LOL That's far enough south. However, I'm not sure you want to be that close to be beach.

As if New Zealand is much bigger than Florida!!!

I was speaking vertically, not horizontally. New Zealand is mountainous. Florida is only a few feet about sea level.

You really don't know what this thread is about do you?

So, how high would you say is high enough?

At least fifty feet. New Zealand is much more than that. Florida is not.

Jane, here is a link for you. It will lead to a couple of others.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/04/0420_040420_earthday.html

and here is a newer one from national geographic

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0323_060323_global_warming.html

Ice Age 3 was funny! If you appreciate Pixar cartoons then this is yet another one you will have a good time with.

Those animals make the Ice Age look fun to live in.

*** Joe ***

Thank you for the advanced warning!

... 1 meter per century? I guess, my descendats would have to worry about that peoperty...

Meanwhile, I'm planning to enjoy the 50-60 years I have left!

Just remember it is the "Global Warming THEORY"... it isn't a law (i.e. "The Law of Gravity")...

If you were in Michigan last February when the temps hit 30 below zero you'd be laughing at global warming, wishing for summer to come...

I sincerely believe the Global Warming Theory is a convenient way to push for left-wing liberal politcal action that amounts to basically zilch-o... except that a lot of eastcoast (and left-coast) university grant money gets generated ... into the millions most likely billions of dollars... Telling people you can prove global warming is sort of like telling folks you can prove God exists... or... that you can prove God doesn't exist...

It has sort of combined with (or spawned, don't remember which) the "Green" movement wherein a lot of corporations are actually attempting to be (howbeit it ever so slightly for some) a little more ecology conscious.

Belching tons of pollutants is obviously not a good thing. I don't need the global warming politcal action committe to tell me pollution is bad.

Now let's talk about the latest organic foods craze and please explain exactly how many milligrams, etc of pesticides and chemicals can scientifically be proven to shoot out of a chicken butt into (or) not into an organic chicken egg that gets a grocery store price at Whole Foods of $6.00 a dozen...

Meanwhile major corporations are laying off thousands in the U.S., and hiring workers for like 14 cents an hour in such places as Bangladesh... workers which are forced to work 20 hour days, sleep beside their sewing machines, and are black listed or beaten to a bloody pulp if they even whisper anything about a trade union... (see the book: "People Before Profits" by Charles Derber)

Nobody gives a $hit about that... they are too busy chasing globally warm rainbows and worrying about pesticides in chicken eggs...

Ok you just caught MY attention...

1 meter as in rise in level? On an OCEAN.

what would 1 meter more do to a tsumami? Eeek!
what would 1 meter more do the the shorelines of the world?

What would 1 meter make in the tide change?

I lived near a lake... a large man made one.

1 meter would change the SHORELINE from 900-1100 range to the 1300+ range...

I stopped there... I did not do the math for the whole landmass of the earth... If an ocean is changed that much (and its not a tide).

What makes for good research is an honest evaluation of each side. True research SHOULD be objectional, but in today's "politcally correct" world of academia, the research oft times gets scewed histerically to the left-wing side. At that point, in a world run by the ultra rich who think they are intellectuals, federal grant money pours out of Washington, into the college campuses, and we have a whole bunch of heads full of mush running around trying to substatiate their new billion-dollar federal global warming grant...

Statistics that are speculative are easily fabricated. Since the event or events haven't happened yet (remember the Y2K bug of 1999?) public opinion can be stirred simply by using the media circus propaganda machine to tell the sheeples what to think.

Sort of like some ground digger finding a skull out in the middle of no where with a big fore head. Suddenly they have speculated that it is a missing link. When in all actuality, it was probably some dude who was born with a real nasty birth defect, and knowing human nature, he became an outcast, and that is why no other skulls like his were found anywhere near his. Most likely mankind had annihilated itself, as we seem to have the tendency to do... and he was banished from his village into the unknown outback somewhere... a zillion years later some college grant money gets generated and they claim it proves the "Theory" of evolution...

Very much like telling somebody you can prove God exists... or that you can prove that God does not exist.... either way, if you are a very good public speaker and research presenter, you can generate millions of dollars of grant money. And that is what keeps universities afloat. Some universities have a grant quota they require of their professors... So, to keep his or her job (or promise of tenure, or promotions after tenure...), they keep stimulating the latest ridiculous un-provable theory.....

That is where the money is, and that is why I want to be a college professor when I grow up.

I want the letters "Ph.D." chiseled into my headstone when they chuck me 6 feet under.

In that case, Adventure_B, you can relax: the rise concerns only the natural bodies of water that replenish its volume...

Aye... the natural bodies of water the use it for a heat dump... What if all those bodies of water froze just a bit more in the highlands one year...

and melted the next...

The ocean would swell, tides would become dangerous where they had not... Not a big event mind you... but then in planetary terms and human levels... Would cause much harm.

and only take 2 or three years to happen.

Look, Adventure_B,

we are moving at a high velocity... and, soon, we're about to hit the wall! It doesen't matter wether you worry about it or not...
*** The process is erreversable, and so is the outcome! ***

So, WHY SPOIL WHATEVER TIME YOU HAVE LEFT? ? ?
(after all, excessive worrying might result in Alcers

Because I want to save as many as possible... If it happens many generations from now or a small disaster leading up to it.

I am a human...

but mostly iam.

Humans do not die quiting they die trying so the next human wont need as much work to take the next step.

TelephoneMan:******************************************************
That's for sure -- nobody's got a crystal ball to know the future! (and disprove those university bastards...)

STATISTICS, however, do not depend on them, it just blindly colect and report data which may support those "ridiculous un-provable theories", or not -- in which case the auther suffers a professional ridicule and a tarnished reputation... * * * * * *

* Apparently, those university bastards have actually found a way of influencing the Statistics to support their findings!!!
****THAT'S WHY WE'RE HEARING ALL THOSE BAD FORECASTS! ! !****

LOL, you might think twice before chiseling the letters "Ph.D." into your headstone -- might have a bad connotation: Phantom Desinformer!

*** Really admirable attitude!!! And I certainly hope your (our) efforts won't pass in vain...

However, there are many indicators of the fact that Humanity has already passed the POINT OF NO RETURN ! ! ! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I didn't take the time to explain, but here is the short version. Hurricane Ike reached the exact top of the seawall which prevented it from wiping the city of Galveston off the face of the planet as was done in 1900. All the areas nearby without seawalls were destroyed. A one or two foot rise in ocean level would have been sufficient to destroy the city.

Hurricanes are simply natures way of taking excess heat from ocean water near the tropics and sending it North. There is no theory, of which I am aware, that says the hurricanes are going to be lessened by the additional heat the oceans already have and are expected to get. There is a good chance Miami is going to get hit. With a slight increase in sea level, the whole area can get smashed in the same way as Galveston and Hurricane Ike.

The "fifty feet" is how far to stay about sea level to prevent hurricane damage, not how much I expect the ocean to rise. Fifty feet in Florida is most of the state.

There are major changes going on with the laws concerning coastal construction. There is really really good reason for this.

free info for anyone interested in an alternative opinion:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/floy4.html
The former U.S. vice president, Al Gore, is now urging civil disobedience to stop coal plants. He told a New York audience recently, "If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration."

Global Warming and Reinventing Government have been Gore’s two lifelong causes. He is using the one to accomplish the other. His fundamental assumptions and views of global warming were well documented in his film, An Inconvenient Truth. Thousands of schoolchildren have viewed it. Gore was even awarded a Nobel Peace prize for the documentary in 2007 which he shared with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It is telling that the very first Chairman of that IPCC group, John Houghton, had pronounced, "Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen." True to script, Gore announced disasters and many listened.

As Gore urges civil disobedience to stop coal plants for the sake of carbon dioxide emissions, it is time to revisit several of those assumptions and implications he made in An Inconvenient Truth. Each of the fourteen highlighted here is a snapshot of the Global Warming doomsayers’ views. The added perspective shows the fraud of the catastrophic manmade Global Warming thesis:

Carbon dioxide drives the temperature of the planet. Gore assumes that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the causal factor of warming temperatures. But, for at least 240,000 years carbon dioxide has been a lagging indicator of any warming. That means that the earth warms and, later, there is an increase in the gas carbon dioxide. Roy Spencer, Climate Research Scientist in Huntsville, Alabama, notes that "the cooling effects of weather have a stronger influence on surface temperatures than the warming influence of greenhouse gases." The major greenhouse gases are water vapor (which accounts for 70–90 percent of the effect), carbon dioxide and methane. Many scientists work on the theory that the sun is the prime driver of Earth’s climate. Earth temperature and sun activity do correlate closely. Additionally, many scientists examine the larger cosmos. Their theories reveal an interplay between the sun and cosmic rays – sub-atomic particles from exploded stars. Further, they discern long-term temperature patterns as our solar system moves through the arms of our Milky Way galaxy. Again, those events correlate more closely to Earth’s temperatures than do manmade carbon dioxide levels.

Temperatures will rise 1.5–4.5 degrees Celsius when CO2 levels double from a pre-industrial level of 280ppm to 560ppm. Because Earth’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide changes has been overstated, the scientifically likely temperature result of such a doubling is 1.5–2.0 degrees Celsius. Earth’s current CO2 level is 380ppm.

Catastrophic Global Warming will cause sea levels to rise 20 feet. The work of scientists supports a sea level rise of about one inch per decade. In one hundred years it should rise 10–12 inches.

Catastrophic Global Warming is forcing island nations to evacuate their populations to New Zealand because of rising sea levels. Tuvalu was the poster child for this alarm, but neither Tuvalu nor any other islanders have evacuated to New Zealand.

Catastrophic Global Warming is melting Antarctic sea ice. But, Antarctic sea ice is thickening over the gigantic continent. This thickening reduces sea level. There is ice loss on a tiny sliver of the continent stretching out far northward. That is what Gore’s movie image relies upon. The ice shelf collapse there was more likely to have been driven by ocean current fluctuations.

Catastrophic Global Warming is resulting in extreme weather. Tornadoes? The US is home to one-third of all the world’s tornadoes. But, tornadoes have not increased. Drought? There is not greater incidence of drought. Record typhoons and cyclones? No. Hurricanes? There are about ninety-five hurricanes annually and globally. But, hurricanes are neither more frequent nor more intense. In 2004 the IPCC hyped hurricane-fears without any scientific soundness. Gore’s film footage implies that hurricane Katrina was an inescapable consequence of manmade globally averaged warming. Facts do not support that alarm.

Catastrophic Global Warming has caused global temperatures to be warmer now than they have been in 1,000 years. Gore’s graph displays a long level period ending in an upward sweep like a hockey stick, displaying the appearance of runaway temperatures. A young IPCC scientist named Mann created this hockey stick graph for a 2001 report, making the real Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age disappear. It was an enormously effective prop. Alarmists used it for their the-science-is-settled position. It made the 20th-century temperature increase look unique. But, Mann’s methodology would have conjured any random set of numbers into a hockey stick. And, the temperature increase was not unique. In 2006 the National Academy of Sciences issued a report stating that this graph used flawed data. The IPCC has dropped the use of the Mann hockey stick from its 2007 Report. But, this piece of deliberate disinformation caused great damage to truth and science.

Catastrophic Global Warming has dried up Lake Chad. Lake Chad has been totally dry several times before humans were adding any CO2. That situation is due to over-extraction by communities.

Catastrophic Global Warming has been shrinking the snows of Kilimanjaro. By the time Ernest Hemingway wrote The Snows of Kilimanjaro in 1936, half of the snow was already gone. This is before man began releasing CO2 into the atmosphere to any extent by burning fuels for energy. No temperature on the mountain is above freezing. There has been no temperature change in fifty-five years. Shrinking is likely to be a circulation issue and lower precipitation, not a rising temperature issue.

Catastrophic Global Warming increases mosquito-borne malaria. Malaria was endemic to most of the developed world just fifty to one hundred years ago. We eliminated malaria in Europe and the United States while the world warmed. 600,000 people died of malaria in Siberia. Malaria sickens 300 to 500 million poor people annually, killing as many as 2.7 million each year. In sub-Saharan Africa, one in 20 children dies of malaria. The approximately forty million humans killed by malaria since 1972 have died because a politician, William Ruckelshaus, as the Environmental Protection Agency’s first head, banned the beneficial pesticide DDT.

Catastrophic Global Warming is quickly melting Arctic sea ice. Arctic sea ice decreases during the summer melt season, and Arctic temperatures have risen faster than anywhere else. But, the Arctic region was warmer in the 1930’s. That could not have been caused by mankind. And, Artic sea ice has recovered from 3 million square kilometers to 14 million square kilometers. Ice-cover around the Bering Strait and Alaska has more recently been at its highest level ever recorded.

Catastrophic Global Warming is killing polar bears. Factually, that claim was based on a single sighting of four dead bears the day after an "abrupt windstorm" in an area housing one of the increasing bear populations. Global polar-bear population has increased dramatically over the past decades.

Catastrophic Global Warming is melting Greenland’s ice. Greenland has been warmer. Its ice did not melt – except around its edges. There has been no net warming – and perhaps a slight cooling – since 1937. Vikings colonized and farmed Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period. The return of colder climate drove them away.

And, lastly, for An Inconvenient Truth,

Catastrophic Global Warming has caused mass extinctions. Warming extends ranges for plant and animal species. Biodiversity is enhanced. That’s why the greatest concentration of biodiversity is in the tropics. Higher concentrations of carbon dioxide are shown to increase plant production, while lowering water requirements and reducing stress. Animals thrive on more abundant plant-life. Enriched CO2 has yielded an additional one-sixth production which would not have happened in its absence.

Each of these fourteen scenarios would have been an environmental bad had it happened and had it been empirically proven to have been caused by humans. The alarming events did not happen. The scary scenarios all came from computer climate models. There has been no empirical proof substantiating Gore’s claims and implications.

The hypothesis of catastrophic globally averaged warming resulting from human-caused carbon dioxide increases has failed. Failed hypotheses should be rejected.

The catastrophic Global Warming hypothesis fails to show that changes in carbon dioxide drive changes in temperature. Changes in carbon dioxide do not account well for the highly variable climate we know the Earth has had, including the Roman Warming (200 B.C. to A.D. 600), the cold Dark Ages (A.D. 440 to A.D. 900), the Medieval Warming (A.D. 900–1300 when CO2 levels were much lower than today), and the Little Ice Age (1300–1550 when there were few sunspots). The catastrophic Global Warming hypothesis is a feeble theory made seemingly true by pure repetition.

The catastrophic Global Warming hypothesis fails to explain the reality of the last one hundred years. Half of our modern warming occurred from 1905–1940, when carbon dioxide levels were still quite low. The net warming since 1940 is a minuscule 0.2 degrees Celsius. An interlude of global cooling occurred in the 1950s and 1960s, when CO2 levels were increasing. It totally fails to explain the absence of warming in the last ten years, despite a continuing rapid increase in CO2 concentration. If greenhouse action by carbon dioxide drove warming, the upper air should have warmed faster than the surface, but observations show the opposite has been the case. Although computer models say temperatures should have risen, Alabama temperatures have fallen for 115 years. Citrus crops used to be common. What could you do about this catastrophe? Buy jackets and get out of the citrus business. In other words, adapt.

It is fraud to spread alarmism of catastrophic "human-caused global warming" based upon projections generated from computer climate models which have substantial uncertainties and are markedly unreliable. It is fraud upon fraud to throw scarce resources at Global Warming when such expenditures will have inconsequential results except to impoverish us, notwithstanding that Al Gore believes it will be good for our spirituality to work together on such a common cause. There are real and achievable global causes of diseases, malnutrition, sanitation and energy that are valid projects and worthy efforts – efforts that Bjørn Lomborg endorses in his book, Cool It. No global efforts toward expensive CO2 cuts are valid or worthy. Current Climate policies are health and wealth destruction policies.

Doomsayers are claiming that climate can be adjusted in some predictable way, but it can not. It is fraud to claim that it can. As published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Richard Lindzen of M.I.T. has conducted studies that thwart the greenhouse effect. What that means is that "just because the greenhouse effect is real, it does not follow that an increase in intensity will necessarily lead to a significant increase in mean global air temperature, as climate alarmists are wont to claim…Hence it is not inconceivable that an increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration may result in no warming at all. Or even a cooling!...Much more research will be required before we can determine that the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content even constitutes a problem, much less specify its magnitude and prescribe ameliorative measures for dealing with it."

The magnetic attraction of government funding for global-warming research, the political climate of fear-based policies seen in both climate issues and economic issues, and doom-sopping journalism works to push events into a downward spiral of exaggeration and hype. Al Gore rides this emotional wave. He has refused all debate with climate scientists. It is after all, for him, not about truth. For him truth is simply inconvenient.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/deming3.html
As the years pass and data accumulate, it is becoming evident that global warming is a fraud. Climate change is natural and ongoing, but the Earth has not warmed significantly over the last thirty years. Nor has there been a single negative effect of any type that can be unambiguously attributed to global warming.

As I write, satellite data show that the mean global temperature is the same that it was in 1979. The extent of global sea ice is also unchanged from 1979. Since the end of the last Ice Age, sea level has risen more than a hundred meters. But for the last three years, there has been no rise in sea level. If the polar ice sheets are melting, why isn't sea level rising? Global warming is supposed to increase the severity and frequency of tropical storms. But hurricane and typhoon activity is at a record low.

Every year in the US, more than forty thousand people are killed in traffic accidents. But not one single person has ever been killed by global warming. The number of species that have gone extinct from global warming is exactly zero. Both the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets are stable. The polar bear population is increasing. There has been no increase in infectious disease that can be attributed to climate change. We are not currently experiencing more floods, droughts, or forest fires.

In short, there is no evidence of any type to support the idea that we are entering an era when significant climate change is occurring and will cause the deterioration of either the natural environment or the human standard of living.

Why do people think the planet is warming? One reason is that the temperature data from weather stations appear to be hopelessly contaminated by urban heat effects. A survey of the 1221 temperature stations in the US by meteorologist Anthony Watts and his colleagues is now more than 80 percent complete. The magnitude of putative global warming over the last 150 years is about 0.7 °C. But only 9 percent of meteorological stations in the US are likely to have temperature errors lower than 1 °C. More than two-thirds of temperature sensors used to estimate global warming are located near artificial heating sources such as air conditioning vents, asphalt paving, or buildings. These sources are likely to introduce artifacts greater than 2 °C into the temperature record.

Another cause of global warming hysteria is the infiltration of science by ideological zealots who place politics above truth. Earlier this month, the Obama administration issued a report that concluded global warming would have a number of deleterious effects on the US. In 1995, one of the lead authors of this report told me that we had to alter the historical temperature record by "getting rid" of the Medieval Warm Period.

The Obama report refers to – six times – the work of a climate scientist named Stephen H. Schneider. In 1989, Schneider told Discover magazine that "we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have." Schneider concluded "each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." Schneider's position is not unusual. In 2007, Mike Hulme, the founding director of the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research in Britain, told the Guardian newspaper that "scientists and politicians must trade truth for influence."

While releasing a politicized report that prostitutes science to politics, the Obama administration simultaneously suppressed an internal EPA report that concluded there were "glaring inconsistencies" between the scientific data and the hypothesis that carbon dioxide emissions were changing the climate.

If we had an appreciation for history, we would not be fooled so easily. It has all happened before, albeit on a smaller scale in an age where people had more common sense. On May 19, 1912, the Washington Post posed these questions: "Is the climate of the world changing? Is it becoming warmer in the polar regions?" On November 2, 1922, the Associated Press reported that "the Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the waters too hot." On February 25, 1923, the New York Times concluded that "the Arctic appears to be warming up." On December 21, 1930, the Times noted that "Alpine glaciers are in full retreat." A few months later the New York Times concluded that there was "a radical change in climatic conditions and hitherto unheard of warmth" in Greenland. About the only thing that has changed at the Times since 1930 is that no one working there today is literate enough to use the word "hitherto."

After the warm weather of the 1930s gave way to a cooling trend beginning in 1940, the media began speculating on the imminent arrival of a new Ice Age. We have now come full circle, mired in a hopeless cycle of reincarnated ignorance. H. L. Mencken understood this process when he explained "the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary."