Thread: Australia mean sea levels and IPCC report

You know I read the sea level charts and using the current data that is suggesting that in about 500 years we may see a 1 metre sea (mean) level rise. I don't know about anyone else, but I guess I won't be around to view the results of that estimate. More than that I don't know what changes will occur in the management of the whole of humanity or what technological advances that may be employed to manage the consequences of sea level rise.

I do however know that The Netherlands has a significant proportion of it's land that is below current sea level and that much of it was reclaimed from the sea in the last century. I also know that the level of the lagoon in which Venice Italy is located, is now being controlled by barrages to keep the level of the lagoon from innundating the city.

What I also notice is that many of the people denigrating scientists or science have never studied science or the disciplines of scientific experimentation or, are even able to tell the difference between an "experiment" or a "study" and neither do they care if it suits their argument. I may even be so bold to suggest that many people denigrating science don't even have a decent ability to use the English language or conform to it's grammatical norms.

I have studied science and have worked with the United Nations (World Health Organisation) and have to say that I have not found the suggested conspiracies or attributes in either the UN or science as a whole.

Diana

I also know that the level of the lagoon in which Venice Italy is located, is now being controlled by barrages to keep the level of the lagoon from inundating the city.

I do not want to appear to challenge any science but if you have a look at this article you will see that a major contributor to Venice problems is sinking of the city due to groundwater extraction. The worst tidal event was in 1966, well before Climate change was seen as an issue.

[Landscape Architecture Study Tour with Professor Jack Ahern

Similarly, the current inundation of Bangkok is largely caused by sinking of the land area due to excessive extraction of groundwater. I can recall walking along the nearest side street to the Australian Embassy , and looking under buildings that were less than 20 years old and the clearance was up to 50CM. Even back in the 1980s Bangkok was 1M below mean sea level.

The IPCC report recognises that recent flood events are considered more serious because now more people and assets are in harms way.

I can see that some of the contributors to this thread have a jaundiced view of scientists, but I can assure you that I have worked with scientists and tasked them , working for the largest state run scientific organisation in NSW.
I formed a view after a considerable time that many scientists spend a large amount of their time seeking funds for project proposals to ensure that they were able to lead projects, and thus be able to publish and gain promotion, as projects won and scientific articles published are the major basis for career progression and promotion.
In this environment there is a great incentive to "say what is wanted to be heard". I do not think that ONE project has been funded in Australia arguing against Climate Change.
I have tried in this thread to only consider facts , that is why I have referenced where possible.
Regards Philip A

I wonder if the proof about the melting of the glaciers by the world glacier monitoring service is enough to convince the skeptics that the planet is warming.
The facts are there to see.
New satellite images show that an Antarctic ice shelf continues to disintegrate and even more surprising is that it's happening during the Southern Hemisphere's winter.
Are the images from the satellite manipulated for political purposes, or by the scientist to have the results in the way that they like?
Ted Scambos, an expert with the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center, said warm sea water appears to be "reaching the underside of the Wilkins Ice Shelf and thinning it rapidly — and perhaps reaching the surface, or at least mixing with surface waters." Perhaps Ted Scambos if from the left

Environment Canada’s Canadian Ice Service (CIS) is predicting the minimum Arctic sea
ice extent to again be less than 5 million square kilometres in September, 2011. A value
similar to or less than the average extents observed in September, 2008, and September,
2010, is expected. This value (≤4.9 million square kilometres) will make the Arctic sea
ice extent in September, 2011, either the second or third lowest in the 1979-2011 record.
This value lies well below the average September extent for 1979-2010 of 6.6 million
square kilometres based on the NSIDC sea ice index.
Have the Polar Bears in the north pole a secret agenda and are starving to prove a political point?
I do not think so.

Originally Posted by PhilipA

I do not want to appear to challenge any science but if you have a look at this article you will see that a major contributor to Venice problems is sinking of the city due to groundwater extraction. ...

...I can see that some of the contributors to this thread have a jaundiced view of scientists, but I can assure you that I have worked with scientists and tasked them , working for the largest state run scientific organisation in NSW.
I formed a view after a considerable time that many scientists spend a large amount of their time seeking funds for project proposals to ensure that they were able to lead projects, and thus be able to publish and gain promotion, as projects won and scientific articles published are the major basis for career progression and promotion.
In this environment there is a great incentive to "say what is wanted to be heard". I do not think that ONE project has been funded in Australia arguing against Climate Change.
I have tried in this thread to only consider facts , that is why I have referenced where possible.
Regards Philip A

Phillip

In regard to the comment about the sinking cities and innundation. Yes I am aware and have been for some years about the over-extraction from water ossifers under Venice. However my point was not about the reasons for the sea level rise in any city or region of the world, but to point out that sea level rise in any particular area may be mitigated by technological solutions, not just by relocation of the affected inhabitatants.

That many scientists have to devote significant time and effort to seeking funding sources is true. Assuming that the funding of research taints the findings of the research subsequently conducted, is derogatory of the ethics of the majority of scientists. Furthermore, suggesting that "not one project has been funded in Australia ...", is drawing a rather long bow and one in itself that I suspect is not backed up by research or evidence.

Thank you for your diligence to the facts and provision of references.

Diana

Chucaro , no need to worry about the Polar bears yet.
In October the coverage is 7.9 Million square miles and is increasing rapidly.
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

I have been reading several articles on Climate change from the skeptic's sites and scientific sites and there seems to be little consensus on the position in Antarctica. While continental ice is decreasing slightly, sea ice is increasing.
However one thing has become clear to me that I did not know. That is that Arctic warming and melt has almost no effect on sea levels as it is mostly floating already and Archimedes principle holds, however the main game is continental Antarctic ice melt which has the potential to raise sea levels by up to 16 metres.
So let us hope that the Antarctic ice stays solid as this would be the most devastating effect of climate change. Anything else is "chump change".
Regards Philip A

So was it global warming or la nina that caused last summers floods?

I am now at least willing to concede that CO2 has the potential to warm the planet as I was persuaded by facts presented in an unbiased documentary that was all about the carbon cycle as it relates to the petroleum industry. With no scientist for or against making wild claims what they had to say made sense.

I dont however believe in the Al Gore doom and gloom predictions as it would take so many years for the planet to become unliveable due to carbon pollution that the human race would have found another way to destroy the planet before then.