|
|
What follows is an article called "Dire warning of sea level rise from world's most famous climate scientist" by reporter Gary Farrow, published by the New Zealand Herald on July 23rd, 2015, along with my observations.
A new study, led by James Hansen, NASA's former lead climate scientist, and 16-co-authors, paints a very grim picture of the stability of the world's sea levels in the near future. A once very high-profile NASA employee and his assistants have decided to up the ante in the struggle for research grants in a world no longer convinced it's going to drown. Many of those involved in writing the report are regarded as being at the top of their respective fields. In an attempt to prevent your bs alarm from going off, they want you to be confident that these aren't a bunch of fringe jokers. The conclusion they reached was that glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica are going to melt 10 times faster than predicted earlier. They're dissatisfied with the boredom of global warming experienced by the general populace, and decided to liven things up with even faster ice-melting predictions. This would result in sea level rise of at least 10 feet in as few as 50 years. This would result in some people and animals moving further inland, but only if the Earth behaved exactly like their manipulated data and computer models for 50 years straight. The study has not been peer reviewed yet, but is generating a lot of thought about the future of the world's oceans, as well as the fate of human and animal populations that depend on their current state. There's that pesky absence-of-peer-review factor again! Of course, that does not prevent the doom sayers from their misanthropic dance of panic. It emphasised the feedback loop in the Southern Ocean. An interesting choice, as the sea ice extent in Antarctica is increasing. As the glaciers melt, cooler fresh water forces warmer salt water under the ice sheets, which results in them melting faster. A fascinating theory, but Antarctica isn't actually shrinking in the real world. It's a vicious circle, and Hansen says he hopes the findings will help persuade governments and large organisations to enact change, more than previous studies have. It's a vicious circle, just like the one where the research grants start to dry up from a world that no longer fears becoming Waterworld, so then the climate scientists come up with another startling prediction based on selective data that supports their new (same old) theory. The researchers used a combination of paleoclimate records, computer models and observations of contemporary sea level rise to come to their findings. The researchers used a combination of old weather data, computer models custom-designed to bear out their predictions, and theory-friendly selections of sea level statistics to bolster their desire to scare you. The study doesn't predict the precise timing of the feedback loop, but says it is likely to occur this century. In order to insure their success, they've left the time frame wide enough to make a killing in research grants before the fear wears off. Although their research apparently predicts "dire" consequences if we ignore it, they wisely decide to leave the time frame ambiguous, to avoid laughing-stock status in a few decades. The ultimate implication of this is that every coastal city on the planet may be habitable for only a few more decades, requiring "emergency cooperation among nations," as Hansen says. For those of you who aren't sufficiently disturbed by their predictions, Hansen draws a frightful image designed to manipulate your emotions. And of course humanity, with all its ingenuity, could never, not even in fifty years, figure out a way to keep the water out if Hansen's vision of Waterworld was actually realized. The paper will be published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, which is an open-access journal to encourage discussion, and it is important to note it will not be formally peer reviewed before it appears online. To maximize the panicked ripples in the pond, the paper will be available to the public before peer-reviewers label it unsubstantiated exaggeration. It is, nonetheless, very sobering food for thought as to where climate change is taking us. It is, nonetheless, very interesting water-cooler chatter for those who don't have anything better to attend. Mr Farrow, as a responsible journalist, feels the need for this disclaimer just in case the study is deemed balderdash. |