That kind of report will help with the over population problem. It will just get worse, be glad you don't live in a coastal area.

This is interesting, from the NASA website:

"Recent observations of Greenland and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet raise concerns for the future. Satellites detect a thinning of parts of the Greenland Ice Sheet at lower elevations, and glaciers are disgorging ice into the ocean more rapidly, adding 0.23 to 0.57 mm/yr to the sea within the last decade. The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is also showing some signs of thinning. Either ice sheet, if melted completely, contains enough ice to raise sea level by 5-7 m. A global temperature rise of 2-5°C might destabilize Greenland irreversibly. Furthermore, even with possible future accelerated discharge from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, it highly unlikely that annual rates of sea level rise would exceed those of the major post-glacial meltwater pulses."

The last sentence is key. Apparently, during the last interglacial period (around 8,000 years ago), sea level rose at an astonishing one foot every 5.55 years! This was the last of many sea rise "spurts" that occurred during the several interglacial periods over the past 19,000 years. The first such spurt may have started about 19,000 years ago, at which time ocean levels rose 10-15 m in less than 500 years (one foot every ten years).

Source here:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/gornitz_09/

ok

so we should check cloud coverage records because we have to consider how light travels-light and heat is reflected off the cloud tops much like ice reflects it but light changes form and now enters the environment

eg human> and then travels through the body and absorbs the colors and exits as dark light -the light the body does not use(we can assume it's dark because of the color of shadows

now as the light travels hits the ground it then leaves at and angle because the earths a sphere and curve(not straight lines that's the way we look at things on paper eg maps

now because of pollution the light is now travelling back up to the clouds now it is absorbed and reflected back to the ground so heat is retained in the clouds and the earth so heats up-now pollution eg coal would be dark so would absorb the heat

we need to check the clouds densities and how the water cycle has evolved-remember we interrupt it with dams -do clouds form above dams instead of the ocean -it would mess up the natural pattern-also causes droughts -i would watch those dams because the density at the bottom of the dam wall would constantly move and depending on the rock erosion over time would break the dams

we need the dam water to dilute the chemicals we have put into the ground

we need to make clouds in the arctic >

also why not build reservoirs in the drought areas and filter water through- we can make it rain by replicating the water cycle it's not that hard really using science and logic

now if this is the case could it be that cancer traps the dark light in the body and that feeds it growth - shine a light on it.also you never hear of ear cancer maybe the ear wax which kills all sorts of things from bacteria to fungus-(wax could be the answer)-also attached to the eyes a color receiver-what if we rely on photosynthesis of color more than we think-what if we literally take the color out of light?

also if white light changes so would dark light as it travels through forms

Read the headline and couldn't stop laughing. The Mayans were right. It's just going to take a bit longer than just one day.

Can't wait to go boating down Broadway.

Funny how burning coal for decades and decades, even before China and India became economic powerhouses and started dumping their own carbon waste into the atmosphere, the problem of acid rain brought on by all the sulfur dioxide in coal fired power plant emissions was killing plant and aquatic life.

Why?

Because all us itty bitty insignificant humans using power generated by itty bitty insignificant coal burning power plants that can't possibly never, ever in a bizillion, million years burn enough coal to accumulate in our atmosphere and hurt a great big old planet like Earth and its climate, burned too much coal and was poisoning our planet and it started to die. What did we do? Well golly gee whiz, we used cap and trade. And guess what? The acid rain was reduced to the point that the forests and lakes came back.

I guess all us itty, bitty, insignificant, wittle humans and our coal really did hurt a great big old planet like Earth after all.

From the Environmental Defense Fund site:

The way forward, EDF experts argued, was to harness the power of the marketplace. Our cap-and-trade approach, written into the 1990 Clean Air Act, required that overall sulfur emissions be cut in half, but let each company decide how to do it. And power plants that cut their pollution more than required could sell those extra allowances. A new commodities market was born.

Under this market-based plan, sulfur emissions have gone down faster than predicted and at one-fourth of the projected cost. By 2000, scientists were documenting decreased sulfates in Adirondack lakes, improved visibility in national parks and widespread benefits to human health. The Economist called it "the greatest green success story of the past decade."

the oil companies have been blatantly lying about this issue for several decades and everyone is confused. it's no wonder that United Nations estimates are low. we are well past peak oil and headed on a downhill slope that is sure to end in disaster.

climate change predictions in general will continue to be surpassed... the human race has not seen anything yet compared to what will happen over the next several decades

Science isn't a voting matter. It proves out or it doesn't. Do we have contingency plans for the worst? That's a voting matter, are we prepared for the worst or do we not prepare and take the risks.

40 more feet and I will have ocean view property. Not too sure if I can wait 100,000 years for the view.

Darn it... I gotta start building that giant wooden boat thing that Zeus keeps telling me to do. Or was it Poseidon that told me to do it... Odin maybe? Oh well I gotta get right on that task as soon as I finish reading this 2012 year old story tale. It's a fascinating read! Too bad it plagiarised a much older Mesopotamian tale about some guy named Gilgamesh.

The large number of deniers here have obviously been influenced by the highly paid demagogues such as Limbaugh or those on Fox "news". There's a lot of money being spent to thwart the efforts of honest scientists trying to study and report the issue. These demagogues rely on the population being ignorant enough to swallow their BS. They preach what they know to be untrue to people they know to be idiots.

Looks to me like they've found plenty of idiots out there.

To be honest I do not believe this data right now. I live in Buffalo and the level of Lake Eire is at least 1-2 feet below old levels from just 15 years ago. There is a spot that is connected to the lake which use to be marsh and wetlands right off the lake now is completely dry. I would think that if the oceans are raising lakes can't be going down. It just physics.

The rational peoples of the world have been entirely too deferential to the anthropogenic climate change deniers.

We all know their position is absurd and only a warped reflection of their short-sighted greed. They are nothing other than a reincarnation of the characters who vociferously denied that errant farming practices contributed to the dust-bowl, DDT was tied to avian depopulation, and tobacco smoking caused lung cancer and other diseases.

We should hit these anti-science minions hard here and everywhere they make their unreasonable and inane arguments. But, most importantly, we must contact our elected representatives to urge them to accept the inconvenient truth: our global climate is warming in part due to human activities and that we can and must take steps to diminish human contributions to this process.

Science, in large measure, contributed to the developed greatness of our country. Those who disparage science, either on account of superstition or avarice, are enemies to our long-term health and economic welfare. We must immediately and urgently take steps to reduce and counter their influence.

This simply points out what so many have been trying to tell others for many, many years! Their "computer models" are USELESS and wrong, even as is their, stated (it's certain they know better), causative factor!

Few, none I know of, deny that Climate Change is occuring! In fact it's an iron clad guarantee! It was predicted by Isaac Newton in 1755, further explained by Seth Carlo Chandler in 1891, Scienticically and Mathematically diagramed by Milutin Milankovitch during WWI and proven by Hays, Imbrie & Shackleton in1976! Been occuring, in 41,000 year cycles, for the last 250 Million years or so! It's a result of Nutations! It will continue to occur, with or without Al Gore, Obama, or the UN, as long as the Planet exists!

and if you believe the UN here a bridge for sale

They must have checked the water levels at high tide. We need to stop giving these people grant money, they sure know how to throw it away. One other thing they need to back up in history about some 6,000 years or so and start from that point and move forward. Anyway a rise of .01 of an inch is no reason to move all of the coastline cities yet. The land in Louisiana and in many places subside more than that in a year. We lose more wind blown top soil than that in a year. When they learn how to jack up the land give me a call.

If we are able to take away the grant money given to these people the human stress levels will drop. That will help in the cost of the ever rising cost of health care.

Except they are lying.

The report actually said 3.3 mm not 2 mm. So the current rate of rise that is 3.1 is actually LESS than they said it was going to be. Not more.

The UN IPCC report of 2007 said it was rising 3.3 mm a year.

If we take Rahmstorf’s 1993 – 2006 period value of 3.3 mm/year, then we see that sea level rise has actually slowed down by 3%, and not risen 60%. The tricks being used by alarmist climate scientists are becoming ever more obvious and desperate.

http://notrickszone.com/2012/11/29/stefan-rahmstorfs-sea-level-amnesia-using-his-own-numbers-sea-level-rise-actually-dropped-3/

The thing I love most about science topics at nbcnews.com is the non-political nature of the discussions in the forums afterwords...

Whether or not any particular study merits further scrutiny is beside the point. There is very broad scientific consensus that human activity is a probable factor in climate change, so the climate change deniers largely should be ignored at this point because there is more important work to do than to refute marginal arguments. It is worth disseminating the results of legitimate studies and tracing the funding that keeps the marginal and often fallacious research alive and kicking. There always will be legitimate dissenters among scientists and that gives science it's strength. But, as with all research, there is a point at which we say that we know enough and must move ahead, especially when the stakes are high.

Well let's see here---.1 inch per year that's 1 inch per decade or 12 inches every 120 years. At that rate New Orleans has at least another thousand years before it ends up all underwater. Florida maybe 2000 years.

What's the rush?

Embrace Change!

Get a good topographical map and plan ahead to own your own beachfront property on the cheap!!

Oh give it a break!! This is not an election. This is science. Yes the UN has it's own agenda. Taking your guns away from you is one. I don't think the UN is a viable entity. I believe we should withdraw from it. I also believe we should stop giving our tax money to people overseas. They are wanting to cut programs for our elderly and poor but at the same time they want to send billions overseas. GET REAL!If they want to cut spending start at the UN. Stop throwing our tax dollars at other governments. UNESCO,UNICEF I don't care. Cut all of the spending for foreign national an see how the budget looks then. If the foreign governments don't care enough to provide Healthcare for their people I sure as heck don't want to send money to them. Period.

If the sea levels go up as they are expected to then land value here in the midwest is going to be a premium. Let's see. San Diego, LA, Washington, New Orleans, Newark, Baltimore, Miami, they all sound like they could be the names of swamps and bays to me.

The bottom line is this... There is nothing you can do about it!

Whether you believe this is a man made occurance, natural occurance, or an act of God....

THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!

If we are all doomed, so be it, I won't spend the rest of my doomed life worrying about it....

Now time to get into my car and make some exhaust while I drive to Lowes to pick up some firewood made from trees and burn it in my wood burning stove tonight because its cold and the store is too far to walk to.

I'm pretty sure most of the human population of this world will do the same on a cold night and......

THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!

DOOM

Most of these Idiots forget that the earth runs in thousands of years of cycles, the sky is falling the sky is falling, the problem is the falling pieces are hitting the wrong people on the haed

The sun has been and will be the biggest player in global climate. The increase in co2 from burning fossil fuels keeps the suns energy from radiating back into space, so increasing co2 and other greenhouse gases will contribute to increase warming. An interesting point of inquiry might be the particular spectrum of energy co2 is responsible for since increasing the amt of co2 to a point beyond what is already able to be absorbed might not retain any more heat. Another interesting point would be to concentrate on average low temps, rather than high temps, since it is possible that at some point increased cloud cover may diminish incoming energy to some max, but that greenhouse gasses and increased cloudcover might diminish the energy lost to space. My observations indicate that high temps are not really getting higher, though some years they may persist in the triple digits longer. But low temps at night are not dropping like they used to. 100F in the daytime might be tolerable to life for days at a time, but it will become much less tolerable if it still stays in the 90's at night. Life on earth for all species would have to change or die. So far, indications are that life is dieing. Slowing emmisions might not be enough and stopping them will not have any effect for 100's if not thousands of years. We need to leave the global warming debate, and its causes behind with the naysayers and look at ways to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. I've already started with thousands of trees, and that in the short term is our best bet. More trees, less concrete. Being part of the solution to a problem is so much more rewarding than pointing fingers or attempting to debate imbeciles, trolls and the sponsors of fossil fuel energy and its biggest customer, the taxpayer funded military industrial complex.

Ulli Kulke, veteran journalist at the German flagship daily DIE WELT, posts a comment at his blog on über-alarmist Stefan Rahmstorf’s claim that “sea levels are rising 60% faster” than previously thought in 2007.

Sea levels have decelerated over the last years. Chart source:

Being a devout alarmist, Rahmstorf is obsessed with finding ways to produce spectacular headlines. In Germany scary climate headlines have become a tradition every November, just before every major climate conference. Doha this year is no different.

In his latest claim, Rahmstorf claims that just a few years ago, sea levels were thought to be rising 2 mm/year. Suddenly the sea level, the satellites say, is actually now rising at 3.2 mm/ year – that’s 60% faster then they thought!

But as Kulke points out in his piece titled False climate alarm surrounds an old hat, Rahmstorf is suffering from (selective) amnesia, and forgot what he said in the UN-IPCC report of (2007): Rahmstorf back then:

Satellite measurements show a rise of 3.1 mm/year for the period 1993-2003 – and if you consider the measurements through 2006, it’s even 3.3 mm/year.”

Kulke writes, with a bit of sarcasm:

It was, after all, quite some time ago, and there was so much data in that thick report. Also with sea levels – some numbers were lower and some were higher. But Rahmstorf, the ocean scientist, had been lead author in every climate report. For this reason the data shouldn’t be anything new for him. Back then the report projected an increase of 18 – 59 cm for the coming century.

Alarm, Alarm. Let’s increase the growth of data. Or, to speak like Honecker (leader of former communist regime East Germany): Always higher, never lower! And if it’s not possible to increase the current data, then let’s just reduce the data of the past. Just like some climate scientists also want to reduce the temperature of the hottest year since instrumental measurements began, namely 1998, just so that this decade can once again appear to be on the rise. Or just like Michael Mann tried with his infamous hockey stick – but failed.”

If we take Rahmstorf’s 1993 – 2006 period value of 3.3 mm/year, then we see that sea level rise has actually slowed down by 3%, and not risen 60%. The tricks being used by alarmist climate scientists are becoming ever more obvious and desperate.