20 Dec 2019, 9:39 pm
blazingstar wrote:
I was referring more to sea level rise. 
Oh I see, yes we have elevated areas called the Dandenong ranges which will be a refuge from rising sea levels. In Sydeny they have the Blue Mountains. Coastal areas in Sydney and Melbourne will be imapacted
21 Dec 2019, 1:02 am
21 Dec 2019, 1:10 am
cyberdad wrote:
blazingstar wrote:
I was referring more to sea level rise.
Oh I see, yes we have elevated areas called the Dandenong ranges which will be a refuge from rising sea levels. In Sydeny they have the Blue Mountains. Coastal areas in Sydney and Melbourne will be imapacted
Quote:
Professional alarmist Tim Flannery in 1996 warned that global warming would drown beachfront houses eight storeys high (see from 4:23):
Anyone with a coastal view from their bedroom window, or their kitchen window, or whereever, is likely to lose their house as a result of that change, so anywhere, any coastal cities, coastal areas, are in grave danger.
But the very next year he bought a house just four or five metres from the edge of the tidal waters around the Hawkesbury estuary:
Anyone with a coastal view from their bedroom window, or their kitchen window, or whereever, is likely to lose their house as a result of that change, so anywhere, any coastal cities, coastal areas, are in grave danger.
But the very next year he bought a house just four or five metres from the edge of the tidal waters around the Hawkesbury estuary:
What a goose. <disgust>
21 Dec 2019, 3:19 am
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
blazingstar wrote:
I was referring more to sea level rise.
Oh I see, yes we have elevated areas called the Dandenong ranges which will be a refuge from rising sea levels. In Sydeny they have the Blue Mountains. Coastal areas in Sydney and Melbourne will be imapacted
Quote:
Professional alarmist Tim Flannery in 1996 warned that global warming would drown beachfront houses eight storeys high (see from 4:23):
Anyone with a coastal view from their bedroom window, or their kitchen window, or whereever, is likely to lose their house as a result of that change, so anywhere, any coastal cities, coastal areas, are in grave danger.
But the very next year he bought a house just four or five metres from the edge of the tidal waters around the Hawkesbury estuary:
Anyone with a coastal view from their bedroom window, or their kitchen window, or whereever, is likely to lose their house as a result of that change, so anywhere, any coastal cities, coastal areas, are in grave danger.
But the very next year he bought a house just four or five metres from the edge of the tidal waters around the Hawkesbury estuary:
What a goose. <disgust>
21 Dec 2019, 3:32 am
is china terraforming you guys in order to make you a special administrative region?
21 Dec 2019, 5:42 pm
Kiprobalhato wrote:
is china terraforming you guys in order to make you a special administrative region?
China operates on long term planning so I suspect their aim is for all the geographic zones in the Pacific and Indian oceans to be within their economic sphere of influence including Australia and New Zealand.
But yeah I get the cause/effect thing, they produce CO2 resulting in fires in Australia. Perhaps a burn't continent and submerged pacific islands are acceptable collateral damage.
21 Dec 2019, 7:01 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Kiprobalhato wrote:
is china terraforming you guys in order to make you a special administrative region?
But yeah I get the cause/effect thing, they produce CO2 resulting in fires in Australia. Perhaps a burn't continent and submerged pacific islands are acceptable collateral damage.
I guess you know more than our expert on climate change and drought correlation.
Quote:
Andrew John Pitman AO is a British-Australian atmospheric scientist. He was born in Bristol in 1964 and educated at Liverpool University. He holds a Postgraduate Certificate in Educational Leadership from Macquarie University.
And it sounds "great" to say the islands are sinking because of CO2 emissions.
The problem is,
Not everyone agrees with your position.
Bummer.
Quote:
No, climate change didn’t cause “5 Whole Pacific Islands” to be swallowed by sea level rise https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/08/ ... evel-rise/
21 Dec 2019, 7:02 pm
Kiprobalhato wrote:
is china terraforming you guys in order to make you a special administrative region?
I doubt it,
But anything/k is possible.
21 Dec 2019, 8:26 pm
Pepe wrote:
I guess you know more than our expert on climate change and drought correlation.
Well I read Pepe...
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-018-0150-4
China has been more proactive on climate change than the US since 2008 because of the smog that's choking their major cities. Prior to that they have been more concerned with industrialisation and were not so concerned about bushfires in Australia or sinking islands (As both Australia and the Pacific are of long term economic interest to China and they have investments across the region I don't think it's in their best interest to see our region become "unproductive"...
21 Dec 2019, 8:36 pm
Pepe wrote:
And it sounds "great" to say the islands are sinking because of CO2 emissions.
The problem is,
Not everyone agrees with your position.
Bummer.
The problem is,
Not everyone agrees with your position.
Bummer.
Still peddling that tired old argument? even the climate denialists have accepted that CO2 is linked to global warming and rising sea levels...what they stand firm on is that humans are not responsible for the CO2
I notice the Trump cheer squad ran away rather fast when I asked some stubborn individuals to provide me the name of one scientist who
i) offers an alternative to man made CO2 emissions being responsible for global warming
ii) is a tenured academic in a recognised university
iii) has a track record in publishing on climate research in recognised peer reviewed journals
iv) has not received $1 or more from contracts, grants or salaries from the fossil fuel industry
It's been 2 yrs now and not one name! must be my turn to use an annoying emoji
21 Dec 2019, 11:56 pm
Pepe wrote:
...
Quote:
No, climate change didn’t cause “5 Whole Pacific Islands” to be swallowed by sea level rise https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/08/ ... evel-rise/
The scale used there is deceiving. Take for instance this plot:
Then compare to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise
Then we realize that in 25 years, the sea level has risen 8.5 cm, which is consistent with the situation shown for Nauru if you would trace a linear regression line from 1993 to 2018. The usage of meter as the vertical axis' scale is simply deceiving.
People tend to think that because it's only 8.5 cm in 25 years, the sea rising is a slow phenomenon. But please ask Californians whether they think it is a slow phenomenon, and they will tell you: no, it's a clear and present danger.
Sea rising is largely imperceptible elsewhere, except in one particular geographic configuration: sandy bluffs. Along the California coast, the sea rising effect is amplified by a factor 15, when it comes to coastal bluffs. That means that if the sea rises by one foot, the bluffs would retreat by 15 feet. While 8.5 cm might not be much elsewhere, it means 1.3 meters of bluff retreat. All of a sudden, the effect is now very real.
Here are three separate bluff collapse incidents just this year, near the Del Mar area in Southern California (all three location within a stretch of about 8 miles, one with 3 fatalities, another one within 3 feet of a train track):
And if you think these are isolated events, here is the list of bluff collapses that I have been able to find, just around the same area.
2015-09-12
https://youtu.be/b43G_zhQ95Q
2016-07-13
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/on-air/as-seen-on/vanessamidday0713_san-diego/54614/
2016-11-08
https://www.10news.com/news/bluff-collapses-onto-del-mar-shoreline
2016-11-30
https://youtu.be/3Pn3bhoP0RY
2018-08-22
https://www.facebook.com/fox5sandiego/posts/514424938969562/
2018-10-01
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/on-air/as-seen-on/new-bluff-collapse-crumbles-near-del-mar-train-tracks_san-diego/152669/
2018-12-10
https://www.facebook.com/ABC10News/posts/302788633695750/
2019-02-15
https://mobile.twitter.com/scripps_ocean/status/1096581540727840768
2019-04-22
https://www.facebook.com/KUSINews/posts/356466714972835/
2019-05-17
https://rumble.com/v7nfix-del-mar-bluff-collapses-feet-from-ocean-view-homes.html
2019-08-02
https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/video/4137694-1-dead-in-encinitas-cliff-collapse/
2019-08-19
https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/crumbling-cliff-caught-on-camera-in-solana-beach
2019-11-29
https://m.facebook.com/watch/?v=2430399390390646&_rdr
And if you think Californians are not worried, think again:
Grim Choices as California Disappears Under Sea Level Rise
https://www.govtech.com/em/safety/-Grim-Choices-as-California-Disappears-Under-Sea-Level-Rise.html
The point is, sea level rising's first casualty is not expensive beach houses or small island nations. Rather, it's the infrastructures on unstable bluffs. What can you do when there is virtually no land to relocate a train line, like the case of Del Mar? One practical solution is to move the train tracks to underground tunnels, which will take decade(s) to complete, at a multi-billion dollar expenditure. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/communities/north-county/sd-no-train-tunnel-20190212-story.html
So, rising sea level is not some distant future issue. When you continue to see people killed by bluff collapses (yep, more people have been killed) and train tracks at a few feet from falling, you know you have a problem, now. And it is perhaps already too late to prevent more disasters from happening.
22 Dec 2019, 7:13 am
22 Dec 2019, 1:16 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
I guess you know more than our expert on climate change and drought correlation.
Well I read Pepe...
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-018-0150-4
Well, I read this:
Quote:
As the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter accounting for approximately 27% of global GHG emissions (excluding LULUCF), China’s actions both at home and abroad have an enormous impact on global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. China’s 2030 Paris Agreement Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) is however rated “Highly Insufficient”. The country's current domestic policies however are headed in a slightly better direction towards an "Insufficient" rating, indicating a significant potential for the country to increase its NDC level of ambition.
In the last few years there had been hopeful signs that China's CO2 emissions were flattening. However, discouragingly, increased fossil fuel consumption drove an estimated 2.3% increase in Chinese CO2 emissions in 2018 and 4% in the first half of 2019, marking a third year of growth after emissions had appeared to level out between 2014 and 2016. Exacerbating this deteriorating picture is the fact that China started construction of 28 GW of new coal-fired power capacity in 2018 after lifting a previous construction ban, bringing its total coal capacity under construction to 245 GW. China’s recent increased coal consumption and development is inconsistent with the Paris Agreement, under which 1.5˚C compatible pathways for non-OECD Asia coal power generation would need to be reduced 63% by 2030 [below 2010 levels], leading to a phase-out by 2037. China’s emissions, like the rest of the world’s, need to peak imminently, and then decline rapidly. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/
In the last few years there had been hopeful signs that China's CO2 emissions were flattening. However, discouragingly, increased fossil fuel consumption drove an estimated 2.3% increase in Chinese CO2 emissions in 2018 and 4% in the first half of 2019, marking a third year of growth after emissions had appeared to level out between 2014 and 2016. Exacerbating this deteriorating picture is the fact that China started construction of 28 GW of new coal-fired power capacity in 2018 after lifting a previous construction ban, bringing its total coal capacity under construction to 245 GW. China’s recent increased coal consumption and development is inconsistent with the Paris Agreement, under which 1.5˚C compatible pathways for non-OECD Asia coal power generation would need to be reduced 63% by 2030 [below 2010 levels], leading to a phase-out by 2037. China’s emissions, like the rest of the world’s, need to peak imminently, and then decline rapidly. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/
cyberdad wrote:
China has been more proactive on climate change than the US since 2008 because of the smog that's choking their major cities. Prior to that they have been more concerned with industrialisation and were not so concerned about bushfires in Australia or sinking islands (As both Australia and the Pacific are of long term economic interest to China and they have investments across the region I don't think it's in their best interest to see our region become "unproductive"...
You do realise that "championing climate change mitigation" does not involve increasing CO2 emission every year by around 30%, right?
You do know what the word "mitigation" means, right?
Quote:
mitigation
noun: mitigation
the action of reducing the severity, seriousness, or painfulness of something.
noun: mitigation
the action of reducing the severity, seriousness, or painfulness of something.
In no way is China "mitigating" CO2 emissions if they are *contributing*, hello. <sigh>
They are mitigating their contribution to planetary plant food.
Probably not even that.
It's probably more correct to say: China is mitigating their increasing contribution to CO2 emissions,
But apparently this is not the case in the last 2 years.
Based on my link, it is safe to say the "Pepo" is right again.
Moit,
I am not arguing for the sake of arguing.
I am making a rational, logical "argument" based on reason.
What has been presented here is clearly nonsense,
Erm, your stuff,
Not mine.
With the assumption: My link is better than your link. Ner, ner, ner ner, ner.
22 Dec 2019, 1:31 pm
22 Dec 2019, 1:41 pm
blazingstar wrote:
The bush fires are not humorous and I apologize.
I thought watching Koala "bears" explode in a puff of smoke was hilarious.
Maybe that is just me.
I'm really not sure where I am going with this post.
I think someone has hacked my account.
22 Dec 2019, 7:28 pm
