Posted on 06/01/2009 6:24:10 AM PDT by PROCON
By 2100 visitors to Boston could be parking their boats, not their cars, in Harvard Yard.
Major cities in the northeastern U.S. and eastern Canada "are directly in the path of the greatest rise" in sea level if Greenland continues to melt due to global warming, a new study says.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalgeographic.com ...
Promise?
Its not sea level rise. Its sewer backup caused by an over abundance of rats, particularly demorats.
what a total absolute CROCK ... they talk as if ice melt will surge toward us as a tsunami ... what BS, sea level is sea level and it will rise equally around the world (if at all)
My house will beachfront property in 100 years? I feel cheated.......
National Geographic is an agenda/junk-science whore. All their articles are like this. And, right on cue, at the END of the article, comes the sensible disclaimer captioned above.
The "news" is what they DON'T tell you. That would be the "facts on the ground" (or in the water, in this case). Instead, they give you the garbage-out from the garbage-in computer models. What tripe! I want to hear from them: "What is the sea-level now; and what was it 100 years ago? Where, when and how did you get your measurements in each case? Did you account for normal ocean swells and swelling due to temperature? You know -- scientific stuff!" Instead, we are eternally bored with their garbage speculations. It's getting old.
Best news I’ve heard all day!
...and the downside is?
That’s true of normal water. Globally warmed water however seeks to do the most emotionally gripping economic damage so as to keep journalists busy.
Another “poor choice of words” from a leftist. It’s all quite simple and based on mean sea level and the elevation above that the city is. For example, NYC is at elevation 33 feet which means it’s average elevation is 33 feet. If sea levels rise 20 feet then the elevation of NYC would be 13 feet. This is an average and there are other parts of the city with much lower elevation and they would be first to flood. But there is no “path” as the author suggests. All areas that are close to sea level would be impacted, not just major cities like the author wants people to believe and panic with.
That’s a wonderful list. Mind if I borrow it somethime?
This whole "global warming" nonsense was exposed as a fraud a few years ago when we started reading all these stories about how the canals of Venice were going to disappear because of rising sea levels.
Of course, sea levels don't rise only in one place. Venice DOES have a problem with "rising" water levels, but that's because the city was built on swampy ground and the land mass is slowly sinking.
Bumping the Worry List!
So...we’re looking at a 3-foot rise over the next century.
We’re also looking at a 9-foot rise over the next 6 hours.
Signal-to-noise ratio? Yawn.
Revising the “prediction” to 2100 now that the sea level rise previously predicted has failed to materialize I see.
should keep that on your about page, that’s good
Hopefully the areas that voted for Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank will be the first ones underwater LOL.
LQ
I concluded she doesn’t have a degree because she only lists 3 years at CU and attendance at UM, with no degree listed.
But seriously, these "gloom and doom" scenarios have been around since I wore short pants to my 1st grade classroom back when Lyndon Johnson was president.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.