners who are regularly seen these days dumping riprap, boulders and cement all along the edge where the parking lot meets the strand. Several stretches of the local highway are being similarly encroached upon by Old Briney and will soon need major reinforcements to save them in the event of our seasonal storm surges.

This all happened within the last two years. Very dramatic. Clammers and fishermen are openly alarmed about the situation. But I guess it's all just made up..

 

[Pidgey]

Well, you're far out of the range of even the AGW folks for whatever reason. You can sorta' monitor sea level rise here:

http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/en/news/ocean-indicators/mean-sea-level/

Some local changes occur because of variations in the orbit of the moon and whatnot. There's an image on that page that shows where notable excursions from the mean are by way of varied coloring. Most notably, the higher sea level extrema follow surface temperature anomalies to a large degree as can partially be seen by comparing the colors in the graph from the link above to the same basic anomaly color coding in the one below:

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomnight.1.3.2008.gif

 

[Sihouette]

I've lived near this beach for about 25 years. Native americans that are friends of mine and their families have lived near this beach for hundreds, if not thousands of years. None of them remember anything like it, nor in their stories, and they are mournful of their lost gathering grounds for their favorite mollusks that were on rocks that now almost never surface above the water.

I am telling you the honest truth. The sea level has risen very noticeably in the last two years. There are no explanations for seasonal or other explanations of the moon or tides. It is quite simply that the sea level has risen...dramatically...recently...in as many years as recorded or oral history tell of.

Them's the facts.

 

[Pidgey]

And I'm just telling you that the official number by devout AGW-funded groups give the information in that website above, showing an average of three (3) millimeters per year rise, or three (3) centimeters per decade (about an inch).

It's a fact that tectonic plate movements can cause some areas to be lifted up and others to go down. Other things that can affect specific localities can be the removal of gas & oil, erosion due to an aquifer outlet, prevailing ocean current flow regimes like the phase of the PDO (negative or positive) and other such things like the orbital characteristics of the moon and other planets (there are some really long-term variations on those). Rocks will eventually erode, too. There are some very low islands in Indonesia that were supposed to be inundated that haven't been, as well as Bangladesh, which has actually grown more area instead of losing it.

That said, oceanic scientists who are firm believers in AGW would tell you that your local observations would only be representative of AGW theory as a whole if it were within the stated mean seal level rise. Otherwise, it'd have to be due to some other cause.

Put a number to it: how much rise in inches over how many years?

 

[Sihouette]

We've not had a tectonic upheaval that would explain the rise we see here in about 300 years. We aren't talking millimeters, we're talking feet. There has been a rise in feet in the water level with no other explanation like mining, tectonic movement or any other incidental cause except just a rise in sea level. We've lived through El Ninos and La Ninas and nothing has shown like this.

And it is alarming

You don't need an advanced degree in anything to know that the same beach you walked your dog on with hundreds of feet between the breakers and the bluffs at a given high tide, that now laps at the bluffs in a medium high tide is abnormally high. I've only seen the waves that close in the past in an extremely high tide during a hellacious storm. Now in calm seas in the Summer the surge pours in and is making backwater pools at the feet of the bluffs every single day. New year-round brackish lagoons are forming in areas previous always dry most of the year.

The eyes aren't deceiving us. We know sea level rise when we see it.

 

[Andy]

We've not had a tectonic upheaval that would explain the rise we see here in about 300 years. We aren't talking millimeters, we're talking feet. There has been a rise in feet in the water level with no other explanation like mining, tectonic movement or any other incidental cause except just a rise in sea level. We've lived through El Ninos and La Ninas and nothing has shown like this.

And it is alarming

You don't need an advanced degree in anything to know that the same beach you walked your dog on with hundreds of feet between the breakers and the bluffs at a given high tide, that now laps at the bluffs in a medium high tide is abnormally high. I've only seen the waves that close in the past in an extremely high tide during a hellacious storm. Now in calm seas in the Summer the surge pours in and is making backwater pools at the feet of the bluffs every single day. New year-round brackish lagoons are forming in areas previous always dry most of the year.

The eyes aren't deceiving us. We know sea level rise when we see it.

In the other thread you were debating in, the opposing side constantly rejected your evidence that was based on scientifically gathered data, with personal anecdotal evidence, hear-say, and attacks on your motives.

Now the positions are reversed.

What you can say is, the water level in relation to the land level, has shifted up. Can you prove conclusively that it is only because the water level is higher? And even so, can you say that it is because of global warming, instead of the dozens of other possibilities?

By the way, a land mass can rise and sink due to tectonic plate movement, without a massive or even noticeable upheaval of any kind. The plates are in constant motion of some sort, whether we feel it in an earth quake, or not.

Here's my point...
No one is suggesting you are blind, or seeing something that is not there. We are suggesting that your limited personal data, constrained to one section of one beach in one area of the world, may not apply to the entire planet.

Other areas, such as my Uncle who has lived in Florida for the past 30 years, has had the reverse observation. His beach has grown, and the water line is further away from his beach side property, than ever before.

Does his experience disprove global warming? No. Does yours prove global warming? No. This is why you do scientific research, and gather tons of data from hundreds of sources, in order to make real conclusions.

Back to the data...

As you can see, the rise in global mean sea level, is roughly 3 millimeters /per year.

Now, if you choose to take your personal limited experience, over the scientific data from global sources, that's your choice. Just remember, you are acting just like those people in the other thread that ignored your scientific sources for their personal experience.

 

[Pidgey]

About where are we talking about?

 

[Stalin]

Kinda' like Evolution, right?

​

No.

Evolution is a THEORY.

Do I have to educate everyone on thos forum on Scientific Philosophy 101 ?

Comrade Stalin

 

[Sihouette]

What you can say is, the water level in relation to the land level, has shifted up. Can you prove conclusively that it is only because the water level is higher? And even so, can you say that it is because of global warming, instead of the dozens of other possibilities?~Andy

Nope. I cannot say it is global warming specifically...though I can sure postulate that... All I can tell you is that even with past El Ninos and La Ninas, earthquakes and all the other examples that were given for flutuations in sea level near me, the breakers remained at the same average distance from the bluffs. I used a process of deduction to come to my conclusion that the sea level has risen, significantly.

So now, even with a steep incline on our beach, the tides average the breakers about 100 feet closer to the bluffs in calm conditions than they have in anyone's memory, recent or distant via lore. So unless there is another parameter that wasn't brought up that might explain the situation, I'm going to opt for Occam's Razor and say it's because sea levels are simply rising, (from global cooling?..lol..) faster than we think. And maybe our area is more susceptible to that somehow?

 

[Pidgey]

Gravity's the dominant force here. You simply can't have more water (deeper) than everyone else due to gravity. Sea level actually drops over large undersea mountains due to more local mass (gravitational anomalies), though. You can find some discussion of that here:

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/announcements/text_predict.HTML

But, since the mean seal level in the rest of the world isn't rising with you, this means you're sinking. Better formulate an escape plan!

 

[Sihouette]

It's weird. I hear of reports from people living on atolls who say that they can visibly see the breakers closer than in recent memory...and pleading for help, to no avail while "scientists" employed by the reluctant countries these people are appealing to report that there is no significant difference in wave break levels..

And now our entire area is either "imagining" that the breakers are lapping at the bluffs in normal seas where they never came close before, or our entire section of the west coast of N. America is "sinking into the ocean" suddenly, and significantly within the last two years without so much as a 5.0 earthquake or better...

Bullocks. "Scientists" differ in their findings depending on where their paychecks come from. If I was going to try to hide the fact that global warming was happening...say if I had a vested interest in the petrolium/coal industry that is the main source of global warming, I would form a "task force" with a catchy green-sounding name, staffed with people on my payroll to underreport rising sea levels so that actual accounts of that happening would remain with the locals and never make the news in the form of "officially sanctioned" data.

Just saying...

Occam's razor usually applies to natural phenomenon. Human politics and affairs have their own "Occam's razor"....greed is the source of most motivations.

 

[Bunz]

If I can chime on a few things here a little late, even if maybe just to spur a further discussion. Firstly, I dont think many people will dispute that global warming is happening, the biggest question is more about what is the cause, and if it is helped by man burning fossil fuels.

Personally, if I may include some personal anecdotal evidence about my experiences and listening to people much older who have been paying attention to the sea for a life time longer than myself.

While the tides where I live will flucuate over 30 feet from low to high in 6 hours during the full moon, there has been a noticable increase in the last 10 years of erosion. I have noticed a few things, firstly, is that the worst storms we experience in the Bering Sea comes in August/September/October. Historically, there is often a considerable amount of sea ice in place in the coastal areas that help dissipate such erosion. Which in plenty of places along the west coast of Alaska will more or less swallow entire communities in the next 10-20 years.

A second example is that of a winter moose hunt that was established 30 or so years ago for the month of December near my community. The regulations require that someone travel to the other side of the nearby river to access the resource. For the first 2 decades of the hunt, there was generally no problem with the river having enough ice to cross safely to access the hunting grounds in question during the month of December. In the last 10 years, only once have people been able to transit the river by sno-go across the ice to provide meat for thier families during the legal time frame.

 

[laughinatreps]

Nahhhhhhhhhhh! global warming is just a man made myth.......

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming.html

• Average temperatures have climbed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880, much of this in recent decades, according to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

• The rate of warming is increasing. The 20th century's last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for several millennia, according to a number of climate studies. And the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen warmest since 1850.

• The Arctic is feeling the effects the most. Average temperatures in Alaska, western Canada, and eastern Russia have risen at twice the global average, according to the multinational Arctic Climate Impact Assessment report compiled between 2000 and 2004.

• Arctic ice is rapidly disappearing, and the region may have its first completely ice-free summer by 2040 or earlier. Polar bears and indigenous cultures are already suffering from the sea-ice loss.

• Glaciers and mountain snows are rapidly melting—for example, Montana's Glacier National Park now has only 27 glaciers, versus 150 in 1910. In the Northern Hemisphere, thaws also come a week earlier in spring and freezes begin a week later.

• Coral reefs, which are highly sensitive to small changes in water temperature, suffered the worst bleaching—or die-off in response to stress—ever recorded in 1998, with some areas seeing bleach rates of 70 percent. Experts expect these sorts of events to increase in frequency and intensity in the next 50 years as sea temperatures rise.

• An upsurge in the amount of extreme weather events, such as wildfires, heat waves, and strong tropical storms, is also attributed in part to climate change by some experts.


http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html



1. What is the greenhouse effect, and is it affecting our climate?

The greenhouse effect is unquestionably real and helps to regulate the temperature of our planet. It is essential for life on Earth and is one of Earth's natural processes. It is the result of heat absorption by certain gases in the atmosphere (called greenhouse gases because they effectively 'trap' heat in the lower atmosphere) and re-radiation downward of some of that heat. Water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, followed by carbon dioxide and other trace gases. Without a natural greenhouse effect, the temperature of the Earth would be about zero degrees F (-18°C) instead of its present 57°F (14°C). So, the concern is not with the fact that we have a greenhouse effect, but whether human activities are leading to an enhancement of the greenhouse effect by the emission of greenhouse gases through fossil fuel combustion and deforestation.
to top 2. Are greenhouse gases increasing?

Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There is no scientific debate on this point. Pre-industrial levels of carbon dioxide (prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution) were about 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), and current levels are greater than 380 ppmv and increasing at a rate of 1.9 ppm yr-1 since 2000. The global concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today far exceeds the natural range over the last 650,000 years of 180 to 300 ppmv. According to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), by the end of the 21st century, we could expect to see carbon dioxide concentrations of anywhere from 490 to 1260 ppm (75-350% above the pre-industrial concentration).



But I would guess, to some folks, that NOAA, USGS, and National Geographic rank right up there with National Inquirer, Star magazine and the rest of the gossip rags.....

Yeah, you're right, it's all a hoax. And the idea that over half of the worlds glaciers, ICE FORMATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, are now gone due to solar flares (which have been around for millennia) or variations in the moons orbit (which has been occurring for billions of years) is completely plausible. Global temperatures rising has absolutely nothing to do with the FACT of BILLIONS OF ADDITIONAL HUMAN BEINGS PUMPING OUT TRILLIONS OF TONS OF ADDITIONAL CO2 SINCE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION does it now?

Keep fooling yourselves, you won't have to be around to clean up the mess will you? Your great grandchildren will do it for you won't they? But why should you give a shat about them? They don't have any affect on your "bottom line".....you should only worry about what you have to spend today.....



http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/glaciers.htm

 

[Sihouette]

I just remember trying to walk on the beach last Summer with my dog like I've done for years, during an average high tide and we kept scrambling to find a dry island between the breakwater and the bluffs to "escape" to between wave sets to get from one end to the other.

Not in over 25 year have I had to do that. On the highway I drive we used to see the waves waaaaaayyyy out beyond hundreds of feet of sand. Now every single day they are clearly visible and nearby from the highway...all the time...

No science necessary at all. Sea levels are rising dramatically.

 

[Pidgey]

Well, there are other interesting solar things going on that deserve strong consideration in this whole deal. Take this one, for instance:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/23sep_solarwind.htm

Russian solar scientists have been saying for a few years now that we're goin' down and deep cold should set in within a few decades. The impression is that it will be like the 1800s or so. Keep checking this one:

Those are essentially graphs showing wind anomalies by way of AAM (Atmospheric Angular Momentum) calculations. From the years on these two graphs from 1958 to the mid '70s, we were in a cooling phase and then we started warming. You can (if you'll take the time to study it) easily see the relationship between a positive GLAAM (Global AAM) anomaly and warming as well as a negative GLAAM anomaly and cooling, if you compare those graphs with a temperature track like can be found here:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1958/mean:3

We've been running mostly negative for almost a decade now. There are VERY strong ties between the GLAAM and solar effects, including the IMF (Interplanetary Magnetic Field). If the next solar cycle continues to be a dud, we might see some substantial cooling just like the Russian scientists say.

But on your sea level rise, trust me: if we could measure that the level had risen by inches or feet in the last few years the AGW people would screaming their heads off about it. If it's more a deal that your sand has washed away a bit, then it doesn't do a thing for their cause.