Government funded scientists says it all. It shouldn't surprise anyone what those government funded scientists say. They're going to provide the answers those doing the funding want to hear or magically the funding goes away.
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says we can expect the oceans to rise between 11 and 38 inches (28 to 98 centimeters) by 2100, enough to swamp many of the cities along the U.S. East Coast"
"When sea levels rise rapidly, as they have been doing, even a small increase can have devastating effects on coastal habitats. As seawater reaches farther inland, it can cause destructive erosion, wetland flooding, aquifer and agricultural soil contamination, and lost habitat for fish, birds, and plants."
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/sea-level-rise/
Always easy to ping pong climate deniers, fortunately for those that recognize climate change the preponderance of scientific evidence rests with our argument, actually, last told, 97% of climate change science
Oh, so I guess studies financed by such as the coal industries would be better indicators, got it
If that islander is too stupid to get out of the way of a 1.5mm oncoming tidal wave that takes a year to develop then I'd say Natural Selection took care of him.First islander that loses a family to drowning should seek him out and lynch him.
If that islander is too stupid to get out of the way of a 1.5mm oncoming tidal wave that takes a year to develop then I'd say Natural Selection took care of him.
Let's say that islander is 6' tall. Based on how much the increase/year is (1/16") and assuming he's an 18 year old adult, he'd have to live until he was 978 years old before he drowned.
The good news is that he has 960 years to move to higher ground.
I take it you figured out how I came up with 978 years old.
Trust me, I'm not going to check your arithmetic on this.It was an estimate but close enough.
Of course. Trust me, I'm not going to check your arithmetic on this.![]()
No need to run around moving the goalposts, idiot....we can say with confidence that its impossible to measure the sea level with the accuracy to within 0.5 mm.....
It is easy to fool someone, but it is almost impossible to convince them that they have been fooled. That is the fraudsters' staple psychological tool used by the likes of Al Gore and many others."The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says we can expect the oceans to rise between 11 and 38 inches (28 to 98 centimeters) by 2100, enough to swamp many of the cities along the U.S. East Coast"
"When sea levels rise rapidly, as they have been doing, even a small increase can have devastating effects on coastal habitats. As seawater reaches farther inland, it can cause destructive erosion, wetland flooding, aquifer and agricultural soil contamination, and lost habitat for fish, birds, and plants."
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/sea-level-rise/
Always easy to ping pong climate deniers, fortunately for those that recognize climate change the preponderance of scientific evidence rests with our argument, actually, last told, 97% of climate change science
https://www.westernjournal.com/global-warming-predictions-proven-wrong-97-4-time/
The climate change hoax pushers could flip a coin and get it right more often.
Sorry but this is racist without a shadow of a doubt.How would a knuckle dragging prosemite traitor like you know the measurement criteria for anything other than your shekel pouch ?
It is easy to fool someone, but it is almost impossible to convince them that they have been fooled. That is the fraudsters' staple psychological tool used by the likes of Al Gore and many others.
Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
Beautiful, as a rebutal to National Geographic "cfm" gives us the Western Journal, did you think they would say anything different
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/western-journalism
Oh, now show us again the study of some obscure climate denying researcher who you will laud as the most outstanding voice of his generation, yet, if one posts contrary evidence as say provided by NASA you tell us it is irrelevant or imply NASA's information is flawed
Fogcatcher, your as predictable as the sun rising
I presented a paper published by the American Meteorological Society, and a webpage from the NOAA website. You're such smarmy little fucker, completely clueless and outclassed.Beautiful, as a rebutal to National Geographic "cfm" gives us the Western Journal, did you think they would say anything different
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/western-journalism
How would a knuckle dragging prosemite traitor like you know the measurement criteria for anything other than your shekel pouch ?