80% of California Surf Spots Gone with 3 Feet of Sea Level Rise

Bohter

Michael Peterson status
Mar 7, 2006
2,665
232
63
Wrong

From NOAA

Most people are surprised to learn that, just as the surface of the Earth is not flat, the surface of the ocean is not flat, and that the surface of the sea changes at different rates around the globe. For instance, the absolute water level height is higher along the West Coast of the United States than the East Coast.
That "article" is somewhat confusing.....mixing rates of change with absolute water level heights....whatever that means. Take a look at the cross-section of the Panama Canal.....locks go up the same amount, right at 85 ft, as down eh.

So what's the difference in sea level between the west and east coasts again? Is there one?
 

elcalvo

Michael Peterson status
Mar 16, 2004
3,314
436
83
NE
On the East Coast, a 3 foot rise in sea level would lessen the drag caused by our shallow continental shelf and thus improve the quality of our waves.
 

jkb

Tom Curren status
Feb 22, 2005
10,042
8,981
113
Central California
Japanese climate scientist

Just saw this today.
Perhaps not every climate scientist is convinced that we know the future. :unsure:
He's absolutely correct that climate models can be flat out wrong. However, that doesn't disprove climate change. I've said this before and I'll say it again.

Science isn't very good at proving something, but it is excellent at disproving things. So while science can't conclusively prove that AGW is real, it can look at the null hypothesis (that increases in carbon dioxide will not cause warming) and refute it.

Here are a few key facts:

-CO2 is a greenhouse gas
-Since the Industrial revolution, CO2 levels have increased 40% in the atmosphere
-Physics tells us that a doubling of our atmospheres CO2 will increase the surface temperature by 1.2*C

With these 3 simple facts, the null hypothesis is disproven.

What can be argued is how the climate will react to this increase in CO2 since the Earth's climate is very complex and some feedback loops are not known with a degree of certainty (this is where all those models come in).

What most deniers do is use the uncertainty in the feedback loops as proof that AGW isn't real, and that's bullshit.