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

Skip to comments.

Ancient Rome's fish pens confirm sea-level fears
New Scientist ^ | 09:30 16 August 04 | Jeff Hecht

Posted on 08/16/2004 5:06:16 AM PDT by ckilmer

Ancient Rome's fish pens confirm sea-level fears

09:30 16 August 04

Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.

Coastal fish pens built by the Romans have unexpectedly provided the most accurate record so far of changes in sea level over the past 2000 years. It appears that nearly all the rise in sea level since Roman times has happened in the past 100 years, and is most likely the result of human activity.

Sea-level change is a measure of the relative movement between land and sea surfaces. Tide-gauge records show that the sea level has been rising 1 to 2 millimetres a year since widespread measurements began around 1900, but do not pinpoint when the trend started.

Earlier sea levels can be estimated from geological data, but the accuracy is limited to about half a metre, which is not enough to precisely chart the history of sea-level rise.

So Kurt Lambeck of the Australian National University in Canberra turned to fish pens on the Tyrrhenian coast of Italy for a more accurate record of ancient sea level.

Ice age rebound

The Romans dug these fish pens into bedrock, and the water line in these well-preserved structures shows that the sea level along the Italian coast 2000 years ago was 1.35 metres below today's levels. "They were used for only a very short time, so they make rather nice markers," says Lambeck.

He then analysed how land elevations changed along the Italian coast due to both plate tectonics and the after-effects of the last ice age. In a paper to appear in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters, he concludes that geological processes pushed the land up by 1.22 metres over last two millennia, which means that the global sea level rose by 13 centimetres.

That is only about 100 years' worth of rise at the present rate of around 1 to 2 millimetres per year, implying that nearly all of it has occurred since 1900. While there is no proof that human activity is to blame, "I can't think of a natural process that would have started in 1900," he says.

The result "is a significant one", says Jonathan Gregory, who studies global changes in sea level at the University of Reading, UK. The finding supports the idea, based on the few tide-gauge records that extend back two centuries, that the rise in sea level did indeed accelerate about a century ago.

While Gregory cautions that this does not prove that global warming is responsible, both he and Lambeck agree that the results fit the rise in ocean volume expected from global warming melting glaciers in the industrial age.

Jeff Hecht


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: ancientrome; archaeology; babylon; catastrophism; climate; climatechange; eclipse; fagan; fishpen; ggg; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; godsgravesglyphs; history; junkscience; politics; roman; romanempire; sealevel; shitforbrains; stalagmites
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-134 next last

1 posted on 08/16/2004 5:06:17 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

GGG Ping!


2 posted on 08/16/2004 5:07:25 AM PDT by TomServo ("Meanwhile, the Midvale police visit his locker and find out why they call him 'Buzz'...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

It sounds as if you'll have plenty of time to move your house if you're too close to the ocean.


3 posted on 08/16/2004 5:09:05 AM PDT by coconutt2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

More scientific arrogance: "We humans are so frighteningly powerful, we can do things that affect the geologic and astro-physical balance of this fragile little globe we live on. We're making it hotter; we're wiping out forests; we're melting the polar ice caps; we're making the oceans rise, and it's all GEORGE W. BUSH'S fault!!!"

What total crap.

4 posted on 08/16/2004 5:10:01 AM PDT by TonyRo76 (Proud to be a part of the Reagan Generation. God Bless America!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Really.

How does this socialist dingbat know that the sea level has risen? Maybe the land sunk.


5 posted on 08/16/2004 5:13:29 AM PDT by sergeantdave (NIMBY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

"I can't think of a natural process that would have started in 1900"

Ergo, SUV's are bad, m'kay?


6 posted on 08/16/2004 5:14:03 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
We're all gonna die, and Bu$hitler knows it!
7 posted on 08/16/2004 5:14:39 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

I'm not too sure what scientific conclusions may be drawn from a single data point. Staying in the Mediterranean area, I recall the plain between the site of Troy and the beach where the Greeks landed is a mile or more wider then in ancient times. Further the area around Alexandria that held the palace of Cleopatra is totally submerged now, and has been for centuries. The Mediterranean seems to have been active for a long longer then just 100 years.

Has anyone noticed the Tidal Basin in DC rearing up to swallow the national monuments in the last century ?


8 posted on 08/16/2004 5:16:35 AM PDT by tlb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

I am always struck by their glib pronouncements that rising sea levels have to be cause by humans.
Did humans cause the "little Ice Age"?
It should be no secret that the earth warms and cools for a variety of reasons and, as is being discovered,that warming or cooling can be sudden. Why do they assume that it has to be gradual and measured?
There are many things in Nature that are not.


9 posted on 08/16/2004 5:18:46 AM PDT by Adder (Can we bring back stoning again? Please?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76

Yep!


10 posted on 08/16/2004 5:19:35 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (Conspiracy Guy, Secretary of Humor and Tomfoolery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
fish pens?


11 posted on 08/16/2004 5:21:00 AM PDT by glock rocks (WHat are you? omnipivoyant or sumthin?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

The moon is falling and we're all gonna die!!


12 posted on 08/16/2004 5:22:55 AM PDT by JoeSixPack1 (Kerry couldn't have gone to Sears in Cambodia Christmas day! They were closed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

This is speculation on top of speculation on top of wishful thinking on top of political agendas. Just a cursory glance at this article reveals far too many unknown and unknowable variables for any even tentative conclusions.


13 posted on 08/16/2004 5:23:08 AM PDT by Drawsing (It is not honorable to seek one's own honor.....Proverbs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Something is fishy about this guys science. ;-)


14 posted on 08/16/2004 5:26:33 AM PDT by commish (Freedom Tastes Sweetest to Those Who Have Fought to Preserve It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Adder; glock rocks

Earth warms and fish pens...suddenly, I feel like taking Monday off and go wet a line.


15 posted on 08/16/2004 5:32:50 AM PDT by battlegearboat (I'm reporting for duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JoeSixPack1

We're DOOMED.


16 posted on 08/16/2004 5:36:55 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

http://www.john-daly.com/

Note the photo of the mean sea level mark made in 1841 by Sir James Ross (look for a horizontal line). Note the sea level at low tide. The total range of tide is one meter in this part of the world, and this mark is very close to what would be the middle of this one meter range.

BTW, any one been to Venice lately? Seen the water lapping at the steps of the city? As is well known, Venice is subsiding and the same thing probably happened to the old Roman fish farms, as an earlier poster noted. Of course, this fact has been so well known for such a long time that it could not be hijacked by the enviro-brownshirts.

The global warming enthusiasts and their fellow travelers live in a fact-free fantasy land. Whatever 'facts' they have about this or other issues, they make up.


17 posted on 08/16/2004 5:47:07 AM PDT by KamperKen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: commish

My math skills are sometimes off but...
if the water level is 1.35 meters higher now than 2000 years ago and the land mass in that area has risen 1.22 meters in the same period wouldn't the change be 2.57 meters and not 13 centimeters?

This story sounds bogus to me...


18 posted on 08/16/2004 5:51:34 AM PDT by RedEyeJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: battlegearboat

I'm with ya! Hearing the siren call of the wild troutsie myself....


19 posted on 08/16/2004 5:58:10 AM PDT by Adder (Can we bring back stoning again? Please?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Adder
I'll noodle 'em and you can stone 'em.

BTW, the official reason I'm taking the day off is to celebrate Nicki Hilton's early morning marriage to the Masked Marvel.

20 posted on 08/16/2004 6:08:23 AM PDT by battlegearboat (I'm reporting for duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: KamperKen
Problem:
"... As is well known, Venice is subsiding and the same thing probably happened to the old Roman fish farms..."
Venice was built on a marsh, pretty sophisticated actually, the fish pens are said to be carved into bedrock. The two are not comparable.
In any event, the 'science' behind this report is questionable, the statement that data implies sea level rise over the past 100 years sounds a lot like what the researcher believed before he looked at anything at all.
I'll just 'imply' that the facts were tailored to fit a predetermined result.
21 posted on 08/16/2004 6:11:47 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day

Lol! Bump.


22 posted on 08/16/2004 6:24:34 AM PDT by TonyRo76 (Proud to be a part of the Reagan Generation. God Bless America!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

OK..The world population is around 7 billion. What if we had had no industrial revolution? What if we had maintained the Roman way of life? Can you imagine 7 billion people cutting down trees and burning them to prepare their food, pottery and so on everyday? Can you imagine 7 billion people eliminating into the rivers?
Can you imagine the amount of food in form of game that would be needed to feed all these people?


23 posted on 08/16/2004 6:25:35 AM PDT by Dallas59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

He then analysed how land elevations changed along the Italian coast due to both plate tectonics and the after-effects of the last ice age. In a paper to appear in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters, he concludes that geological processes pushed the land up by 1.22 metres over last two millennia, which means that the global sea level rose by 13 centimetres.

This seems to me to be making an estimate to the nearest ton and then drawing a conclusion based on that estimate to the exact ounce.


24 posted on 08/16/2004 6:25:53 AM PDT by Phrostie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

"most likely the result of human activity."

Later in this article, it states that there is no proof to support the above. Of course, the 'greenies' have quit reading by then. Climate change is promordial. It's the 'why' part that always gets political, despite the admitted lack of proof.


25 posted on 08/16/2004 6:29:10 AM PDT by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
That is only about 100 years' worth of rise at the present rate of around 1 to 2 millimetres per year, implying that nearly all of it has occurred since 1900. While there is no proof that human activity is to blame, "I can't think of a natural process that would have started in 1900," he says.

The 19th century was an especially cold century. If there was more moisture tied up in snow worldwide, this could account for an increase in the comparatively warmer 20th century--besides, Europe was still warming up from the Little Ice Age in the latter half of the second millennium.
26 posted on 08/16/2004 6:30:55 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76

"More scientific arrogance: "We humans are so frighteningly powerful, we can do things that affect the geologic and astro-physical balance of this fragile little globe we live on. We're making it hotter; we're wiping out forests; we're melting the polar ice caps; we're making the oceans rise, and it's all GEORGE W. BUSH'S fault!!!"
What total crap."

I "mostly" agree. I would like to know who the scientists and environmentalists blame for the dinosaurs extinction, volcano activity back then, the ice age, that HUGE meteor hitting earth like a nuclear bomb back way when. Guess those events where the fault of humans, Bush, Ronald Reagan. I do however blame humans for polluting our rivers and creeks. They are too easy to trash in such short time spans with over development, earth run off and greedy land developers who hook up massive housing track water waste lines to rivers and creeks instead of city water sewer plants.


27 posted on 08/16/2004 6:35:18 AM PDT by SunnySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
Coastal fish pens built by the Romans have unexpectedly provided the most accurate record so far of changes in sea level over the past 2000 years. It appears that nearly all the rise in sea level since Roman times has happened in the past 100 years, and is most likely the result of human activity.

Huh?

While Gregory cautions that this does not prove that global warming is responsible, both he and Lambeck agree that the results fit the rise in ocean volume expected from global warming melting glaciers in the industrial age.

Oh
28 posted on 08/16/2004 6:36:06 AM PDT by Vision ("This is in God's hands now")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks

But how do we explain Sean Penn?


29 posted on 08/16/2004 6:37:27 AM PDT by MP5 (Those guys are fags)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
That is only about 100 years' worth of rise at the present rate of around 1 to 2 millimetres per year, implying that nearly all of it has occurred since 1900. While there is no proof that human activity is to blame, "I can't think of a natural process that would have started in 1900," he says.

How about sunspot activity and increased solar energy output, which has been measured over the last century as considerably higher than in the past?

Oh, but I forgot....you have an agenda to push. Don't let any scientific facts get in the way. ;)

30 posted on 08/16/2004 6:38:47 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
It appears that nearly all the rise in sea level since Roman times has happened in the past 100 years, and is most likely the result of human activity.

Most likely? Hasn't this nimrod ever heard of the Little Ice Age, and the warmer period prior to that, that would have affected sea levels?

31 posted on 08/16/2004 6:38:55 AM PDT by dirtboy (Forget Berger's socks - has ANYONE searched his skin folds for classified documents?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Its Bush's fault.


32 posted on 08/16/2004 6:39:22 AM PDT by wjcsux (Don't be a girly man! Vote Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drawsing

True scientific reports include margins of error. I suspect the data is meaningless when the moe is included.


33 posted on 08/16/2004 6:44:40 AM PDT by Soliton (Alone with everyone else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tlb
Has anyone noticed the Tidal Basin in DC rearing up to swallow the national monuments in the last century ?

Not since Wilbur Mills and Fanne Foxe were fished out.

34 posted on 08/16/2004 6:49:40 AM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Some people go "postal", I tend to go "biblical" on people when I read things like this.

According to scriptures there will be a time when the climate gets hot enough to scorch a man, and the sea levels rise to frightening levels, but according to scriptures, it is because the sun grows brighter and hotter. Not because of any physical thing man is doing to the planet.

It could be that liberals are glomming onto an actual event and attempting to turn it to some political advantage, it could be pure junk science going on and nothing is really changing climate wise. If there is something actually going on, then one can reasonably assume, we may be entering that time foretold when the sun grows hotter.


35 posted on 08/16/2004 6:50:42 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
Great! I've been waiting for a good global warming thread.

Hey you SUV drivers! Get out there and put some miles on those puppies. You guys are slacking off.

Here we are in the middle of August in southern Indiana, a time and an area where temps should be in the 90's daytime and 70's night and I'm having to run the blinking furnance to keep warm!!!

We need MORE global warming not less.

Now get in your SUV's and drive!!!

36 posted on 08/16/2004 7:03:21 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tlb
I recall the plain between the site of Troy and the beach where the Greeks landed is a mile or more wider then in ancient times. Further the area around Alexandria that held the palace of Cleopatra is totally submerged now, and has been for centuries.

Troy was located on the hill of Hisarlik, which in the Bronze Age overlooked a substantial bay. This provided an excellent anchorage at the mouth of the Dardennelles and was thus a natural site for a substantial town. The bay, however, silted up in late antiquity, which is the primary reason the site of Troy became problematic. With modern mapping techniques to identify the Bronze Age shoreline, the site jumps right out at you.

37 posted on 08/16/2004 7:10:04 AM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
It appears that nearly all the rise in sea level since Roman times has happened in the past 100 years, and is most likely the result of human activity.
That's ridiculous. During the medieval warming period sealevel was higher than it is now (by feet), and has since declined, and hasn't budged.

38 posted on 08/16/2004 8:50:49 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76

Someone should ask these "scientists" if a glass of ice water overflows when the ice melts...


39 posted on 08/16/2004 8:53:33 AM PDT by Guillermo (It's the 99% of Mohammedans that make the other 1% look bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tlb
Has anyone noticed the Tidal Basin in DC rearing up to swallow the national monuments in the last century ?
Well said. There are those who believe that when erosion (from the waves which hit the beach continuously) bring down a seaside home, or a lighthouse, that it's a sign of sealevel rise due to global warming. Those who believe that are stone-cold stupid.

40 posted on 08/16/2004 8:55:19 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
The melting of the ice caps is, as you said, another fiction. Antarctica's average ice depth is puffed up by the submerged ice (where most of Antarctica's ice is), which, if it melted, would not do anything to sealevel, other than possibly slightly reducing them. Furthermore, the oceans don't rise due to warming at depth (that's the latest non-factual claim to which the global warming demagogues have retreated) -- the oceans don't warm at depth, they get colder and heavier with minerals and whatnot with depth.
41 posted on 08/16/2004 9:00:27 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Well, I'm 1100 feet above sea level in northern NJ. Bring your jammies if things get wet at your place...


42 posted on 08/16/2004 9:03:06 AM PDT by Pharmboy (History's greatest agent for freedom: The US Armed Forces)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76

good post!


43 posted on 08/16/2004 9:04:54 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Adder; aruanan; dirtboy
Adder -- Did humans cause the "little Ice Age"?

aruanan -- Europe was still warming up from the Little Ice Age in the latter half of the second millennium.

dirtboy -- Most likely? Hasn't this nimrod ever heard of the Little Ice Age, and the warmer period prior to that, that would have affected sea levels?
Well put.
William the Conqueror's Global Warming
by Steven J. Milloy
Lloyd Keigwin, a researcher from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution... concluded that although sea surface temperature (SST) in the northern Saragasso Sea is now about 1 degree centigrade warmer than 400 years ago during the Little Ice Age, it is about 1 degree cooler than about 1,000 years ago during the Medieval Warm Period. Keigwin's conclusions are based on his study of sediment accumulation in the Saragasso Sea... Eleventh century society burned no gasoline. There were no electric power plants to burn coal. No chemical plants emitted volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Airplanes, reputed to emit as much of the greenhouse gases as the eighth most polluting nation, were still 900 years away from being invented.
So, if carbon emissions really were to blame, it would be vastly better for the environment to burn hydrocarbon fuels than it was to burn wood, since there were so few people around then compared to now. :') IOW, the climate is natural.
Caves reveal clues to UK weather
by Tom Heap
At Pooles Cavern in Derbyshire, it was discovered that the stalagmites grow faster in the winter months when it rains more. Alan Walker, who guides visitors through the caves, says the changes in rainfall are recorded in the stalactites and stalagmites like the growth rings in trees. Stalagmites from a number of caves have now been analysed by Dr Andy Baker at Newcastle University. After splitting and polishing the rock, he can measure its growth precisely and has built up a precipitation history going back thousands of years. His study suggests this autumn's rainfall is not at all unusual when looked at over such a timescale but is well within historic variations. He believes politicians find it expedient to blame a man-made change in our weather rather than addressing the complex scientific picture.
I like the closing sentence -- "future decision-making could be made based on scientific data and not on political expediency". I wouldn't count on it, but that would be great.

44 posted on 08/16/2004 9:09:41 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
It appears that nearly all the rise in sea level since Roman times has happened in the past 100 years, and is most likely the result of human activity.

That is only about 100 years' worth of rise at the present rate of around 1 to 2 millimetres per year, implying that nearly all of it has occurred since 1900. While there is no proof that human activity is to blame, "I can't think of a natural process that would have started in 1900," he says.

While Gregory cautions that this does not prove that global warming is responsible, both he and Lambeck agree that the results fit the rise in ocean volume expected from global warming melting glaciers in the industrial age.

LOL… Oh yea, I’d bet the farm on this.

45 posted on 08/16/2004 9:19:01 AM PDT by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomServo; blam; FairOpinion; Ernest_at_the_Beach; SunkenCiv; 24Karet; A.J.Armitage; abner; ...
The reason given for this 2136 year alteration? Isostatic rebound. Nearly the same latitude.
In the shadow of the Moon
New Scientist
30 January 1999
book mentioned in article
At 8.45 on the morning of 15 April 136 BC, Babylon was plunged into darkness when the Moon passed in front of the Sun. An astrologer, who recorded the details in cuneiform characters on a clay tablet, wrote: "At 24 degrees after sunrise-a solar eclipse. When it began on the southwest side, Venus, Mercury and the normal stars were visible. Jupiter and Mars, which were in their period of disappearance, became visible. The Sun threw off the shadow from southwest to northeast." If present-day astronomers use a computer to run the movements of the Earth, Moon and Sun backwards from their present positions, like a movie in reverse, they find something very odd. The total eclipse of 15 April 136 BC should not have been visible from Babylon at all. The zone of totality should have passed over the Spanish island of Mallorca, 48.8 degrees west of Babylon-a difference of more than one-eighth of a complete rotation of the Earth, or 3.25 hours. The only explanation is that the planet's rotation has slowed since 136 BC, making the day longer. Of course, there are many other records of the ancients observing cosmic events, from supernovas to comets, but the value of these sightings to modern science is limited. Reports of eclipses, however, are in a class of their own. If the Earth has accumulated a change in orientation equivalent to an eighth of a turn in just over 2000 years, then we can infer that the day has lengthened by an average of a few milliseconds a century. This is an extraordinarily precise figure to deduce from historical records. In fact, it is without precedent.
Okay, Tom, NOW I'm ready to add it to GGG. ;')
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest
-- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

46 posted on 08/16/2004 9:20:43 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
nearly all the rise in sea level since Roman times has happened in the past 100 years, and is most likely the result of human activity

Einstein published his Special Theory of Relativity in 1905. Coincidence?

47 posted on 08/16/2004 9:28:01 AM PDT by RightWhale (Withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty and establish property rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
They're leaving out one very important point.

Italy has a lot of volcanic activity, and the land rises and sinks. Years ago, National Geographic had an article about the Pelagrean Fields and the Naples region. They had pictures of Roman ruins that had recently submerged, and others that had popped up out of the sea. They were worried that there might be another major event in the region, along the lines of Vesuvius . . .

48 posted on 08/16/2004 9:34:36 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (. . . Ministrix of ye Chace (recess appointment), TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
That is only about 100 years' worth of rise at the present rate of around 1 to 2 millimetres per year, implying that nearly all of it has occurred since 1900. While there is no proof that human activity is to blame, "I can't think of a natural process that would have started in 1900," he says.

The scientific method at its best.

49 posted on 08/16/2004 9:44:34 AM PDT by Nathaniel Fischer (RIP RWR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Totally ignores quite conclusive opposing data from New Zealand.


50 posted on 08/16/2004 9:56:02 AM PDT by Frumious Bandersnatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-134 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