Climate Change Puts Buildings, Coastlines, The North At Most Risk: Report Extreme wea

[chuckChuck]

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

NASA satellite data shows since 1993 that sea level has risen 93 mm.

"Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global warming: the added water from melting ice sheets and glaciers and the expansion of seawater as it warms. The first graph tracks the change in sea level since 1993 as observed by satellites.

The second graph, derived from coastal tide gauge data, shows how much sea level changed from about 1870 to 2000."

A5 no doubt you have the evidence to disprove NASA's data and conclusions on sea level rise. LOL

[Guest]

I'm not claiming to know anything about sea level rise, that is why I keep asking you and DML about this because you are the obvious experts on all things AGW. Even Austranada defers to your expertise on these matters. Which is why I really was hoping you could answer my very simple question.

If someone of your vast knowledge, and acess to unlimited cut and paste articles is unwilling, or unable to provide an answer, I'm left to conclude that the answer must be so unpalatable to your ideology that you refuse to even acknowledge it exists.

So, please take this opportunity to prove me wrong.

And I'm not sure when I ended up in Northern Alberta, or in the backwoods? EDIT, it just occurred to me that perhaps you have been stalking the wrong AlbertaFarmer? Have you successfully tracked down and stalked one of the previous 4 iterations of AlbertaFarmer on Agriville, one who happens to live in the backwoods of northern Alberta?

and he lives in NW Sask ,FFS, a lot further north than you'll. i guess he missed the many times you said where you farmed . you will have to state it in "cut and paste" format ,lol. but he is consistent with the cult's teachings. if you can't win the argument , cut the opponent down instead and call them a denier, knuckledragger,backwoods hick, etc. don't ever let anyone question the extreme leader of the cult

[jazz]

So sea level rise is 2mm per year LOL. That should threaten coastlines in about 10,000 yrs. Earths crust is rising at the same pace.

Why doesnt NASA move inland? Sitting on the florida panhandle seems like a bad idea when they are going to be washed away any day now.

[Guest]

and it was obviously a lot warmer right here at one time , unless big bert the crocodile walked all the way here from florida and died here? maybe he did though, like the arctic fox that just walked across 4400 km of ice thats not there supposedly?
the cards are a fallen for the cult , fast and furious now
these dumb shits don't realize that climate has always changed, alway will. long after they're plant food

[Guest]

So sea level rise is 2mm per year LOL. That should threaten coastlines in about 10,000 yrs. Earths crust is rising at the same pace.

Why doesnt NASA move inland? Sitting on the florida panhandle seems like a bad idea when they are going to be washed away any day now.

oh, don't bring details into the argument , just fear mongering only , please

[AlbertaFarmer5]

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

NASA satellite data shows since 1993 that sea level has risen 93 mm.

"Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global warming: the added water from melting ice sheets and glaciers and the expansion of seawater as it warms. The first graph tracks the change in sea level since 1993 as observed by satellites.

The second graph, derived from coastal tide gauge data, shows how much sea level changed from about 1870 to 2000."

A5 no doubt you have the evidence to disprove NASA's data and conclusions on sea level rise. LOL

As I keep saying, I'm not doubting or denying any data about sea level rise. I'm acknowledging that it really is happening, and that is why it is such a sacred cow to the alarmists, because unlike all the other predictions they have made that stubbornly refuse to cooperate, sea levels just keep on rising, and makes for really dramatic propaganda to scare the masses with, your originally posted report being a perfect example.

All I am asking is how much worse is it thanks to CAGW vs. without? Do you think 100% of SLR is the result of human activities, because that is always the impression the alarmist try to give? Do you "believe" that without elevated CO2, SLR would be zero, and coastal communities would never have to worry about SLR displacing them? How many different ways can I word this simple question?

Instead of answering, all you and DML keep doing is proving my point that you can't possibly question this one because it is all you have left.

[jazz]

And a farmer that doesn't know the water cycle is a scary thing. If ice melts it doesn't just go into the ocean and sit there. A percentage goes to evaporation and water vapour, some will return to ground water, inland lakes could grow. More abundant moisture in the atmosphere could allow some drier areas of the earth to return to permanent vegetation which will then use up that C02 we are so scared of.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And a farmer that doesn't know the water cycle is a scary thing. If ice melts it doesn't just go into the ocean and sit there. A percentage goes to evaporation and water vapour, some will return to ground water, inland lakes could grow. More abundant moisture in the atmosphere could allow some drier areas of the earth to return to permanent vegetation which will then use up that C02 we are so scared of.

What is even scarier, is someone claiming to be a farmer who doesn't comprehend photosynthesis and the carbon cycle...

[AlbertaFarmer5]

More abundant moisture in the atmosphere could allow some drier areas of the earth to return to permanent vegetation which will then use up that C02 we are so scared of.

Remove the word COULD from that statement, global greening is happening at an embarrassing rate as a result of increased CO2, and changing weather patterns. See the Sahel on the border of the Sahara desert as a great example of the myriad benefits of higher CO2. One of those feedbacks that just keeps on giving.

[jazz]

The amount of available freshwater could rise as a result. That would be handy as we add another 4 billion people to the planet that the IPCC doesnt seem to think is a problem.

Its all garbage and it has ensnared some of our least critical thinking people. A group that is growing by leaps and bounds as they drink the MSM pablum daily.