OMG! We’re all gonna die!
A major U.S. government global warming report due out this week predicts that sea levels could rise as high nearly seven feet by the end of this century, imperiling millions of Americans who live within feet of high-tide levels.
Government scientists say that the rate of sea level rise has doubled since 1992 and is projected to “rise by another 1 to 4 feet in this century.” But this is only the lower end of how much sea levels could rise.
“A wider range of scenarios, ranging from 8 inches to 6.6 feet of rise by 2100, has been suggested for use in risk-based analyses,” according to the Obama administration’s National Climate Assessment (NCA).
“In the U.S., millions of people and many of the nation’s assets related to military readiness, energy, transportation, commerce, and ecosystems are located in areas at risk of coastal flooding because of sea level rise and storm surge,” the NCA said.
Rising sea levels are only some of the problems the NCA warns will come from man-made global warming. Other dangers from a warming world include increasing droughts, storms, floods and tornadoes.
But NCA says that sea level rises pose a special risk because the “U.S. population growth has been greatest in coastal zones and in the arid Southwest, areas that already have been affected by increased risks from climate change.”
“After at least two thousand years of little change, sea level rose by roughly 8 inches over the last century, and satellite data provide evidence that the rate of rise over the past 20 years has roughly doubled,” the NCA continued.
“In the U.S., millions of people and many of the nation’s assets related to military readiness, energy, transportation, commerce, and ecosystems are located in areas at risk of coastal flooding because of sea level rise and storm surge,” the NCA added.
This frightening future can be averted, says the NCA, if mankind phases out its use of fossil fuels — which make up almost 90 percent of the world’s energy needs. In the U.S., more than 80 percent of power is generated by fossil fuels.
NCA’s claim about rising sea levels, however, runs counter to emerging data on the topic. First, satellite data compiled by the University of Colorado shows that sea levels have not been rising faster in the last two decades. While local sea levels may have risen faster or even fallen, there has been no overall acceleration of sea level rises.
“We now have satellite measurements for 20 years which indicate a steady rise of about 3 mm per year, and during that time no acceleration,” said Lennart Bengtsson, a senior research fellow at the Environmental Systems Science Centre at the University of Reading, on the Swedish blog Stockholms Initiativet.
“However, it is important to be clear that this is an average and that there were considerable local variations related to tectonic changes, among others, after the last ice age,” Bengtsson added. “The isostatic adjustment that needs to be done in order to obtain useful data are being evaluated by the experts now. As you can see from the graph, it is clear that we need a relatively long time to obtain a realistic trend, but 20 years is certainly enough.”
Even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change data, which NCA draws from, shows there has been no acceleration in rising sea levels.
“It is very likely that the mean rate was [1.7 millimeters per year] between 1901 and 2010 for a total sea level rise of [0.19 meters],” according to the IPCC’s latest assessment. “Between 1993 and 2010, the rate was very likely higher at [3.2 millimeters per year]; similarly high rates likely occurred between 1930 and 1950.”
“It is likely that global mean sea level has accelerated since the early 1900s, with estimates ranging from 0.000 to 0.013 [millimeters per year],” IPCC added.
Second, some scientists have even suggested there is no relationship between carbon dioxide emissions and sea levels. NCA argues that CO2 heats the ocean and causes sea levels to rise, but a study published in the Journal of Geodesy last year found that sea levels have not risen any faster.
The study found that the sea level has only risen by 1.7 millimeters per year over the last 110 years, all while carbon dioxide concentrations in the air have risen by a third. This suggests that rising carbon concentrations have not impacted the rate at which sea levels are rising.
“For the last 40-50 years strong observational facts indicate virtually stable sea level conditions,” said Nils-Axel Mörner, former head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University. ”The Earth’s rate of rotation records a mean acceleration from 1972 to 2012, contradicting all claims of a rapid global sea level rise, and instead suggests stable, to slightly falling, sea levels.”
Even though the nation’s average temperature has risen by as much as 1.9 degrees since record keeping began in 1895, it’s in the big, wild weather where the average person feels climate change the most, said co-author Katharine Hayhoe, a Texas Tech University climate scientist.
Extreme weather like droughts, storms and heat waves hit us in the pocketbooks and can be seen by our own eyes, she said. And it’s happening a lot more often lately. The report says the intensity, frequency and duration of the strongest Atlantic hurricanes have increased since the early 1980s, but it is still uncertain how much of that is from man-made warming. Winter storms have increased in frequency and intensity and shifted northward since the 1950s, it says.
Also, heavy downpours are increasing – by 71 percent in the Northeast. Heat waves, such as those in Texas in 2011 and the Midwest in 2012, are projected to intensify nationwide. Droughts in the Southwest are expected to get stronger. Sea level has risen 8 inches since 1880 and is projected to rise between 1 foot and 4 feet by 2100.
The political viability of climate change denial gets more preposterous by the day, which is not to say that it doesn’t remain effective. We are gradually coming to a consensus of denial in which we see the effects of climate change as a series of random phenomena, to be studied individually, but never to be linked effectively enough to require national action.
The report also says “climate change threatens human health and well-being in many ways.” Those include smoke-filled air from more wildfires, smoggy air from pollution, more diseases from tainted food, water, mosquitoes and ticks. And then there’s more pollen because of warming weather and the effects of carbon dioxide on plants. Ragweed pollen season has lengthened by 24 days in the Minnesota-North Dakota region between 1995 and 2011, the report says. In other parts of the Midwest, the pollen season has gotten longer by anywhere from 11 days to 20 days.
Watch your evening news. I will guarantee you that, some time this summer, you will see EyeCenter News 15 do a story on what a terrible season this is for allergy sufferers, complete with citizens’ sneezing on camera. I will be amazed if the news story mentions this report at all. Luckily, though, Tiger Beat On The Potomac has its eye on what’s really important — how the president will sell the science. And, of course, experts disagree.
And a decided few skeptics have been particularly outspoken. For instance, John Coleman, the now-retired founder of the Weather Channel, has called global warming “the greatest scam in history.” One explanation Seitter has been hearing privately – and which more than one meteorologist also shared with POLITICO – is skepticism over climate modeling that tries to predict changes decades down the road. At least mathematically, these models aren’t much different from the modeling that TV meteorologists use to forecast weather mere days in advance, which often can prove challenging to do accurately.
“They know their own models become unreliable very quickly, and it makes it hard for them to become comfortable with a lot of the climate modeling being used to forecast many years rather than just a handful of days,” Seitter said. Climate researchers counter that climate – which changes over decades and centuries – is much different from day-to-day weather.
“Counter”? It is an undeniable fact that climate is “different from day-to-day weather.” That’s not a proposition worthy of serious debate.
Those of us who have chronicled the global warming hoax, now called “climate change”, know that it is based on decades of lies about carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gas” with predictions that the Earth will heat up and cause massive problems unless those emissions are drastically reduced by not using coal, oil and natural gas.
Two American think tanks, The Heartland Institute and the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) have been among those exposing those lies for years. The lies have been generated and led by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“Despite the panel’s insistence that the Earth is getting hotter, five different datasets show that there have been no observable warming for 17 and a half years even as carbon dioxide levels have risen 12%,” notes Christopher Monckton, a science advisor to Britain’s former Prime Minister Thatcher. “The discrepancy between prediction and observation continues to grow.”
Recently, two Chinese assistant professors of economics, Fuhai Hong and Xiaojian Zhao, were published in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics. Their paper, “Information Manipulation and Climate Agreements”, openly advocated lying about global warming/climate change in order to get nations to sign on to the International Environmental Agreement.
“It appears that news media and some pro-environmental organizations,” they noted, “have the tendency to accentuate or even exaggerate the damage caused by climate change. This article provides a rationale for this tendency.”
Craig Rucker, CFACT’s Executive Director, responded to the Chinese authors saying “They’re shameless.” Theirs and others ends-justify-the-means tactics reflects the attitudes and actions of environmental organizations and serves as a warning to never accept anything they say on any aspect of this huge hoax.
CFACT’s President and co-founder, David Rothbard, noted that “Global warming skeptics have long charged that alarmists are over-hyping the dangers of climate change.” How long? Back in 1989, the late Stanford University professor, Stephen Schneider, said, “So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ which we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance between being effective and being honest.”
There is no “right balance” between telling lies and telling the truth when it comes to science or any other aspect of our lives. Suffice to say that thousands of scientists who participated in the IPCC reports over the years supported the lies, but many have since left and some have openly denounced the reports.
As the latest IPCC summary of its report has garnered the usual verbatim media coverage of its outlandish predictions, The Heartland Institute has released its own 1,062 page report from the “Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) called “Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts. An 18-page summery is available at http://climatechangereconsidered.org.
Among its findings:
Atmospheric carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
There is little or no risk of increasing food insecurity due to global warming or rising atmospheric CO2 levels.
Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels do not pose a significant threat to aquatic life.
A modest warming of the planet will result in a net reduction of human mortality from temperature-related events.
Based on hundreds of peer-reviewed studies, the NIPCC report is free of the lies that are found in the IPCC report whose studies have been, at best, dubious, and at worst, deliberately deceptive.
In light of the natural cooling cycle the Earth has been in that is good news and it will be even better news when the planet emerges from the cycle that reflects the lower levels of radiation from the Sun.
On March 31, CNS News reported that “The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s latest report estimates it will cost developed nations an additional $100 billion each year to help poorer nations adapt to the devastating effects of ‘unequivocal’ global warming, including food shortages, infrastructure breakdown, and civil violence. But that figure was deleted from the report’s executive summary after industrial nations, including the United States, objected to the high price tag.”
The price tag reveals the IPCC’s real agenda, the transfer of funds from industrial nations to those less developed. It’s about the money and always has been. It’s not global warming the planet needs to survive, it is the costly lies about it.