Remember the kerfuffle raised by climate change activists over the past three or four decades, alleging that many island chains would soon be submerged beneath the waves due to rising sea levels?
The Guardian was in fine form last June stating that rising oceans will extinguish more than land. “It will kill entire languages,” it added, noting the effect on Pacific islands such as Tuvalu. Those areas of the Earth that were most hospitable to people and languages are now becoming the “least hospitable”.
Silly emotional Guardianista guff of course, but happily it does not seem to apply to Tuvalu. A recent study found that the 101 islands of Tuvalu had grown in land mass by 2.9%. The scientists observed that despite rising sea levels, many shorelines in Tuvalu and neighbouring Pacific atolls have maintained relative stability, “without significant alteration”. A comprehensive re-examination of data on 30 Pacific and Indian Ocean atolls with 709 islands found that none of them had lost any land. Furthermore, the scientists added, there are data that indicate 47 reef islands expanded in size or remained stable over the last 50 years, “despite experiencing a rate of sea-level rise that exceeds the global average”.
The Maldives is also a poster scare for rising sea levels, with the attention-seeking activist Mark Lynas – he of the nonsense claim that 99.9% of scientists agree humans cause all or most climate change – organising an underwater Cabinet meeting of the local Government in 2009. As it happens, the Maldives is one of a number of areas that have seen recent increases in land mass. Other areas include the Indonesian Archipelago, islands along the Indochinese Peninsula coast, and islands in the Red and Mediterranean Seas. Notably, the coastal waters of the Indochinese Peninsula had the most substantial gain, with an increase of 106.28 km2 over the 30-year period. Of the 13,000 islands examined, the researchers found that only around 12% had experienced a significant shoreline shift, with almost equal numbers experiencing either landward (loss) or seaward (gain) movement.
. . .
Sea level rise is not a “predominant” cause of the changing coasts, the scientists note.
There's more at the link.
I find it interesting that the climate change alarmists made claims such as "submerged islands!", then insisted that there was no time to waste, we had to act now, and we had to throw millions (if not billions) of dollars at the problem to "protect vulnerable populations", as well as damage our own economies by cutting back on anything and everything that might contribute to rising sea levels. When research over several years (in some cases, decades) has now proved that their claims were wrong, they're conspicuous by their deafening silence. All the money they gouged out of politically correct governments and "woke" corporations . . . what good did it do? Where did it go? Who benefited most from it? No good asking those questions; they won't answer them - but we all know where the money came from that's kept them employed and living comfortably - some would say high on the hog - all this time.
Almost the entire climate change industry is based on pseudo-scientific twaddle. Go watch the video report at that link. It's the truth.
Peter
Sadly truth is something these crazies seem invulnerable to....they've founded their new religion, dammit, so stop telling me facts!! (sigh) Meanwhile, the rest of us, esp. farmers around the world, get it in the neck to support ther fantastical and fanatical beliefs...
ReplyDeleteIsostatic rebound, maybe?
ReplyDeleteThe sea levels have been rising since the end of the last ice age, at about 3mm or 1/10" per year. It's hard to measure that because there are several factors that complicated the measurement and since many tidal gauges are in ports surrounded by cities, as the cities grow, the land tends to sink, complicating the measurement.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is you'd better darn well hope sea levels are rising because if they're falling it means the next ice age is starting. Year in and year out excessive cold kills more people than heat.
Many of the places that are complaining have driven away business and destroyed their own communities - since, like good socialists everywhere, they are running out of money, they're using this as a way to get money from other people.
ReplyDeleteJonathan
Better than them tipping over because you know, chain reaction.
ReplyDeleteWe’ve known for quite some time that it is all grade A baloney. The question is how do we put the bell on this particular cat?
ReplyDeleteI recently watched a vid from a guy who went to the Marshall Islands as a kind of "this place is kinda weird" travel vlog. Part of it included him claming that within his lifetime (he appears to be late 20's or early 30's) the entire island chain is going to be underwater.
ReplyDeleteSuch a laughable claim, but made with such belief and sincerity.....
Spending some time on an island while in my youth and photos of when said island was taken from the Japanese and the time I was there, simple comparison showed no appreciative sea level rise in 30 years.
ReplyDeleteThen there's other little things, like bridges and seawalls built in the 20's and 30's all along the Intercoastal waterway that show... no appreciative sea level rise since they were built.
The island the Statue of Liberty is on? No appreciative sea level rise since it was built.
And on and on and on.
This information about the corals is nothing new. The thing with corals is, like bamboo, there are growth and die back cycles, measured in years, decades and centuries depending on what particular coral one is looking at. And like multiple cycles all running at the same time there is overlap of growth cycles and overlap of die-back cycles. Again, nothing new, but it generates more grant money to study why the cyclical die-backs could be caused by non-normal causes than to open a friggin book and read that 'staghorn coral has a growth/death cycle of X number of years.'
Dumb-asses. And Panic Artists. All of this has been known since at least the 1900's. Definitely after WWII. Definitively by the 1970s.
But cracking a book and reading a fact generates no mullah for the researcher or for the NGO that funnels the money away from whatever it is supposed to actually be doing.
Dumb-asses and Panic Artists.
I am in my 50s and had an English gentleman in his 70s telling me all about a new berg calving in Antartica yesterday and how scientists were claiming a global 3 m sea level rise as it melts. I remained supremely calm and requested he perform a very simple experiment for me; fill a tumbler with ice, and then water. Mark the water level. Then come back in an hour once the ice has all melted and note where the new level in the tumbler is. I then explained I am a geologist and have studied a little of the changes in climate through hundreds of millions of years - not an expert but have had fundamental education in basic science. I urged him to try that simple experiment, several times, and then mentioned genuine science releases raw data and invites scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteReal climate change issues.
ReplyDeletehttps://theethicalskeptic.com/2020/02/16/the-climate-change-alternative-we-ignore-to-our-peril/
Nobody has built an energy and material balance around Earth that is accurate to more than one digit. These idiots are stating that they can predict the warming of the Earth by less than 1% from 288 K to 290.5 K. I do not trust anything that they generate as their math is incredibly imprecise.
ReplyDeleteAnd that brings up another of my rants. These idiots are using based temperature values (C) instead of using absolute temperature values (K). By using based values, they make things seem much much worse. If they use absolute values, then the supposed problem looks much less devastating.
> The problem is you'd better darn well hope sea levels are rising because if they're falling it means the next ice age is starting. Year in and year out excessive cold kills more people than heat.
ReplyDeleteWe are still living in an ice age. An ice age is defined as when one or both of the Earth's pole are frozen. Having both poles frozen is rare, only happens 11% of the time according to the geologists whom I question.