Tiberius Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 Ok got it. So they're blaming earthquakes. So are you saying global warming is causing earthquakes? nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 nope Ok I'm sorry I missed the part that did say it was anthropogenic. Dredging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 Ok I'm sorry I missed the part that did say it was anthropogenic. Dredging. You missed more than that buddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 You missed more than that buddy Maybe I did but all I saw there was that there is tidal changes and the reasons for that are tectonic activity and climate change. The only mention that I saw that said any of this was manmade was dredging. So are you suggesting we go to dredging credits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 This seems believable to me: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.html And the original article was also convincing That and the originalmarticle aren't consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 That and the originalmarticle aren't consistent. That's fine. Both are generally in line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 That's fine. Both are generally in line Is that a step below consensus? Scientists are generally in line on global warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 That's fine. Both are generally in line No, they're not. There's a significant difference between "one foot per century" and "four feet per century" By analogy, that's would be calling predictions that the Iraq War would have cost "600 billion" and "two trillion" in line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 How many years before Al Gore's oceanfront place is taking on water? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 No, they're not. There's a significant difference between "one foot per century" and "four feet per century" By analogy, that's would be calling predictions that the Iraq War would have cost "600 billion" and "two trillion" in line. But they agree that it is rising and the cause and that its accelerating. And I consider both more authoritative than you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 But they agree that it is rising and the cause and that its accelerating. And I consider both more authoritative than you. What's the cause that they agree on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 But they agree that it is rising and the cause and that its accelerating. And I consider both more authoritative than you. Forget all the crap you read. The Sun causes all the fluctuations in climate. All you need to know so quit propping up a lie so it can be used as a political and financial control mechanism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 But they agree that it is rising and the cause and that its accelerating. And I consider both more authoritative than you. Really? The ten feet of predicted rise at New Orleans and the foot of rise at Hampton Roads are caused by the same thing? How's that again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 How many years before Al Gore's oceanfront place is taking on water? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Hang on....let me go put my egg shells and burnt crusts into a separate container so I can reduce the carbon footprint of humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Those emissions, primarily from the burning of fossil fuels, are causing the ocean to rise at the fastest rate since at least the founding of ancient Rome, the scientists said. They added that in the absence of human emissions, the ocean surface would be rising less rapidly and might even be falling. The increasingly routine tidal flooding is making life miserable in places like Miami Beach; Charleston, S.C.; and Norfolk, Va., even on sunny days. I've read the ancient Romans kept very precise records of tidal flooding on Miami Beach. Apparently Maximinus I liked to stay at the Fontainbleau. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 25, 2016 Author Share Posted February 25, 2016 Really? The ten feet of predicted rise at New Orleans and the foot of rise at Hampton Roads are caused by the same thing? How's that again? Yes, its pretty clear Question for you. Do you agree that C02 is a heat trapping gas in the atmosphere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Yes, its pretty clear Question for you. Do you agree that C02 is a heat trapping gas in the atmosphere? Now you're just back to trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 25, 2016 Author Share Posted February 25, 2016 Now you're just back to trolling. Does that question scare you? Funny, I ask one question and its trolling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Water vapor is a more dominant greenhouse gas than CO2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts