monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@ossobucotemp,

Yes. That's my understanding of it (and it sort of used to be my line of work - studying that stuff).

https://www.theweathernetwork.com/us/news/articles/us-weather/california-sea-levels-may-rise-higher-than-expected/82174/

and yeah, it's about California ... but it matters

Quote:

Wednesday, May 10, 2017, 4:04 - Researchers from the California Ocean Protection Council authority is warning that melting ice shelves in Antarctica could cause sea levels to rise, with the most dramatic increase expected in California.

According to a report by the council’s Science Advisory Team, for every foot of global sea-level rise caused by the melting West Antarctic, sea levels will rise approximately 1.25 feet in the California coast.

Researchers theorize that due to Earth’s rotation and gravitational pull, melting ice in Antarctica — particularly in the western portion — is pulled toward the California coast. This makes rising sea levels more dramatic in the region.

In 2100, sea levels could rise as high as 6.9 feet in San Francisco and 7.1 feet in La Jolla.

link to pdf of full report

http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/rising-seas-in-california-an-update-on-sea-level-rise-science.pdf

3 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

The first step in fighting climate change has to be getting rid of all of the liberals.

No, it's to get rid of the deniers.

2 Replies

@giujohn,

Yes, and we can see it warming every year, because of us...

1 Reply

@ossobucotemp,

You mean to burn, graze or cut the undergrowth at regular times. That's good practice to avoid burning the whole forest, in Mediterranean and OZ forests. Also in California.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

I wonder what their predictions were 10 years ago and how accurate they are now? You do realize that no climate models have been true in the last 20 years but have continued to claim how horrible things will be a decade from now.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

They're not 100% but the overall trendlines have been right for at least the last x years (I did my first report on this subject in 1973).

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

We have had some similarities, re lines of work.

Anyway, far away, we had pretty good times in Venice, and shortly bought a house together, and that lasted for decades.

We lived beach near.

The beach wasn't all that far, it was just there.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Yes.

I, oldie, haven't ability to specify now.. which is an annoying,

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

No, it's to get rid of the deniers.

Ahh...an acolyte of Bill Nye The Fascist Guy.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

No, it's to get rid of the deniers.

The deniers are not the ones who are preventing us from solving any climate problems. All the deniers are doing is questioning fraudulent science.

The liberals are the ones who are prohibiting climate problems from being solved.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Obama the True Believer became president with two years of an absolute lock on congress.

What did he pursue?

A stimulus package to reward his supporters and Obamacare to establish a legacy.

Whether or not you think either are important, could they be more important than the fate of the earth?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

In 2013, if Obama had taken all of the political capital that he wasted in a fruitless temper tantrum against the NRA, and instead used that political capital pursuing climate change legislation, he would have succeeded.

And with successful major legislation in Obama's second term, Hillary would have easily won the 2016 election.

On the other hand, Obama did overrule the Left and start building a handful of nuclear reactors. That will help a little bit on the climate front.

Although that small positive can perhaps be offset by the negative of his opposition to pipelines.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Yes, and we can see it warming every year, because of us...

Every year Gracie??? You mean 1.5 degrees in 137 years...that's .0109489051094891 degrees a year...that's some eyesight ya got there...LOL

2 Replies

@Debra Law,

Comey's firing has nothing to do with his job performance, as it should have before Jan. 20. A week ago he testified to a Congressional Comm., just this past Monday he requested more funds (from the Deputy Att. Gen.) to investigate the Russian-Trump connection, & Sally Yates's unshakeable appearance has Trump sweating.

His post Tweets give away so much. Cool

2 Replies

@jcboy,

Read the letter. This has nothing to do with an investigation. Believe it Trump said so. Cool

0 Replies

I find it interesting that FOX news has intellectual discussions at times.

0 Replies

@giujohn,

I'm not sure you understand the significance of greenhouse gases. Or the concept of "average global temperature". Or the difference between readings on land and readings taken in the sea.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Although that small positive can perhaps be offset by the negative of his opposition to pipelines.

The opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline may have been overly influenced by politics but opposing the Keystone project made environmental sense. "If you build it they will come." Basically the project will lock us into dependency on oil from tar sands for the next thirty years, precisely at the time that we should be developing sustainable sources of energy. There are significant environmental complications from wide-scale development of tar sands as a source of oil.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Your post made my heart stop. I haven't seen that article yet in local paper but as dreadful as the message sadly there are sick f@$ks who see nothing wrong with this brand of perversion. I don't see the penalties as draconian, rather more far too lenient. Even prison inmates find this so abhorant these offenders need their be protected from the other cons.

2 Replies

@glitterbag,

So today we have Trump yukking it up in the Oval Office with Russia's ambassador to the US and Russia's Foreign Minister. (Sure, this happened all the time in previous administrations) The White House press corps was not allowed in for a picture op, but the Russian News Org. TASS was allowed in. The Russians released the photo..........I'm guessing the Rhodes scholar in the Oval Office didn't trust 'fake news' so it was up to Russia to publish. What the f@$ks wrong with this picture????

1 Reply

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know