People repeating that claim are probably doing a fairly common debate tactic of exaggerating their opponent's position, then taking down that exaggerated claim and pretending that this takes down the original claim. Kind of like "I think airport security measures have gone too far." "Well, do you want people bringing guns onto planes? Of course not. So the current security restrictions are just fine."
No. I don't. The climate of the planet has changed drastically on it's own, very quickly throughout the history of the planet. We already know that the earth's average temperature is lower than in say 1210 AD. We know that water levels have risen and fallen on their own, and we know that changes in atmospheric chemicals have occurred due to a number of events, eruptions, earthquakes, temperature changes, etc. There is absolutely no reason to assume that our short existence is the reason for this temperature change.
And no, even if all the ice at the poles were to melt, the water level would not go up. If anything, it would go down. Before I explain that part, you need to know that the solid state of water is less dense than it's liquid counter part. This is because the solid state of water has an alignment of particles that creates air pockets throughout the structure. In essence, 1 cubic meter of solid water, will have significantly more volume than if that same cube were to melt. The ice that is at the polar caps, already takes up a certain amount of space in the oceans, if it were to melt, the air pockets would empty and in reality the water level would sink.
One argument to this, is the snow and ice that are on land and not taking up space in the water. This ice is nowhere near the immensity of the ice that makes up the "coasts" of the polar regions. This little bit of ice and snow would also most likely melt and form inland lakes, and rivers.
I have seen both claims. Where do you think the pictures of the statue of Liberty halfway flooded come from? Joe Romm does both. Anyone read his book to see if he puts a specific claim in there?
Look up MIT climate roulette wheel to see claims of 8C, albeit just a small probability.
And this guy Prinn is a reasonable guy, who has stated that small amounts of global warming can be a good thing, and I believe has said 2m sea level rise.
Yes I have seen +8C claims but not 20ft
Where do I think our climate will be by 2100, well I expect a Dalton type minimum for a few decades and then slight warming, so pretty much the same as now for temperatures, sea level is rising for reasons other than temperature, so about 3 or 4 inches higher by 2100.
I've only ever heard denialist claiming that that has been said, but I would assume that such a temperature increase in such a short time would have resulted in the extinction of the human species, which may not be a bad thing
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2...
I found this prediction of a 6C rise without much problem on Google. I certainly remember the shrill claims not so long ago generally as a maximum credible rise yada yada yada. It seems some alarmists have a short memory when it comes to the lines in the sand they draw. I wasn't necessarily referring to you in that comment.
I too think it is rhetoric, and not too far from claims that I can remember. I don't remember too many alarmists that would believe it was that high. Most would recognize that there was an interval that it would fall in and that clearly was at the max if not over it.
We have had all kinds of figures quoted. Here are some sea level figures from James Hansen. In one place he says: "... the eventual sea level response is about 20 meters of sea level for each degree Celsius of global warming". 5 metres seems quite popular (16.5 feet approx).
I think it was an extreme alarmist that said 8C warming, but the 20 feet was surely instigated by Al Gore in his movie. I also believe he said something about a "runaway effect" happening and he based this mostly on the science and how it was explained to him by several climate scientists. The term "unequivocal" was also stated by him and he was talking about the IP CC's assessment of the extent of warming being human caused.
Should we alarm everyone, if the global average temps drop another 0.28C by next August as they did from 2012 to 2013? A drop of 0.56C is very significant. Isn't it? they'll have to take this section off of Y/A if that happens.
These people seem to think that : http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/02...
No. I didn't believe it when the alarmists in the mid '90s claimed the same would occur by 2030 and it's laughable that it would occur by 2100.
"Does anyone here believe that temperatures will rise 8C by 2100 and the sea will rise by 20 feet ..?
... or is this just another straw-man?"
It seems that the Deniers have yelled that it is absurd to consider the possibility of those things, and so you tacitly accept what is being yelled at you.
Not impressive.
My Global Teams from all walks of life have implemented my first Global Warming Solution to extract sand from the bottom of oceans around their continents since 2008 and have save dry land from going under 1.7 miles on each dry land mass. We're also watching the comings and goings of Alien crafts and Aliens created Global Warming, because our findings show Global Warming is a ALIEN Organism, but we think now my solution may have deleted Global Warming. Mike / Global Command= civilians
... or is this just another straw-man?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…
In the 5 years I've been hanging around here I don't recall anyone making claims such as this. Is my memory failing; can anyone link to such claims? ... or is the questioner just repeating what he has seen from the denialists here?
Where do you think mean sea level and global average temperatures will most likely be in 2100?
Is there ANYONE out there who thinks they will be +8C and +20 feet?
If you do, what are your reasons for thinking so?
unless the claims are backed up by real science papers, I toss these out. I cannot recall any such claims.
Given the IPCC tends to be conservative, I'll go slightly higher than their average business as usual scenario. +4C and 3-5 feet.
Given how politics and business works, a reduction of additional greenhouse gases is not likely for another 50 years.
I don't pay much attention to such projections -they are at best informed guesses- but climate scientists have had a fairly good track record over the past 30-40 years, certainly better than most stock analysts predicting the long trend of the Dow Jones Index, for example. Nevertheless, it takes me about 30 seconds to note (here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm... that the high end of the IPCC's 2007 projections were for a MAXIMUM of +2C and +7feet by 2100. It looks like this particular instance involves a fossil fuel industry duped climate change denier too lazy or stupid (or both, probably) to even be able to cut and paste credibly, before trying to dump the 20 or 30 thousandth lame copy-cat anti-science lie here.
Ask Gringo, he's on record saying that he believes waves will soon be lapping over the roofs of 8 story buildings, so what's that ? about a hundred feet.
No, there's been a generation(+) that hasn't seen any GW. You alarmist are so far behind the times, it's just amusement for true realist.
Your link is broken. But it sounds more like rhetoric than a straw man.
No , I wont be around either . The only people that say 20 feet Helen Cullen and Micheal
Mann .
By 2100, we will be up to our eyeballs into the next ice age.
Check the ice record, the next ice age is due.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok...
You had better hope this hockum AGW religion is true...
Honestly I have seen predictions of 8-12 inches by 2050 and if the poles continue to melt at an accelerated rate 6-10 feet by 2100 I am not a dooms day sayer, but simple common sense can illustrate that by 2100 (and AGW will go well beyond that, if we don't collectively reduce our carbon footprint and switch ASAP to wind, solar, geothermal, and nuclear power it will go beyond 2300) there will be serious water shortages as the need for crops and farm animals need yo be supplied to more and more people, because of this and drought, desertification, torrential rains and mud slides, extreme storms, they could be 10's of millions of people migrating in hope of food or water or shelter and work
It will not be the planet we know
One thing it is not is a straw man argument. I find it funny that people claim that models don't work, and yet claim to know that such an increase in temperature and sea level can't happen.
I think it will be lesser amount
Cvt ybynu
