Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 247 posts

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#131

Post by leephillips »

Johnythree wrote: post #102
droopyEyelids wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and that would slow the rotation of the earth. I'd love to see a calculation of how much ice would have to melt for us to add another leap second. Or to back it up, how would timekeeping bodies deal with that? Would we actually remove a second because there would technically be less "time" (measured in days, meaning axial revolutions of the Earth) per year?

It's been done. I can't find the reference, but apparently the extreme accuracy of atomic clocks has proven that the mass of water moving from the poles to the equator has slowed the earth's rotation as predicted.

There's a reference and some discussion at http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/04/the-leap-second-becau...

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#132

Post by givinguflac »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #72
M_Grey wrote: post #11

I suspect that we can expect a lot of bad news to emerge over the next few decades, as the promise of climate change becomes the reality of climate change.

On the other hand, people have been saying that for last few decades, and the bad news hasn't had much impact.

Yeah, there definitely hasn't been an increase in fires, consistently experiencing the hottest months/years repeatedly, increasingly severe record drought in many places, or general extreme weather records being set. Yeah, no big deal..

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#134

Post by madaxe_again »

M_Grey wrote: post #11

I suspect that we can expect a lot of bad news to emerge over the next few decades, as the promise of climate change becomes the reality of climate change.

I'm afraid it will start emerging much sooner than on a decadal timescale - we're already seeing the impact in terms of crop yields and weather damage costs, all over the globe.

Simultaneously, our political systems are gyrating wildly as they struggle to function in an ever faster and more interconnected and complex world.

No, I think we're going to see a lot of bad news over the next few years. The impacts of climate change don't need to be crippling to overtopple a fragile society - just pernicious and frequent.

Demolish metropolises in the gulf states a few times more - when do they stop rebuilding? When it's impractical, or when it's impossible? Flood rural areas of England a few more years in a row - do people remain there? Do insurers continue to offer coverage? Who pays to rehome these migrants? A political crisis grows rapidly. Cynically, I note in the U.K. that the devastating regional floods have only been reported regionally. They don't really want people to get the picture it's happening everywhere.

I do wonder if some of what's happening in the media and state around migrants is to harden us for a future where many or most are dispossessed and homeless.

The anticipation of all hell breaking loose can be as bad as the reality.

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#135

Post by givinguflac »

Shivetya wrote: post #115
WillPostForFood wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, people have been saying that for last few decades, and the bad news hasn't had much impact.

It is always in how the numbers are used, cherry picking by both sides. However the real take away here is that they figured out they were wrong yet again. Of course they lean towards the more extreme each time but even some publications indicate that Antarctic changes are due to natural variability. Then lets play with sea rise, the fear is always that some islands will wash away and port towns will be at further ri…

This is an idiotic response at best. Are you honestly trying to say that the variations are natural? We have thousand upon thousands of years of climate details in ice cores, and while there is natural variation, the last 100 years vary more than anything else we can find in history. Here is an unbiased visual representation of all the temperature data we have from the last 20,000 years or so. Notice how the temperature does vary over time, but it takes thousands of years for the variance to occur. Scroll all the way to the bottom and look how drastically it's changed over even the last fifty years. This is the most straightforward representation I could find, and it's facts not opinion: https://xkcd.com/1732/

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#136

Post by Scarblac »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #122
tajen wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm in the fortunate position that this is possible for me since I live in the city I can't approve. You've made the choice. You've paid for this choice. People keep claiming that I'm lucky to live close from my work and not have children. I was a choice, and blaming it on chance undervalues the effort we make (i.e. paying twice the price for housing and/or only choosing among jobs within a certain radius of public…

We had meat and heating before petrol, why would you expect it to go away? Are you in California by chance? Because you seem to ignore the fact that large part of already-inhabitated world is unlivable without heating (and, possibly, meat). Canada, Scandinavian countries, Russia, even then Germany and Poland, and as south as Bosnia. It's as if you were thinking that warm countries becoming unlivable is tragedy, but c…

> We had meat and heating before petrol, why would you expect it to go away?

We had _some_ meat before petrol (when my parents were kids in the 1950s, sundays were special because they had meat, the 18th century won't have been better). And since the start of the industrial revolution, world population has increased about sevenfold.

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#137

Post by [deleted] »

refurb wrote: post #57
flukus wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal is to not sit on or arses while we wait for people who already produce less CO2 than us to reduce their usage.

The real measure should be CO2 output per unit of GDP. We still need to make stuff, so if you're going to release CO2, it better be an efficient use of it.

[deleted]

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#138

Post by ArkyBeagle »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #55
Eadrax wrote: post #15

There is nothing we can do, as long China and India get a pass, 3.2 billion people in 2 country doing nothing. Even if the US disappeared off the face of the map, its still to late. I say let it happen, it will propel us into a new era off innovation and environmental awareness. No one is going to take it seriously until its to late anyway .

Suggesting China and India aren't doing enough is at best a form of colonialism and at worst racist. Both produce far less CO2 per capita than western countries. The west has an interest in stunting their industrial growth not out of any sort of altruistic concern, but because they fear competition. Regardless, both India and China are embracing renewables and clean energy at a faster pace than the west, they're not…

If we can avoid nation-state-thinking then yes. We can't; the basic architecture of any agreement right now must use the nation-state as signatory.

That is a sale that cannot be made. It looks like a transfer of (mythical) carbon credits from the US to other nations.

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#139

Post by guard-of-terra »

Scarblac wrote: post #136
guard-of-terra wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had meat and heating before petrol, why would you expect it to go away? Are you in California by chance? Because you seem to ignore the fact that large part of already-inhabitated world is unlivable without heating (and, possibly, meat). Canada, Scandinavian countries, Russia, even then Germany and Poland, and as south as Bosnia. It's as if you were thinking that warm countries becoming unlivable is tragedy, but c…

> We had meat and heating before petrol, why would you expect it to go away? We had _some_ meat before petrol (when my parents were kids in the 1950s, sundays were special because they had meat, the 18th century won't have been better). And since the start of the industrial revolution, world population has increased about sevenfold.

"Industrial revolution" is a loose concept, it started at different time in different places and didn't really become runaway before mass petrol.

For us colder northern countries, population didn't change that much since the coming of petrol. Maybe 1,5x increase in all. Definitely not sevenfold.

Re: NASA Scientists Suggest We’ve Been Underestimating Sea Level Rise

#140

Post by tjic »

madaxe_again wrote: post #134
M_Grey wrote: post #11

I suspect that we can expect a lot of bad news to emerge over the next few decades, as the promise of climate change becomes the reality of climate change.

I'm afraid it will start emerging much sooner than on a decadal timescale - we're already seeing the impact in terms of crop yields and weather damage costs, all over the globe. Simultaneously, our political systems are gyrating wildly as they struggle to function in an ever faster and more interconnected and complex world. No, I think we're going to see a lot of bad news over the next few years. The impacts of clima…

Crop yields continue to climb.

http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/cereal_yields...

Post reply on HN