[PROCON]

The United States will actually get a lot more sea level rise than many other parts of the world — possibly over 14 feet. Call it geophysical karma —

As the "evidence" for man-made globalwarming fades, these cultist loons get even loonier.

[Organic Panic]

It is scary that we definitely MAY have done ‘something.’

It is all true. One end of my swimming pool is deeper than the other side. Proof that sea level rise will hurt women and minorities most.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

So according to that premise, Florida swampland that was reclaimed some fifty years ago should be underwater and not the really expensive real estate it is now.

[Dilbert56]

Bullshit. US can't hold a candle to the CO2 spewing from South America, Sub-Saharan Africa and China. Also small compared to natural CO2 emissions from oceans on fault lines.

[b4its2late]

[Vince Ferrer]

The left sure loves the fear porn.

[sauropod]

What will never be equitable, though, is this: The U.S. is a rich country. It can pay a lot more to adapt to climate change and to rising sea levels. Poorer countries might get a little less sea level rise in scenarios like the one discussed here — but they’re radically less able to cope with it.

At the end of it, it's all about money.

Yours.

[RegulatorCountry]

If the situation were even remotely that dire, there would not be concessions for so-called “developing” economies such as China, permitting them to emit far more particulate matter and pollute far more than the US ever did at it’s peak over 30 years ago. This to me says it’s political and redistributionist claptrap intended yet again to hamstring the US economy. World temperature has varied significantly over recorded history, and coastlines have varied significantly across the world according to archaeological evidence. Man did not cause that, and man cannot change that. This belief is so persistent and so apparently entrancing to so many, and for the life of me I just don’t see why. It defies logic.

[SkyDancer]

So the sea level can rise in one area only?

[Da Coyote]

Dear WaPo, read my lips: you all are journalists because you couldn’t even get a D in freshman physics.

Please leave science to grownups (which apparently excludes the vast majority of those government grant seeking “climate researchers”.

[Jack Hydrazine]

“The United States will actually get a lot more sea level rise than many other parts of the world — possibly over 14 feet. Call it geophysical karma —”

Some 9,000 years ago sea level was 20 to 30 feet higher than today, but we’ve cooled off since then.

When we go back into the deep freeze, of the two million year ice age we are in (which will happen any day now being that we are at the very tail end of this inter glacial)], the seas will drop 450 to 500 feet back down to the edge of the continental shelves where they were before.

[beef]

If the disaster is irrevocable, then we have to accept it. The end is near. I say party on. Good thing it is mostly liberals on the coasts

[The Great RJ]

Gee, I can’t wait for Al Gore’s seaside mansion in California to slip into the Pacific.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Wood pulp/paper manufacturing is among the dirtiest industries in the world and one of the largest energy users. It’s well past time for a serious surcharge on heavy users of the dirtiest of paper products - newsprint. Users should be responsible for the air and water contaminants released in the production of newsprint, as well as being responsible for the waste created in disposing of the final product. It’s not hyperbole to notice that the world’s natural resources would benefit from eliminating the production of newsprint.

I wonder what Chris Mooney has to say about it.

[Darksheare]

China pumps out far more crap than anyone else.
I guess in liberal global warming minds that all magically becomes rainbows and smurf droppings.

[Svartalfiar]

Humans have a hard time conceiving of the incredible scale of an ice sheet, so the consequences of such a change can be lost upon us.

I think Mr. Mooney has a hard time conceiving of the incredible scale of how big the oceans are.

Ocean surface area: ~360M sq km.
Antarctica surface area: ~13M sq km (doubles in winter with sea ice added)

So if we take 26 (assuming biggest spread of ice), divide by 360, you get .0722. If the continent has 11 feet of sea level rise, that means there's 11 / .0722 feet of ice there. 152 feet. But, the west is only about 1/3 of Antarctica, so multiply that by 3. 450 feet of ice, above sea level, in winter with ice at it's max width/length. However, looking at some other studies, the west ice is only about 8.5% of Antarctic ice. So our thickness is now almost 12 times our number, not 3. ~1800 feet deep.

Now we have to assume that this warming is only affecting the ice above sea level, and the west shelf. You have to melt 1800 feet of ice to get that kind of rise in sea levels. But wait. Ice loses about 9% of it's volume when it melts, so let's multiply that number by 1.09. We're up to 1980+ feet. I know the ice is thick, and mountainous in areas, but that's a huge block of ice (avg thickness, above sea level) to have that much ice ready to melt and flood the world.

So, let's figure about sub-sea level ice. This stuff actually lowers the ocean level when it melts. So, for every unit of volume you lose here, you have to have 9% additional ice melting above sea level to just maintain ocean levels.

* Yes, I know these numbers are nowhere near exact, but it gives a small general representation of how much ice is needed to actually raise the oceans by the amount this article claims, all other things being ignored. I probably put more thought into this than the author put into his numbers.

Hey, here's a quick article I found that goes a bit more into numbers than me: WAIS not Collapsing..

[mulligan]

Mooney is loony. Plus being stupid and incompetent.

[Col Freeper]

To: Chris Mooney,

[Hot Tabasco]

Since the average annual temp. of the Antarctic is around -45 F, there’s gonna have to be a heck of a lot of warming to melt all that ice.

[Ronaldus Magnus III]

It is times like these that remind me of that wonderful quote from yet another ‘climate expert’ Steven Schneider: “Each of us must decide between being effective, and being honest.”

If up until now we use /s to indicate sarcasm,  can we all now agree that /sc indicates scambo? 

It also reminds me of many of the socalled ‘experts’ on the IPCC who turn out to be economists...

[mosesdapoet]

See how “our guilt” works ! Our goverment’s MSM (ministry of socialist mendacity) feeds its favorite “newspaper of record” gossip collumnist some selective statistic finding which goes unchallanged. Which reports globull catasstrophy citing some obscure on the dole source. That gets confirmed by another on the dole academic. The cause is “our guilt”. And that gets picked up and distributed because It’s Our Fault.