Ocean rise and ice melt accelerating....

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, golly, if all those smart scientists, and you, want to reorder our entire economy, to save us, it'd be nice to know what we'll get for our money.

Then go read something once in a while, Todderino.

You want us to spend trillions, and you can't show the benefit?

Hilarious!!!

I want to spend trillions?


Tooddsterinoroni, why do you go on the internet, invent fake characters, and debate them> This seems like freakish behavior, for a grown man.

Also... after all of this time prattling on about climate change... all of the time you've spent... how are you so fucking utterly ignorant of ANY of it?

I want to spend trillions?

You don't?

On windmills?

You tell me what you want us to waste our money on.......

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then go read something once in a while, Todderino.

You want us to spend trillions, and you can't show the benefit?

Hilarious!!!

I want to spend trillions?


Tooddsterinoroni, why do you go on the internet, invent fake characters, and debate them> This seems like freakish behavior, for a grown man.

Also... after all of this time prattling on about climate change... all of the time you've spent... how are you so fucking utterly ignorant of ANY of it?

I want to spend trillions?

You don't?

On windmills?

You tell me what you want us to waste our money on.......

Why? You can go piss up a rope, for all I care.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You want us to spend trillions, and you can't show the benefit?

Hilarious!!!

I want to spend trillions?


Tooddsterinoroni, why do you go on the internet, invent fake characters, and debate them> This seems like freakish behavior, for a grown man.

Also... after all of this time prattling on about climate change... all of the time you've spent... how are you so fucking utterly ignorant of ANY of it?

I want to spend trillions?

You don't?

On windmills?

You tell me what you want us to waste our money on.......

Why? You can go piss up a rope, for all I care.

But....the children......the rising water......the ice caps.......

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The cost to taxpayers of flooding, the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, the cost of insurance rates, the cost of destroyed property...

.... Look, Toddster-makin-copies, I long ago abandoned any attempt to appeal to anyone's compassion or empathy. This is 'Murica now, where those things are bad words. i'll stick to the numbers, like dollars and deaths. Just for you, my little sociopath-in-waiting.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The cost to taxpayers of flooding, the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, the cost of insurance rates, the cost of destroyed property...

.... Look, Toddster-makin-copies, I long ago abandoned any attempt to appeal to anyone's compassion or empathy. This is 'Murica now, where those things are bad words. i'll stick to the numbers, like dollars and deaths. Just for you, my little sociopath-in-waiting.

The cost to taxpayers of flooding, the cost of rebuilding infrastructure

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

i'll stick to the numbers, like dollars and deaths.

Apparently....you won't.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

You ask a lot of questions!

 

[Wyatt earp]

The cost to taxpayers of flooding, the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, the cost of insurance rates, the cost of destroyed property...

You do know it will happen regardless, if man was here or not right??????

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

You ask a lot of questions!

You avoid a lot of questions. Is it because you're an idiot?

 

[Old Rocks]

The cost to taxpayers of flooding, the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, the cost of insurance rates, the cost of destroyed property...

You do know it will happen regardless, if man was here or not right??????

What a liar you are. Without the GHGs put in the atmosphere by man, the ocean levels would be very slowly decreasing as the glaciers received and retained more snow. It is the GHGs that are creating the present warming. That has repeatedly been proven by the scientists. Ignorant deniers like you have failed to show that this is not the case, and all you are capable of doing is flapping yap, and showing yourselves for fools and tools.

 

[Old Rocks]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

Dumb ass, how the hell do you explain the fact that Houston had a 100 year flood in 2015, a 100 year flood in 2016, and then a 1000 year flood in 2017. Now what are the chances of that? Care to to a little statistical math? That says there was a forcing agent that changed the math of that happening. Now you answer what that forcing agent was.

 

[Old Rocks]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

You ask a lot of questions!

You avoid a lot of questions. Is it because you're an idiot?

Is it because you are an idiot that you cannot see the reason that Texas is investing in more and more windmills and solar farms? And when the subsidies end, will continue to invest in wind and solar. The world will invest trillions in the renewables because it is the most economical form of generation right now. And will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

 

[westwall]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Amazingly enough, when you look at their methods they all have one thing in common. They are all eventually modified by computer models. Huh. Imagine that. Take real data, massage it through the magic of computer modelling, and voila, you have the result you desire. But....it ain't data. It's computer derived fiction.


Methods
Altimeter Data Processing.
The altimeter data were processed following the recommendations set forth in ref. 15, including the latest orbits, tide models, sea-state bias models, water vapor corrections, etc. Following ref. 15, the “cal mode” correction to the TOPEX data was not applied, because the correction degraded comparisons to tide-gauge sea-level measurements, and because later investigation showed it should not have been applied in the first place. Not applying the cal-mode correction slightly increases the estimated sea-level acceleration. Measured GMSL was corrected for the effects of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment with a global model, which increased the GMSL rate by 0.25 mm/y (25).

Pinatubo GMSL Contribution.
The computation of the effects of the eruption of Mount Pinatubo on GMSL using the NCAR LE of models (21) is described in ref. 12. Because this model ends in 2010, we assumed an exponential decay from 2010 to the present. This correction increases the quadratic acceleration estimate by 0.02 mm/y2. The error in this correction was estimated from the variance of the NCAR LE at 0.01 mm/y2.

Computation of the ENSO GMSL Contribution.
We removed the effects of ENSO and Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)-related variations on GMSL by computing a correction. This correction was computed via a joint cyclostationary empirical orthogonal function (CSEOF) analysis of altimeter GMSL, GRACE land water storage, and Argo-based thermosteric sea level from 2005 to present. The physical interpretation of these two modes is discussed in ref. 26, although here the understanding of the modal decomposition is extended through the inclusion of additional variables. The two leading CSEOF modes were subsequently projected onto the altimeter data from 1993 to present and averaged over the global ocean to arrive at what we refer to as a GMSL ENSO correction. Applying this correction reduced the quadratic acceleration value by 0.033 mm/y2. Based on the ENSO and PDO variability during the altimeter record, a positive acceleration is expected due both to the presences of two large El Niños at either end of the record and the recent shift from the positive to negative phase of the PDO. To allow for the possibility that this correction might have not removed all of the ENSO signal and also based on sensitivity tests of the decomposition, we carry an error estimate of 0.01 mm/y2 for this correction.

Calculation of Acceleration.
We perform a least-squares fit of a quadratic using a time epoch of 2005.0 (the midpoint of the altimeter time series), where acceleration is twice the quadratic coefficient. All of the data were weighted equally––weighting the data based on error estimates from tide-gauge differences did not appreciably change the results.

Tide-Gauge–Based Altimeter Acceleration Error Estimate.
The altimeter sea-level measurements were differenced with individual tide-gauge sea-level measurements, and then stacked and globally averaged to detect changes in the altimeter instrument behavior, assuming the tide-gauge measurements are perfect, following ref. 13. While there are overlaps between each of the four satellites in the time series, allowing instrumental biases to be determined and removed, there was no overlap in early 1999 when the TOPEX altimeter was switched from Side A to Side B of its electronics. As a consequence we estimated a bias here of 5.7 mm by leveling the TOPEX Side A tide-gauge differences to an average of the Jason-1–3 differences. This is a slightly different value than was found in ref. 15 (5 mm) because our analysis technique was different. Once this adjustment was made, an AR1 noise model was used to estimate the 1σ error in the quadratic acceleration coefficient of 0.011 mm/y2. This is almost certainly a conservative error estimate because it assumes the tide-gauge sea-level measurements are perfect.

Acceleration Validation.
We computed a rough validation (Table 2) of the altimeter-based acceleration estimate by comparing to other datasets, although they cover different time periods. We used the GRACE mascon data from ref. 27 and computed time series by averaging the mascons over (i) Greenland, (ii) Antarctica, and (iii) mountain glaciers and small ice caps (areas updated from ref. 28).

Constraining the thermosteric contribution to sea-level acceleration is hampered by the large discrepancies and related uncertainties that exist in ocean heat content datasets (20, 29). The root cause of these discrepancies has been attributed to errors in the raw data and mapping methods used to infill data gaps, which are particularly large in the southern oceans, but substantial progress has been made recently in dealing with these issues (30, 31). Given the systematic biases imparted by both data errors and infilling methods, a simple averaging across available datasets is not an effective means of minimizing bias (32). Rather, the optimization of mapping methods is likely to offer a suitable best estimate for quantifying both thermosteric contributions to acceleration and their uncertainty. Here we use the estimate provided from ref. 23. Comparison with independent data, such as the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiative balance also provides insight (32). We find the TOA reconstruction of ref. 33 to be broadly consistent with the value of acceleration derived from ref. 23.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

Dumb ass, how the hell do you explain the fact that Houston had a 100 year flood in 2015, a 100 year flood in 2016, and then a 1000 year flood in 2017. Now what are the chances of that? Care to to a little statistical math? That says there was a forcing agent that changed the math of that happening. Now you answer what that forcing agent was.

Hurricane Harvey stalled, dumped 60 inches of rain. Nothing to do with CO2. Idiot!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

You ask a lot of questions!

You avoid a lot of questions. Is it because you're an idiot?

Is it because you are an idiot that you cannot see the reason that Texas is investing in more and more windmills and solar farms? And when the subsidies end, will continue to invest in wind and solar. The world will invest trillions in the renewables because it is the most economical form of generation right now. And will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

The world will invest trillions in the renewables because it is the most economical form of generation right now.

You just can't prove it.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Wait, not until 2100. No problem, I will be dead and most likely so will my kids, and since I have no grandkids yet....well I don’t care. Drill baby drill!

 

[Old Rocks]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

Dumb ass, how the hell do you explain the fact that Houston had a 100 year flood in 2015, a 100 year flood in 2016, and then a 1000 year flood in 2017. Now what are the chances of that? Care to to a little statistical math? That says there was a forcing agent that changed the math of that happening. Now you answer what that forcing agent was.

Hurricane Harvey stalled, dumped 60 inches of rain. Nothing to do with CO2. Idiot!

Now look, young fool, it had everything to do with global warming and the melt in the Arctic.

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Amazingly enough, when you look at their methods they all have one thing in common. They are all eventually modified by computer models. Huh. Imagine that. Take real data, massage it through the magic of computer modelling, and voila, you have the result you desire. But....it ain't data. It's computer derived fiction.


Methods
Altimeter Data Processing.
The altimeter data were processed following the recommendations set forth in ref. 15, including the latest orbits, tide models, sea-state bias models, water vapor corrections, etc. Following ref. 15, the “cal mode” correction to the TOPEX data was not applied, because the correction degraded comparisons to tide-gauge sea-level measurements, and because later investigation showed it should not have been applied in the first place. Not applying the cal-mode correction slightly increases the estimated sea-level acceleration. Measured GMSL was corrected for the effects of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment with a global model, which increased the GMSL rate by 0.25 mm/y (25).

Pinatubo GMSL Contribution.
The computation of the effects of the eruption of Mount Pinatubo on GMSL using the NCAR LE of models (21) is described in ref. 12. Because this model ends in 2010, we assumed an exponential decay from 2010 to the present. This correction increases the quadratic acceleration estimate by 0.02 mm/y2. The error in this correction was estimated from the variance of the NCAR LE at 0.01 mm/y2.

Computation of the ENSO GMSL Contribution.
We removed the effects of ENSO and Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)-related variations on GMSL by computing a correction. This correction was computed via a joint cyclostationary empirical orthogonal function (CSEOF) analysis of altimeter GMSL, GRACE land water storage, and Argo-based thermosteric sea level from 2005 to present. The physical interpretation of these two modes is discussed in ref. 26, although here the understanding of the modal decomposition is extended through the inclusion of additional variables. The two leading CSEOF modes were subsequently projected onto the altimeter data from 1993 to present and averaged over the global ocean to arrive at what we refer to as a GMSL ENSO correction. Applying this correction reduced the quadratic acceleration value by 0.033 mm/y2. Based on the ENSO and PDO variability during the altimeter record, a positive acceleration is expected due both to the presences of two large El Niños at either end of the record and the recent shift from the positive to negative phase of the PDO. To allow for the possibility that this correction might have not removed all of the ENSO signal and also based on sensitivity tests of the decomposition, we carry an error estimate of 0.01 mm/y2 for this correction.

Calculation of Acceleration.
We perform a least-squares fit of a quadratic using a time epoch of 2005.0 (the midpoint of the altimeter time series), where acceleration is twice the quadratic coefficient. All of the data were weighted equally––weighting the data based on error estimates from tide-gauge differences did not appreciably change the results.

Tide-Gauge–Based Altimeter Acceleration Error Estimate.
The altimeter sea-level measurements were differenced with individual tide-gauge sea-level measurements, and then stacked and globally averaged to detect changes in the altimeter instrument behavior, assuming the tide-gauge measurements are perfect, following ref. 13. While there are overlaps between each of the four satellites in the time series, allowing instrumental biases to be determined and removed, there was no overlap in early 1999 when the TOPEX altimeter was switched from Side A to Side B of its electronics. As a consequence we estimated a bias here of 5.7 mm by leveling the TOPEX Side A tide-gauge differences to an average of the Jason-1–3 differences. This is a slightly different value than was found in ref. 15 (5 mm) because our analysis technique was different. Once this adjustment was made, an AR1 noise model was used to estimate the 1σ error in the quadratic acceleration coefficient of 0.011 mm/y2. This is almost certainly a conservative error estimate because it assumes the tide-gauge sea-level measurements are perfect.

Acceleration Validation.
We computed a rough validation (Table 2) of the altimeter-based acceleration estimate by comparing to other datasets, although they cover different time periods. We used the GRACE mascon data from ref. 27 and computed time series by averaging the mascons over (i) Greenland, (ii) Antarctica, and (iii) mountain glaciers and small ice caps (areas updated from ref. 28).

Constraining the thermosteric contribution to sea-level acceleration is hampered by the large discrepancies and related uncertainties that exist in ocean heat content datasets (20, 29). The root cause of these discrepancies has been attributed to errors in the raw data and mapping methods used to infill data gaps, which are particularly large in the southern oceans, but substantial progress has been made recently in dealing with these issues (30, 31). Given the systematic biases imparted by both data errors and infilling methods, a simple averaging across available datasets is not an effective means of minimizing bias (32). Rather, the optimization of mapping methods is likely to offer a suitable best estimate for quantifying both thermosteric contributions to acceleration and their uncertainty. Here we use the estimate provided from ref. 23. Comparison with independent data, such as the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiative balance also provides insight (32). We find the TOA reconstruction of ref. 33 to be broadly consistent with the value of acceleration derived from ref. 23.

I see. So this is also modified by computer programs? LOL

That's the conclusion of a team of University of Miami scientists that used a wealth of data from everything from tidal records and rain gauges to insurance claims to look at how often Miami Beach's streets have ended up underwater. They found that since 2006, rain-based floods have increased by 33 percent and tidal flooding by an astounding 400 percent.

"That's a surprising number," says Dr. Shimon Wdowinski, the study's lead author. "Nobody can say whether it will continue increasing at this rate. But this is still clearly a significant increase in flooding events."

Miami Beach's Tidal Flooding Has Jumped by 400 Percent in the Past Decade

 

[Old Rocks]

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?
Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

You ask a lot of questions!

You avoid a lot of questions. Is it because you're an idiot?

Is it because you are an idiot that you cannot see the reason that Texas is investing in more and more windmills and solar farms? And when the subsidies end, will continue to invest in wind and solar. The world will invest trillions in the renewables because it is the most economical form of generation right now. And will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

The world will invest trillions in the renewables because it is the most economical form of generation right now.

You just can't prove it.

There it is.