Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #508973 > unrolled thread

New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 15:20 -0600
    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-23 22:13 +0000
      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the worldâ?Ts coasts by the end of the centuryâ?"sooner than previously anticipated "Ringer" <byoung@peoplestel.net> - 2015-07-23 17:48 -0500
        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world??Ts coasts by the end of the century??"sooner than previously anticipated jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-24 00:27 +0000
        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the worldâ?Ts coasts by the end of the centuryâ?"sooner than previously anticipated benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 00:15 -0400
    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Simeom <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-23 17:18 -0500
      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated "Ringer" <byoung@peoplestel.net> - 2015-07-23 17:48 -0500
        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Simeom <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-23 18:26 -0500
        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-23 16:34 -0700
          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 18:41 -0600
            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-23 17:57 -0700
              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 19:00 -0600
                Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-23 18:14 -0700
                  Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 19:22 -0600
                    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Simeom <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-23 20:40 -0500
                    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-24 01:44 +0000
                    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-23 19:06 -0700
                      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 20:18 -0600
                        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-23 19:22 -0700
                          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-23 23:23 -0500
                            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-25 09:54 -0500
                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-07-25 11:03 -0400
                                Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-25 11:32 -0500
                                  Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-25 10:00 -0700
                                    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-25 12:44 -0500
                                      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world's coasts by the end of the century--sooner than previously anticipated "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 10:54 -0700
                                        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world's coasts by the end of the century--sooner than previously anticipated HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 14:28 -0400
                                      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-25 11:07 -0700
                                        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 12:19 -0500
                                          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-26 10:38 -0700
                                            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 13:09 -0500
                                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-07-26 14:27 -0400
                                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-26 12:03 -0700
                                                Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 14:36 -0500
                                                  Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-26 13:38 -0700
                                                    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 17:32 -0500
                                                      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-26 15:41 -0700
                                                        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 18:37 -0500
                                                          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-26 18:39 -0700
                                                            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 21:11 -0500
                                                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-27 08:57 -0700
                                                                Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-27 17:53 -0500
                                                  Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-26 21:57 +0000
                                                    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-27 00:17 +0000
                                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-26 21:44 +0000
                                      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Paul Aubrin <chu8i443@free.fr> - 2015-07-25 19:27 +0000
                                        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 12:29 -0500
                                          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Paul Aubrin <chu8i443@free.fr> - 2015-07-26 18:40 +0000
                                            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-07-26 14:24 -0500
                                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Desertphile <Desertphile@nospam.org> - 2015-07-29 07:53 -0600
                                                Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-29 11:07 -0400
                                                  Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-07-29 13:15 -0400
                                                new noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-07-29 21:00 -0700
                                            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world¢s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Desertphile <Desertphile@nospam.org> - 2015-07-29 13:33 -0600
                                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-29 19:48 +0000
                                      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-25 21:04 +0000
                              Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Paul Aubrin <chu8i443@free.fr> - 2015-07-25 18:34 +0000
                            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century---sooner than previously anticipated benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 16:04 -0400
                        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-24 03:18 +0000
            Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-24 00:51 +0000
          Re: Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Nobody <not@home.anymore> - 2015-07-24 01:49 +0000
        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 00:18 -0400
          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 07:32 -0400
    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Chom Noamsky <moose-riders-suck@bc.commmmm> - 2015-07-23 16:14 -0700
    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world's coasts by the end of the century--sooner than previously anticipated "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-07-24 21:23 -0700
    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-25 06:45 +0000
      Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 10:45 -0600
        Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-25 16:57 +0000
          Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world's coasts by the end of the century--sooner than previously anticipated noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 20:56 -0700
    Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world's coasts by the end of the century--sooner than previously anticipated Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-07-25 13:08 -0700

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#508973 — New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated

New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by 
the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/?WT.mc_id=SA_ENGYSUS_20150723




> The world's ice is in trouble. Based on paleoclimate records,
> observations of the world today and computer models, a warming ocean
> is speeding the meltdown of massive ice sheets in Greenland and West
> Antarctica. This new finding, by climatologist James Hansen of
> Columbia University and colleagues, suggests that sea levels could
> rise at least five meters—and possibly as much as nine meters—within
> 50 to 100 years, a rate both faster than and six times as deep as
> previous estimates. And such dramatically rising seas and stronger
> storms followed during past periods when the global annual average
> temperature was only roughly 1 degree Celsius warmer than today, the
> team found. An outcome of that magnitude could doom most of the
> megalopolises lining today's coastlines, the team says. And the
> extent of current efforts to combat climate change are nowhere near
> what will be required to prevent the submersion of thousands of
> kilometers of coastline.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#508998

In sci.physics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by 
> the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated

I suggest you are full of shit as usual ass hole.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509001 — Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the worldâ?Ts coasts by the end of the centuryâ?"sooner than previously anticipated

jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by
>> the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated
>
> I suggest you are full of shit as usual ass hole.

Can you show that it won't accelerate based on the same data? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509023 — Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world??Ts coasts by the end of the century??"sooner than previously anticipated

In sci.physics Ringer <byoung@peoplestel.net> wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by
>>> the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated
>>
>> I suggest you are full of shit as usual ass hole.
> 
> Can you show that it won't accelerate based on the same data? 

You mean the data from faulty models?
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509111 — Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the worldâ?Ts coasts by the end of the centuryâ?"sooner than previously anticipated

On 07/23/2015 06:48 PM, Ringer wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by
>>> the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated
>>
>> I suggest you are full of shit as usual ass hole.
>
> Can you show that it won't accelerate based on the same data?

Well oceans certainly COULD stop rising. That is Sam's usual "proof".

Generally speaking warming is not continuing, and oceans are not rising 
any more than they usually do (2mm a year). However, coastal areas CAN 
sink which has the same effect. This could well happen in California 
where people are over-pumping ground water. And that can even double the 
current coastal inundations. So what do you propose to reduce water 
over-pumping?



-- 
         ___           ___           ___            ___
        /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
       /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
      /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
     /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
    /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
    \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
     \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
      \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
       \_:/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
                      \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#508999

On 7/23/2015 4:20 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by
> the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/

fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/?WT.mc_id=SA_ENGYSUS_20150723 

>>


sad to see scientific American to fall so far to print pseudo science 
FUD  like this crap.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509002 — Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated

Simeom wrote:
> On 7/23/2015 4:20 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by
>> the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated
>>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
>
> fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/?WT.mc_id=SA_ENGYSUS_20150723
>
>>>
>
>
> sad to see scientific American to fall so far to print pseudo science
> FUD  like this crap.

How does it fit the definition of pseudoscience? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509012

On 7/23/2015 5:48 PM, Ringer wrote:
> Simeom wrote:
>> On 7/23/2015 4:20 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by
>>> the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated
>>>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
>>
>> fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/?WT.mc_id=SA_ENGYSUS_20150723
>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> sad to see scientific American to fall so far to print pseudo science
>> FUD  like this crap.
>
> How does it fit the definition of pseudoscience?
>
>

its based upon computer models which are based upon assumptions and 
little data, 99% or more of temperature at location points data is 
filled in by computer program, not measured.

a "Warming Ocean" which is less that 1/2 degree F from 1940 to 2015, is 
only surface temperature by sattilite, and not the volume of ocean.... 
etc etc.......

the total area they discuss is far less that 0.1% of earth surface which 
could convert sunlight to infrared ice vs ground, which cannot effect 
anything....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509014

On 7/23/2015 3:48 PM, Ringer wrote:
> Simeom wrote:
>> On 7/23/2015 4:20 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world’s coasts by
>>> the end of the century—sooner than previously anticipated
>>>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
>>
>> fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/?WT.mc_id=SA_ENGYSUS_20150723
>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> sad to see scientific American to fall so far to print pseudo science
>> FUD  like this crap.
>
> How does it fit the definition of pseudoscience?

The paper hasn't even passed the test of peer review.  Greenmobbers 
always swear the gold standard of science is peer review, but Hansen and 
company are so elite now they don't need no stinking peer review!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509025

On 7/23/15 5:34 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
> The paper hasn't even passed the test of peer review.  Greenmobbers
> always swear the gold standard of science is peer review, but Hansen and
> company are so elite now they don't need no stinking peer review!

   Peer review of the Hansen paper is in progress.

   Climate researcher blasts global warming target as 'highly dangerous'
> http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/07/climate-researcher-blasts-global-warming-target-highly-dangerous

 > Climate scientist James Hansen has fired a new salvo in the climate
 > wars. In a new paper, Hansen and colleagues warn that the current
 > international plan to limit global warming isn’t going to be nearly
 > enough to avert disasters like runaway ice-sheet melting and
 > consequent sea-level rise. Hansen told reporters at a press
 > conference yesterday that he hoped the paper—to be published online
 > this week—would influence global climate talks this December in Paris
 > and encourage negotiators to reconsider their goal of keeping warming
 > to less than 2°C above preindustrial levels, a laudable but
 > insufficient target, some scientists say. But how influential this
 > paper will be is unclear, given its flaws.
 >
 > The new study, which includes nearly 300 references and is 66 pages
 > long, argues that the 2°C target—hard-won as it might be
 > politically—isn’t good enough, and is in fact “highly dangerous.” At
 > that temperature, the study says, enough ice-sheet melting causes a
 > positive feedback loop that leads to more melting and rising seas.
 > Instead, Hansen and his co-authors say, a far better target would be
 > to return to an atmosphere with 350 parts per million CO2. That
 > number currently stands at about 400 parts per million.
 >
 > The researchers make their case in part by describing paleoclimate
 > data from the Eemian, an interglacial (warm) period that lasted from
 > about 130,000 to 115,000 years ago. During that time, temperatures
 > were less than 1°C warmer than they are today, but sea level stood
 > about 5 to 9 meters higher due to large-scale ice sheet melt. The end
 > of the period experienced powerful storms as well, according to
 > sedimentary evidence the researchers cite.
 >
 > The paper also describes an atmosphere-ocean modeling study of
 > feedback loops caused by ice sheet melting under 2°C conditions. What
 > they found, Hansen says, is that melting ice sheets in Greenland and
 > Antarctica could inject enough fresh water into the seas to slow the
 > formation of two key water masses: the North Atlantic Deepwater and
 > the Antarctic Bottom Water formations. Both are part of the so-called
 > Great Ocean Conveyor Belt of ocean circulation. The injection of so
 > much cold water, they say, could lead to a stratification of the
 > water column, with warm water buried underneath cold surface water.
 > “Instead of emerging at the surface, much of that heat is melting the
 > ice shelves,” Hansen says, producing more fresh water and amplifying
 > the feedback. That is particularly striking, he added, because it’s
 > what we’re observing right now: an increase in cold surface waters
 > around Antarctica and Greenland, as well as increases in sea ice
 > around some parts of Antarctica.


 > On that, many scientists do agree. Mann says that although he is
 > skeptical about the details of the study, by putting forth these
 > ideas the authors, “have initiated an absolutely critical discussion”
 > about the 2°C target. “The stakes couldn’t be any higher. If we make
 > the wrong choices, there is no planet B for us to turn to.”
 >
 > *Updated, 22 July, 10:00 a.m.: This story has been updated to clarify
 > that the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics is
 > peer-reviewed. However, peer review of the Hansen paper is ongoing.


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509034

On 7/23/2015 5:41 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 7/23/15 5:34 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>> The paper hasn't even passed the test of peer review.  Greenmobbers
>> always swear the gold standard of science is peer review, but Hansen and
>> company are so elite now they don't need no stinking peer review!
>
>    Peer review of the Hansen paper is in progress.

Yes, thanks for confirming my point.  Isn't it a bit presumptuous to 
release a paper intended to influence policy, that hasn't actually been 
reviewed and accepted for publishing?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509037

On 7/23/15 6:57 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>
> Yes, thanks for confirming my point.  Isn't it a bit presumptuous to
> release a paper intended to influence policy, that hasn't actually been
> reviewed and accepted for publishing?
>

   Did you find anything in the content that wasn't scientifically
   correct, Chomp?


   Climate researcher blasts global warming target as 'highly dangerous'
> http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/07/climate-researcher-blasts-global-warming-target-highly-dangerous
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/


 > Climate scientist James Hansen has fired a new salvo in the climate
 > wars. In a new paper, Hansen and colleagues warn that the current
 > international plan to limit global warming isn’t going to be nearly
 > enough to avert disasters like runaway ice-sheet melting and
 > consequent sea-level rise. Hansen told reporters at a press
 > conference yesterday that he hoped the paper—to be published online
 > this week—would influence global climate talks this December in Paris
 > and encourage negotiators to reconsider their goal of keeping warming
 > to less than 2°C above preindustrial levels, a laudable but
 > insufficient target, some scientists say. But how influential this
 > paper will be is unclear, given its flaws.
 >
 > The new study, which includes nearly 300 references and is 66 pages
 > long, argues that the 2°C target—hard-won as it might be
 > politically—isn’t good enough, and is in fact “highly dangerous.” At
 > that temperature, the study says, enough ice-sheet melting causes a
 > positive feedback loop that leads to more melting and rising seas.
 > Instead, Hansen and his co-authors say, a far better target would be
 > to return to an atmosphere with 350 parts per million CO2. That
 > number currently stands at about 400 parts per million.
 >
 > The researchers make their case in part by describing paleoclimate
 > data from the Eemian, an interglacial (warm) period that lasted from
 > about 130,000 to 115,000 years ago. During that time, temperatures
 > were less than 1°C warmer than they are today, but sea level stood
 > about 5 to 9 meters higher due to large-scale ice sheet melt. The end
 > of the period experienced powerful storms as well, according to
 > sedimentary evidence the researchers cite.
 >
 > The paper also describes an atmosphere-ocean modeling study of
 > feedback loops caused by ice sheet melting under 2°C conditions. What
 > they found, Hansen says, is that melting ice sheets in Greenland and
 > Antarctica could inject enough fresh water into the seas to slow the
 > formation of two key water masses: the North Atlantic Deepwater and
 > the Antarctic Bottom Water formations. Both are part of the so-called
 > Great Ocean Conveyor Belt of ocean circulation. The injection of so
 > much cold water, they say, could lead to a stratification of the
 > water column, with warm water buried underneath cold surface water.
 > “Instead of emerging at the surface, much of that heat is melting the
 > ice shelves,” Hansen says, producing more fresh water and amplifying
 > the feedback. That is particularly striking, he added, because it’s
 > what we’re observing right now: an increase in cold surface waters
 > around Antarctica and Greenland, as well as increases in sea ice
 > around some parts of Antarctica.


 > On that, many scientists do agree. Mann says that although he is
 > skeptical about the details of the study, by putting forth these
 > ideas the authors, “have initiated an absolutely critical discussion”
 > about the 2°C target. “The stakes couldn’t be any higher. If we make
 > the wrong choices, there is no planet B for us to turn to.”
 >
 > *Updated, 22 July, 10:00 a.m.: This story has been updated to clarify
 > that the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics is
 > peer-reviewed. However, peer review of the Hansen paper is ongoing.


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509044

On 7/23/2015 6:00 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 7/23/15 6:57 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>>
>> Yes, thanks for confirming my point.  Isn't it a bit presumptuous to
>> release a paper intended to influence policy, that hasn't actually been
>> reviewed and accepted for publishing?
>>
>
>    Did you find anything in the content that wasn't scientifically
>    correct, Chomp?

Isn't that the whole point of the peer review process, to make sure 
research withstands scientific scrutiny BEFORE it is offered for public 
consumption?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509049

On 7/23/15 7:14 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>
> Isn't that the whole point of the peer review process, to make sure
> research withstands scientific scrutiny BEFORE it is offered for public
> consumption?
>

   Most papers on arXiv.org wind up there before the completion of peer
   review and publication. Get over it. Did you find anything in the
   content that wasn't scientifically correct, Chomp?


   Climate researcher blasts global warming target as 'highly dangerous'
> http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/07/climate-researcher-blasts-global-warming-target-highly-dangerous
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/

 > Climate scientist James Hansen has fired a new salvo in the climate
 > wars. In a new paper, Hansen and colleagues warn that the current
 > international plan to limit global warming isn’t going to be nearly
 > enough to avert disasters like runaway ice-sheet melting and
 > consequent sea-level rise. Hansen told reporters at a press
 > conference yesterday that he hoped the paper—to be published online
 > this week—would influence global climate talks this December in Paris
 > and encourage negotiators to reconsider their goal of keeping warming
 > to less than 2°C above preindustrial levels, a laudable but
 > insufficient target, some scientists say. But how influential this
 > paper will be is unclear, given its flaws.
 >
 > The new study, which includes nearly 300 references and is 66 pages
 > long, argues that the 2°C target—hard-won as it might be
 > politically—isn’t good enough, and is in fact “highly dangerous.” At
 > that temperature, the study says, enough ice-sheet melting causes a
 > positive feedback loop that leads to more melting and rising seas.
 > Instead, Hansen and his co-authors say, a far better target would be
 > to return to an atmosphere with 350 parts per million CO2. That
 > number currently stands at about 400 parts per million.
 >
 > The researchers make their case in part by describing paleoclimate
 > data from the Eemian, an interglacial (warm) period that lasted from
 > about 130,000 to 115,000 years ago. During that time, temperatures
 > were less than 1°C warmer than they are today, but sea level stood
 > about 5 to 9 meters higher due to large-scale ice sheet melt. The end
 > of the period experienced powerful storms as well, according to
 > sedimentary evidence the researchers cite.
 >
 > The paper also describes an atmosphere-ocean modeling study of
 > feedback loops caused by ice sheet melting under 2°C conditions. What
 > they found, Hansen says, is that melting ice sheets in Greenland and
 > Antarctica could inject enough fresh water into the seas to slow the
 > formation of two key water masses: the North Atlantic Deepwater and
 > the Antarctic Bottom Water formations. Both are part of the so-called
 > Great Ocean Conveyor Belt of ocean circulation. The injection of so
 > much cold water, they say, could lead to a stratification of the
 > water column, with warm water buried underneath cold surface water.
 > “Instead of emerging at the surface, much of that heat is melting the
 > ice shelves,” Hansen says, producing more fresh water and amplifying
 > the feedback. That is particularly striking, he added, because it’s
 > what we’re observing right now: an increase in cold surface waters
 > around Antarctica and Greenland, as well as increases in sea ice
 > around some parts of Antarctica.


 > On that, many scientists do agree. Mann says that although he is
 > skeptical about the details of the study, by putting forth these
 > ideas the authors, “have initiated an absolutely critical discussion”
 > about the 2°C target. “The stakes couldn’t be any higher. If we make
 > the wrong choices, there is no planet B for us to turn to.”
 >
 > *Updated, 22 July, 10:00 a.m.: This story has been updated to clarify
 > that the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics is
 > peer-reviewed. However, peer review of the Hansen paper is ongoing.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509059

On 7/23/2015 8:22 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 7/23/15 7:14 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>>
>> Isn't that the whole point of the peer review process, to make sure
>> research withstands scientific scrutiny BEFORE it is offered for public
>> consumption?
>>
>
>    Most papers on arXiv.org wind up there before the completion of peer
>    review and publication.

No so. most papers on arXiv.org were
	not submitted for peer review,
	never intended for peer review
	never intended for publication in a professional Journal
	failed peer review

a paper published before peer review is highly questionable, therefore 
using Sam's logic, publishing on arXiv.org is AVOIDING peer review, 
because is has known flaws.

simple test, find a paper on arXiv.org, and google it to see if it is 
published in a professional Journal.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509071 — Re: New research suggests rising oceans could swamp the world?s coasts by the end of the century?sooner than previously anticipated

In alt.global-warming Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/23/15 7:14 PM, D'Oh D'Oh D'ohbrainsky wrote:
>> Isn't that the whole point of the peer review process, to make sure
>> research withstands scientific scrutiny BEFORE it is offered for public
>> consumption?
>   Most papers on arXiv.org wind up there before the completion of peer
>   review and publication. Get over it. Did you find anything in the
>   content that wasn't scientifically correct, Chomp?
...

It's just another case of poiting out uncrossed i's (sic) from the company men.

Groups at NASA (incl Hansen) and elsewhere have been publishing papers
warning a 2C limit as suggested in IPCC reports was still too dangerous for
4-5 years that I know of.

"A Recipe for Disaster" was one title from 2010-11.

--
Action needed to bolster London's supply chain against extreme weather risks
Supply Management, 23 Jul 2015 11:39Z 
London's supply chain is not adequately prepared for the impact of extreme 
weather around the world, according to a report.

Central Asia Floods Reawaken Glacier Anxieties
EurasiaNet, 23 Jul 2015 15:26Z 
Tajikistan has been the worst hit, with abnormally high temperatures causing 
rapid snow and glacier melts. The country is 93 percent covered by high 
mountains, making it particularly vulnerable to landslides and flash floods. 
Dozens of homes have been ...

Late-Week Storms to Rattle Winnipeg, Minneapolis and Omaha
AccuWeather.com, 23 Jul 2015 15:28Z 
A potent storm system swinging across the northern Plains and neighboring 
Cantada will spark severe storms on Thu and Fri.

Rain, Wind, Severe Storms to Whip Central Europe Saturday
AccuWeather.com, 23 Jul 2015 15:29Z 
"Given that this [type of strengthening storm system] normally occurs in 
fall or winter as opposed to midsummer, some very anomalous and dangerous 
weather is possible in parts of Europe on Saturday," stated AccuWeather 
Meteorologist Anthony Sagliani.

Navy climate change expert sees opponents ignoring science - Times Union
Albany Times Union, 23 Jul 2015 17:27Z 
When he headed the Navy's climate change task force, the group looked at 
issued like rising sea levels, which is one outcome of global warming. Naval 
bases around the world will be affected and planners have to be ready for it, 
he said. In his new job ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509080

On 7/23/2015 6:22 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 7/23/15 7:14 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>>
>> Isn't that the whole point of the peer review process, to make sure
>> research withstands scientific scrutiny BEFORE it is offered for public
>> consumption?
>>
>
>    Most papers on arXiv.org wind up there before the completion of peer
>    review and publication. Get over it. Did you find anything in the
>    content that wasn't scientifically correct, Chomp?


You mean the journal 'Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics', where the 
status is currently 1st stage 'discussion paper'.  The paper has a long 
ways to go before acceptance for final publication, if and when it 
passes 1st and 2nd stages of review, including revisions, etc.  That may 
not happen until long after events like Paris 2015.  Oh wait, there's 
your answer right there for hyping a pre-publication draft in the media.

***

Whiplash Warning When Climate Science is Publicized Before Peer Review 
and Publication

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/07/23/whiplash-warning-when-climate-science-is-publicized-before-peer-review-and-publication/?_r=0

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509085

On 7/23/15 8:06 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
> You mean the journal 'Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics', where the
> status is currently 1st stage 'discussion paper'.  The paper has a long
> ways to go before acceptance for final publication, if and when it
> passes 1st and 2nd stages of review, including revisions, etc.  That may
> not happen until long after events like Paris 2015.  Oh wait, there's
> your answer right there for hyping a pre-publication draft in the media.

   Hey Chomp, Did you find anything in the content that wasn't
   scientifically correct?



   Climate researcher blasts global warming target as 'highly dangerous'
> http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/07/climate-researcher-blasts-global-warming-target-highly-dangerous
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossil-fuels-must-be-phased-out-to-avoid-drowned-coastlines/


 > Climate scientist James Hansen has fired a new salvo in the climate
 > wars. In a new paper, Hansen and colleagues warn that the current
 > international plan to limit global warming isn’t going to be nearly
 > enough to avert disasters like runaway ice-sheet melting and
 > consequent sea-level rise. Hansen told reporters at a press
 > conference yesterday that he hoped the paper—to be published online
 > this week—would influence global climate talks this December in Paris
 > and encourage negotiators to reconsider their goal of keeping warming
 > to less than 2°C above preindustrial levels, a laudable but
 > insufficient target, some scientists say. But how influential this
 > paper will be is unclear, given its flaws.
 >
 > The new study, which includes nearly 300 references and is 66 pages
 > long, argues that the 2°C target—hard-won as it might be
 > politically—isn’t good enough, and is in fact “highly dangerous.” At
 > that temperature, the study says, enough ice-sheet melting causes a
 > positive feedback loop that leads to more melting and rising seas.
 > Instead, Hansen and his co-authors say, a far better target would be
 > to return to an atmosphere with 350 parts per million CO2. That
 > number currently stands at about 400 parts per million.
 >
 > The researchers make their case in part by describing paleoclimate
 > data from the Eemian, an interglacial (warm) period that lasted from
 > about 130,000 to 115,000 years ago. During that time, temperatures
 > were less than 1°C warmer than they are today, but sea level stood
 > about 5 to 9 meters higher due to large-scale ice sheet melt. The end
 > of the period experienced powerful storms as well, according to
 > sedimentary evidence the researchers cite.
 >
 > The paper also describes an atmosphere-ocean modeling study of
 > feedback loops caused by ice sheet melting under 2°C conditions. What
 > they found, Hansen says, is that melting ice sheets in Greenland and
 > Antarctica could inject enough fresh water into the seas to slow the
 > formation of two key water masses: the North Atlantic Deepwater and
 > the Antarctic Bottom Water formations. Both are part of the so-called
 > Great Ocean Conveyor Belt of ocean circulation. The injection of so
 > much cold water, they say, could lead to a stratification of the
 > water column, with warm water buried underneath cold surface water.
 > “Instead of emerging at the surface, much of that heat is melting the
 > ice shelves,” Hansen says, producing more fresh water and amplifying
 > the feedback. That is particularly striking, he added, because it’s
 > what we’re observing right now: an increase in cold surface waters
 > around Antarctica and Greenland, as well as increases in sea ice
 > around some parts of Antarctica.


 > On that, many scientists do agree. Mann says that although he is
 > skeptical about the details of the study, by putting forth these
 > ideas the authors, “have initiated an absolutely critical discussion”
 > about the 2°C target. “The stakes couldn’t be any higher. If we make
 > the wrong choices, there is no planet B for us to turn to.”
 >
 > *Updated, 22 July, 10:00 a.m.: This story has been updated to clarify
 > that the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics is
 > peer-reviewed. However, peer review of the Hansen paper is ongoing.




-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509088

On 7/23/2015 7:18 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 7/23/15 8:06 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>> You mean the journal 'Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics', where the
>> status is currently 1st stage 'discussion paper'.  The paper has a long
>> ways to go before acceptance for final publication, if and when it
>> passes 1st and 2nd stages of review, including revisions, etc.  That may
>> not happen until long after events like Paris 2015.  Oh wait, there's
>> your answer right there for hyping a pre-publication draft in the media.
>
>    Hey Chomp, Did you find anything in the content that wasn't
>    scientifically correct?

The new Hansen et al study is provocative and intriguing but rife with 
speculation and “what if” scenarios. It has many conjectures and huge 
extrapolations based on quite flimsy evidence, but evidence nonetheless. 
In that regard it raises good questions and topics worthy of further 
exploration, but it is not a document that can be used for setting 
policy for anthropogenic climate change, although it pretends to be so.

The paper is long. It hinges upon interpretation of paleo and other data 
that is apt to be somewhat controversial. It uses a model that is coarse 
resolution and which does not have a very good climate simulation. The 
evaluation of the model leaves much to be desired: no differences are 
shown compared with observations, and some errors are large. No mention 
is made of ENSO or Pacific decadal variations that dominate interannual 
and decadal variability in the real world, and which are a key to 
understanding the recent hiatus, and recent trends that are not 
representative of longer-term trends, although frequently interpreted as 
such. In section 4.5, the authors point out the need to simulate a 
number of features realistically and the model does not really do them 
very well, especially basic things like sea surface salinity. So the 
relevance of the model is not established. They use the model for a 
number of highly artificial experiments that are supposed to depict 
melting of ice at high latitudes: ”freshwater injection.” These 
experiments introduce a lot of very cold fresh water in various places, 
and then they see what happens. The question is how relevant these are 
to the real world and what is happening as global warming progresses? 
They do not seem at all realistic to me.

A key to a lot of this is how clouds change, and one needs to get clouds 
right in the first place to have confidence in the results. 
Unfortunately, this is an area where major problems exist. Huge problems 
occur over the southern oceans for instance and all models have far too 
much sunshine penetrating to the surface compared with observations. No 
doubt the southern ocean, featured strongly by Hansen et al, plays an 
important role, but data there are poor, and change is not well known; 
in particular the recent hiatus in global warming greatly influences any 
observations, which can therefore be quite misleading wrt trends. I 
certainly do not believe the result claimed with regard to less snow 
over Antarctica with a warming climate. Although Hansen argues that the 
real world is responding even faster than in the model scenarios, this 
is not at all clear owing to the natural variability.

The paper is quite well written and a tour de force in many respects, 
but there are way too many assumptions and extrapolations for anything 
here to be taken seriously other than to promote further studies. The 
authors often say that “these model limitations must be kept in mind” – 
and there are many other model limitations not discussed – but then they 
do not keep them in mind when drawing conclusions. Some of the 
conclusions with regard to the need for immediate actions I strongly 
agree with, but it seems that this study has gone out of its way to make 
the case, stretching credibility.

-- Kevin Trenberth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#509115

On 7/23/2015 9:22 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
> On 7/23/2015 7:18 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 7/23/15 8:06 PM, Chom Noamsky wrote:
>>> You mean the journal 'Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics', where the
>>> status is currently 1st stage 'discussion paper'.  The paper has a long
>>> ways to go before acceptance for final publication, if and when it
>>> passes 1st and 2nd stages of review, including revisions, etc.  That may
>>> not happen until long after events like Paris 2015.  Oh wait, there's
>>> your answer right there for hyping a pre-publication draft in the media.
>>
>>    Hey Chomp, Did you find anything in the content that wasn't
>>    scientifically correct?

> -- Kevin Trenberth

Hilarious to see him cite Trenberth! Next week the chumpsky will attack
Trenberth.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web