Sea level rises fact or fiction?

Al Gore said that Manhattan would be under water by 1999.

Just look at St. Augustine, FL., the level of the sea hasn't significantly risen since its founding. There are many paintings of the Thames River, which is correlated to the sea, going back before St. Augustine's establishing and these show that the water level is just about the same as it was centuries ago. Now we hear all these outcries that we are losing the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps. With all this loss of ice, shouldn't we see some significant rise in sea level?

Then you see terror in the eyes of people like lilady <I live in Malaysia, surrounded by sea. My neighboring countries consist of groups of islands. We all can see the rising of sea level.> Alright, water seeks its own level, that is an established fact chiseled in stone. Now how come we haven't seen the sea level rise in England or the US? Remember, laws were enacted and taxes were collected due to the scare that Manhattan would be under water by 1999. Now that scare hasn't come true, do you think it would only be reasonable that those who proposed such foolishness at least apologize? They keep screaming their calamity even louder. I think Malaysia has learned from these Eco-Terrorists like Al Gore and James Hansen and are distributing their own brand of tax raising and power grabbing legislation.

Quotes by H.L. Mencken, famous columnist: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." And, "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it."

Sea Level rise to the extent of calamity: Fiction.

we do not sense a parental duty to mom Nature because she is OUR mom. and persons typically abuse the love they have for his or her parents. i'm very a lot for the planet. that is the in elementary words one we've like this, and that i rather doubt we are going to discover yet another beforehand we leech the foodstuff out of this one. i imagine that folk who have self belief that we do not have any outcome on the earth are ignorant. each and every little thing which will ever be finished would have an outcome on something, or someone. I hate it even as human beings do not give up and picture that we are not the in elementary words ones who inhabit this international. What about animals? Animals are significant to preserving this international in a careful stability, and not in any respect only domesticated ones. we won't be able to %. and decide on the animals we enable to stay or die. we favor them for nutrition, and those we eat for nutrition favor nutrition, each and every each and every now and then different animals. If we assume of we can live to inform the tale in any issue, what about different living organisms? some human beings do care sufficient for my area. some human beings do act on their beliefs. yet all of us favor to paintings at the same time to make a distinction. And if there are those who refuse to renowned the info that we DO have an outcome on our ecosystem, then we would not in any respect opposite what we've started. i'm not saying that international warming is incontrovertible actuality, that continues to be concept. The reason and outcome of pollutants can in spite of the undeniable fact that be shown. pollutants releases issues into the ambience that are undesirable, and we breathe them in, and they impression our respiratory. How not hassle-free is that to understand? we'd want to continually be very frightened. And it truly is unbelievably ill and disgusting what number of human beings brush such articles off so with out delay. The Earth is more desirable than our dumpster, it truly is a house with different living beings in it. we'd want to study the thanks to seem after it and percentage it.

Some interesting and incorrect points you have there.

The numbers you are quoting seem to be for sea ice in Summer it does shrink to ~3 million sq km the area of Antarctica itself is quite a bit larger according to one of the sources you list (where I happen to work) it is closer to 14 million sq km, it almost doubles in Winter with the expansion of Winter sea ice.

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/fact...

Sea ice does not contribute to sea level rise, except it seems in the confused minds of deniers.

Glacial ice is the (partial) cause of sea level rise along with thermal expansion, at the moment thermal expansion is the greater effect but as we continue to warm ice will take over.

You also have uninformed comment (as usual) from the likes of "jerry"

"amal typical warmunist, maybe do the math again and see how long it will take to melt all the ice, the answer is thousands of years not 20-50 like you say", not sure what an "amal" is?

No scientist is saying all of Antarctica is going to melt in 20-50 or even 100 years again this is denier invention (a kind way of saying lying) if deniers did the simple math they keep talking about then they might get that if it takes 5000 years for something as big as an ice sheet to melt completely then 1-2% can melt in 50-100 years, given that the observable warming effect started over 100 years ago and that by the end of this century that will be 200 years, then the amounts being talked about are not only possible they are probably conservative.

Glacial mass in both Antarctic and Greenland is indeed shrinking http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm#la...

Sea level is rising (and the rate is increasing) it was ~1.7mm a year up to the 90's now it is 3.19mm

http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm#se...

The expansion in "perk" season to ~20 million sq km is again sea ice, as I said it does not contribute to sea level rise, for Antarctica it is on average only 1m thick.

Antarctica's glacial ice is on average 2000m thick

Glacial ice is, for the most part, land based and not displacing water and often even the 'tongues' of glaciers that extend into water are grounded on the sea floor so are not entirely free floating, glaciers flow like water in slow motion. In a stable average temperature loss is balanced by snowfall and the glacier remains about the same size (with season fluctuation).

As well you have the direct evidence of both tide gauges and more recently satellite data that show quite clearly sea level is rising. In what seems to be an ever growing list of stories they simply 'makeup' denier claim this is simply the end of the last ice age yet the data on that shows a rapid rise in sea level between 15-8 thousand years ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea...

This slowed markedly ~7 thousand years ago and pretty much stopped ~2 thousand years ago.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Se...

In fact if you look at the rate of rise between 7-4 years ago it was about 3m in 4 thousand years, the current rate of 3.19mm is by comparison 3.19m in just a quarter of that time, or put another way the current rate of rise is 4 times faster than it was 7-4 thousand years ago.

Apart from the usual rants deniers have no real answer for this.

amal typical warmunist, maybe do the math again and see how long it will take to melt all the ice, the answer is thousands of years not 20-50 like you say

The sea level is rising. We have seen it along the East Coast. Wow, I will apologize for Al Gore that he got the date wrong. The fact that he was RIGHT has nothing to do with it. We all must stand and prepare for the inevitable. Let us not be ostriches and stick our heads in the sand. Let us be prepared as best we can and protect our children.

http://web.mit.edu/mbuehler/www/SIMS/Thermal%20Exp...

http://cosee.umaine.edu/cfuser/resources/tr_sea_le...

http://labman.phys.utk.edu/phys136/modules/m2/temp...

Have fun learning.

You've not accounted for the biggest contributor to sea level rise, Thermal Expansion.

But first, the melting of arctic ice will not directly contribute to global sea level rise as its ice is already located in the water. Only the melting of land-based ice (ie, Antarctica and Greenland and from glaciers) will contribute to sea level rise.

"Sea level rise is an inevitable consequence of global warming because ocean water expands as it warms, and because melted ice from the land adds more water to the oceans. The rate of rise increased from the 19th to the 20th centuries, with the result that ocean levels are now more than 20 cm higher than in 1870. Satellite and coastal measurements show that the rate of sea level rise since the early 1990s has been substantially larger than the average rate for the 20th century, and larger than for any similar length period in the historical record. The observed rise is consistent with increased rates of ice melt and ocean warming." 'The Science of Climate Change', Australian Academy of Science, August 2010 (1)

Arctic ice is irrelevant to the question. It iexists in the water, so the volume it represents is already accomodated by the oceans.

Ice on land is not in the ocean and thus, if melted, would add its liquid volume equivalent to the oceans. Where you have problems with your arithmetic is a comparison of area when volume is the concern. It is true that the ice on Antarctica and Greenland is much smaller in area than the surface cover of the oceans, but it is also thick. So thick, that if all of the ice were to melt and the water were added to the oceans, sea level would rise by about 70 meters.

When the glaciers that used to cover much of northern North America, Europe and Asia melted some 8-15 thousand years ago, sea level rose by about 120 meters. before this melt, the Black Sea was dry. Must have made a very interesting flood event when the sealevel rose above the lip of the basin. This flood event is well documented archeologically, and is one of the proposed sources for the innumerable mythological flood events that appear in the local religious lore (like Noah's flood).

If the ice cover on land changes, it does have a real affect on sea level. The entire state of Florida is developed from a former reef complex that formed underwater before the ice age began about 3 million years ago. If all of the ice melts, doesn't it make sense to you that those places that were underwater beforehand will return to being under water? It has happened over and over through the history of the earth. Sea levels rise and fall.

Doesn't much matter why the ice melts, so whether you believe man is the cause of the melting or not is not relevant. the ice IS melting. Sea levels ARE rising. Not the first time this has happened, won't be the last either. Sea goes up and sea goes down. It is how the earth works.

I just did the math. If half of Greenland melts, along with a QUARTER of Antarctica, this I'd what will happen. Well, if Greenland and Antarctica really melted that much, then probably almost all of the world's glaciers would melt, too. But, just from half of Greenland and a quarter of Antarctica. The sea level would rise so much that these places would go underwater COMPLETELY.

•Manhattan, NY

•46% of Florida: Orlando, Miami, Tallahassee would all go under water

•32% of California: San Fransisco, San Diego, Los Angeles

•90% of Australia: NO MAJOR CITIES SPARED

•India: Calcutta, Goa

•Europe: London, Paris, Madrid, Barcelona, Portugal, and many more

•Basically any city within 35 miles of the shoreline

Yes, my friend. Sea levels rising are fact. I would predict the things I listed above will happen anytime from 2018-2035.

Population growing=More pollution=Damages ozone layer=more heat enters Earth's atmosphere=glaciers, Greenland, and Antarctica melt=sea levels rise by approximately 3.548 meters=Major cities such as the ones I listed above go underwater.

We do not have much time.

I don't know about all those numbers, but the effect of sea level rises can be seen clearly in my region (south east asia). I live in Malaysia, surrounded by sea. My neighboring countries consist of groups of islands. We all can see the rising of sea level. Last two years, they predict my hometown to be below sea level in 10 years, but now they say it will happen in less than 5 years. And floods worsen in many parts of the region. It's a devastating sight.