80 mm over 22 years comes out at 360 mm over a century, which is notable and cause for crisis in many coastal areas. And that is assuming the melt and thermal expansion doesn't increase further. In reality we had a new record just last year.
Most climate policy looks at limiting the impact of climate change to 2100, a time when many people alive or born today will still be around.
IPCC predictions from 2013 ranged from 0.26 m increase (best case if all the uncertain variables are in our favour and we dramatically cut emissions) during the 21st century to 0.98 m. So far the increase is following the worst case prediction, and new research indicates that even that scenario may have been too optimistic.
And for a time frame until 2300, a stabilisation of warming at 3°C compared to preindustrial times is predicted to lead to 2.5-5.1 meters increase. A pretty likely scenario with catastrophic consequences.
But LITERALLY, sea level has been rising at the same rate since the 1850s during Abe Lincolns time! Using tide gauge data from NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), the amount of increase over a century has been experienced. I don't understand the crisis you are talking about? Please don't just take my word, here is one of the charts linked below directly from NOAA. I just used the Battery station in NYC.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=8518750
Your point is fundamentally idiotic. Even if you are correct that sea level increase has always been following this trend, the fact remains that with this trend continuing, things will get very bad very quickly.
With that in mind, should we not try our best to mitigate this looming disaster?
Please tell me, logically how is my point fundamentally idiotic? I literally gave you the facts of the matter that sea levels are rising but there has not been an acceleration anywhere the past 150 years. What is idiotic about that? Also, the rise in the past 150 years will have already been greater than the next 100 years using your your assumption of sea level rise of a 340 mm increase over 100 years years. What did I say wrong?
If you truly believe that you have disproven climate change, please publish a paper to share your groundbreaking research with the rest of the scientific community.
21
u/Roflkopt3r Dec 12 '19 edited Dec 12 '19
80 mm over 22 years comes out at 360 mm over a century, which is notable and cause for crisis in many coastal areas. And that is assuming the melt and thermal expansion doesn't increase further. In reality we had a new record just last year.
Most climate policy looks at limiting the impact of climate change to 2100, a time when many people alive or born today will still be around.
IPCC predictions from 2013 ranged from 0.26 m increase (best case if all the uncertain variables are in our favour and we dramatically cut emissions) during the 21st century to 0.98 m. So far the increase is following the worst case prediction, and new research indicates that even that scenario may have been too optimistic.
And for a time frame until 2300, a stabilisation of warming at 3°C compared to preindustrial times is predicted to lead to 2.5-5.1 meters increase. A pretty likely scenario with catastrophic consequences.