Remember me
▼ Content

Why sea level rise will be a good thing.



Page 1 of 212>
Why sea level rise will be a good thing.31-12-2015 18:42
Tai Hai Chen
★★★★☆
(1079)
If temperature does increase 3 C and Earth reaches the state of the Eemian peak 125,000 years ago when modern humans evolved, sea level would be several meters higher than today and sea ice would be all but gone. 90% of currently unpopulated lands would be habitable. Canada, for instance, would be 10% populated compared to only 1% populated today. CAGW creeps claim coastal areas will be drowned by the rising sea. Possibly. But the increase in habitable land will result in a huge net benefit from sea level rise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eemian
Edited on 31-12-2015 18:58
28-08-2016 02:56
StephenS20
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
That could be true that vast areas of land in the far north could become far more habitable, but think about the displacement of people. If sea levels rise, many people will likely have to flee their homes to escape rising waters. While there will be new habitable (and possibly even new arable areas), there will be substantial displacement of people. There also would likely be extreme heat in many areas that goes far beyond what is experienced today.
28-08-2016 18:14
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
This is exactly what the US military and the insurance companies are worried about. How much war will be caused by people moving into areas populated by other people? Just look at what the 3 year drought started in Syria when people left rural areas and moved into the cities. Three degrees will multiply this problem by a huge amount. The people in Southern Florida now have a petition to split the state because the capital is in the north and will not address their flooding problems. And how much land will be rendered un-inhabitable due to heat? How many businesses will go under in those now un-inhabitable lands due to flooding and heat? How many diseases will be spread by movements of insects and other animals? How much will it cost to build the infrastructure necessary to make all those new habitable areas habitable?

We have never faced a problem like this before so we don't know how bad it can get. But the evidence points to catastrophic.
28-08-2016 19:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
This is exactly what the US military and the insurance companies are worried about. How much war will be caused by people moving into areas populated by other people? Just look at what the 3 year drought started in Syria when people left rural areas and moved into the cities. Three degrees will multiply this problem by a huge amount. The people in Southern Florida now have a petition to split the state because the capital is in the north and will not address their flooding problems. And how much land will be rendered un-inhabitable due to heat? How many businesses will go under in those now un-inhabitable lands due to flooding and heat? How many diseases will be spread by movements of insects and other animals? How much will it cost to build the infrastructure necessary to make all those new habitable areas habitable?

We have never faced a problem like this before so we don't know how bad it can get. But the evidence points to catastrophic.


If Florida is so bad, why are people moving INTO Florida in droves?

The only flooding problems in Florida have to do with rivers silting up. The EPA is the problem, since they won't let them dredge the rivers like they used to and keep them clear.

The sea level is not measurable. There has been no detectable rise along any shore.


The Parrot Killer
29-08-2016 00:28
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
This is exactly what the US military and the insurance companies are worried about. How much war will be caused by people moving into areas populated by other people? Just look at what the 3 year drought started in Syria when people left rural areas and moved into the cities. Three degrees will multiply this problem by a huge amount. The people in Southern Florida now have a petition to split the state because the capital is in the north and will not address their flooding problems. And how much land will be rendered un-inhabitable due to heat? How many businesses will go under in those now un-inhabitable lands due to flooding and heat? How many diseases will be spread by movements of insects and other animals? How much will it cost to build the infrastructure necessary to make all those new habitable areas habitable?

We have never faced a problem like this before so we don't know how bad it can get. But the evidence points to catastrophic.


If Florida is so bad, why are people moving INTO Florida in droves?

The only flooding problems in Florida have to do with rivers silting up. The EPA is the problem, since they won't let them dredge the rivers like they used to and keep them clear.

The sea level is not measurable. There has been no detectable rise along any shore.


I would think they are moving to areas in Florida that are not close to the coastline. According to the University of Miami's Department of Atmospheric Sciences the water level has risen 1.27 inches/year over the last 5 years and saltwater is intruding into aquifers causing some cities to shut down wells because of saltwater contamination. At that rate in 50 years it will rise an additional 5 feet assuming the rate doesn't increase which is probably a bad assumption since the rate has been increasing since 1996.

But your argument is with the people of South Florida who support the petition, not with me. I was just pointing out the existence of the petition.
29-08-2016 01:47
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5216)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
If temperature does increase 3 C and Earth reaches the state of the Eemian peak 125,000 years ago when modern humans evolved, sea level would be several meters higher than today and sea ice would be all but gone. 90% of currently unpopulated lands would be habitable. Canada, for instance, would be 10% populated compared to only 1% populated today. CAGW creeps claim coastal areas will be drowned by the rising sea. Possibly. But the increase in habitable land will result in a huge net benefit from sea level

...and what when the earth cools?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
29-08-2016 07:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
This is exactly what the US military and the insurance companies are worried about. How much war will be caused by people moving into areas populated by other people? Just look at what the 3 year drought started in Syria when people left rural areas and moved into the cities. Three degrees will multiply this problem by a huge amount. The people in Southern Florida now have a petition to split the state because the capital is in the north and will not address their flooding problems. And how much land will be rendered un-inhabitable due to heat? How many businesses will go under in those now un-inhabitable lands due to flooding and heat? How many diseases will be spread by movements of insects and other animals? How much will it cost to build the infrastructure necessary to make all those new habitable areas habitable?

We have never faced a problem like this before so we don't know how bad it can get. But the evidence points to catastrophic.


If Florida is so bad, why are people moving INTO Florida in droves?

The only flooding problems in Florida have to do with rivers silting up. The EPA is the problem, since they won't let them dredge the rivers like they used to and keep them clear.

The sea level is not measurable. There has been no detectable rise along any shore.


I would think they are moving to areas in Florida that are not close to the coastline. According to the University of Miami's Department of Atmospheric Sciences the water level has risen 1.27 inches/year over the last 5 years and saltwater is intruding into aquifers causing some cities to shut down wells because of saltwater contamination. At that rate in 50 years it will rise an additional 5 feet assuming the rate doesn't increase which is probably a bad assumption since the rate has been increasing since 1996.

But your argument is with the people of South Florida who support the petition, not with me. I was just pointing out the existence of the petition.

They are moving right to the coastline. Guess they don't mind the hurricanes.

Salt water intrusion is because of river silting.


The Parrot Killer
31-08-2016 00:47
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
This is exactly what the US military and the insurance companies are worried about. How much war will be caused by people moving into areas populated by other people? Just look at what the 3 year drought started in Syria when people left rural areas and moved into the cities. Three degrees will multiply this problem by a huge amount. The people in Southern Florida now have a petition to split the state because the capital is in the north and will not address their flooding problems. And how much land will be rendered un-inhabitable due to heat? How many businesses will go under in those now un-inhabitable lands due to flooding and heat? How many diseases will be spread by movements of insects and other animals? How much will it cost to build the infrastructure necessary to make all those new habitable areas habitable?

We have never faced a problem like this before so we don't know how bad it can get. But the evidence points to catastrophic.


If Florida is so bad, why are people moving INTO Florida in droves?

The only flooding problems in Florida have to do with rivers silting up. The EPA is the problem, since they won't let them dredge the rivers like they used to and keep them clear.

The sea level is not measurable. There has been no detectable rise along any shore.


I would think they are moving to areas in Florida that are not close to the coastline. According to the University of Miami's Department of Atmospheric Sciences the water level has risen 1.27 inches/year over the last 5 years and saltwater is intruding into aquifers causing some cities to shut down wells because of saltwater contamination. At that rate in 50 years it will rise an additional 5 feet assuming the rate doesn't increase which is probably a bad assumption since the rate has been increasing since 1996.

But your argument is with the people of South Florida who support the petition, not with me. I was just pointing out the existence of the petition.

They are moving right to the coastline. Guess they don't mind the hurricanes.

Salt water intrusion is because of river silting.


Well there is no accounting for what some people will do. Bet they can get some really good prices on the ocean front property.

The sea levels are rising. They can walk out and measure it. The people in south Florida that are seeing the streets flooded more and more during rainstorms know it. No amount of denying from people that don't live there can change that.
31-08-2016 07:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
This is exactly what the US military and the insurance companies are worried about. How much war will be caused by people moving into areas populated by other people? Just look at what the 3 year drought started in Syria when people left rural areas and moved into the cities. Three degrees will multiply this problem by a huge amount. The people in Southern Florida now have a petition to split the state because the capital is in the north and will not address their flooding problems. And how much land will be rendered un-inhabitable due to heat? How many businesses will go under in those now un-inhabitable lands due to flooding and heat? How many diseases will be spread by movements of insects and other animals? How much will it cost to build the infrastructure necessary to make all those new habitable areas habitable?

We have never faced a problem like this before so we don't know how bad it can get. But the evidence points to catastrophic.


If Florida is so bad, why are people moving INTO Florida in droves?

The only flooding problems in Florida have to do with rivers silting up. The EPA is the problem, since they won't let them dredge the rivers like they used to and keep them clear.

The sea level is not measurable. There has been no detectable rise along any shore.


I would think they are moving to areas in Florida that are not close to the coastline. According to the University of Miami's Department of Atmospheric Sciences the water level has risen 1.27 inches/year over the last 5 years and saltwater is intruding into aquifers causing some cities to shut down wells because of saltwater contamination. At that rate in 50 years it will rise an additional 5 feet assuming the rate doesn't increase which is probably a bad assumption since the rate has been increasing since 1996.

But your argument is with the people of South Florida who support the petition, not with me. I was just pointing out the existence of the petition.

They are moving right to the coastline. Guess they don't mind the hurricanes.

Salt water intrusion is because of river silting.


Well there is no accounting for what some people will do. Bet they can get some really good prices on the ocean front property.

The sea levels are rising. They can walk out and measure it. The people in south Florida that are seeing the streets flooded more and more during rainstorms know it. No amount of denying from people that don't live there can change that.


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


The Parrot Killer
31-08-2016 23:16
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.
31-08-2016 23:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?


The Parrot Killer
01-09-2016 02:00
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?

Fire away then. Why do you think satellites are unable to measure average sea levels?
01-09-2016 02:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?

Fire away then. Why do you think satellites are unable to measure average sea levels?


Basically because that is not what they were designed to do, though The Church of Global Warming claims it is.


The Parrot Killer
01-09-2016 10:55
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Into the Night wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?

Fire away then. Why do you think satellites are unable to measure average sea levels?


Basically because that is not what they were designed to do, though The Church of Global Warming claims it is.

Utter nonsense. That's precisely what the TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites were built for. Why would you think otherwise?

OSTM/Jason-2

"The Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM)/Jason-2 is an international satellite mission that will extend into the next decade the continuous climate record of sea surface height measurements begun in 1992 by the joint NASA/Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) Topex/Poseidon mission and continued in 2001 by the NASA/CNES Jason-1 mission. This multi-decadal record has already helped scientists study global sea level rise and better understand how ocean circula-tion and climate change are related.

Developed and proven through the joint efforts of NASA and CNES, high-precision ocean altimetry measures the distance between a satellite and the ocean surface to within a few centimeters. Accurate observations of variations in sea surface height-also known as ocean topography-provide scientists with information about the speed and direction of ocean cur-rents and heat stored in the ocean. This information, in turn, reveals global climate variations."
01-09-2016 19:29
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
If temperature does increase 3 C and Earth reaches the state of the Eemian peak 125,000 years ago when modern humans evolved, sea level would be several meters higher than today and sea ice would be all but gone. 90% of currently unpopulated lands would be habitable. Canada, for instance, would be 10% populated compared to only 1% populated today. CAGW creeps claim coastal areas will be drowned by the rising sea. Possibly. But the increase in habitable land will result in a huge net benefit from sea level rise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eemian


The maximum rate at which an ice sheet can be heated by sunshine is very limited.

No sea level rise of more than 1m is predicted by the IPCC by 2100. This is up on the previous prediction of 59cm which was shown to be wrong fairly quickly as they had clearly exagerated some figures upwards. So now the new figure has grown even more... odd that.

My money is on the result of a slight sea level drop should the world's climate get 3c warmer. This is due to the absorption of water by the currently dry lands which will get lots wetter. When the water table in the Sahara rises by 50m and there is a similar soaking of central Asia it could easily take 50cm out of the oceans.

And I don't buy the idea of any significant ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica as being credible.
01-09-2016 19:32
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
If temperature does increase 3 C and Earth reaches the state of the Eemian peak 125,000 years ago when modern humans evolved, sea level would be several meters higher than today and sea ice would be all but gone. 90% of currently unpopulated lands would be habitable. Canada, for instance, would be 10% populated compared to only 1% populated today. CAGW creeps claim coastal areas will be drowned by the rising sea. Possibly. But the increase in habitable land will result in a huge net benefit from sea level rise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eemian


The maximum rate at which an ice sheet can be heated by sunshine is very limited.

No sea level rise of more than 1m is predicted by the IPCC by 2100. This is up on the previous prediction of 59cm which was shown to be wrong fairly quickly as they had clearly exagerated some figures upwards. So now the new figure has grown even more... odd that.

My money is on the result of a slight sea level drop should the world's climate get 3c warmer. This is due to the absorption of water by the currently dry lands which will get lots wetter. When the water table in the Sahara rises by 50m and there is a similar soaking of central Asia it could easily take 50cm out of the oceans.

And I don't buy the idea of any significant ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica as being credible.

Given your incessant lying, why should anyone give a rat's ass what you think?
01-09-2016 19:33
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?

Fire away then. Why do you think satellites are unable to measure average sea levels?


Basically because that is not what they were designed to do, though The Church of Global Warming claims it is.

Utter nonsense. That's precisely what the TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites were built for. Why would you think otherwise?

OSTM/Jason-2

"The Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM)/Jason-2 is an international satellite mission that will extend into the next decade the continuous climate record of sea surface height measurements begun in 1992 by the joint NASA/Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) Topex/Poseidon mission and continued in 2001 by the NASA/CNES Jason-1 mission. This multi-decadal record has already helped scientists study global sea level rise and better understand how ocean circula-tion and climate change are related.

Developed and proven through the joint efforts of NASA and CNES, high-precision ocean altimetry measures the distance between a satellite and the ocean surface to within a few centimeters. Accurate observations of variations in sea surface height-also known as ocean topography-provide scientists with information about the speed and direction of ocean cur-rents and heat stored in the ocean. This information, in turn, reveals global climate variations."


And what use is that data?

There is of course a very good way to measure the change in ice at the poles and growth of ocean water. That's the day length.

As ice melts at the poles it would spread over the whole world and thus in order to conserve the angular momentum the spin of the earth would be slowed, a tiny bit.

This is accurate to the tenths of mm that the warmists need for their models but they don't use it because it's shown no change.
01-09-2016 19:37
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?

Fire away then. Why do you think satellites are unable to measure average sea levels?


Basically because that is not what they were designed to do, though The Church of Global Warming claims it is.

Utter nonsense. That's precisely what the TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites were built for. Why would you think otherwise?

OSTM/Jason-2

"The Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM)/Jason-2 is an international satellite mission that will extend into the next decade the continuous climate record of sea surface height measurements begun in 1992 by the joint NASA/Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) Topex/Poseidon mission and continued in 2001 by the NASA/CNES Jason-1 mission. This multi-decadal record has already helped scientists study global sea level rise and better understand how ocean circula-tion and climate change are related.

Developed and proven through the joint efforts of NASA and CNES, high-precision ocean altimetry measures the distance between a satellite and the ocean surface to within a few centimeters. Accurate observations of variations in sea surface height-also known as ocean topography-provide scientists with information about the speed and direction of ocean cur-rents and heat stored in the ocean. This information, in turn, reveals global climate variations."


And what use is that data?

There is of course a very good way to measure the change in ice at the poles and growth of ocean water. That's the day length.

As ice melts at the poles it would spread over the whole world and thus in order to conserve the angular momentum the spin of the earth would be slowed, a tiny bit.

This is accurate to the tenths of mm that the warmists need for their models but they don't use it because it's shown no change.

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.
01-09-2016 20:33
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?

Fire away then. Why do you think satellites are unable to measure average sea levels?


Basically because that is not what they were designed to do, though The Church of Global Warming claims it is.

Utter nonsense. That's precisely what the TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites were built for. Why would you think otherwise?

OSTM/Jason-2

"The Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM)/Jason-2 is an international satellite mission that will extend into the next decade the continuous climate record of sea surface height measurements begun in 1992 by the joint NASA/Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) Topex/Poseidon mission and continued in 2001 by the NASA/CNES Jason-1 mission. This multi-decadal record has already helped scientists study global sea level rise and better understand how ocean circula-tion and climate change are related.

Developed and proven through the joint efforts of NASA and CNES, high-precision ocean altimetry measures the distance between a satellite and the ocean surface to within a few centimeters. Accurate observations of variations in sea surface height-also known as ocean topography-provide scientists with information about the speed and direction of ocean cur-rents and heat stored in the ocean. This information, in turn, reveals global climate variations."


And what use is that data?

There is of course a very good way to measure the change in ice at the poles and growth of ocean water. That's the day length.

As ice melts at the poles it would spread over the whole world and thus in order to conserve the angular momentum the spin of the earth would be slowed, a tiny bit.

This is accurate to the tenths of mm that the warmists need for their models but they don't use it because it's shown no change.

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/rising-sea-levels-shown-actually-slow-down-earths-rotation-0/

I would have to go and buy a scientific calculator to do it myself.


The most accurate clock ever built only loses one second every 15 billion years. Scientists have a set a new record in accurate timekeeping, creating an atomic clock that won't lose or gain a second in 15 billion years — a time span greater than the estimated age of the Universe.22 Apr 2015


Given that the precision would be better than a trillionth of the rate of rotation and th eeffect of an aditional mm is in the order of a billionth of the radius of the world it should be far more accurate than 0.01mm.
01-09-2016 20:42
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/rising-sea-levels-shown-actually-slow-down-earths-rotation-0/

I would have to go and buy a scientific calculator to do it myself.


The most accurate clock ever built only loses one second every 15 billion years. Scientists have a set a new record in accurate timekeeping, creating an atomic clock that won't lose or gain a second in 15 billion years — a time span greater than the estimated age of the Universe.22 Apr 2015


Given that the precision would be better than a trillionth of the rate of rotation and th eeffect of an aditional mm is in the order of a billionth of the radius of the world it should be far more accurate than 0.01mm.

You are, of course, ignoring that fact that the speed of the Earth's rotation is affected by other factors in addition to the melting of the ice caps. This is why you cannot use changes in the Earth's rotation speed to accurately measure sea level changes.
01-09-2016 23:49
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?


Well that's how SOME are built and the way they used to all be built. I well know we have more modern tidal gauges now but it's the exact same principle. I was trying to make it simple so you could understand it.

This may come as a surprise to you but scientists actually do know that the land is sinking in some areas which is why the account for that when measuring the sea rise. So although mostly where the land is sinking it's at a much slower rate than the rise in the sea level, it is making the problem worse.

Sure we can talk about satellite instrumentation but it's going to be similar to our discussion on measuring the surface temperature and you didn't respond to my last post where I answered all your critiques to the problems you thought there were with the measurements.
02-09-2016 00:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?


Well that's how SOME are built and the way they used to all be built. I well know we have more modern tidal gauges now but it's the exact same principle. I was trying to make it simple so you could understand it.

This may come as a surprise to you but scientists actually do know that the land is sinking in some areas which is why the account for that when measuring the sea rise. So although mostly where the land is sinking it's at a much slower rate than the rise in the sea level, it is making the problem worse.

Sure we can talk about satellite instrumentation but it's going to be similar to our discussion on measuring the surface temperature and you didn't respond to my last post where I answered all your critiques to the problems you thought there were with the measurements.


Since you don't understand statistical math at all, my answers were not understandable to you. Discarding them outright, however, is not a legitimate way to deal with your problem.

You are not quite right though concerning the satellites. The instrumentation problem with them is not a statistical one.

Tidal stations have nothing to reference by for determining absolute sea level. The land is sinking in Florida (and along the southern coast of North America) and rising along the North Coast). What reference are you going to use to 'correct' the reading?


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 02-09-2016 00:45
02-09-2016 00:36
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?


Well that's how SOME are built and the way they used to all be built. I well know we have more modern tidal gauges now but it's the exact same principle. I was trying to make it simple so you could understand it.

This may come as a surprise to you but scientists actually do know that the land is sinking in some areas which is why the account for that when measuring the sea rise. So although mostly where the land is sinking it's at a much slower rate than the rise in the sea level, it is making the problem worse.

Sure we can talk about satellite instrumentation but it's going to be similar to our discussion on measuring the surface temperature and you didn't respond to my last post where I answered all your critiques to the problems you thought there were with the measurements.


They have nothing to reference by. The land is sinking in Florida (and along the southern coast of North America) and rising along the North Coast). What reference are you going to use to 'correct' the reading?


I take it you have heard of land surveying and GPS? I owned an engineering company for several years and we used both.
02-09-2016 00:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?


Well that's how SOME are built and the way they used to all be built. I well know we have more modern tidal gauges now but it's the exact same principle. I was trying to make it simple so you could understand it.

This may come as a surprise to you but scientists actually do know that the land is sinking in some areas which is why the account for that when measuring the sea rise. So although mostly where the land is sinking it's at a much slower rate than the rise in the sea level, it is making the problem worse.

Sure we can talk about satellite instrumentation but it's going to be similar to our discussion on measuring the surface temperature and you didn't respond to my last post where I answered all your critiques to the problems you thought there were with the measurements.


They have nothing to reference by. The land is sinking in Florida (and along the southern coast of North America) and rising along the North Coast). What reference are you going to use to 'correct' the reading?


I take it you have heard of land surveying and GPS? I owned an engineering company for several years and we used both.


GPS is basing its reference against orbital velocity. It is accurate only to within +- 100 feet altitude in the best of receivers. In most cases the error is +- 200 feet.

Orbital velocity changes in a single orbit. The Earth's gravitational field is not constant, you see. Horizontal positioning is accurate as the satellite passes over reference stations and compares them to their own internal atomic clock. They are not particularly good at knowing their own altitude.

Land surveying is measuring horizontal distances between 'known' points, or to measure height above surrounding terrain. It uses a relative measuring system, based on the relative position against a given point on land (which itself is moving).


The Parrot Killer
02-09-2016 01:06
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:


My family DOES live there, stupid.

They cannot 'walk out there' and measure it.

Streets flood in Florida because of silt in rivers and drainage canals.


Sure they can Knight. The tidal gages are just vertical measuring sticks that anyone can see. Walk right up to them say once a week at the exact same time every week and write down the sea level measured on the stick. Then average those measurements over a year and you will see the average sea height at the location for that year just like the real scientists do. Then over several years you will see a trend of rising sea levels. Like scientists have seen over the past several decades.

In addition we have the sea levels measured by satellites every day as conformation.

What's really stupid is shutting your eyes and closing your ears to the overwhelming scientific evidence because your world view doesn't want it to be true.


That's not how a tidal gauge is built.

A tidal gauge is a concrete well with openings underwater and at the top. This minimizes wave action in the well.

The tidal gauge is dependent on the land it is sitting on as its reference. The land moves. It rises, it sinks, etc.

Currently, the southern coast of the United States is sinking. The northern coast of the North American plate is rising.

There are a hell of a lot more tidal stations on the southern coast than on the northern one. Guess what that does to the average?

Florida streets flood because of silt buildup in nearby rivers and other drainage systems. The Everglades themselves are silting up.

The government is the cause. The EPA will not let them dredge the rivers and drainage systems anymore, so they can save the giant flying vampire toad from extinction.

Now, do you want to talk about the satellite instrumentation problems?


Well that's how SOME are built and the way they used to all be built. I well know we have more modern tidal gauges now but it's the exact same principle. I was trying to make it simple so you could understand it.

This may come as a surprise to you but scientists actually do know that the land is sinking in some areas which is why the account for that when measuring the sea rise. So although mostly where the land is sinking it's at a much slower rate than the rise in the sea level, it is making the problem worse.

Sure we can talk about satellite instrumentation but it's going to be similar to our discussion on measuring the surface temperature and you didn't respond to my last post where I answered all your critiques to the problems you thought there were with the measurements.


They have nothing to reference by. The land is sinking in Florida (and along the southern coast of North America) and rising along the North Coast). What reference are you going to use to 'correct' the reading?


I take it you have heard of land surveying and GPS? I owned an engineering company for several years and we used both.


GPS is basing its reference against orbital velocity. It is accurate only to within +- 100 feet altitude in the best of receivers. In most cases the error is +- 200 feet.

Orbital velocity changes in a single orbit. The Earth's gravitational field is not constant, you see. Horizontal positioning is accurate as the satellite passes over reference stations and compares them to their own internal atomic clock. They are not particularly good at knowing their own altitude.

Land surveying is measuring horizontal distances between 'known' points, or to measure height above surrounding terrain. It uses a relative measuring system, based on the relative position against a given point on land (which itself is moving).


Please don't tell that to the company I work for and all our customers. They all think that when we sell them a satellite antenna that it's capable of keeping that satellite in an almost exact location. And most of all don't tell that to any of the surveyors I work with. Because they think when they go back ten years later the will be able to find those property corners and their elevations very accurately just like they think they do today. It would put them out of a job if people find out they are not within 100 feet of those corners when the find them in the field.
02-09-2016 01:17
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Please don't tell that to the company I work for and all our customers. They all think that when we sell them a satellite antenna that it's capable of keeping that satellite in an almost exact location. And most of all don't tell that to any of the surveyors I work with. Because they think when they go back ten years later the will be able to find those property corners and their elevations very accurately just like they think they do today. It would put them out of a job if people find out they are not within 100 feet of those corners when the find them in the field.


Horizontal accuracy of GPS is +- 30 ft. Your elevation measurements are relative to a spot chosen by you. If you continue to use that spot, the relative elevation doesn't change (unless the land changes).

Your secret is safe with me, unless they read this forum!


The Parrot Killer
02-09-2016 16:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5216)
Into the Night wrote:GPS is basing its reference against orbital velocity. It is accurate only to within +- 100 feet altitude in the best of receivers. In most cases the error is +- 200 feet.

This is the reason pilots don't even consider using GPS to land. We'd have a never-ending stream of crashed aircraft.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-09-2016 16:40
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Please don't tell that to the company I work for and all our customers. They all think that when we sell them a satellite antenna that it's capable of keeping that satellite in an almost exact location. And most of all don't tell that to any of the surveyors I work with. Because they think when they go back ten years later the will be able to find those property corners and their elevations very accurately just like they think they do today. It would put them out of a job if people find out they are not within 100 feet of those corners when the find them in the field.


Horizontal accuracy of GPS is +- 30 ft. Your elevation measurements are relative to a spot chosen by you. If you continue to use that spot, the relative elevation doesn't change (unless the land changes).

Your secret is safe with me, unless they read this forum!


Thanks for keeping that a secret. I really like what I do.

You should keep up with the latest technology. If you are talking about a car's or plane's GPS you are correct because that is all that is needed to do the job. But with my GPS I can travel from one coast to the other coast and come within 30 feet of my destination. In the same way using my more sophisticated equipment I can go from one coast to the other coast, set up my GPS and locate the corner and elevation of that property within a few inches. How did that GPS know where that corner was within a few inches if its accuracy is only +- 30 feet?
03-09-2016 02:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Please don't tell that to the company I work for and all our customers. They all think that when we sell them a satellite antenna that it's capable of keeping that satellite in an almost exact location. And most of all don't tell that to any of the surveyors I work with. Because they think when they go back ten years later the will be able to find those property corners and their elevations very accurately just like they think they do today. It would put them out of a job if people find out they are not within 100 feet of those corners when the find them in the field.


Horizontal accuracy of GPS is +- 30 ft. Your elevation measurements are relative to a spot chosen by you. If you continue to use that spot, the relative elevation doesn't change (unless the land changes).

Your secret is safe with me, unless they read this forum!


Thanks for keeping that a secret. I really like what I do.

You should keep up with the latest technology. If you are talking about a car's or plane's GPS you are correct because that is all that is needed to do the job. But with my GPS I can travel from one coast to the other coast and come within 30 feet of my destination. In the same way using my more sophisticated equipment I can go from one coast to the other coast, set up my GPS and locate the corner and elevation of that property within a few inches. How did that GPS know where that corner was within a few inches if its accuracy is only +- 30 feet?


Using pure GPS you don't. A typical car or plane GPS is accurate only to +- 100 ft horizontal position. It is why there is no precision approach system using GPS.

Fortunately, your profession uses other reference points than just pure GPS.


The Parrot Killer
03-09-2016 15:53
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Please don't tell that to the company I work for and all our customers. They all think that when we sell them a satellite antenna that it's capable of keeping that satellite in an almost exact location. And most of all don't tell that to any of the surveyors I work with. Because they think when they go back ten years later the will be able to find those property corners and their elevations very accurately just like they think they do today. It would put them out of a job if people find out they are not within 100 feet of those corners when the find them in the field.


Horizontal accuracy of GPS is +- 30 ft. Your elevation measurements are relative to a spot chosen by you. If you continue to use that spot, the relative elevation doesn't change (unless the land changes).

Your secret is safe with me, unless they read this forum!


Thanks for keeping that a secret. I really like what I do.

You should keep up with the latest technology. If you are talking about a car's or plane's GPS you are correct because that is all that is needed to do the job. But with my GPS I can travel from one coast to the other coast and come within 30 feet of my destination. In the same way using my more sophisticated equipment I can go from one coast to the other coast, set up my GPS and locate the corner and elevation of that property within a few inches. How did that GPS know where that corner was within a few inches if its accuracy is only +- 30 feet?


Using pure GPS you don't. A typical car or plane GPS is accurate only to +- 100 ft horizontal position. It is why there is no precision approach system using GPS.

Fortunately, your profession uses other reference points than just pure GPS.


The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for? What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?
03-09-2016 17:01
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5216)
Hank wrote:The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for?

Because other instrumentation guides you.

GPS does not get you to "within a few inches" unless by "a few" you mean "many."

Hank wrote:What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?

Because we don't exactly know the sea level, so there is no fixed reference point for anything floating in the ocean like you have when using an ILS for example when landing aircraft.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-09-2016 17:18
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
IBdaMann wrote:
[quote]Hank wrote:The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for?

IBdaMann wrote:

Because other instrumentation guides you.


I have no idea what you are talking about and you don't either. I don't have any other instruments except the GPS
IBdaMann wrote:
GPS does not get you to "within a few inches" unless by "a few" you mean "many."

I used to do it all the time.



Hank wrote:What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?

IBdaMann wrote:
Because we don't exactly know the sea level, so there is no fixed reference point for anything floating in the ocean like you have when using an ILS for example when landing aircraft.

The USGS has bench marks all over the US. I can just compare that reading to the bench marks.
03-09-2016 21:34
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
[quote]Hank wrote:The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for?

IBdaMann wrote:

Because other instrumentation guides you.


I have no idea what you are talking about and you don't either. I don't have any other instruments except the GPS
IBdaMann wrote:
GPS does not get you to "within a few inches" unless by "a few" you mean "many."

I used to do it all the time.



Hank wrote:What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?

IBdaMann wrote:
Because we don't exactly know the sea level, so there is no fixed reference point for anything floating in the ocean like you have when using an ILS for example when landing aircraft.

The USGS has bench marks all over the US. I can just compare that reading to the bench marks.


Because you are able to accurately repeat your measurement. That's what your particular style of receiver does. It is no better at initial position, but it is very good at repetitive position.

We use the same sort of receivers to measure tectonic plate movement. We don't where the plate IS to within +- 30 ft, but we can see it move to within inches.

This does not work for altitude.


The Parrot Killer
03-09-2016 22:42
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
[quote]Hank wrote:The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for?

IBdaMann wrote:

Because other instrumentation guides you.


I have no idea what you are talking about and you don't either. I don't have any other instruments except the GPS
IBdaMann wrote:
GPS does not get you to "within a few inches" unless by "a few" you mean "many."

I used to do it all the time.



Hank wrote:What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?

IBdaMann wrote:
Because we don't exactly know the sea level, so there is no fixed reference point for anything floating in the ocean like you have when using an ILS for example when landing aircraft.

The USGS has bench marks all over the US. I can just compare that reading to the bench marks.


Because you are able to accurately repeat your measurement. That's what your particular style of receiver does. It is no better at initial position, but it is very good at repetitive position.

We use the same sort of receivers to measure tectonic plate movement. We don't where the plate IS to within +- 30 ft, but we can see it move to within inches.

This does not work for altitude.


Don't care where it is relative to what?

So GPS can measure in two dimensions but not the third dimension? Why not?
04-09-2016 00:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10199)
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
[quote]Hank wrote:The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for?

IBdaMann wrote:

Because other instrumentation guides you.


I have no idea what you are talking about and you don't either. I don't have any other instruments except the GPS
IBdaMann wrote:
GPS does not get you to "within a few inches" unless by "a few" you mean "many."

I used to do it all the time.



Hank wrote:What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?

IBdaMann wrote:
Because we don't exactly know the sea level, so there is no fixed reference point for anything floating in the ocean like you have when using an ILS for example when landing aircraft.

The USGS has bench marks all over the US. I can just compare that reading to the bench marks.


Because you are able to accurately repeat your measurement. That's what your particular style of receiver does. It is no better at initial position, but it is very good at repetitive position.

We use the same sort of receivers to measure tectonic plate movement. We don't where the plate IS to within +- 30 ft, but we can see it move to within inches.

This does not work for altitude.


Don't care where it is relative to what?

We don't know where the plate is. Sorry, typo.
Hank wrote:
So GPS can measure in two dimensions but not the third dimension? Why not?

The system is not designed to. We can get a reading of altitude from it, but it is not very accurate.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2016 15:54
Hank
★☆☆☆☆
(77)
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Hank wrote:
[quote]IBdaMann wrote:
[quote]Hank wrote:The how am I able to go from one coast to the other and be within a few inches of the point I'm looking for?

IBdaMann wrote:

Because other instrumentation guides you.


I have no idea what you are talking about and you don't either. I don't have any other instruments except the GPS
IBdaMann wrote:
GPS does not get you to "within a few inches" unless by "a few" you mean "many."

I used to do it all the time.



Hank wrote:What's the difference between the instrument I'm using to find that point and one floating in the ocean as far as reading the elevation?

IBdaMann wrote:
Because we don't exactly know the sea level, so there is no fixed reference point for anything floating in the ocean like you have when using an ILS for example when landing aircraft.

The USGS has bench marks all over the US. I can just compare that reading to the bench marks.


Because you are able to accurately repeat your measurement. That's what your particular style of receiver does. It is no better at initial position, but it is very good at repetitive position.

We use the same sort of receivers to measure tectonic plate movement. We don't where the plate IS to within +- 30 ft, but we can see it move to within inches.

This does not work for altitude.


Don't care where it is relative to what?

Into the Night wrote:
We don't know where the plate is. Sorry, typo.]/quote]

We don't know where the plate is relative to what?

[quote]Hank wrote:
So GPS can measure in two dimensions but not the third dimension? Why not?

Into the Night wrote:
The system is not designed to. We can get a reading of altitude from it, but it is not very accurate.


Do you know how GPS works?

How am I able to get the altitude from my GPS at a corner and it be within a few inches of the correct altitude?
04-09-2016 16:33
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/rising-sea-levels-shown-actually-slow-down-earths-rotation-0/

I would have to go and buy a scientific calculator to do it myself.


The most accurate clock ever built only loses one second every 15 billion years. Scientists have a set a new record in accurate timekeeping, creating an atomic clock that won't lose or gain a second in 15 billion years — a time span greater than the estimated age of the Universe.22 Apr 2015


Given that the precision would be better than a trillionth of the rate of rotation and th eeffect of an aditional mm is in the order of a billionth of the radius of the world it should be far more accurate than 0.01mm.

You are, of course, ignoring that fact that the speed of the Earth's rotation is affected by other factors in addition to the melting of the ice caps. This is why you cannot use changes in the Earth's rotation speed to accurately measure sea level changes.


What other factors?

Which of these factors cannot be easily modeled?
04-09-2016 16:42
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/rising-sea-levels-shown-actually-slow-down-earths-rotation-0/

I would have to go and buy a scientific calculator to do it myself.


The most accurate clock ever built only loses one second every 15 billion years. Scientists have a set a new record in accurate timekeeping, creating an atomic clock that won't lose or gain a second in 15 billion years — a time span greater than the estimated age of the Universe.22 Apr 2015


Given that the precision would be better than a trillionth of the rate of rotation and th eeffect of an aditional mm is in the order of a billionth of the radius of the world it should be far more accurate than 0.01mm.

You are, of course, ignoring that fact that the speed of the Earth's rotation is affected by other factors in addition to the melting of the ice caps. This is why you cannot use changes in the Earth's rotation speed to accurately measure sea level changes.


What other factors?

Which of these factors cannot be easily modeled?

Tidal effects, continental drift, earthquakes, magma movements, for example.

Of these, I'd guess that tidal effects and, perhaps, continental drift may be modellable. Earthquakes and magma movements less so. If you're that interested, why not do a literature search and so what you can find?
04-09-2016 16:47
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/rising-sea-levels-shown-actually-slow-down-earths-rotation-0/

I would have to go and buy a scientific calculator to do it myself.


The most accurate clock ever built only loses one second every 15 billion years. Scientists have a set a new record in accurate timekeeping, creating an atomic clock that won't lose or gain a second in 15 billion years — a time span greater than the estimated age of the Universe.22 Apr 2015


Given that the precision would be better than a trillionth of the rate of rotation and th eeffect of an aditional mm is in the order of a billionth of the radius of the world it should be far more accurate than 0.01mm.

You are, of course, ignoring that fact that the speed of the Earth's rotation is affected by other factors in addition to the melting of the ice caps. This is why you cannot use changes in the Earth's rotation speed to accurately measure sea level changes.


What other factors?

Which of these factors cannot be easily modeled?

Tidal effects, continental drift, earthquakes, magma movements, for example.

Of these, I'd guess that tidal effects and, perhaps, continental drift may be modellable. Earthquakes and magma movements less so. If you're that interested, why not do a literature search and so what you can find?


Given that I am expected to believe that the best way to measure the ice mass changes of Greenland is by the deviation of satellites going over there the laval flows which do not significantly effect the mass distribution of the earth over decades would be very easy to measure with surface gravitometers.

Tidal effects would of course be inconsequential. What happened last year happened this so no change there.

Nope, you have yet to point out why there is any trouble with day length as a measure of distribution of mass between poles and general sea level.
04-09-2016 17:28
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:

Yes, melting ice from the poles would indeed slow the Earth's rotation by a tiny amount. But given the lack of any references or calculations, I'm going to assume that the tenths of a mm accuracy is just your usual bullshitting.


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/rising-sea-levels-shown-actually-slow-down-earths-rotation-0/

I would have to go and buy a scientific calculator to do it myself.


The most accurate clock ever built only loses one second every 15 billion years. Scientists have a set a new record in accurate timekeeping, creating an atomic clock that won't lose or gain a second in 15 billion years — a time span greater than the estimated age of the Universe.22 Apr 2015


Given that the precision would be better than a trillionth of the rate of rotation and th eeffect of an aditional mm is in the order of a billionth of the radius of the world it should be far more accurate than 0.01mm.

You are, of course, ignoring that fact that the speed of the Earth's rotation is affected by other factors in addition to the melting of the ice caps. This is why you cannot use changes in the Earth's rotation speed to accurately measure sea level changes.


What other factors?

Which of these factors cannot be easily modeled?

Tidal effects, continental drift, earthquakes, magma movements, for example.

Of these, I'd guess that tidal effects and, perhaps, continental drift may be modellable. Earthquakes and magma movements less so. If you're that interested, why not do a literature search and so what you can find?


Given that I am expected to believe that the best way to measure the ice mass changes of Greenland is by the deviation of satellites going over there the laval flows which do not significantly effect the mass distribution of the earth over decades would be very easy to measure with surface gravitometers.

Tidal effects would of course be inconsequential. What happened last year happened this so no change there.

Nope, you have yet to point out why there is any trouble with day length as a measure of distribution of mass between poles and general sea level.

You're the one who is proposing the technique, so you tell me.

How much would you expect a rising sea level of about 3.4 mm (some from polar ice melting and some from thermal expansion of seawater) to slow the Earth's rotation? Over what duration would this be measurable? How would it compare to the continual slowing of the Earth's rotation by tidal effects? What about continents drifting towards or away from the poles? What would their effect be?
Page 1 of 212>





Join the debate Why sea level rise will be a good thing.:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Good beginner book827-08-2019 00:51
Sea Level Rise - Not a Worry.3316-06-2019 18:20
Rising sea levels2410-06-2019 18:22
This doesn't sound good...129-05-2019 06:22
Antarctica's Effect on Sea Level Rise in Coming Centuries2613-05-2019 07:51
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact