Global Warming and Rising Sea Levels

Upvote.

If Sea Levels Rise,
Will that have an effect upon Elevation of Mountains on Topographical Maps?

For example, Everest is 29K above sea level.

If Sea Levels Rise, will that result in <29K ???

29,031 feet above sea level to be precise.

Sea level is expected to rise a single foot in thirty years.

So Everest will still be 29k feet above sea level if those projections remain precise.

But 40% of Hawaii’s beaches may be underwater. The other coastal states may fair better.

So far, sea levels have only risen by a few inches, as the OP meme shows. But the projections of the sea levels rising have mostly been consistently accurate.

"So far, sea levels have only risen by a few inches, as the OP meme shows."

I don't think you're looking at the same photo as everyone else. If anything, the photo on the right shows a small drop in sea level.

Of course, it's all probably pointless, right? That's assuming there are tides in New York harbor. So photographic "evidence" of this sort should be irrelevant to either side of this argument.

So you don’t know how inches look miles away. They’re negligible.

The water looks the same?

Here’s my though:
Global warming is an issue bc we unnaturally accelerated it.
It’s not as bad as the government makes it out to be, but it does not mean it should just be ignored

Coral is a very important part of the ocean's eco-system that host many, many, forms of marine life, and once the coral dies, so too will that affect our vast oceans.

We are melting our ice caps that are used to keep this planet cool and livable. Without our ice caps, our cool oceans, our planet will become a very hot place, a lot of forest fires, a lot of extreme weather (including blizzards.) Weather will become increasingly difficult to predict.

But w/e. Confirmation bias right? Ocean levels haven't risen enough for you yet. Doesn't affect you? Not your problem.

When the NOAA director's salary is $287,000 per year, there is a chance that their "studies" produce results that favor the government's stance on the topic of the environment. Hard to rule out bias if you want to keep that cushy job safe.

You're welcome to disprove the results.

Classic meme, upvote sir.

so very well stated

i love you

Sure lets sink a bunch of rubber tires like Florida once tried in an attempt to promote coral reproduction and growth. . .work quite well. . .EXCEPT IT DIDN'T! Want to do that then take a long hard look at any sunken metal boat or airplane guess what happens even if it takes a few decades. We got airplane and vehicle graveyards. Strip a few them of anything toxic and sink them. See what happens over time and it coral will take to them as they have done to ships and planes that crashed into the oceans.

So, you're focusing on what they'll grow on...

I'm talking about change in ocean temperature that is affecting the coral right now...

It's not that I don't think we should strive to curb pollution.

It's that I don't trust politicians.
"Peer-reviewed" studies are just another Big Club as well, like the we get hit in the head with every day.
Covid-19 hysteria exposed this.

I also don't like how the Sun is never in the equation when I read the Climate Change religious texts.

Sure the sun is in the equation. That's what causes the warming lol. I mean, we make gases that trap it. There's a loose theory about the sun's expansion warming the Earth and the habitable zone moving, but there's no hard data for that yet.

Peer-reviewed is an issue for you? So what would you have in its place? What method could scientists use to corroborate and verify the results of rival scientists? Already, this method of acquiring knowledge is the most strictly conservative in their approach.

To even submit a research paper for grants, you need to speak to five different science specialists - a panel, and tell them what you want to do. If your paper smells even remotely like shit, they'll toss it on you and tell you to go back and try again.

You do your paper, at least 1,000 is the minimum sample size (number of people tested). Then you have to prove it twice, submit it to others for testing, see if they can repeat the results, then you submit it back to the panel, then they put it out for the greater scientific community to test and see if they can repeat the same results.

Depending on the experiment, it can take several years, to complete. Mental health studies are even harder as the experiments typically span 7 to 14 years at minimum so developmental change can be noted.

Sure, there can be some hacks who get put on the panel. But this is the best we've got.

Could you offer a better solution?

1989 UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.