Posted on 01/24/2015 7:07:43 AM PST by PROCON
Your analysis is spot on; any globalwarming would have many more positive effects than negative.
People are eating the religionists lunch over at WaPo. Wow. I should go sit down.
It is scary that we definitely MAY have done ‘something.’
It is all true. One end of my swimming pool is deeper than the other side. Proof that sea level rise will hurt women and minorities most.
So according to that premise, Florida swampland that was reclaimed some fifty years ago should be underwater and not the really expensive real estate it is now.
The left sure loves the fear porn.
At the end of it, it's all about money.
Yours.
My thought is if this is true, Australia will be swamped. And they don’t seem to care. Plus, if anything gets flooded out it will be rat enclaves, minus a few.
I look forward to our aquatic overlords.
If the situation were even remotely that dire, there would not be concessions for so-called “developing” economies such as China, permitting them to emit far more particulate matter and pollute far more than the US ever did at it’s peak over 30 years ago. This to me says it’s political and redistributionist claptrap intended yet again to hamstring the US economy. World temperature has varied significantly over recorded history, and coastlines have varied significantly across the world according to archaeological evidence. Man did not cause that, and man cannot change that. This belief is so persistent and so apparently entrancing to so many, and for the life of me I just don’t see why. It defies logic.
Are you sure the exponent isn’t 3 or 4?
The elite econuts during the 1920s were saying the same basic thing back then.
So the sea level can rise in one area only?
Dear WaPo, read my lips: you all are journalists because you couldn’t even get a D in freshman physics.
Please leave science to grownups (which apparently excludes the vast majority of those government grant seeking “climate researchers”.
“The United States will actually get a lot more sea level rise than many other parts of the world — possibly over 14 feet. Call it geophysical karma —”
Some 9,000 years ago sea level was 20 to 30 feet higher than today, but we’ve cooled off since then.
When we go back into the deep freeze, of the two million year ice age we are in (which will happen any day now being that we are at the very tail end of this inter glacial)], the seas will drop 450 to 500 feet back down to the edge of the continental shelves where they were before.
Of course, Mother Erf is going to punish the U.S. the most because of our evil, oil consuming capitalistic ways.
The screeching about sea level rise in specific locales is due to subsidence in those locales. The land is settling. That can be due to a number of things. The only human-related cause would be depleting the aquifer more rapidly than it naturally replenishes, for drinking water.
Truthfully, I haven’t begun to take this apart.
I haven’t read his article but I did skim it. He made the case that for some large amount of CO2 (1250 ppm) released into the atmosphere, that most of it (900 ppm) is present something like a hundred years later.
So, without pulling the quoted papers, I do notice that Mr. Mooney makes no mention of the consumption of CO2 by plankton in the oceans and grasses (lawns, prarie, etc.). So the reader is left without data to make a considered judgment and he is also subjected to the Gorebull hysteria contained in this article.
Like I said, I haven’t pulled the papers, but I suspect the dishonesty of this piece is much worse than this.
Gee, I can’t wait for Al Gore’s seaside mansion in California to slip into the Pacific.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.