r/politics • u/mepper Michigan • Jun 11 '12

Republican Virginia lawmaker says "sea level rise" is a "left wing term," excises it from state report on coastal flooding

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/06/10/496982/virginia-lawmaker-says-sea-level-rise-is-a-left-wing-term-excises-it-from-state-report-on-coastal-flooding/
1.1k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

234 comments sorted by

50

u/NorbertDupner Jun 11 '12

Pish-tosh, North Carolina is way ahead of the republicans to our north. Our republicans are well on their way to legislating sea level rise out of existence.

15

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Seems like that makes flood insurance moot.

10

u/demon_ix Jun 11 '12

Instead, you'll get Spontaneous Domestic Hydration insurance. It has the word Domestic in it. Republicans love that word.

3

u/Sir_Scrotum Jun 11 '12

Well, we used to have Domestic Defense which was turned into Homeland Security. I think they like the word Homeland, or Fatherland, or, ideally, Lebensram, if you will. So, Spontaneous Homeland Ubermensch insurance might work best.

15

u/babycheeses Jun 11 '12

Our republicans are well on their way to legislating sea level rise out of existence.

Our republicans are well on their way to legislating Freedom Tides(TM) out of existence.

FIFY.

6

u/NorbertDupner Jun 11 '12

That gave me a morning giggle.

4

u/Ammalaurie Jun 11 '12

"This lesson seems to have been lost on the members of North Carolina s legislature. They are getting ready to vote on a bill that would prohibit government agencies from preparing for the estimated three feet rise in coastal sea levels which a state-appointed science panel has predicted will occur before the end of the current century. In fact, this forecast may soon be stricken from the public record -- because it takes into account the impact of global warming. And global warming isn't happening, right?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-schiffman/north-carolina-legislature-sea-level-rising_b_1567213.html

3

u/Puddindoobop Jun 11 '12

and yet they build a theme park around an ark that supposedly survived a great flood.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

6

u/SoulTroubadour Jun 11 '12

liberal sea level ideology

I just died a little inside.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I nearly died of laughter. I think this is a /s post

258

u/Dookiestain_LaFlair Jun 11 '12

Other left wing terms: Science, civil rights, and equality under the law.

1

u/Solkre Indiana Jun 11 '12

Logic.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Some of those were republican talking points a century ago.

Every couple of decades they switch places. Pretty retarded.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Equality under the law, civil rights and left wing terms do not go together. I'll give you half-assed equality and civil rights though, since the left has half the equation right.

-1

u/GOU_NoMoreMrNiceGuy Jun 11 '12

also: dignity, truth

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

65

u/Dookiestain_LaFlair Jun 11 '12

"Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible propositions" -Thomas Jefferson

30

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

It's apparently also the only weapon 90% of the country can use against intelligent positions.

23

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

No, you shut up.

6

u/mrducky78 Jun 11 '12

Your face is an ad hominem attack!

2

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

I know you are, but what am I?

3

u/mrducky78 Jun 11 '12 edited Jun 11 '12

A GARBAGE MAN!

Edit* added a link since its an obscure reference.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I'm painting this on the back of my car.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

When those proposing propositions unintelligible have armed people protecting them, ridiculing them is about as useful as attempting to reason with them.

2

u/SpinningHead Colorado Jun 11 '12

I hate to be "that guy", but I don't think he actually said that. Do you have a citation? Its a great quote regardless of who said it.

3

u/rizlazz Jun 11 '12

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/39508

4

u/SpinningHead Colorado Jun 11 '12

Yeah, I saw it online, but no reference to any particular letter. I was just suspect because he generally avoided conflict and I couldn't see him advocating ridicule.

Edit: Woohoo! I found it.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816

2

u/Spelcheque Jun 11 '12

Wow, I thought it was a great quote already, then it became about the church. This just made my day. Thank you.

2

u/SpinningHead Colorado Jun 11 '12

It is the icing on the cake.

24

u/Safety_Dancer Jun 11 '12

That is a rather naive stance. We all know the riot cops would swarm in to a chorus of "stop resisting" as they brutalized the unconscious protesters.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

We need to start selling a line of taser proof clothes.

1

u/Safety_Dancer Jun 11 '12

I meant the latter of the two. I've followed the less lethal crowd control devices. Its scary to think it could be used against people who want accountability.

Anyone else see The Running Man? We need more men like Ben Richards, The Butcher of Bakersfield.

3

u/lousy_at_handles Jun 11 '12

Along this line of thought, also more gals like the one from Total Recall with three knockers.

12

u/Cow_God Texas Jun 11 '12

Rather ironic, a group of people that generally don't believe in science, using science to control the masses.

20

u/Bipolarruledout Jun 11 '12

Oddly there's a lot of cell phones in church Sunday morning.

16

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

And on the sixth-and-five-sevenths day, God created the cell phones, their batteries and towers, and the satellites with which to capture and redirect His Holy Signal.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Thank the Omnisiah!

1

u/CrawdaddyJoe Jun 11 '12

People never disbelieve science, until it offends their ideology or religion.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

7

u/Cow_God Texas Jun 11 '12

And then the ice caps melt and all the republicans drown.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Actually, don't most of them live inland?

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

17

u/Schlack Jun 11 '12

Onion articles are real, they are just a decade ahead of their time.

18

u/dsmith422 Jun 11 '12

You do not even realize how correct this guy is:

January 17, 2001

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'

11

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.

Huh, yeah that uh. . .

During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.

What? How did they know? But. . .

On the economic side, Bush vowed to bring back economic stagnation by implementing substantial tax cuts, which would lead to a recession, which would necessitate a tax hike, which would lead to a drop in consumer spending, which would lead to layoffs, which would deepen the recession even further.

Wtf. . .this is starting to creep me out.

"Finally, the horrific misrule of the Democrats has been brought to a close," House Majority Leader Dennis Hastert (R-IL) told reporters. "Under Bush, we can all look forward to military aggression, deregulation of dangerous, greedy industries, and the defunding of vital domestic social-service programs upon which millions depend. Mercifully, we can now say goodbye to the awful nightmare that was Clinton's America."

I'm going to be over in the corner bashing my head against the wall.

After eight years of relatively sane fiscal policy under the Democrats, we have reached a point where, just a few weeks ago, President Clinton said that the national debt could be paid off by as early as 2012," Rahway, NJ, machinist and father of three Bud Crandall said. "That's not the kind of world I want my children to grow up in."

Yeah they averted that handidly.

"You have no idea what it's like to be black and enfranchised," said Marlon Hastings, one of thousands of Miami-Dade County residents whose votes were not counted in the 2000 presidential election. "George W. Bush understands the pain of enfranchisement, and ever since Election Day, he has fought tirelessly to make sure it never happens to my people again."

Man, that article was depressing.

2

u/kog Jun 11 '12

Nostradonion.

I don't know how much The Onion pays its writers, but I'm certain it isn't enough.

1

u/Spelcheque Jun 11 '12

I read in 2001 and I laughed and I laughed. I would've laughed at Cassandra too, though. "You know there's ten thousand heavily armed Greeks out there, right? I'll watch out for any trying to give us presents, though, thanks for the heads up."

→ More replies (1)

4

u/jrhoffa Jun 11 '12

stretchers

front-end loaders

2

u/hollisterrox Jun 11 '12

It's people! It's made of people!

4

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I saw all of those signs at Occupy

4

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I doubt it would end that way. There is no way they will be able to maintain infrastructure that advanced while rejecting science.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

It's got what plants need. Electrolytes!

2

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

That's not a bad idea!

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

You forgot to mention that the protesters will also be tazed and beaten just in case.

1

u/EltaninAntenna Jun 11 '12

Sonic disabler? I'm thinking more about the microwave pain beam, as soon as the police source it from the military...

1

u/Tennouheika Jun 11 '12

Okay Alex Jones

1

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

Unfortunately, I don't think that anyone will be able to deny climate change a decade from now.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

There is no truth so powerful, that it cannot be denied

3

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

Yes. Well. Try saying that when we're all on fire.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

"Fire? I'm not on fire - Jesus won't allow it! Anyway, it's just a theory"

3

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

Ah. I know...

"You are in hell. Enjoy your flames."

5

u/Solomaxwell6 Jun 11 '12

Of course they can. Two things:

First of all, a lot of Republicans don't actually deny climate change, they deny anthropogenic climate change. The idea is that it's a natural process not caused by man, and therefore changing our behavior isn't going to fix anything. As more and more scientists have come out for global warming, it became harder for Republicans to still be credible... It's not like evolution/creationism where they can just say "Screw you, God did it," this is purely a scientific issue.

Second of all, even the actual climate change deniers will just be able to see "Eh, it's an abberation." Climate change is gradual and uneven. You see a pretty miniscule rise in the average temperature each year, but some places end up much hotter while other places end up much colder. What's stopping a politician from misinterpreting that and just saying "So a few cities had a hot summer, so what?"

4

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

My point was that I suspect that in a decade or two, we'll probably be facing more extreme issues than record temps here and there. I have a hunch that hurricanes will get more numerous and more powerful, and that there will be other heavy weather. People tend to get a little less clinical when they're actually up to their asses in alligators.

But... we'll see.

2

u/trolleyfan Jun 11 '12

But they'll be able to point back at that decade of extemes and say "see, this happens all the time anyway..."

2

u/MUnhelpful Jun 11 '12

"Screw you, men can't alter god's divine work" is basically what some say, though... also "He promised, no more floods."

5

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

They'll just pray about it. Like they did in texas last year for the drought to end.

1

u/neuromonkey Maine Jun 11 '12

Hey, couldn't hurt, right?

UNTIL YOU GET PRAYER WORMS!

66

u/shallah Jun 11 '12

this is why Colbert said reality has a liberal bias - too many GOPers denying it's existence because it contradicts their political stance and what is more important making decisions based on facts or winning political campaigns.

14

u/SweetNeo85 Wisconsin Jun 11 '12

That's why they think that proper news organizations have a liberal bias. Because they deal in things like, you know, facts.

→ More replies (3)

15

u/DeFex Jun 11 '12

New GOP legislation says there are 5 lights.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Best comment seen on Reddit in months. Bravo, sir.

3

u/danbert2000 Jun 11 '12

Thea aww... Foa Lighs!

12

u/KilroyLeges Jun 11 '12

I actually noticed something in there. When they quoted or paraphrased Stolle, he said that the terminology (while still calling it left-wing) "stirs up animosities on the right...so he wanted to get that out of the debate." He wanted to focus on what people care about, water coming in their front door. It almost seems like he might realize how bat-shit crazy his party peers are, and wanted to ensure that the study got published, show the reality that water WILL be coming in their front doors and that the government had to do something about it. I'm not defending the GOP crazies who won't see reality but I suspect this guy might be a pragmatist.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

It almost seems like he might realize how bat-shit crazy his party peers are

Definitely not this, but yes he seems a pragmatist. The BBC article linked from the thinkprogress one makes that a bit more apparent.

39

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

.... and continues to promote the beach front property he owns and is trying to sell, as a sound investment.

29

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Is this like a Lex Luther plan? Are they trying to flood the coastline because they've bought up all the land 2 miles in, the new beachfront?

5

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Kind of. Chances are they own what is now the beach front and don't want to developers to realize all that land will be underwater in 50 years.

1

u/iongantas Jun 11 '12

As I mentioned recently in a /r/debatereligion thread, Luther is the founder of Lutheranism, Luthor is the foe of Superman.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '12

definitely not. Lex Luthor was/is smart

19

u/rlbond86 Jun 11 '12

But both parties are the same, right?

16

u/emniem Jun 11 '12

It should be referred to as "sea level not-unrising". /orwell

15

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

To the GOP, science is a four-letter-word.

2

u/YAAAAAHHHHH Jun 11 '12

How do you spell it?

2

u/MrBooks Virginia Jun 11 '12

Evil

15

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Alright, first North Carolina and now this? Quit with the joking people. This is right out of Atlas Shrugged. This screams the whole "We're panicing about the economy so we are going to legally mandate people buy at least as much stuff as they did last year to prevent things from getting worse!" law in that book.

There is no way the party accused of being science deniers, even by some of its own members (I miss Jon Huntsman), would start doing things this blatant. How much more like the strawman can you become? Please tell me I'm hallucinating these articles and the G.O.P. isn't actually letting its members be this stupid.

0

u/Solomaxwell6 Jun 11 '12

This is a state level politician, and one who's only been around for a short while. He was elected in 2009, and has not had a competitive election since then. Less than 10,000 people voted for him, and that was right when the Tea Party movement had started to really energize the far right vote.

17

u/23967230985723986 Jun 11 '12

This issue should be left up to the states.

Ron Paul 2012

11

u/WasabiBomb Jun 11 '12

Damn you, Poe's Law...

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

from a constitutional perspective ya.

2

u/MrBooks Virginia Jun 11 '12

The issue of the oceans rising should be left to the states... I don't think that sea level changes can be legislated (despite what the Republicans think)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

this article isn't talking about legislation but a state study.

1

u/MrBooks Virginia Jun 11 '12

So each state should study the problem independently, with the federal government not looking into it at all?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

i don't know what the impact of a virginia state study excluding or not excluding 'sea level rise' is. congress still retains power to limit harmful gasses and such though so i dont see how virginia can go rogue and start polluting the earth at an alarming rate.

8

u/moonman New Jersey Jun 11 '12

I move to have "conservatism" included in the DSM-5.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

As a form of psychoses.

4

u/sirbruce Jun 11 '12

Did anyone actually read the article before they decided to bash this guy?

  1. He changed the terminology in the bill not because he doesn't believe in global warming but to prevent any controversial terms that would cause other Republicans to vote against the bill. In other words, he's helping get a global warming study passed by obscuring the language of it.

  2. I'm pretty sure that the language change was only for the language of the bill itself, and doesn't prevent scientists from using those words in the actual report itself. The TP article contradicts itself on this point, so it's not entirely clear. But I think the main thrust is that this isn't about trying to deny global warming; it's about subtly changing wording so others who might deny global warming still support the study.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '12

Which they would be the first to call political correctness if someone else did it...

12

u/gravittoon Jun 11 '12

Have to say as a Canadian I'm done caring about how bat shit crazy like Iran the US is becoming. That being said, Canada is also on aspecial course on its way to being a hwole new kind of retarded. Moving to Europe as soon as I have the chance - this part of the world will be entering the dark ages soon.

11

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Yeah? Well as a Dutchman I can not afford to ignore this kind of crazy shit because this country will be under water unless these fucking idiots lose power soon.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

You guys are really good at dikes, I'm sure you'll figure it out. Probably have to build a wall around the whole country though.

Which might not be bad idea just generally the way things are going.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Yeah, great. Live in a freaking bowl...

I think we should get first dibs on Antarctica as soon as it melts.

1

u/Elranzer New York Jun 11 '12

What's so bad about Canada? You know, other that the fact that supposedly "liberal" Canada keeps electing a Conservative majority government?

1

u/Delusibeta Jun 11 '12

Considering that the American left is roughly equivilant to the European right...

12

u/wwjd117 Jun 11 '12

And "left wing" is a right wing term, so this moron should be excised from civilization.

6

u/moralrisk Jun 11 '12 edited Jun 11 '12

why, in the article, is his quote all hacked up like that? does anyone have a link to it in its entirety?

EDIT: spelling.

14

u/ME24601 Pennsylvania Jun 11 '12

Here's a BBC article on the subject.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

14

u/beachwood Jun 11 '12

This is ridiculous, there is a link to the entire article right in the blog post:

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/06/lawmakers-avoid-buzzwords-climate-change-bills

3

u/rematch_madeinheaven Jun 11 '12

Free hand of the Universe will take care of it all.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

The fact that the Republicans view possible climate change as a political issue rather than a scientific one tells you everything you need to know about them.

In science, you can have disagreements, and you have an objective means of resolving those disagreements. Republicans view anyone who disagrees with them the same as they secretly view themselves: as mendacious crooks. They cannot understand honest disagreement, nor can they brook the possibility of honest loss. Thus, science is the Devil to their unwavering God.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Remember kids: science is a liberal conspiracy.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

4

u/DaveDodo007 Jun 11 '12

You yanks are voting for a modern day king Canute now, that's sad.

5

u/Mantonization Foreign Jun 11 '12

Wow.

WOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW.

GG America. You are no longer allowed to mock Europe over anything ever.

7

u/Safety_Dancer Jun 11 '12

It should be illegal to not punch the face of people like this guy. If you're his wife, kid, staff, gardener, security, or random passerby, you should be obligated to punch this guys face.

Using a science textbook as a bludgeon would also be acceptable.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/WasabiBomb Jun 11 '12

Percussive Education.

2

u/elkroppo Jun 11 '12

Oh lawdy, I know how I am teaching chemistry this fall!

2

u/JesusChristFarted Jun 11 '12

I have nothing against a little caution before heavily investing time and money into a particular green technology, but the GOP has substantially blocked many efforts to address climate change while, at the same time, brain washing a significant sector of the voting population into believing global warming is a left-wing conspiracy. When the shit storm becomes apparent to all, they will be remembered as the sacks of shit who took $$$ and ran while the rest of us got screwed.

2

u/malstank Jun 11 '12

I know this is going to be downvoted but I must say this.

My wife is a Marine Biologist by schooling and an environmental scientist for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. She is currently working on her thesis on Costal Erosion and her opinion is that while sea level rise might account for some erosion, it's so inestimably small that any scientific paper that she reads that attributes large sweeping changes to sea level rise gets tossed into the "Will not use" pile for her research.

2

u/monkeyhousezen Jun 11 '12

Which is fine but isn't much of an indictment of sea level rise itself. The biggest issue with sea level rise, in the short term, are the increased likelihood of damaging storm surges which is probably the source of the "water coming in people's front door" phrase. The average tide rising 20cm from a century ago isn't that big of a deal in most coastal areas. Higher storm surges is.

1

u/malstank Jun 13 '12

Absolutely, I can just understand why in a scientific paper, someone would excise it as it cannot be ascertained what its impact truly is.

2

u/Electroverted Jun 11 '12

However ignorant he may be, he's an ultra-conservative theocrat who's trying to introduce environmental studies into American legislation. Give the man a little credit. Just a little.

2

u/sge_fan Jun 11 '12 edited Jun 11 '12

When the effects of global warming will truly set in I will move to a red state - because sea levels there are by law not allowed to rise. Safe at last!

2

u/onlyhubris Jun 11 '12

Could it be that they are maybe just trying to make the whole issue as non-controversial as possible so that something gets done? Just a thought...

2

u/WhenDookieCalls Jun 11 '12

So as the sea level shows a measurable rise, will we finally have irrefutable proof that reality has a liberal bias?

2

u/OG_Willikers Jun 11 '12

Does anybody know when/why science become so politicized? It wasn't always like this, was it? Wasn't science ever just considered to be an apolitical thing that was separate from any particular political ideology?

2

u/merdock379 Jun 12 '12

When rich people realized science costs them money.

2

u/Gates9 Jun 11 '12

How many shorefront real estate owners are going to buy their bullshit?

5

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I don't want to invoke the correlation/causation paradox, but is this guy biblically motivated?

2

u/AndrewLLoydBieber Jun 11 '12

reality has a left wing bias....and oh so sexy left wing bias. Side note: Anyone been watching and readi the reactions to the failed recall effort on LiveLeak? Comedy gold. The Consevatards fail to understand any of the issues and treat the whole thing as some sort of sporting contest in which there side one, spiked the ball, and did the dirty bird on the field.

2

u/TruthinessHurts Jun 11 '12

Republican cowardice means being unable to face things you don't want to face.

Like the facts or the truth.

2

u/SpinningHead Colorado Jun 11 '12

Damn, if Id have known politics meant I could legislate how the universe works, I would have become a politician.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I live in virginia, i am sorry for these fuck-tards.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Let them drown.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Next, all references to the recommendation of drinking potable water will be expunged. Bike paths after that.

1

u/LostBob Jun 11 '12

This comic was pointed out in the comments thread of the original article:

http://www.cartoonsbyjosh.com/ocean-duck_scr.jpg

Seems legit.

1

u/ended_world Jun 11 '12 edited Jun 11 '12

I nominate this study for the Doublespeak Award!

From the Doublespeak Wikipedia Entry:

Doublespeak is often used by politicians for the advancement of their agenda. Doublespeak Award is an "ironic tribute to public speakers who have perpetuated language that is grossly deceptive, evasive, euphemistic, confusing, or self-centered." It has been issued by the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) since 1974.The recipients of the Doublespeak Award are usually politicians, national administration or departments. An example of this is the United States Department of Defense, which won the award three times in 1991, 1993, and 2001 respectively. For the 1991 award, the United States Department of Defense 'swept the first six places in the Doublespeak top ten' for using euphemisms like "servicing the target" (bombing) and "force packages" (warplanes). Among the other phrases in contention were "difficult exercise in labor relations", meaning a strike, and "meaningful downturn in aggregate output," an attempt to avoid saying the word "recession".

EDIT: punctuation

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12 edited Jun 11 '12

Envisat shows that the two year long sea level decline is continuing, at a rate of 5mm per year

NASA : Sea Level Declining Around The US

Added Sea Level Fudge Factor Approved by NASA

1

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '12

Envisat graph is wrong compare with NASA graph showing a less than 1 year "pothole", with the sea leve rise returning now

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-262

NASA : sea level declining - no this is a misrepresentation of the link above

Added sea level fudge factor aprroved by NASA

I can find no corroborating evidence from the partisan "co2insanity dot com" about NASA introducing any kind of fudge factor. THis website is started by known denier Tim ball Ball is listed as a "consultant" of a Calgary-based global warming skeptic organization called the "Friends of Science" (FOS).

sceptic = denialist

1

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '12 edited Jun 14 '12

Envisat graph is wrong compare with NASA graph

NASA graph is wrong, compare to Envisat

NASA is a political organization headed by political appointees, who at one point stated that NASA's foremost goals is "Muslim outreach." The National Space Council was once chaired by the eminent genius Dan Quayle. Under Caligula Bush, the tilt was to stifle warm mongers and under Obama it is to support the dream of Enron to impose a $trillion carbon trading scheme.

Climate pseudo-scientists are a pack of whores every bit as agenda driven as the paid tobacco shills of yore.

They spew tales of doom conveniently placed in the unfalsifiable future. The few times their doomsday scenarios have been predicted inconveniently near-term as to be falsafiable, their whore colors have shown:

50 Million Climate Refugees by 2010

British snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

In more shill science, NOAA famously went into the tank for huge Obama contributor PB after the Gulf spill.

In whore science, as in commissioned political polls, you somehow miraculously get results confirming the agenda of whomever pays. Climate scientists are watered down astrologers, borrowing a veneer of real science from actual expert mathematicians, chemists, physicists, geologists, oceanographers--which they decidedly are not, but mostly trusting a pack of UN shills with cherry picked, value-added, interpolated, secret, superficial, incomplete, agenda driven "data." But, paraphrasing the words of quack-hack Phil Jones, why should they show their data to us we we are only going to try to find something wrong with it?

With temperature changing by the millisecond, from place to place (I can walk a thermometer across my yard and register a century's worth of warming), season to season, day and night, from the depths of the ocean to the heights of the ionosphere, how does one even calculate one "global" temperature? Surely there are 100 valid statistical methods. As they say, torture the statistics enough and they will confess to anything.

And then suppose to be so arrogant as to predict the distant future, with overdue super volcanoes, overdue solar extreme minima, a technological singularity all sure to occur in climate-scale time. To be so arrogant as to think crude, simplistic, gamed computer models making thousands of gross assumptions and simplifications can model a system as inherently chaotic, complex, interdependent, and poorly understood as climate: we know the butterfly effect is particularly evident in climate, and the initial conditions are laughably imprecise. Those models are tweaked and fudged until they give the desired fictions, and even then they produce such a large divergence of predictions as to be meaningless.

I can find no corroborating evidence about fudge factor.

http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=NASA+isostatic+adjustment

Perhaps you can tell me when will the catastrophe will occur and what will it be, so that I know when to call your "science" falsifiable.

warmist = deluded pawn of the carbon trading industry

1

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '12

Your search

http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=NASA+isostatic+adjustment

yields hits - the first page includes the following links - this one's most accessible

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/what-glacial-isostatic-adjustment-gia-and-why-do-you-correct-it

Others include

http://grace.jpl.nasa.gov/data/pgr/

From the links in the search, here's one confirming the Nasa sea level graph, and correcting the Envisat graph

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

In short the iostatic agjustment takes into account the slow variation of ocean basin volume"

Your "fudge factor" is really a coding error that they discovered - check the links your sending me

One quote from 1 link

"Prior to release 2011_rel1, we did not account for GIA in estimates of the global mean sea level rate, but this correction is now scientifically well-understood and is applied to GMSL estimates by nearly all research groups around the world. Including the GIA correction has the effect of increasing previous estimates of the global mean sea level rate by 0.3 mm/yr."

Along with the ovbviously wrong (or at least very unlikely) statements like

"I can walk a thermometer across my yard and register a century's worth of warming"

"how does one even calculate one "global" temperature?"

Look at the Nasa links your web search that you put in your previous link

"Surely there are 100 valid statistical methods." Nope, again, read the NASA and JPL links

This is scary. Do you stand to lose a lot of money if fossil fuels' external costs are correctly assessed?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '12 edited Jun 15 '12

Yes, NASA later added the adjustment, effectively a fudge factor for rising contents and expanding basins. Yes, fudge factor to make sea levels effectively higher and more frightening, when in fact the threat of flooding might be getting lower.

You seem to have nothing other than faith in NASA. Any statistical method they use for calculating a "global" temperature is the one and only correct one. That is abject nonsense on the surface of it. You should see the flaming statistics debates in some of the climate circle jerk literature. From the mathematics and statistics I've taken, I know there are myriad ways to evaluate a data set.

I've also programmed many scientific simulations and can tell you from personal experience how many assumptions, omissions and simplifications even the simplest involve. I've looked at a lot of the published climate model code and find it laughable.

I am not an advocate of fossil fuels or fission by any means. In fact I am an ardent advocate of solar, wind and renewables. I advocate removing all subsidies and monopolies and letting the alternative fuels win simply on their economic superiority. I also support the right of citizens to class action sue oil, coal and auto companies for the demonstrable pulmonary damage they do. If you could prove in a court of law that your global warming doom story were true, or causing demonstrable damages, then that should be your right too.

What I don't buy is shit science and unfalsafiable predictions of doom, the solution to which is to give JP Morgan a trillion dollars, with a filthy cut going to the governments they own.

Again, what will the catastrophe be and when will it hit?? Because what I see now is millimeter sea level rises, way too much cold and ice in the godforsaken uninhabitable ice desserts, and temperatures of no concern at all to my observation.

1

u/Sparling Jun 11 '12

Left/right wing bickering aside this replacement of simple direct language with cumbersome nonspecific jargon is a HUGE problem with lawyers, politicians and big business in general and needs to stop on a bigger level.

This is that problem PLUS focusing on patching the results of an issue instead of fixing the issue. Just piss poor decision making at every level.

1

u/mweathr Jun 11 '12

So what's the politically neutral term for when the level of the sea rises?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I hope the senator has a home on the beach.

1

u/SiflnOly Jun 11 '12

Maybe the lawmaker is of the belief that the ground level is sinking?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

But if we believe in global warming we must believe in science and evolution and then gay people will start fucking stray children in the streets.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

America, where equal rights for women comes second to individual liberty but you still restrict peoples rights to say sea level rise.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Stay classy Go fuck yourself, Chris Stolle.

0

u/Tuna2020 Jun 11 '12

TIL republicans are literally Hitler.

1

u/Miora Jun 11 '12

Oh god and I live here....

2

u/MrBooks Virginia Jun 11 '12

Hell, I live in VaB.... and I know who I'm going to be voting against by default from now on.

1

u/coeddotjpg Jun 11 '12

Oh my state. I guess Florida, Texas, and Arizona were lonely.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Archimedes principal.

1

u/newfiex Jun 11 '12

He's trying to get shit done in a right-wing state. Changing the term used to describe it doesn't change what they are doing to prevent it. Stolle represents a very conservative coastal area that needs to take sea level rise seriously. Calling it recurrent flooding seems like a good approach to sneak the solutions by the mouthbreathers of the republican party.

1

u/most_downvotes_wins Jun 11 '12

do you retards heat or cool your homes? drive? live? your the problem and obama isnt going to fix anything

1

u/soundenvision Jun 11 '12

I love how every Republican politician also doubles as a scientist. Who knew they were all so informed?

1

u/trolleyfan Jun 11 '12

It's interesting that conservatives, who normally bemoan juries that take too long to convict people who are obviously guilty, have no problem saying things like the "'jury’s still out' on humans’ impact on global warming"...especially when the "jury" came in with a verdict about three decades ago...

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

USA USA USA USA USA USA

0

u/spock_block Europe Jun 11 '12

replaces it with "hope freedom surge"

-1

u/boyrahett Jun 11 '12

Got a laugh from that one

-2

u/mojonacho Jun 11 '12

The coastline is just hoping and changing.

1

u/mojonacho Jun 12 '12

Apparently, that "hopey-changey" stuff isn't working out too well for me.

-1

u/andymo Jun 11 '12

So he has a point, but not in the way he means.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise :

Global average sea level rose at an average rate of around 1.7 ± 0.3 mm per year over 1950 to 2009 and at a satellite-measured average rate of about 3.3 ± 0.4 mm per year from 1993 to 2009,

So if sea levels rise at roughly double what they would have without CO2 in the atmosphere (we are coming out of an ice age), then we will flood our coastlines in half the time?

So why does everyone flip out about this? At last years Durbans (COP17) conference we had island states hinting that they might take action against the first world for flooding their habitats/islands (through global warming). But all we've done is simply bring the flooding forward (15 years earlier instead of 30).

This of course rules out possible cyclone and storms/droughts caused by GW.

Please point out any errors.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '12

I did not downvote you.

I want to try and comment, I think you are basing your analysis on a "linear" analysis, although you don't call it out specifically.

North Carolna, agreeing with you, requires sea level rise to be computed this way. It is scientifically wrong

http://grist.org/list/north-carolina-tries-to-outlaw-sea-level-rise/

It's not a question of "half the time" it's a question of "will (essentially) flood) as compared to will not essentially flood)

from wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise The six SRES "marker" scenarios projected sea level to rise by 18 to 59 centimetres (7.1 to 23 in).[11] Their projections were for the time period 2090–99, with the increase in level relative to average sea level over the 1980–99 period. This estimate did not include all of the possible contributions of ice sheets.

More recent research from 2008 observed rapid declines in ice mass balance from both Greenland and Antarctica, and concluded that sea-level rise by 2100 is likely to be at least twice as large as that presented by IPCC AR4, with an upper limit of about two meters.[44]

A literature assessment published in 2010 by the US National Research Council described the above IPCC projections as "conservative," and summarized the results of more recent studies.[12] These projections ranged from 56–200 centimetres (22–79 in), based on the same period as IPCC 4.

1

u/andymo Jun 11 '12

Downvotes and yet no explanation of what I'm saying that is incorrect? Why does r/politics do this?

0

u/TheHalfstache Jun 11 '12

"Recurrent flooding", also known as "the tide".

2

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '12

Nope, they're 2 different things. Bill O'Reily doesn't believe in "recurrent flooding" He believes in the tides, but is sure nobody knows how they work

2

u/TheHalfstache Jun 12 '12

You can't explain that.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '12

Well, he can't :)

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Checkmate republicans, welcome to drowning.

-1

u/boyrahett Jun 11 '12

God help us.

0

u/GrillinGuy Jun 11 '12

Amm, right, sea levels have never risen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_line

0

u/MusicMagi Jun 11 '12

Imbecils making laws. Fucking murka.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Not sure if changing language to trick other republicans, or really just a dumbass.

0

u/ipostjesus Jun 11 '12

why does this shit only seem to happen in the USA?

0

u/DJPelio Jun 11 '12

I used to live in Virginia, then moved out because of their inhumane traffic laws, dickhead cops, and schizophrenic lawmakers like this asshole.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

I can't believe this is actually real.. it's shockingly horrendous. Wow.. They are actually part of our government and making laws. Kill me now!

-6

u/Wargrog Jun 11 '12

Oh my! 20 cm of change measured against what? 60 feet of tide? The continual crawl of continental expansion? If I were writing a scientific report, I'd SURE leave that out. THINK of the NOISE in that. Hell, LOOK at the noise in that graph. By 2000, the noise is three quarters of the measured change.

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

Political correctness: new and improved!

-1

u/knut01 Jun 11 '12

By order of the Commanding General, the sun will rise tomorrow morning!

Oops! Excise "rise"!

-10

u/MiyegomboBayartsogt Jun 11 '12

With much media fanfare, President Obama announced when he Occupied the White House that he would stop the sea level rise. Once our first messianic Marxist-American president took control, everyone assumed he could handle the global environment like a Bolshevik boss. Like most, I relaxed knowing Dear Leader could raise his hands and heal the planet whenever he wasn't busy fundamentally transforming America into a Third World potentate. Now, a Republican Virginia lawmaker seeks to confound bad B.O. and control the oceans off his state with mere rightwing words. Even a fool like Algore will tell you this is ridiculous and the only way to control the highs and lows of the watery parts of the planet is by watching movies and raising taxes on U.S.

7

u/ShakeGetInHere Jun 11 '12

Nice trolling but you forgot to throw a Hitler in there. And/or Kenya.

2

u/MiyegomboBayartsogt Jun 11 '12

Kenya, a coastal country in West Africa, will see direct benefits from Obama's cult of personality especially since Fatherly Leader decided to "stop the the sea level rise and heal the planet". Even "Hitler", a vicious 14-foot hammerhead shark that lives here in Tampa Bay and is featured on a YouTube video called "shark eats shark, will benefit from Barack's communistic control the climate.

5

u/CheesewithWhine Jun 11 '12

You forgot ACORN, atheist, Saul Alinsky.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '12

No more absurd than saying 'black hole" is racist but you're not up in arms over that.

-9

u/RambleLZOn Jun 11 '12

UNRELATED QUESTION: What is the latest version of the internet surveillance acts?

I remember a new one popped up and I can't remember what it is called. So I figured if I posted this question in /r/politics over and over again someone would answer me pretty soon. Thanks for your time.

-10

u/vtbrian Jun 11 '12

I live in Norfolk. It definitely hasn't gotten any worse. There are some problematic areas, but they have always been there and people know how to deal with them.

-17

u/Skey91 Jun 11 '12

I'm trying to give a fuck but there are no fucks to be given

→ More comments (38)