11 ms·

The article claims that it has increased by a foot, which is 30 centimeters: " Changing global trade winds have raised sea levels in the South Pacific about a

by gd1 11y ago

The article claims that it has increased by a foot, which is 30 centimeters: " Changing global trade winds have raised sea levels in the South Pacific about a foot over the past 30 years" What smoothing do you recommend I apply, so that I can see that?

burkaman 11y ago
That graph pretty clearly shows 10 or 15 cm over the last 20 years. I wish I could see the data for 30 years but it doesn't seem impossible that there was a 15 cm rise in those 10 years.
- logfromblammo 11y ago
  http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-time-series-wizard?dlat=7&dlon=171&fit=n&smooth=g&days=7300 http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-t... shows about a 9 cm increase over 20 years. http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-time-series-wizard?dlat=7&dlon=171&fit=n&smooth=g&days=1095 http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-t... does less drastic smoothing, to show a bit more detail.
kaybe 11y ago
Maybe that refers to the maxima, which are in the same order of magnitude? Temporary flooding is also described in the article, with the main issue of destroying freshwater supplies and trees. But you're right, that phrasing is a bit weird.
greglindahl 11y ago
While its fun to make fun of the non-scientific article, I'm actually probing at your claim that it's unchanged. You cited evidence, but it doesn't support your claim.
IanDrake 11y ago
Most GW people are fooled by randomness. It's just this generations version of how people are going to destroy the world. Every generation needs something to freak out about. Here's all you have to know about sea level rise... When land in Ohio is as expensive than land in NYC, we have a big fucking sea level problem. Until then, all the smart and wealthy people in the world aren't concerned and neither should you be.

by gd1 11y ago

burkaman 11y ago

That graph pretty clearly shows 10 or 15 cm over the last 20 years. I wish I could see the data for 30 years but it doesn't seem impossible that there was a 15 cm rise in those 10 years.

logfromblammo 11y ago
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-time-series-wizard?dlat=7&dlon=171&fit=n&smooth=g&days=7300 http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-t... shows about a 9 cm increase over 20 years. http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-time-series-wizard?dlat=7&dlon=171&fit=n&smooth=g&days=1095 http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/interactive-sea-level-t... does less drastic smoothing, to show a bit more detail.

kaybe 11y ago

Maybe that refers to the maxima, which are in the same order of magnitude? Temporary flooding is also described in the article, with the main issue of destroying freshwater supplies and trees. But you're right, that phrasing is a bit weird.

greglindahl 11y ago

While its fun to make fun of the non-scientific article, I'm actually probing at your claim that it's unchanged. You cited evidence, but it doesn't support your claim.

IanDrake 11y ago

Most GW people are fooled by randomness. It's just this generations version of how people are going to destroy the world. Every generation needs something to freak out about. Here's all you have to know about sea level rise... When land in Ohio is as expensive than land in NYC, we have a big fucking sea level problem. Until then, all the smart and wealthy people in the world aren't concerned and neither should you be.