Sentences with phrase «about sea»

What about sea level fall?

That has been used to make MWP - like claims about sea ice: «sea ice has been lower in the past; therefore there is nothing remarkable about current sea ice loss.»

Bishop Hill says - Louise Gray has adopted the role of recruiting sergeant for the Balcombe protest camp, offering up helpful advice on what aspirant participants should bring along: http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/8/7/environmentalist-journalist.html [That pretty much shreds Gray's credibility — Anthony] ============================================================= Lots of chatter about sea ice being higher than in many recent years: Danish Meteorological Institute: Arctic...

[10 Things to Know About Sea Ice]

What can you tell us about the sea ice extent in 1979?

What about sea - floor methane hydrate?

If you are talking about sea ice, then you are talking about what is happening on the margins of Antarctica.

Truth about sea level is a major casualty of the war to implement whatever is deemed necessary to implement legislation to increase government power and control.

A cooling ocean could explain it, but what about sea level rise?

This particular discussion is about sea levels, and your fictitious «acceleration».

Surely you could have found substantive disagreement among scientists about the sea ice prognosis.

It tells me we do have to worry about sea level rise in the future.

In between our series about the global temperature trend and our (upcoming) series about climate & biodiversity, let's do a short series about sea level rise, shall we?

What the report says about sea ice and climate change: Since the early 1980s, annual average Arctic sea ice has decreased in extent between 3.5 percent and 4.1 percent per decade, become 4.3 to 7.5 feet (1.3 and 2.3 meters) thinner.

The mainstream media needs to realize that Mörner is simply not a credible source of information about sea level rise or climate science in general.

This post is on Nils - Axel Mörner is Wrong About Sea Level Rise, not on your predilection for ignoring the totality of the data by focusing on cherry - picked periods of time too short to rise to the level of statistical significance.

Hansen was also wrong about the portion of emissions remaining in the atmosphere and about sea level.

IPCC conclusions about sea level rise rely substantially on models.

There is also concern about sea ice normally thick and strong north of Greenland has given way to open sea water in February 2018.

While St. Louis doesn't have to worry directly about sea levels or ice melt, stronger weather patterns including more droughts and floods are likely consequences of global warming, they said.

[JH] Further regurtitation by you of Koonin's claim about sea level rise will constitute «excessive repetition» and «slogaqneering.»

Until now, the plaintiffs had been coastal cities and counties worried primarily about sea level rise.

Ignoring the good news about sea levels, «We must take climate change more seriously warn Met Office scientists», says the Scotsman.

«I don't think arguments about sea - level rise are anything like a game - changer,» he added, «because if people aren't prepared to mitigate on behalf of their children, whom they love, it's hard to see how information about people 300 years away will do more to alter their behaviour.»

A concatenation of non-sequiturs cascade from the first: about sea - level rise, species extinction, drought, famine, resources wars, and so on.

If we agree with you that CO2 readings are false and surface temperature rise is false, then what about sea level rise, precipitation reduction, reduction in the temperature of the upper atmosphere, or evaporation pan reduction?

However, by simply saying that «climate change is real», a variety of activists, researchers and politicians can deliver a great deluge of non-sequiturs about sea - level rise, species extinction, drought, famine, resources wars and so on.

You haven't a clue about sea level — http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/how-not-to-analyze-tide-gauge-data/ shreds some of the crap that's been written.

ATTP: You take a simplistic point — that CO2 tends to raise temperatures and deflect from a very important issue of whether sea level is actual rising and what the real world shows about sea level rising.

«This isn't a story about sea - level rise.

In some cases these charts were simply ice extents, in others some information about sea ice concentration was also available.

Other skeptic arguments about sea level concern the validity of observations, obtained via tide gauges and more recently satellite altimeter observations.

[REFERENCE — National Snow and Ice Data Center, All About Sea Ice, Characteristics: Arctic vs. Antarctic, http://nsidc.org/seaice/characteristics/difference.html]

Stick to the facts: the IPCC writes about sea level in its Summary for Policy Makers (available at www.ipcc.ch): «For RCP8.5, the rise by the year 2100 is 0.52 to 0.98 m».

Proving Americans» assessment correct, the National Geographic is caught pushing obvious «science» B.S. about sea level rise.

«There's a definite recognition among people who weren't talking about sea level rise 5 years ago that it's something to be concerned about,» said Laura Tam, a policy director at SPUR, which is an urban planning think - tank based in San Francisco.

And there are more subtle issues like whatever is done about sea / land boundaries.

There is also no cause for concern about the sea levels rising because of the massive Larsen C iceberg since it merely disconnected from the shelf.

Related to this is the fact that many people get confused about sea surface temperatures and ocean heat content, and understanding their fundamental difference, how they are measured, and what they are measuring is important.

And scientists can sample ice cores, permafrost records, and tree rings to make some assumptions about the sea ice extent going back 1,500 years.

For example see the first comment by Simon holgate here, who in a private email that he gave me permission to reproduce, contradicted my comments about sea level oscillations.

I asked him to confirm that he had published articles about sea level rise under different names and when and why he had changed his name.

What is it about the sea that is changing and causing it to rise?

Moreover, as you know there is considerable uncertainty about sea level rise due to ice cap melting (esp Greenland), to the degree that the AR4 SPM essentially threw up its hands and said more work done here, we can not estimate this with any degree of certainty.

No need to worry about sea levels then, is there?

There are recent scary stories about sea levels rising that will sink Fremantle, so I have looked at the tidal gauge records: -LSB-...]» Possibly sinking as the coastal plain's aquifer is being pumped dry.»

A great deal of the work I have been doing recently concerns land conditions and the movements of glaciers, so although not specifically about sea levels, have a very direct impact on them.

Governor's Hurricane Conference, in West Palm Beach this week, which will draw more than 1,000 stakeholders, has not one word about sea - level rise in its program.

The projections will provide more details about sea - level rise, for which observations show rates increasing, and should give a more precise estimate of the levels we will see at the end of the century.

Anyway what makes you think you know more about sea level change, apart from your dogmatic arrogance?