>North Carolina ...
> "Jeffress Williams, a coastal marine geologist with the U.S. Geologic Survey 
> ... to a state panel ...
> working on recommendations ... to the General Assembly ... for the coming 
> session.
>
> Sea level rose about eight inches on North Carolina's coast during the 20th 
> century, Williams said. "

Ack!thpft! when I went looking for a cite for that, GScholar
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Sea+level+rise%22+%22eight+inches%22+%22North+Carolina%22&btnG=Search
found this:

"Global Warming and Sea Level Rise
 Most of the refuge lies at or within a few feet of sea level. Much of
the refuge has a water table within a foot of the soil surface.
Marshes cover the majority of the refuge. Wetland forest stands cover
the
balance of the refuge. Scientists predict that sea level along the
North Carolina coast will rise from
two to three feet in the next 100 years due to global warming. That
rise in water level is expected to
change the types of vegetative cover on the refuge; the grass-
dominated marshes that occupy the
majority of the refuge will lie below sea level ..."

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast
Region, Atlanta
2006
http://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning/PDFdocuments/Cedar%20Isalnd/Cedar%20Island%20Draft%20CCP%20edited.pdf

As well as this:

"Sea level rose approximately four feet per century between roughly
8000 BC and 4000 BC, after which the rate of rise slowed to about
eight inches per century.... The rising ocean submerged the
continental shelf and reached the present mouth of the Chesapeake Bay
by 8000 BC. By about 5000 BC, the estuary reached well into the
Potomac River, and by about 4000 BC it reached present day
Annapolis.... reached the bottom of Lower Susquehanna and acquired its
current configuration by
about 1000 BC, although sea level rise has continued in the
present ..."

Seems there's ample precedent for assuming the rate people are saying
can't happen, eh?
Looking at the CO2 levels, the 'four feet per century' coincides more
or less with the typcal end-of-ice-age period.  And now that we've
bumped CO2 up, it makes sense it'd continue, if not melt faster than
it did just recently.

Seems to me much of what we can say is "very likely" --- for example
pandemic influenza -- is just not something the market system has any
way of dealing with, if only because the future discounting makes any
action at all seem improvident to take at the present time.

>Pielke

Seems to me he's functioning as a politician. Anyone betting whether
he's going to be an adviser to a candidate?

> baited Pielke ...

No bait  was needed; it was the first post in reply to the Prometheus
thread, and that's where I recognized the political approach; someone
mentioned another commentator, and Pielke wrote
> "... Lomborg is sounding many of the same themes as us, not vice versa ;-)"

Reads to me like pure campaign-team language, or would-be/wannabe
language at least.
Aside -- anyone know who "us" is, over there?


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated 
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of 
global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the 
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not 
gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to [email protected]

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to