Sea level rise: It's worse than we th...

Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought

There are 3768 comments on the New Scientist story from Jul 2, 2009, titled Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought. In it, New Scientist reports that:

FOR a few minutes David Holland forgets about his work and screams like a kid on a roller coaster.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at New Scientist.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2786 Apr 20, 2013
Do politicians or scientist have a vested interest in a compliant population or an intelligent and informed citizenry?

Make decisions based on facts not fears.
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#2787 Apr 20, 2013
The experts say it is much worse than we thought.

These forecasts do not cause me to be afraid.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2788 Apr 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>And cut economic activity by 80%:
.
<quoted text>Cape and trade CO2, that's failed everywhere its tried, too easy to cheat.
A new tax would take money out of the consumer's hands, that demand will go to government, not the market where it does good.
.
<quoted text>To the left, invest doesn't mean using your own money to grow and protect capital, they mean using your money; government spending and your taxes. I oppose investing in green energy, let the market work without government interference. We've had enough investing in green energy, maybe better we should invest in fossil fuel.
.
<quoted text>I don't like lighter, slower and less powerful cars; why not dump conservation and encourage the production and use of energy and fuel? Why perpetuate panic when we've got all the oil, coal and gas we need?
Hybrid cars have more than one motor moving your car, more systems to break down. Solar power won't move cars and batteries are too heavy and inefficient.
Dump fuel efficiency, better to have market efficiency.
.
<quoted text>Like we haven't spent billions doing this already? How many green buildings do you want?
Worry about your own home, get government out of the markets, let people live as they like.
.
<quoted text>Taxis are the only form of public transportation that don't require government subsidy. Governments make money off taxi licenses.
Quit forcing people into densely populated cities and out of our cars. We love our cars as much as you love climate.
So why are they still searching for fossil fuels? They spent last year almost half a trillion dollars when only a quarter of what's known could be burned in any conceivable future?

So you love cars more than climate. We knew that already. Duh.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2789 Apr 20, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
The experts say it is much worse than we thought.
These forecasts do not cause me to be afraid.
Fair Game: "...vigorously defending statements or positions they know to be illogical or untrue."

Insurance rates are against you. Duh.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2790 Apr 20, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
So why are they still searching for fossil fuels? They spent last year almost half a trillion dollars when only a quarter of what's known could be burned in any conceivable future?
So you love cars more than climate. We knew that already. Duh.
Fossil fuels are so useful and profitable, they'll always be needed and used. New production techniques keep down costs. We have all the oil we'll ever need already on the continent. And now we're able to export more.

The Alarmists are working with OPEC, to create a false sense of rarity to justify higher energy prices.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2791 Apr 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Fossil fuels are so useful and profitable, they'll always be needed and used. New production techniques keep down costs. We have all the oil we'll ever need already on the continent. And now we're able to export more.
The Alarmists are working with OPEC, to create a false sense of rarity to justify higher energy prices.
Huh??

You continue to be reality-challenged.

It's still true that half a trillion $$$$ they spent last year alone in fossil-fuels search when only a quarter of what's known can be burned in any conceivable future.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2792 Apr 20, 2013
You don't need to search for fossil fuel, it's always available at the pump or for the utility. Only by day solar and when the breeze's right wind are next to useless. We already have stored solar power in oil, coal and gas.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#2793 Apr 20, 2013
Correction: Two-thirds of a trillion dollars, not half a trillion dollars

"Two-thirds of a trillion" $$$$ were spent last year alone in fossil-fuels exploration when only a quarter of that's known can be burned in any conceivable future.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#2794 Apr 20, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Fossil fuels are so useful and profitable, they'll always be needed and used. New production techniques keep down costs. We have all the oil we'll ever need already on the continent. And now we're able to export more.
The Alarmists are working with OPEC, to create a false sense of rarity to justify higher energy prices.
And your proof of collusion with OPEC?

Why do you lie?

Exporting more won't bring my costs down, quite the contrary.

Why do you lie?

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2795 Apr 20, 2013
OPEC and gcaveman1 both share the same goal, making fossil fuels seem rare, increasing prices.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#2796 Apr 21, 2013
Firms 'own unburnable fossil fuels'...
... there is a danger of a carbon "bubble."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment...
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#2797 Apr 21, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
OPEC and gcaveman1 both share the same goal, making fossil fuels seem rare, increasing prices.
Lyin' brian gets paid by the post. Content doesn't matter.

It's a good thing. There is no content.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2798 Apr 22, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Lyin' brian gets paid by the post. Content doesn't matter. It's a good thing. There is no content.
What can't you understand about OPEC wanting to make fossil fuel use rare and precious the same as the Greens? Does that weird coincidence freak you out?
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#2799 Apr 22, 2013
[QUOTE who="lyin' brian"]...... create a false sense of rarity......[/QUOTE]

We should limit oil well depths to 1000 feet, since 'lyin' brian' tells us of the great quantities of oil that flow over our feet. We're wasting money drilling deeper. Just use a child's Erector set to get the oil. Our ever newest technologies must be finding oil near the surface, like coal deposits are near the surface.

Never mind the following, since it can't be true:
The average oil well depth in the 1960's was less than 2500 feet. Presently, the average oil well depth is close to 8000 feet.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#2800 Apr 22, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
It's still true that half a trillion $$$$ they spent last year alone in fossil-fuels search.....
Can't be true.

'lyin' brian' says the oil is flowing over our shoes. Oil will always be available at the gas station.'lyin' brian' says so. Oil wells are getting shallower all the time.'lyin' brian' says so.'lyin' brian' must be believed.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#2801 Apr 22, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't be true.
'lyin' brian' says the oil is flowing over our shoes. Oil will always be available at the gas station.'lyin' brian' says so. Oil wells are getting shallower all the time.'lyin' brian' says so.'lyin' brian' must be believed.
You are right. It is actually .67 tn $$$, i.e. MORE. I checked the figure that was in UK money.

b_gone is still paid to lie here. The 'dirt' is gone like tina, ff, moth, gordy, kalie, etc. except for their judging still in icons.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2803 May 6, 2013
Where's tina ?

Using 1992 as a starting point, John Boon projects that the sea level at Norfolk could rise about 2 feet by 2050.

That follows thousands of years in which the sea level went up only about a foot a century.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2805 May 7, 2013
You can create a trend of any slope if you pick the right start and end dates. Don't panic, learn to swim.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2806 May 7, 2013
b_gone is a goner; when will it end!

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2807 May 7, 2013
SpaceBlues won't engage the issue, a slope is defined by the start and end points. Instead, he prefers ad hominem fallacies, irrationality, insults and defamation.

If you believe in science, cite the most compelling experiment you've found for climate change mitigation.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Oceanography Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Scientists Beg for Climate Action (Dec '07) Thu indict EXXON 1,863
Lost in the sea Sep '16 clement 1
News The world's clouds are in different places than... Jul '16 Too Easy 14
News With La Nina around the corner, dry weather in ... Jun '16 Kev 1
News new Scientists find minivan-sized sponge, world... (May '16) May '16 Jack 8
News As Canada probes Haida Gwaii ocean fertilizing,... (Apr '16) Apr '16 lotsa fish poop p... 1
News El Nino, La Nina patterns may be keys to predic... (Apr '16) Apr '16 Go Blue Forever 1
More from around the web