Catastrophic sea levels 'distinct possibility'

Catastrophic sea levels

www.breitbart.com

A breakthrough study of fluctuations in sea levels the last time Earth was between ice ages, as it is now, shows that oceans rose some three meters in only decades due to collapsing ice sheets.
The findings suggest that such an scenario -- which would redraw coastlines worldwide and unleash colossal human misery -- is "now a distinct possibility within the next 100 years," said lead researcher Paul Blanchon, a geoscientist at Mexico's National University

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 15-4-2009 by superdeluxe]

What a pretty scary thought that our coastlines will change within the next 100 years. What can cities do right now to try and survive this? I am wondering if there is any technology that would be able to make giant seawalls or something that could help against this.

Start to create buildings on giant stilts?

Or are we just going to have to abandon the coasts, and move further inland?

www.breitbart.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by superdeluxe


Coastal buffer zones have been advocated for years but people really want their beach front homes then when a hurricane comes they look for a bail out much like those that live in flood prone areas. The Netherlands have the most advanced coastal defense against rising sea water that I know of and they need it as a good portion of that country is reclaimed from the sea and at or below sea level. It would be good to sea a map of the above sea level locations for each foot of sea rise. Too bad so many people fight science.

several times I've read just under 200 feet in a worse case... that's a pretty tall stilt house... Guess I'll have to rethink buying a foreclosed home in Miami and get me some good old beachfront land in Knoxville

[edit on 15-4-2009 by DaddyBare]

reply to post by superdeluxe


Well firstly, there isn't really anything you can do, building sea walls isn't going to help all that much because then that limits mobility of trade and narrows channels.

The sea levels are rising all the time, and if this is suspected to take atleast 100 years, then technological inovation will find a solution at some point or another.

It's never a good idea to work against mother nature, she usually wins every time. And the re-drawing of coast lines might be better for us anyway, it would bring up fresh land and provide a rush of nutrients to in land soil.

That's just my opinion however, it would cause some unseen destruction and despair, but that is the human condition. We live on a terra forming planet that constantly changes itself in response to our actions and natural cycles.

It's only a matter time before our way of life gets in the way of the natural order of things.

~Keeper

It might be because i live 700 meters above sea level that i am not worried - but it also might be for following reasons:
Dutch manage living with almost constant flooding - they use walls, dams,sea-gates and now add floating houses. So it will not cause mayhem if answer to this possibility planned in advance.
Also,even more important - it is a "distinct possibility" according to the research. So it probably would not happen (in foreseeable future). But even if it does - several decades are long time if people will choose cool heads and planned response over running around and screaming "what to do now??".
It will not be the biggest or most dangerous challenge future will present to us - thats for sure.

Great thoughts from everyone thank you.

I had another question about cities that are on the water, but are further inland via Inlet, for example, cities such as Seattle, does it have any additional protection because the Ocean has to funnel through the Strait of Juan De Fuca and Puget Sound?

No disrespect to the researchers, but what exactly constitutes a 'distinct possibility'?

Why is it that these scientist are reported as stating the inevitability of doom and gloom, but never actually saying precisely how likely the scenario is?

Do they think we would not understand 10%, 1 in 1,000, or anything that might have a real statistical value?

reply to post by Maxmars


Distinct possibility means they have no real proof and want to line their pockets with global warming cash by pointing out trends in the Arctic only. Don't pay attention to the fact that the ice sheet in Antarctica (where 90% of the worlds ice is) has grown by 4.7% since 1980. That's just a fluke that should be ignored in favor of their computer models.

Okay for something fun go look at these maps ... they assume a 100 meter rise in sea levels
Funny how most of the places I always wanted to visit or live will all be underwater...
World Maps

They've bombarded us with Catastrophic climate this and disastrous climate that. I'm passed caring and they are all full of crap, if they gave a hoot then they'd club together and create a 200bn package for open source electric battery technology and large scale geothermal power stations. Instead they pollute the oceans, the air and the land which doesn't have to happen all for the pursuit of profit....


There is no profit in saving the earth, especially now that we have carbon credits, way to go you corrupt slimy political scumbags.

Quick! if we all pay our carbon taxes, we can bribe mother nature so that she might reconsider!

I heard Al Gore will be negotiating the agreement

Humans should try and understand that nature is what it is, It can not be controled.
We must learn to live with the planet and not try and control it.
For thousands and thousands of years humans where adaptable and lived within the conditions, If water levels where high, they moved to higher ground, if sea level was lower, once again they moved.
We as people have become a bit to arrogant and now feel as though we are seperate from nature and feel as though we must control the world.

smartest move would be to adapt rather than try and control, those animals that have adapted in the past are the ones that have survived.

is "now a distinct possibility within the next 100 years,"

Ever notice that these people always seem to speak in uncertainties? If you can't say something is 100%, without a doubt, going to happen then don't say it. It's pure speculation and worse, speculation with an ulterior motive.


TheAssociate

Here is what I think: all big cities by the oceans and lakes are - too big anyway. People should move inland and live normal lives, with their own food and clean air to breath.

By the time we have this problem, hopefully, bankers will no longer have the power, they will be gone and there would be no need for big, polluted cites which were made for population control and profit of - bankers only.

So, no big deal. It will be actually a good change. Hopefully, we will never again have useless big cities that create misery to human kind.

Just a thought.


[edit on 15-4-2009 by greshnik]

It's GREENWARE pure and simple.

It don't exist. No matter how many could, may, or mights you wrap it up nice and pretty in...

It's speculative BS and has absolutely ANYTHING to do with REAL GREEN.

In another thread the question was asked (and answered ) how much has the 'sea level' risen in the last 100 years.

100 meters? 10 meters? 1 meter?

Without looking it up, take your best guess.

When you get the real answer...

There is 'a distinct possibility' (you) (read: could/may/might) understand exactly how much you've been hustled.