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

Groups > sci.physics > #509287 > unrolled thread

New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 21:20 -0600
    Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 10:23 -0600
      Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted Fritz Köhler <fritzk@notrenetwork.net> - 2015-07-25 16:59 +0000
        Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted Fritz Köhler <fritzk@notrenetwork.net> - 2015-07-25 17:01 +0000
        Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will   rise much faster than predicted Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-07-26 09:06 +0200
          Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will   rise much faster than predicted R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-07-26 07:53 +0000
      Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-25 17:02 +0000
        Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 13:51 -0600
          les trois lettres noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 13:01 -0700
          Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-07-25 20:07 +0000
    Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 11:23 -0700
      Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 16:11 -0400
        Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 14:27 -0600
      Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 16:32 -0400
      Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-07-25 13:40 -0700
    Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 13:37 -0700

#509287 — New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted

New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much 
faster than predicted
> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-faster.html

> A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted
> climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario
> where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have
> predicted—they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and
> Physics—an open access site created to allow for public peer review
> of researcher ideas.
>
> At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if
> global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been
> set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a
> rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have
> suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous
> levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels
> are somehow kept below that benchmark.
>
> To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened
> before—back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age),
> when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they
> are now. They found that ocean levels were higher than they should
> have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for
> an explanation—after much work they came up with the idea that a
> small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet
> ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which
> created a feedback loop—the more the ice sheet melted the faster it
> began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that
> adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation,
> where coastal areas and island countries will face dire
> consequences.
>
> The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
> climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
> on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
> world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
> addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
> will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
> set—that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
> that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
> too late—if it is not already.
>

   OK jimp, my faithful Pavlov's dog, we wait your name calling.


-- 

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]

#509362

On 7/25/15 12:34 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
> New arm waving speculates doom and gloom; yet more off topic FUD from
> the ass hole.
>

   Hey jimp, try eating some of your wife's makeup so's you can be more
   pretty on the inside.

   New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise
   much faster than predicted
> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-faster.html


 > A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted
 > climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario
 > where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have
 > predicted—they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and
 > Physics—an open access site created to allow for public peer review
 > of researcher ideas.
 >
 > At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if
 > global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been
 > set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a
 > rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have
 > suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous
 > levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels
 > are somehow kept below that benchmark.
 >
 > To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened
 > before—back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age),
 > when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they
 > are now. They found that ocean levels were higher than they should
 > have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for
 > an explanation—after much work they came up with the idea that a
 > small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet
 > ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which
 > created a feedback loop—the more the ice sheet melted the faster it
 > began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that
 > adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation,
 > where coastal areas and island countries will face dire
 > consequences.
 >
 > The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
 > climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
 > on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
 > world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
 > addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
 > will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
 > set—that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
 > that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
 > too late—if it is not already.
 >




-- 

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]

#509372

Sam Wormley wrote:

>    New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise
>    much faster than predicted
>> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-
faster.html

So what, is this bad too?? More water can't be bad. Gives more fish. Fish 
taste good, cod liver oil enough to everybody.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/270071.php

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

#509376

Fritz Köhler wrote:

> Sam Wormley wrote:
> 
>>    New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise
>>    much faster than predicted
>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-
> faster.html
> 
> So what, is this bad too?? More water can't be bad. Gives more fish.
> Fish taste good, cod liver oil enough to everybody.
> 
> http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/270071.php

Cod liver oil - the forgotten food
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqr_XekPts4

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

#509533 — Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted

Am 25.07.2015 18:59, schrieb Fritz Köhler:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>>     New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise
>>     much faster than predicted
>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-
> faster.html
>
> So what, is this bad too?? More water can't be bad. Gives more fish. Fish
> taste good, cod liver oil enough to everybody.
>

Well, that's not true: higher sea levels do not give more fish.

Reason: the level of water above the sea floor is (on average) very 
large. If this distance would increase a few centimetre, this wouldn't 
extend the living space for fish significantly.

But the sea levels are falling (on average), by a rate of about 4m per 
millennium.

This could be estimated from the current lake near the Airport 
Fiomicino. The Lake Tiberius was formerly the harbour of Rome, but is 
now 8m above sea level.

Since the harbour had sea-level at the time of ancient Rome (roughly 
2000 years ago), the sea-level has fallen by 8 m in 2000 years or 4 m in 
a millennium.

Other ways to estimate the same results would be:
- analysing the age of corals on the current land of atolls
- determine the age of marine fossils on mountains
- hight of ancient harbours above the sea
- age of ocean-related human artefacts in current mountains


TH

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

#509545 — Re: New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted

In sci.physics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> Am 25.07.2015 18:59, schrieb Fritz K?hler:
>> Sam Wormley wrote:
>>>     New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise
>>>     much faster than predicted
>>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-
>> faster.html
>> So what, is this bad too?? More water can't be bad. Gives more fish. Fish
>> taste good, cod liver oil enough to everybody.
> Well, that's not true: higher sea levels do not give more fish.
> Reason: the level of water above the sea floor is (on average) very 
> large. If this distance would increase a few centimetre, this wouldn't 
> extend the living space for fish significantly.
> But the sea levels are falling (on average), by a rate of about 4m per 
> millennium.
> This could be estimated from the current lake near the Airport 
> Fiomicino. The Lake Tiberius was formerly the harbour of Rome, but is 
> now 8m above sea level.

Unfortunately your musing don't correlate well with regognised
publications. E.g. the Med SLR reconstruction for the past 150ky is 
<http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/nature11593RapidCoupling.jpg>
(the blue line in lower panel)

This seems to show SL in the Med rose by 4m over the past 25k
years and within the last 1k seems to have flat-lined.

Fimicino is still on the coastline and the city fathers record it
as 1m above sea level.

The port of Hobart, Tasmania, is 10-40m above sea level yet ships 
reach it from the sea every day.

The upper reaches of the Mississippi are 100m above sea level, yet
it could be reached by ship from the sea before various straightening
and lock-building exercises were carried out in the 19th and 20th cent.


> Since the harbour had sea-level at the time of ancient Rome (roughly 
> 2000 years ago), the sea-level has fallen by 8 m in 2000 years or 4 m in 
> a millennium.
> Other ways to estimate the same results would be:
> - analysing the age of corals on the current land of atolls
> - determine the age of marine fossils on mountains
> - hight of ancient harbours above the sea
> - age of ocean-related human artefacts in current mountains


--
Homes Under Threat As Wildfires Rage In West
Sky News, 24 Jul 2015 12:14Z 
Holidaymakers flee and houses are at risk after separate wildfires threaten 
communities in Washington, Montana and California.

Investors could lose $4.2tn because of climate change, report warns ...
The Guardian, 24 Jul 2015 18:12Z 
Investors could lose $4.2tn due to impact of climate change, report warns. 
Investments in fossil fuel companies face serious risk from global warming, 
research by the Economist Intelligence Unit shows. The future is grim for 
private holdings in fossil ...

Witness Talks Huron Tornado
KELOLAND TV, 24 Jul 2015 23:14Z
From funnel cloud to touch down, a Huron woman says she will not forget 
seeing an actual tornado. Thursday night's twister south of Huron near State 
Highway 37 damaged buildings as well as power lines.

'Brain-Eating' Amoeba Reappears in Louisiana Parish's Water Supply
ABC News, 24 Jul 2015 23:16Z 
A potentially deadly amoeba has been found in the water supply of a parish 
outside New Orleans for the second time in two years, officials said.

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

#509386

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/25/15 12:34 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>> New arm waving speculates doom and gloom; yet more off topic FUD from
>> the ass hole.
>>
> 
>   Hey jimp, try eating some of your wife's makeup so's you can be more
>   pretty on the inside.

Hey shit head, take your mindless copies of off topic speculation to
a group where they belong or start your own blog, you spamming ass 
hole.

<snip repaste of snipped, off topic, speculative FUDD>



-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#509421

On 7/25/15 11:02 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Hey shit head, take your mindless copies of off topic speculation to
> a group where they belong or start your own blog, you spamming ass
> hole.


   Hey jimp, did you find anything scientifically incorrect in the linked
   paper? Try not to be so nasty jimp.

   New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise
   much faster than predicted
> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-faster.html

 > A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted
 > climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario
 > where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have
 > predicted—they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and
 > Physics—an open access site created to allow for public peer review
 > of researcher ideas.
 >
 > At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if
 > global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been
 > set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a
 > rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have
 > suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous
 > levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels
 > are somehow kept below that benchmark.
 >
 > To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened
 > before—back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age),
 > when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they
 > are now. They found that ocean levels were higher than they should
 > have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for
 > an explanation—after much work they came up with the idea that a
 > small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet
 > ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which
 > created a feedback loop—the more the ice sheet melted the faster it
 > began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that
 > adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation,
 > where coastal areas and island countries will face dire
 > consequences.
 >
 > The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
 > climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
 > on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
 > world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
 > addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
 > will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
 > set—that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
 > that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
 > too late—if it is not already.


-- 

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]

#509424 — les trois lettres

why is that guy such an a-head?...  anyway,
I'll bet there's no mention of a)
subsidence/erosion, and b)
u.h.i

>  > The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
>  > climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
>  > on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
>  > world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
>  > addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
>  > will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
>  > set--that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
>  > that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
>  > too late--if it is not already.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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]

#509433

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/25/15 11:02 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Hey shit head, take your mindless copies of off topic speculation to
>> a group where they belong or start your own blog, you spamming ass
>> hole.
> 
> 
>   Hey jimp, did you find anything scientifically incorrect in the linked
>   paper? Try not to be so nasty jimp.

Hey shit head, who gives a fuck if an off topic copy of some web site
is scientifically accurate?

It is still off topic, ass hole.

Take your copying of web sites to a group suitable for the topic or
your own blog and you will never hear from me again, ass hole.


<snip yet another repaste of off topic shit>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#509407

On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 8:20:53 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much 
> faster than predicted
> > http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-faster.html
> 
> > A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted
> > climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario
> > where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have
> > predicted--they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and
> > Physics--an open access site created to allow for public peer review
> > of researcher ideas.
> >
> > At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if
> > global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been
> > set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a
> > rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have
> > suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous
> > levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels
> > are somehow kept below that benchmark.
> >
> > To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened
> > before--back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age),
> > when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they
> > are now. They found that ocean levels were higher than they should
> > have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for
> > an explanation--after much work they came up with the idea that a
> > small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet
> > ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which
> > created a feedback loop--the more the ice sheet melted the faster it
> > began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that
> > adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation,
> > where coastal areas and island countries will face dire
> > consequences.
> >
> > The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
> > climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
> > on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
> > world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
> > addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
> > will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
> > set--that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
> > that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
> > too late--if it is not already.
> >
> 
>    OK jimp, my faithful Pavlov's dog, we wait your name calling.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

Jim Why so nasty? A bad mouth is only goes with low life wits that need a life. Get the picture. Bert

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

#509429

On 7/25/2015 2:23 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
>
>>     OK jimp, my faithful Pavlov's dog, we wait your name calling.
>>
>>
>
> Jim Why so nasty? A bad mouth is only goes with low life wits that need a life. Get the picture. Bert


So Bert says that Jimp is a 'low life wit' for calling someone a name?
What's wrong with this picture?



-- 
Cut off one head, two more shall take its place.
HAIL HYDRA!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZcG5UOY224

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

#509439

On 7/25/15 2:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
> So Bert says that Jimp is a 'low life wit' for calling someone a name?
> What's wrong with this picture?


   It's hard to keep from laughing!

-- 

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]

#509447

On 07/25/2015 02:23 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 8:20:53 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much
>> faster than predicted
>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-faster.html
>>
>>> A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted
>>> climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario
>>> where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have
>>> predicted--they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and
>>> Physics--an open access site created to allow for public peer review
>>> of researcher ideas.
>>>
>>> At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if
>>> global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been
>>> set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a
>>> rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have
>>> suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous
>>> levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels
>>> are somehow kept below that benchmark.
>>>
>>> To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened
>>> before--back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age),
>>> when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they
>>> are now. They found that ocean levels were higher than they should
>>> have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for
>>> an explanation--after much work they came up with the idea that a
>>> small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet
>>> ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which
>>> created a feedback loop--the more the ice sheet melted the faster it
>>> began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that
>>> adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation,
>>> where coastal areas and island countries will face dire
>>> consequences.
>>>
>>> The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
>>> climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
>>> on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
>>> world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
>>> addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
>>> will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
>>> set--that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
>>> that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
>>> too late--if it is not already.
>>>
>>
>>     OK jimp, my faithful Pavlov's dog, we wait your name calling.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
>> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
>> community, and physics-related social issues.
>
> Jim Why so nasty? A bad mouth is only goes with low life wits that need a life. Get the picture. Bert
>
Lies and ignorance make him irritable, Herb. You doing your part?

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

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

#509453

<herbertglazier0@gmail.com> Glazier the sanctimonious Swine "reber g=emc^2" 
barked:
>
Green gaia kike Sam Wormley wrote:
OK jimp, (Jim Pennino) my faithful Pavlov's dog,
we (= Sam & Swine Gali;Glazier) wait your name calling.
>
Promptly Swine Glazier barked:
 Jim Why so nasty? A bad mouth is only goes with low
life wits that need a life. Get the picture. Bert
>
hanson  wrote:
Nothing on Usenet is as nasty and no-wit as is Glazier,
the Swine, which become clear as soon as
>
<herbertglazier0@gmail.com> :B::ert Glazier, the Swine,
Hate monger, Jewish Jailbird, Faceshitter & Graveyard
vandal, Racist and Bigot "reber g=emc^2" has introduced
himself as/with
>
:B:: "I am a proud Jew with a Superiority complex &
:B:: an IQ of 122", & "I do know how everything works,.."
:B:: "Being Jewish I know this is so very true" -- Bert.
:B:: "I'm a non-bible(torra) Jew I'm the only Jew that
:B:: got 2 letters from two Popes. Bert
:B:: "I gave G=EMC^2 (wrong & stolen) to the world"
:B:: ***** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert *****
:B:: "Even the FBI has me as a trouble maker and
:B:: the FBI blocks my phone from calling them. "....
:B:: cuz "I was mixing sulfur,carbon & iron together
:B:: to make gun powder" ... which happened after....
>
(3)
On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015:
when <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>, the Jewish Swine wrote:
Harlow HVAC, Saul Levy & Benj, I'll be sitting on your face
to take a shit & say: "Open wide". ... after.
>
(2)
On 06Dec2014, you, Hebe Herbie, said to
"benj" <nobody@gmail.com>: Reality is you always post under
me for you are an ass kisser. For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser.
Benj, you can thank me in advance. - TreBert. ... after
>
(1)
On 25Mar2008 Swine Glazier wrote in:
https://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3ffe7b2257cf8a9a
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.physics/uYtpFTRnW4k/morPVyJ7_j8J
Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And have agood laugh
when it seeps down on your face. -- Bert.
>
(above template to be used to snip Bert's Glazierola and
to administer loving "Recall Therapy" for Swine Glazier
until Glazier acknowledges that Glazier is a Swine.
>
<http://tinyurl.com/G-EMC2-Recall-Therapy>
<http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier>.

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

#509451

On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 8:20:53 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much 
> faster than predicted
> > http://phys.org/news/2015-07-paper-prominent-scientists-ocean-faster.html
> 
> > A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted
> > climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario
> > where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have
> > predicted--they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and
> > Physics--an open access site created to allow for public peer review
> > of researcher ideas.
> >
> > At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if
> > global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been
> > set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a
> > rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have
> > suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous
> > levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels
> > are somehow kept below that benchmark.
> >
> > To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened
> > before--back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age),
> > when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they
> > are now. They found that ocean levels were higher than they should
> > have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for
> > an explanation--after much work they came up with the idea that a
> > small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet
> > ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which
> > created a feedback loop--the more the ice sheet melted the faster it
> > began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that
> > adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation,
> > where coastal areas and island countries will face dire
> > consequences.
> >
> > The paper has already been met with some criticism by other
> > climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting
> > on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the
> > world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is
> > addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work
> > will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been
> > set--that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes
> > that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is
> > too late--if it is not already.
> >
> 
>    OK jimp, my faithful Pavlov's dog, we wait your name calling.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

Sam Make my 22 foot boat 122 feet call it the "{ARK) and every fire station should have one to take people off their house roofs.Its a plan  TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web