4 ms·

It does not get repeated because it would suggest that sea level changes are natural, as opposed to being caused by industrial CO2 emissions, and limiting CO2 e

• withinboredom 4y ago
  I imagine that most people haven’t thrown gasoline on a fire. Surely they can’t understand making something bad way more worse than it was.
• StanislavPetrov 4y ago
  >It does not get repeated because it would suggest that sea level changes are natural Sea level changes are absolutely natural and have fluctuated wildly over the history of the planet. The sea level was 360 feet lower 13,000 years ago. Certainly human activity has a measurable effect on the environment but it is simply absurd to pretend that our environment (including sea levels) isn't in a constant state of flux.
  • Ma8ee 4y ago
    The problem now is that the change is some orders of magnitude faster than they used to be.
    • StanislavPetrov 4y ago
      That isn't true at all. The history of the planet is marked by rapid, repeated changes in the climate. The climate is going to change - drastically - just like it has for the entire history of the earth. We should understand that our activity has an influence but it is not the only factor or the dominant one. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ContentFeature/GlobalWarming/images/epica_temperature.png https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ContentFeature/GlobalWarmi...
      • potsandpans 4y ago
        It's quite incredible to see this level of denialism in 2022
        • StanislavPetrov 4y ago
          Are you talking about the denialism of people who reject science and the undisputed fact that the environment has changed frequently and at a high velocity, continuously, over the meticulously documented history of the planet? Or are you referring to those who reject science, and insist, despite the detailed and voluminous evidence, that human activity is the predominant cause of environmental change, without which the climate would be stable?
          • potsandpans 4y ago
            I'm specifically referring to you, who's pathetically muddying the waters on some internet forum.
            • deleted 4y ago
              [deleted]
            • StanislavPetrov 4y ago
              It is sad and pathetic that so many are unwilling to acknowledge the science and the well-documented data. It is even more sad and pathetic that so many are unable to do so. But, unfortunately, that is why society looks the way it does.
      • Ma8ee 4y ago
        If we for a second disregard the fact that it’s a random graph without any context, even that graph shows changes in thousands of years, not like now when the temperature changes happens within decades.
• thrwyoilarticle 4y ago
  Conspiracy theory hogwash. Doggerland is well-discussed.
• MichaelCollins 4y ago
  General knowledge and popular culture acknowledge natural climate changes. However I think people often overestimate the length of time involved in those changes, *overestimating the amount of time that has passed since dramatic climate changes in the past. E.g. knowing of "the ice age" but estimating that it happened millions of years ago and took millions of years for these climate changes to naturally occur. It's certainly not a secret that Manhattan Island was covered by nearly half a mile of ice less than 20,000 years ago, nobody is suppressing this knowledge, but nevertheless I think there's a wide gap between public knowledge and common knowledge.
• potsandpans 4y ago
• simonh 4y ago
  Firstly sea levels have nothing to do with this at all, these coastal changes were caused by erosion. Anyway some sea level changes are natural, some look to be man made. Just because natural changes can happen, it doesn’t follow that man made one’s don't happen, or if they do that it’s ok.
  • MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > Firstly sea levels have nothing to do with this at all, these coastal changes were caused by erosion. The paper seems to say these islands were likely formed from unconsolidated glacial till, and subsequently eroded by some combination of melting glaciers and the Holocene sea-level rise. Islands formed when the sea level was low, and eroded when the sea level was high. When you say sea level rise had 'nothing to do with it', you're contradicting the paper.
    • simonh 4y ago
      The islands have been there since the Holocene sure. The sea level rise was in the Holocene and started the process, but the legends and the historical maps of the islands were made much later than that. The changes since then are due to erosion.