New Study: Sea Level Rise Doesn’t ‘Spell Doom’ – Little To No Loss Of Coastal Wetlands Projected By

[rangerrebew]

New Study: Sea Level Rise Doesn’t ‘Spell Doom’ – Little To No Loss Of Coastal Wetlands Projected By 2100

By Kenneth Richard on 17. September 2018
Another new false-alarm paper reveals that coastal wetlands may not only persist well into the 21st century despite present rates of sea level rise, but the coasts may expand and even prosper due to the natural ability for soil to “build up vertically by sediment accretion”. 

Two years ago, a ground-breaking paper was published in the journal Nature Climate Change indicating that the Earth’s shorelines have been growing overall since the mid-1980s (Donchyts et al., 2016).

In other words, because “coasts are growing all over the world”, there is more land area above sea level today than there was 30 years ago.

http://notrickszone.com/2018/09/17/new-study-sea-level-rise-doesnt-spell-doom-little-to-no-loss-of-coastal-wetlands-projected-by-2100/

[Bigun]

Anyone who has ever floated a few ice cubes in a glass of water knows this!

[truth_seeker]

The pahway from Asia to North America, closed.

The pathway from mainland Europe, to the British Isles, closed.


What took place, for the seas to rise in those times?


Nobody was burning hydrocarbons in internal combustion engines. Nobody was burning coal, in electric generation plants.


So what happened?


And further, was the resulting closure of those land-bridges, a catastrophe so bad, it could not be mitigated?



 

[thackney]

The pahway from Asia to North America, closed.

The pathway from mainland Europe, to the British Isles, closed.


What took place, for the seas to rise in those times?


Nobody was burning hydrocarbons in internal combustion engines. Nobody was burning coal, in electric generation plants.


So what happened?


And further, was the resulting closure of those land-bridges, a catastrophe so bad, it could not be mitigated?

The ice age ended and massive amounts of land-based ice melted into the seas.

[Suppressed]

Anyone who has ever floated a few ice cubes in a glass of water knows this!

@Bigun
Mind explaining?  I'm not seeing any relevance to coastal resiliency under sea-level rise.

[Bigun]

@Bigun
Mind explaining?  I'm not seeing any relevance to coastal resiliency under sea-level rise.

Float some ice cubes in a glass of water then mark the water level in the glass.  Check it again after the ice melts.

[Suppressed]

So, the take-take-away message of the piece is that we need to curtail coastal development, and the systems will adjust naturally.

I think we all knew that...it's just that idjits are against curtailing coastal development.

[Suppressed]

Float some ice cubes in a glass of water then mark the water level in the glass.  Check it again after the ice melts.

@Bigun

That doesn't seem to have any relevance to the article in question, which is resiliency in the case of sea-level rise. 

If you are trying to suggest that melting ice doesn't lead to sea-level rise, your comment is partially right for part of the ice.  Much of the world's ice is on land, not floating, and isn't in isostatic equilibrium.  Melting it causes it to run off the land.  Try putting a knife across your full glass with an melting ice cube on it, and it floods the glass.

Plus, despite high-school science classes saying that liquid water doesn't change volume with temperature, that's not really true.  You do get some expansion with heating.

But again, that's not what the article was about.

[Bigun]

@Bigun

That doesn't seem to have any relevance to the article in question, which is resiliency in the case of sea-level rise. 

If you are trying to suggest that melting ice doesn't lead to sea-level rise, your comment is partially right for part of the ice.  Much of the world's ice is on land, not floating, and isn't in isostatic equilibrium.  Melting it causes it to run off the land.  Try putting a knife across your full glass with an melting ice cube on it, and it floods the glass.

Plus, despite high-school science classes saying that liquid water doesn't change volume with temperature, that's not really true.  You do get some expansion with heating.

But again, that's not what the article was about.

Other than some minute amounts that have escaped into space, every drop of water that was ever on this planet is still. Ice, vapor, or liquid, it doesn't matter.

[thackney]

Other than some minute amounts that have escaped into space, every drop of water that was ever on this planet is still. Ice, vapor, or liquid, it doesn't matter.

Yes, and in our past, when the planet was warmer and a lot of the ice had melted, the seas covered a lot of what is land today.

North America during the late Cretaceous

[Bigun]

Yes, and in our past, when the planet was warmer and a lot of the ice had melted, the seas covered a lot of what is land today.

North America during the late Cretaceous

No question about it. and the presence or absence of man has not one thing to do with it.

[thackney]

No question about it. and the presence or absence of man has not one thing to do with it.

Agreed in general.  We may push it a little but the big changes are not the result of us.

[GtHawk]

Agreed in general.  We may push it a little but the big changes are not the result of us.

Not according to my indoctrinated nephew who just received his masters in mechanical engineering at Berkeley, we agreed to not discuss it anymore after he said "Oh, your one of those" (you can supply the condescending tone in your own mind). I thought I was quite gracious in simply walking away from him.

[roamer_1]

And further, was the resulting closure of those land-bridges, a catastrophe so bad, it could not be mitigated?

 The importance of those land bridges is nothing but a figment of 'scientific' imagination.