LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 06-12-2017, 12:15 PM   #16
KenJackson
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Distribution: Fedora, PCLinuxOS
Posts: 648

Rep: Reputation: 84

There are a few points in favor of sea level rise. I've seen several articles about silt. Apparently, erosion across the world washes so much silt into the ocean that sea level is estimated to rise a fraction of a millimeter per year, every year, regardless of climate.

Also, in there are many ancient cities below sea level. Just google underwater city. Though I suspect most of these date back to before the flood.

And finally, it is widely accepted that when the US was founded, the world was in a mini ice-age. We may still be coming out of it, so sea level would be theoretically rising as a result. Climate change is natural.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwesomeMachine View Post
It sounds a bit contrived that satellites can measure 1/8" of sea level rise! I haven't seen any evidence that that's even possible!

Maldives is the lowest laying country. There is no evidence of any effect of sea level rise there. Every shred of evidence is a future projection, which may or may not be true.

Climate change is a faith-based belief system.
Good points.

The problem is the political bias. Climatologists are under immense pressure to not buck the popular political view. They may lose funding if they do. True science invites challenges. Science-as-a-tool for a political objective attacks challengers.
 
Old 06-12-2017, 11:30 PM   #17
frankbell
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Debian, Mageia, and whatever VMs I happen to be playing with
Posts: 12,498
Blog Entries: 16

Rep: Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211Reputation: 3211
Quote:
There are a few points in favor of sea level rise.
There is one major point in favor of sea-level rise.

The sea level is rising.


Words fail me.

Last edited by frankbell; 06-12-2017 at 11:35 PM.
 
Old 06-13-2017, 12:43 AM   #18
KenJackson
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Distribution: Fedora, PCLinuxOS
Posts: 648

Rep: Reputation: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbell View Post
There is one major point in favor of sea-level rise.

The sea level is rising.
From the article:
Quote:
But because the land in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia (which includes Norfolk) is also sinking, relative sea levels there are rising faster than anywhere on the Atlantic coast.
I just happen to be watching a 2009 BBC documentary right now called "South Pacific" in which they discuss a teeny-weenie island east of New Zealand named "Anuta Island". It has a diameter of 750m and highest point of 65m. It's been inhabited for nearly 400 years.

I've read that sea level really is rising. And just a few inches would make a significant impact on this island community. Yet sea level wasn't mentioned either in the documentary or on the wikipedia page.
 
Old 06-13-2017, 04:31 AM   #19
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware & Android
Posts: 8,269

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828
Jefro, please close the thread or move it to general. As there's so many posters weighing in, the latter course seems wiser. There's certainly no more on-topic posts coming. And if I can't unsubscribe myself from a thread that I've started, please do it for me.
 
Old 06-13-2017, 03:08 PM   #20
jefro
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,883

Rep: Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498Reputation: 2498
Sorry I let this get out of hand. Moved to general.
 
Old 06-13-2017, 03:46 PM   #21
AwesomeMachine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: USA and Italy
Distribution: Debian testing/sid; OpenSuSE; Fedora; Mint
Posts: 3,013

Rep: Reputation: 518Reputation: 518Reputation: 518Reputation: 518Reputation: 518Reputation: 518
I don't think it's possible to make software to depict sea level rise, because no one has been able to model it. And saying that something is accepted scientific fact really isn't the same as hard evidence.

I say the Universe exists inside a giant computer monitor. Everything is recreated at 60 Hz. Since man evolved in the midst of this, we don't even notice it. Who can prove me wrong? It's the same with climate change.

The climate just changes at different times. It's no big emergency. It'll go back to the way it was in about 60 years. It's a cycle, not a continuum. Capitalists are exploiting the cyclical nature of climate to sell green energy products. I don't understand what the investment in climate change is. I hear predictions of doom and gloom, but it never happens!

And anyway, green products must be manufactured. That requires mining, transportation and fabrication. Then, after 20 years, the green energy products become toxic waste, very difficult to recycle.

So, the amount of greenhouse gases stays the same, because energy must ultimately come from somewhere. Electricity must be generated, and it's only 30% as efficient as simply burning the fossil fuel.

So, electric devices use over 3x the energy that fossil-fuel burning devices do. It's simple physics, energy is neither created nor destroyed. Call me ignorant, but it's no substitute for actual evidence.

And if people don't like the truth they should just bury their heads under a pillow. I'm only the bearer of truth. Truth is truth no matter what. If I cease to exist, my word shall still be the truth.

Last edited by AwesomeMachine; 06-13-2017 at 03:48 PM.
 
Old 06-14-2017, 12:29 PM   #22
jeremy
root
 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 12,425

Rep: Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308
Moving forward, technical threads started in technical fora need to stay on topic. Long time members who do not follow this will receive an infraction the first time, followed by a temporary ban if it continues.

--jeremy
 
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Visualizing the Invisible LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 12-02-2015 12:42 PM
visualizing disk layouts? jason_not Linux - General 2 10-13-2011 08:47 PM
Visualizing Windows and fedora on a Ubuntu host inspiron_Droid Ubuntu 4 08-05-2008 08:38 PM
emacs in run level 3 then switch to X (level 7) then back to level 3 dsoliver Slackware 3 09-01-2006 03:31 AM
LXer: The Rise And Rise Of Firefox. Episode: Google, Real Networks LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-06-2006 07:03 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration