Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Global warming doubles rate of ocean rise
Eurek Alert ^ | 11.24.05 | Carl Blesch

Posted on 12/31/2005 6:28:17 PM PST by Coleus

Global warming doubles rate of ocean rise Rutgers-led team shows rising ocean levels tied to human-induced climate change Global ocean levels are rising twice as fast today as they were 150 years ago, and human-induced warming appears to be the culprit, say scientists at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, and collaborating institutions. While the speed at which the ocean is rising – almost two millimeters per year today compared to one millimeter annually for the past several thousand years – may not be fodder for the next disaster movie, it affirms scientific concerns of accelerated global warming.

In an article published in the Nov. 25 issue of the journal Science, Rutgers professor of geological sciences Kenneth G. Miller reports on a new record of sea level change during the past 100 million years based on drilling studies along the New Jersey coast. The findings establish a steady millimeter-per-year rise from 5,000 years ago until about 200 years ago.

In contrast, sea-level measurements since 1850 from tidal gauges and more recently from satellite images, when corrected for land settling along the shoreline, reveal the current two-millimeter annual rise. "Without reliable information on how sea levels had changed before we had our new measures, we couldn't be sure the current rate wasn't happening all along," said Miller. "Now, with solid historical data, we know it is definitely a recent phenomenon.

"The main thing that's changed since the 19th century and the beginning of modern observation has been the widespread increase in fossil fuel use and more greenhouse gases," he added. "Our record therefore provides a new and reliable baseline to use in addressing global warming."

The new sea level record spanning 100 million years of geologic time is the first comprehensive one scientists have produced since a commercial research endeavor in 1987, which, according to Miller, was not fully documented and verifiable.

The findings by Miller's team argue against some widely held tenets of geological science. Miller claims, for example, that ocean heights 100 million years ago and earlier were 150 to 200 meters lower than scientists had previously thought. Changes at these levels can only be caused by the Earth's crust shifting on the ocean floor. Miller's findings, therefore, imply less ocean-crust production than scientists had widely assumed.

During the Late Cretaceous period (the most recent age of dinosaurs), frequent sea-level fluctuations of tens of meters suggest that the Earth was not always ice-free as previously assumed. Ice-volume changes are the only way that sea levels could change at these rates and levels, Miller claims. This suggests small- to medium-sized but short-lived ice sheets in the Antarctic region, and casts doubt whether any of the Earth's warmer eras were fully ice-free.

Miller's team took five 500-meter-deep core samples of sediments onshore along New Jersey's coastline from Cape May to Sandy Hook. The scientists examined the sediment type, fossils, and variations in isotopes, or different forms of the same elements, at different levels in the cores they extracted. Miller also correlated these measurements with others from throughout the world to substantiate the global nature of their record.

### The Rutgers study included participants from the New Jersey Geological Survey, the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Western Michigan University, the University of Oregon and Queens College in Flushing, N.Y. The National Science Foundation provided major funding for the study.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Technical; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: capemay; globalwarming; sandyhook
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 next last

1 posted on 12/31/2005 6:28:18 PM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GreenFreeper; freepatriot32


2 posted on 12/31/2005 6:28:36 PM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

How do we know that the land isn't just sinking?????


3 posted on 12/31/2005 6:33:15 PM PST by SkyDancer ("Talent Without Ambition Is Sad - Ambition Without Talent Is Worse")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

There can be only one possible solution to this terrible delima we face: international socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx! </sarcasm>


4 posted on 12/31/2005 6:34:32 PM PST by Abcdefg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

As you apparently know, the planet is not a rigid shape. The land pushes up in areas and sinks in others.


5 posted on 12/31/2005 6:36:18 PM PST by Abcdefg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: everyone

I just finished reading Michael Crichton's "State of Fear"...there is no global warming...period.


6 posted on 12/31/2005 6:37:43 PM PST by Dr Stormfist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Abcdefg

Just more water for me to bass fish!


7 posted on 12/31/2005 6:38:25 PM PST by BigTom85 (Proud Gun Owner and Member of NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Global Warming? Bring it on!!

8 posted on 12/31/2005 6:40:10 PM PST by DJ Taylor (Once again our country is at war, and once again the Democrats have sided with our enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Stormfist
I saw the interview on 20/20, looks like a good book, Crichton had once called the people in Hollywood a bunch of dummies
9 posted on 12/31/2005 6:41:40 PM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

It's a good read and once more he backs up his work with documented proof. He also pokes fun at Hollywood.


10 posted on 12/31/2005 6:43:31 PM PST by Dr Stormfist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Abcdefg

Right - so when an island or something seems to be flooding it could just mean it's sinking .... I've learned that there's the same amount of water since creation (evolutionary or whatever) on earth but in different forms. Sometimes there's more of one kind (liquid) than other (gas or solid) ....


11 posted on 12/31/2005 6:43:43 PM PST by SkyDancer ("Talent Without Ambition Is Sad - Ambition Without Talent Is Worse")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

How much time do we have left in Fairbanks? 450 feet above sea level.


12 posted on 12/31/2005 6:44:47 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

I think it is all the newly fatter people swimming in the ocean making it all rise.


13 posted on 12/31/2005 6:44:50 PM PST by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

So this idiot is claiming steam power started global warming in 1860.

One underwater volcano can out out more steam in an hour than all the trains in the world put out until Diesels took over.


14 posted on 12/31/2005 6:45:20 PM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Cool. I live in Baltimore. At this rate, in 2000 years, I'll have ocean front property.


15 posted on 12/31/2005 6:45:29 PM PST by gate2wire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer
The question is...

Can you trust a person to accurately explain something that supposedly happened 100 million years ago?



Yet these same people are certainly like the rest of us in that they probably can't recall what they had for dinner a month ago.

Through a complicated, fragmented explanation, fraught with missing essential details, we're supposed to believe this crap and take it for face value because those professing such nonsense have 20 years of formal education?

Let's not forget that these same people who are entrenched in academic society couldn't hold a job anywhere else.

The whole global warming issue is about money and power. Follow it to its source and you'll discover that whoever can persuade the masses in believing it will win BIG. Whether or not global warming is actually happening is inconsequential. It's all about money and power.
16 posted on 12/31/2005 6:45:56 PM PST by hiredhand (My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Globull Warming:
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/a159d77401.jpg
17 posted on 12/31/2005 6:46:33 PM PST by MilleniumBug (Pattycake, Pattycake, Wilson's the man...Bake me a yellowboy fast as you can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

If only Al Gore was here, he would know what to do..


18 posted on 12/31/2005 6:46:51 PM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

16 posts and I am the first to say it????

IT'S BUSH'S FAULT!!!!!

NOW, WE'RE DOOOOMED!!!!!! DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMEEEEED!


19 posted on 12/31/2005 6:48:00 PM PST by freedumb2003 (American troops cannot be defeated. American Politicians can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

The biggest change since the 19th century, which they manage to totally ignore is, the increaed population of earth with it's increase in CO² emissions form mammals breathing! Also the bullsh-t is getting a lot deeper too also. Book em, Barney.


20 posted on 12/31/2005 6:48:57 PM PST by Waco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiredhand

Yep - and ask those people in Europe now ... super cold ...


21 posted on 12/31/2005 6:50:47 PM PST by SkyDancer ("Talent Without Ambition Is Sad - Ambition Without Talent Is Worse")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dr Stormfist
I just finished reading Michael Crichton's "State of Fear"...there is no global warming...period.

I agree. At least no human caused global warming. Mars has a "global warming" problem too. I guess there are too many SUVs on Mars.

I'll be long gone when my house is beach front property...

22 posted on 12/31/2005 6:52:13 PM PST by 69ConvertibleFirebird (Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

"During the Late Cretaceous period (the most recent age of dinosaurs)"

Thanks for reminding us how "accurate" scientific theory was re those too. LOL.

Its all Rovian Mothership Delta's doing. Only 2 million more years and the Blue Coastal Cities will be wiped off the face of the map. Mwau-hahahha.


23 posted on 12/31/2005 6:52:48 PM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Meanwhile, Mars is warming without human help.


24 posted on 12/31/2005 6:54:54 PM PST by gleneagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Abcdefg
There can be only one possible solution to this terrible delima we face: international socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx!

Yup, Global Socialism. Our only hope is to buy emmission credits from the UN...

25 posted on 12/31/2005 6:59:48 PM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Global warming is truly happening but man hasn't had a significant role in causing it.

The sea level has risen more than 120 meters since the peak of the last ice age, about 18,000 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise

Glaciers were up to a mile thick in North Dakota and up to 8,000 feet thick near Hudson Bay during the last ice age . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacier


26 posted on 12/31/2005 7:06:33 PM PST by preacher (A government which robs from Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Stormfist
Aliens Cause Global Warming
Caltech Michelin Lecture ^ | January 17, 2003 | Michael Crichton

Posted on 12/11/2003 1:44:39 PM PST by Dan Evans
Edited on 01/02/2004 6:36:11 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]

My topic today sounds humorous but unfortunately I am serious. I am going to argue that extraterrestrials lie behind global warming. Or to speak more precisely, I will argue that a belief in extraterrestrials has paved the way, in a progression of steps, to a belief in global warming. Charting this progression of belief will be my task today.

27 posted on 12/31/2005 7:09:21 PM PST by streetpreacher (If at the end of the day, 100% of both sides are not angry with me, I've failed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All
Hmm 2mm = .080 inches. We will all drowned in no time.
28 posted on 12/31/2005 7:11:50 PM PST by Nalu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Human induced global warming is now proven scientific fact?


29 posted on 12/31/2005 7:12:03 PM PST by Retired Chemist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Chemist

Has that ever stopped them before?


30 posted on 12/31/2005 7:13:55 PM PST by streetpreacher (If at the end of the day, 100% of both sides are not angry with me, I've failed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

31 posted on 12/31/2005 7:24:34 PM PST by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
While the speed at which the ocean is rising – almost two millimeters per year today compared to one millimeter annually for the past several thousand years – may not be fodder for the next disaster movie, it affirms scientific concerns of accelerated global warming.

This is bogus. There are no standard measurement records from "several thousand years" ago. There is no way to demonstrate this. BALONEY!

32 posted on 12/31/2005 7:29:32 PM PST by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Chemist

"The findings establish a steady millimeter-per-year rise from 5,000 years ago until about 200 years ago."

Two hundred years?

The researchers seem to have overlooked the obvious...if their findings are correct, then global warming began around the time that Congress first convened.


33 posted on 12/31/2005 7:30:31 PM PST by gas0linealley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: hiredhand
You are certainly correct in one sense. Your thesis is a true analogy to radio listeners believing hucksters like Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingrham, and the rest of the cast of thousands who, at one moment repeat what you say in your post and then, in their crass commercial posture ask us to have faith in their assurance that the product du jour is the best, the brightest, the---(fill in the blank). Similarly, their ''personal'' endorsement (vis-a'-vis the product merely buying time for an ad) is intended to convince you upon your total faith in their trustworthiness.

Thus, when the product or service is later found to fail, injure users, or any similar factual establishment that your consumer's faith was misplaced, it is not merely rhetorical to ask: Does that failure justify the listener's future doubt when the talking head is repeating yet another assurance of a fact relating to public policy, political integrity or the purported truthfulness of one person, himself (herself) or another? And, with regard to the future faith of the listener when still another product or service is hawked by the host, what level of trust is reasonable for the listener to have for that product specifically and all representations, assurances and interpretive conclusions as a universal matter?

34 posted on 12/31/2005 7:31:40 PM PST by middie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
I have great difficulty believing any of this especially when the same climatologists can't tell me correctly what the weather will be like this week. Add to that the fact that when ever it has flood here they have been unable to even guesstimate the amount.

Could it be that the hot air being emitted by the "chicken little" "we're all going to die because of the SUV" crowd are the ones that are the cause of all this. I think so.
35 posted on 12/31/2005 7:37:40 PM PST by styky (All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom; justice; honor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: middie
Now THAT is a very good point! Whenever I hear the talk show host "plugging" for a mattress, or some health suppliment, I can only think of ONE thing (whether I'm correct or not!).

...and that one thing is -

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Credibility is extremely valuable, and should be more closely guarded by those who claim to be the "voice of liberty".

Unfortunately, for the most part this doesn't seem to be the case!
36 posted on 12/31/2005 7:41:00 PM PST by hiredhand (My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: styky
Exactly. They can't tell you if it's going to rain 72 hours from now without stating a given margin of error, but we're supposed to take them for their word about something that was suppose to have happened 100 million years ago?!
37 posted on 12/31/2005 7:42:50 PM PST by hiredhand (My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

I agree.


38 posted on 12/31/2005 8:02:47 PM PST by Dallas59 (“You love life, while we love death"( Al-Qaeda & Democratic Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Their grants are about to run out, so they damn well better come up with something. That's why they have to keep issuing a stream of "scary scenarios" (their own exact words) to keep this on the front burner.That's why these "reports" keep trickling out in a preplanned manner.

As funding dries up they will only become more shrill.

Liberalism is ruining science!

39 posted on 12/31/2005 8:11:49 PM PST by capt. norm (Headline: "Energizer bunny arrested, charged with battery")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: middie
That's some pretty heavy navel-gazing. You need to get out more (or lighten up on the refreshments).
40 posted on 12/31/2005 8:17:48 PM PST by capt. norm (Headline: "Energizer bunny arrested, charged with battery")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

There is no way you can get a 1mm annual resolution from core samples. Can't be done. What I assume they did was take the total data and extrapolate to an average per year. An interesting exercise but the varability of any 200 years in 5,000 years could account for the "rise" now. The next 200 year could have no rise. Point is, insufficient data to make a conclusion that Global Warming is the cause.


41 posted on 12/31/2005 8:30:27 PM PST by lp boonie (Good judgement comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgement)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
almost two millimeters per year today compared to one millimeter annually for the past several thousand years

So for the past several thousand years the sea could be rising an average of 1.48 mm and now it is 1.51 mm. Based on the evidence given in the article that could be a true statement even though the actual difference is .03 mm.

Global ocean levels are rising twice as fast today as they were 150 years ago, and human-induced warming appears to be the culprit.

Are they saying non-human produced global warming would have no effect on ocean levels?

IIRC: I read somewhere that global warming would cause the Greenland Ice Sheet to lose mass while the Antarctic Ice Sheet might actually gain mass. Where is this extra water coming from?

42 posted on 12/31/2005 9:01:20 PM PST by Mike Darancette (Mesocons for Rice '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Of course, the fluctuating temperatures of the Sun have nothing to do with it.

I think it's amazing that so many scientist, looking at a teeny speck of time through what amounts to a flickering penlight, think they know everything and can make pronouncements that we're supposed to accept as holy truth.


43 posted on 12/31/2005 9:04:20 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #44 Removed by Moderator

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

To: Coleus

If this farticle is true, why the hell are we going to spend 240 billion bucks rebuilding New Orleans? It doesn't make any sense to me.


46 posted on 12/31/2005 9:36:40 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!

Someday.

47 posted on 01/01/2006 6:25:24 AM PST by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Stormfist

Michael Crichton is as a reliable source of info on science as Michael Moore is on politics.

ie he isnt


48 posted on 01/01/2006 6:32:52 AM PST by bobdsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hiredhand
Thanks. Credibility is the keystone of their critical assertions regarding right verus left, conservative verus liberal, and so on throught their litany of subjects each day. Unfortunately, others who have read the same do not share your understanding and keen sense of perspective.

If I spend 20 minutes detailing how ''A'' is innocent and how we know the prosecuting attorney is driven by some specific sinister motive or, one category of everyday society (like the press) is engaged in a conspiracy, and then seemlessly move into a two minute assurance that product ''B'' will grow hair on Terry Bradshaw, when we know the latter to be untrue, how do we rationalize the fervent belief in the assurances about the first things while rejecting the Bradshaw promise?

This issue wouldn't exist except for the unambiguous guarantee these purveyors of the truth offer to the public. They purport to know the unadulterrated facts and implore you and me to believe and act on the strength of what they tell us. As astounding as it sounds, we've all heard callers tell these gurus that they've stopped watching tv news and don't read the newspaper, except those hawked on the air, and get the ''news and the truth'' from the talking head. To a not insignificant degree some people who actually have a vote really do get their news in that manner.

Scream! What have devolved to?

49 posted on 01/01/2006 6:48:04 AM PST by middie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Powerclam; middie
It's closely related. We're talking about the relationship between trust and credibility. ...something that climatologists and talkshow hosts seem to use to their own benefit irregardless of absolute truth.

I think the bottom line is (unfortunately) that almost everybody seems to have an agenda if you look a little farther into things and don't simply take their expertise and experience at face value. :-)
50 posted on 01/01/2006 7:20:41 AM PST by hiredhand (My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson