Grumpy Greta and the Rising sea

Reality Check:
That meme is plain stupid; it only fuels the leftist narrative of dumb conservatives.
Sea levels have been recorded since the 1850s.
hijacking the top comment to post the data.

no- OP's meme.

It's called TIDES. Ever heard of them?

ok, this is an embarrassing moment for you, but it teaches an important lesson.

Dafuq do tides have to do with global warming scaremongerong?

absolutely nothing, Jeff. that's my point. you can't take photos at high and low tide and say it's evidence against global warming. it's like saying 'gee it still gets cold in winter' or 'today is a lovely day'. it just reveals what you don't know.

How do you know when the pictures were taken? Both were obviously in the daytime, which would suggest on some level that they were of the same tide. Besides, the survey markers on the coast that measured sea level 50 years ago are still about the same. There has been a few tenths rise, but nothing substantial, and that's taking tides into consideration.

i'm just applying common sense. what explanation do you have for two photos taken at the "same tide" that are clearly many feet of ocean level different? if we're saying global warming is hooey, there should be no difference. if you believe they're taken at about the same time of day, why would the sea level be dramatically lower now?

I refer to my opening statement, "How do you know..." If you don't have enough information to make a sound judgment...then don't. Again...according to monument markers used to determine actual sea level, not much has changed in over 50 years since they were set. We still use them as a baseline for all other elevations around the US, and implicity other areas of the world as well. Every state has a grid of "givens" (Long, Lat, and Elev) markers that use the monuments at the coasts as a baseline for establishing elevations across the country. The markers on the coast never move, so if the oceans were actually rising as everyone on the left seems so damned scared of, the markers would prove it....but they don't, cause the oceans are fairly static, only going up a few tenths over the last five decades; not enough to swallow islands and submerge our coastline.

lol you dope. i did have enough info to make a sound judgment, so i did. it's just not obvious to you. here's a plainer comparison of the two photos with the scale adjusted to be the same. the water level in the modern photo is plainly lower, so he didn't account for tides.

your mention of the use of the markers is completely irrelevant. of course those markers can still be used to establish elevations elsewhere in the country *if* the change in sea levels are added to the calculation. colorado doesn't care about a change of a few inches, but coastal states should.

according to noaa.gov:

"Global sea level has been rising over the past century, and the rate has increased in recent decades. In 2014, global sea level was 2.6 inches above the 1993 average—the highest annual average in the satellite record (1993-present). Sea level continues to rise at a rate of about one-eighth of an inch per year. Feb 26, 2021"

so at the present rate, it would rise another foot in the next 100 years. but "the rate has been increasing in recent decades", meaning an acceleration. why are levels rising and why is it accelerating? not a burning issue in New York City, but for flatter states like Florida where real estate and beaches and tourism are major sources of income (and that's just the US, of course), it's a major concern. think acceleration and then think 200-300 years. and there are other impacts of global warming that affect everyone. go do some reading and then you can lecture me.

The pictures aren't even scaled correctly, the base of the statue is different as well and has been extended out..(erosion issues?) But you can see the high tide mark, not that it matters that much, but the water level is essentially the same when you factor in that little discrepancy toward the bottom center of your pic showing added terrain features. Pictures aren't even at the same angle as well. Not the same pic = not enough to make sound judgments. Judgments..yes, just not sound ones. Surveyors don't use pics to establish anything. We use actual measurements that are within .05' or better done by precision instruments. Using pictures taken decades apart and at different angles and distances to buttress a point for or against anything climate-related is just stupid.

lol you experts so full of yourself. if you took the time to measure the heights of various features on the monument, you'd see that it is correctly scaled despite the difference in angles and distance to the camera.

if one could judge the high tide mark, of course it would look the same. the difference would only be a few inches.

you've got some experience yet to get under your belt. i'm sure you'll be better later on.

"if one could judge the high tide mark, of course it would look the same. the difference would only be a few inches."

Well...if nothing else, at least you agree that the ocean only varies by a few inches between pics, which makes my point, and the OP's point abundantly clear. There is nothing to be alarmed about, concerned enough to plan ahead, yes, but not alarmed.

And...in the study of sea levels and structures...and anything concerning land development, I am a paid professional in the field, which is why I know using pictures to talk about this subject is ludicrous. I'm not sure what experience my two degrees and 30+ years in Civil Engineering needs to be better than your Googlebrain knowledge on this subject, but you can keep have it.

well sonuva gun! i too have two degrees and 30+ years experience! and one of the things it's taught me is that experience can improve a person's caution, but usually not their judgment. i was simply referring to your inability to judge scale from photos that had even been resized and aligned to make it easy for you. i assumed from that that you are younger, but maybe you've peaked already. Googlebrain lol

Having lived at the beach, I know the level isn't rising substantially. Erosion is the primary issue, with sand having to be pumped back onto the beaches every few years. That's also why islands gradually move and/or disappear over time. As a civil engineer and occasional surveyor, I'm privy to the data used to establish actual elevations. That's why I brought those monuments up. The oceans are rising slowly...just like they always have, and there will come a time when they start to recede again...just like they always have. But...there is absolutely no call for the level of anxiety and alarm leftists are pushing on everyone. We literally build cities below sea level and no one bats an eye. If the oceans rose three feet over the next hundred years, it would simply push people back...very slowly, into the mainland...We'd adapt, just like we always have. It's easier to build levees and sea walls than it is to turn back the ocean. Not enough is being done to actually mitigate the problem. Instead, leftists would have us believe that paying more in taxes is somehow going to stop nature from doing what it has always done, which is the broader point. Leftists deliberately create and overblow crises for the sake of grabbing power through fear. And I'm not having it. No one on the beach in Florida or anywhere else is even concerned about your 200-300 year predictions especially the politicians buying and leasing real-estate on the coast. You think that we can't come up with a workable solution to rising oceans in a couple of hundred years? Hell we do it all the time now...have been for over a hundred years. It's not even rocket science. It's just moving dirt to where it's needed. All ya need is dump trucks and earthmovers and someone like myself to tell them where to put it.

two points (i don't have the time y'all seem to):

*not* just like it always has. it's argued to be faster than in previous cycles, suggesting a human contribution to the effect.

and true, it's not even a burning issue for Florida, given that solutions to rising seas can always be found. but we don't know the future of the acceleration and other problems of global warming and atmospheric contamination can have faster timelines and be more expensive to solve.

i know some people like to wait for crises to build before action is taken, but i've always been an ounce-of-prevention person.

you just proved how the more modern one is lower than the older one

correct. i proved it's lower in that photo. which means only that the photos aren't evidence of anything but tides.

The water level does look about the same. Liar

grown-ups talking kid

Lol, well your a grown up liar. Look at the pictures again, the water level is essentially the same. Where do you get several feet lower. Oh right you just make it up as usual.

Tell Kiribati that you blind f**k