10 ms·
Am I the only one around here who is old enough to remember this exact prediction from 30 years ago? Florida should have become the next Atlantis 20 years ago.
by TheRealDunkirk 5y ago
Am I the only one around here who is old enough to remember this exact prediction from 30 years ago? Florida should have become the next Atlantis 20 years ago. I understand it's a worrisome issue, but like religious predictions of the end of the world, failures work against credibility.
- the-dude 5y agoSea level rise at the Dutch coast has been stable for about the last 100 years. No significant acceleration.
- titzer 5y agoCitation needed. Besides, sea-level rise is not uniformly distributed, same as temperature variation due to climate change. But overall, yes, the sea level is rising, and it is accelerating globally. All of that is explained here [1]. [1] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...
- the-dude 5y agohttps://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/20.php https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/20.php https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/23.php https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/23.php https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/24.php https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/24.php
- titzer 5y agoAre you gaslighting me or what, dude? Because your own very first link shows a clear sea-level rise of almost 20 centimeters from 1900. (this https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.annual.plots/20_high.png https://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.annual.plots/20_hig..., if you are incapable of clicking on links in actual webpages). What are you trying to say? It hasn't accelerated? Because clearly it must have sped up since before records began, otherwise it would not agree with records and reconstructions from 1000 and 2000 years ago.
- the-dude 5y agoFirst of all, that is in no way an acceptable way to perform a conversation. Secondly, can you read? From my comment : > Sea level rise at the Dutch coast has been stable
- titzer 5y agoTo be brutally honest, it tests people's patience when someone posts trollish, curt, unsupported comments like "it's not accelerating here at place X" when a specific location is clearly not at issue, out of context, and out of perspective of the global problem. Then we end up down a rathole dispelling the stink around another unnecessary distraction which is clearly motivated by nothing but muddying the waters. It's just obfuscation and FUD, frankly. Sorry that it's uncomfortable when you're called out on it.
- the-dude 5y agoSo, you failed at basic reading comprehension and now you are blaming me? Your link fails to load here at my Dutch internet connection btw. edit: climate.gov loads again.
- tpmx 5y agoIn e.g. northern Europe post-glacial rebound (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound) compensates somewhat, depending on locale. Edit: At my location in southern Sweden it seems like this expected land rise compensates for ~70% of the expected sea level rise, but the data seems a bit sketchy. I think more research is needed.
- the-dude 5y agoWell, from that article, The Netherlands appears to be outside that locale.
- rm_-rf_slash 5y agoFlorida is porous limestone. Even the most sophisticated seawalls wouldn’t prevent water from coming in through the sides and up, unless you drilled those walls very deep...and even then you’d have to get water from somewhere once you’ve pumped it all out of the state (an issue already happening regardless of carbon output - look up lateral saltwater intrusion)
- the-dude 5y agoI said nothing about our seawalls, the sea level rise at our coasts has been about stable for the last century with no noticable acceleration.
- titzer 5y ago> the sea level rise at our coasts has been about stable for the last century This just completely false. [1] [1] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- the-dude 5y ago> at our coasts From my initial comment it is crystal clear I am speaking about The Netherlands.
- e40 5y agoMy understanding is that in many places in FL places that were dry are now soaking wet. Saw an article about a development where there are puddles everywhere (lawns, sidewalks, etc) because the water table is rising. If I owned property in FL, I wouldn't be looking at the long term right now.
- smm11 5y agoI lived in Miami for much of the 80s. The King Tides they encounter regularly, now, were unknown then. I can point you at a few dozen houses I know of, that are no longer on the coast, because the ocean is there now. Former neighbors tell me these days they've never seen the water so high; it's not just me.
- gnopgnip 5y agoMiami and other parts of FL have huge problems with both flooding and sea level rise
- VLM 5y agoIts not merely "like" a religion. Faith and belief, scorn numbers science and history, authoritarian leadership, cultish belief in the inevitable apocalypse, control people via massive levels of guilt due to original sin, scorning shunning and hatred of non-believers and those insufficiently devout, hatred of apostates, encouragement of conversion by the sword or otherwise ... I'm sure there are a very small number of actual scientists doing actual science, but its only a tiny fraction.
- spacemark 5y agoSorry, where are climate change deniers being forced to convert "by the sword?" There are elements of your comment that are worth listening to, others give into hyperbole which reduces your credibility.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago>There are elements of your comment that are worth listening to, others give into hyperbole which reduces your credibility. Which is ironically on brand for the topic being discussed here. I like to think that was intentional.
- randomopining 5y agoThe whole point is that it's a problem that is in no single person's immediate interest to solve. Yet it's in our collective interest to solve it, long term. That you can't understand this simple concept would be funny, except that it impacts those of us that do, and especially our children.
- TheOtherHobbes 5y agoI'd be very surprised if that exact prediction was made by peer-reviewed climate models 30 years ago, or if a scientific paper from that time suggested that Florida would become "the next Atlantis" by 2020. It's quite easy to find flooding maps that show the effects of various sea level changes. It's not so easy to find concrete predictions about when those changes are due. Perhaps we should stick to the science instead of imagining hypothetical news stories from decades ago and complaining they were silly.
- spacemark 5y agoYes, let's stick to the science. Which says we have problems, yes, but the narrative so many on here are parroting (all is lost, the gun has already gone off, the world will be uninhabitable) is not remotely close to the predictions even the IPCC has reached. A reminder that predictions of the end of the world are, so far, never true, is welcome.
- notJim 5y agoWho is saying all is lost and that the world will be uninhabitable? People are saying bad things will happen, potentially catastrophic things for those directly affected. Some of these things may create large social challenges. What's wrong with acknowledging that? The fact that it makes you uncomfortable to hear doesn't mean it's not true.
- spacemark 5y agoThose phrases are taken directly from comments in this thread. I agree that we should discuss all possible scenarios. But a lot of the extreme scenarios being parroted are just bonkers, scientifically speaking.
- monocasa 5y agoA ctrl-F for 'uninhabitable' only gives this sub thread and someone saying that some countries (rather than the whole world as you've stated) will be uninhabitable. Which is true.
- elbasti 5y agoActually, the prediction was "If we don't do something in the next 30 years, the scales will tip, so we have to act now." Turns out we didn't act, the scales did tip, and it may actually be too late to do anything about it now.
- mywittyname 5y agoIt's actually illegal in some states to acknowledge the land lost to climate change [0]. Part of the reasoning behind this is to sew doubt in the veracity of the climate predictions of the 80s and 90s. As some people have said, a large amount of coastal land has already been lost to the sea, especially in Florida. This situation is going to take years/decades to really unfold, because, for the most part, it's not like houses will be above ground one day, then under water the next. Instead this will be a gradual process whereby flooding becomes more severe and frequent, yet the ground will be ostensibly "dry" 99% of the time (or underwater only 3 days a year). Then it will be 98% of the time, 97% of the time, etc. [1] is a link to a McKinsey report on climate change and how it will effect Florida and how lenders should prepare. [0] https://skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1518 https://skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1518 [1] https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functions/Sustainability/Our%20Insights/Will%20mortgages%20and%20markets%20stay%20afloat%20in%20Florida/MGI_Climate%20Risk_Case%20Studies_Florida_May2020.pdf https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functio...
- tshaddox 5y agoCan you find any sources of such predictions from 30 years ago? It sounds plausible to me that you're remembering criticism of climate warnings from 30 years ago that described their warnings as hyperbolically apocalyptic.
- aww_dang 5y agoThe rise of technocracy and scientism seems more concerning from where I stand. Oh I know, these experts happen to be infallible. I wouldn't dare dispute their gospel or speak any heresies on this esteemed discussion board. Just the same the trend is concerning. Especially if we are willing to consider the hypothetical world where experts planning the world's energy consumption might possibly have ulterior motives. Of course that isn't the case. It isn't even possible. I'm reliably informed that all skeptic views are paid stooges of the oil companies. https://www.google.com/search?q=Rockefeller+Foundation+climate+change https://www.google.com/search?q=Rockefeller+Foundation+clima... Scientism is infallible. Sure, private researchers funded by the tobacco companies might have fibbed here and there, but that's only because they're greedy capitalists. Government funded research explaining the dangers of cannabis has been 100% accurate. Mass incarceration is a wonderful policy. Scientific experts are qualified not only in their fields of research, but to make wide sweeping social dictates as well.
- ganzuul 5y agoYou don't have a question. You have nothing to add. You just tear at the tapestries and shout at the wall. Why? Who is this for?
- frzj 5y agoThe rockefeller foundation is the 39th biggest foundation. Any search term and it will show something. I tried random terms such as "animal conservation" and "Sydney" and there were a dozen results. Science is about building knowledge, so if climate change against all odds turns out to be false, it will be abandoned and the mechanism that is really behind the data will be the focus of further studies. There is no such thing as scientism but a bunch of different people who are competing for the best explanation of reality. The ability to predict is a very handy thing. Newtonian physics might not be 100% correct, but it makes damn good predictions that made our lives so much better.
- aww_dang 5y agoRockefeller made his fortune in the oil business. Hope this helps you understand the context. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/03/1174/ https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/03/1174/ >Scientism is the view that all real knowledge is scientific knowledge—that there is no rational, objective form of inquiry that is not a branch of science
- myko 5y agoActually the _actual_ predictions seem to be mostly correct, see this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27305500 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27305500 " "How it started" (From your Article) Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. : "How it's Going" A Quarter of Bangladesh Is Flooded. Millions Have Lost Everything. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/climate/bangladesh-floods.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/climate/bangladesh-floods... "
- tobbob 5y agoPeople always say this kind of thing. You're probably mis-remembering a headline of an article you barely read and are suggesting that was the global scientific consensus at the time. If you actually look at the real predictions about the climate, which always come packaged with the level of certainty, worst case, best case etc, then predictions have been remarkably accurate for decades. By comparing this to doomsday religious predictions that of course are nonsense you just add to the widespread public denial.
- TheRealDunkirk 5y agoWell, it's a little tough to find a source for a televised news segment from 30+ years ago, before the rise of the modern internet, but you're just as free to claim my memory is faulty as I am to state my recollection.
- koheripbal 5y agoThis reminds me of a fearmongering TV "documentary" narrated by Leonard Nimoy about 40 years ago I saw that warned that a new ice age was coming and that the evidence was that snow storms were becoming more frequent.
- TheRealDunkirk 5y agoYeah, I left this part out of my comment. My 4th grade science textbook said we were headed for a new ice age by the 90's, and that we'd be completely out of oil by 2000.
- randomopining 5y agoFoolish comment, cherry picking random predictions (from who and what exactly, we don't know) from 30 years ago to "reduce their credibility". Anybody with a brain knows how dumb this is.