Carantoc said...

A discussion on whether group 1 metals react with water is silenced by dropping all the group 1 metals into water and watching. Wouldn't take long.

it wouldn't take long

Carantoc said...
A discussion about sea level rising is finished by evidencing sea levels are rising.

yes, that might take longer. It might involve reading for longer than is reasonable for someone. It might involve more statistical ability than is easily acquired from you tube.

Carantoc said...
If I listened to the cleverest 'scientist' 500 years ago I would have burnt my Grandmother for being a witch, and not believed that sea levels were rising because all the water would spill over the edge of the world.

That was before the scientific method and that is what we all now mean when we say science

Carantoc said...
I don't doubt sea levels are rising. Stand on a hill above the ocean and look at the geography. The sea used to be higher up the land. Go diving underwater, the sea used to be futher out.

Sea levels have changed. It will be trickier to work out.

Carantoc said...

I don't doubt some (betwen 0.1% and 99.9%) of this rise is caused by man-made factors. One being the increase in kiters in the water. If the average kiter weights 80kg, and just floats and there are lots of them in the sea (which there are) then the sea has risen.

I am sure you need to be more accurate than 1%. If the ocean volume increase by 1% I think this would translate to more than 800mm rise.

I'm not. I haven't looked at what error factors all the different ways that we measure have and I haven't looked at all the different factors that we have to exclude.

Carantoc said...

Satellites are not fixed. They all wobble. The atmosphere changes and radiowaves are affected by it. Satellite measurements to mm accuracy is only possible with comparision of their measurements with known locations. AHD is the mean sea level in 1970, as taken by several stations around Australia and traversed by dumpy level. There are closure issues with this traverse. The world is not regular. AHD is fine on comparativly small grids and is always based on a local control point. Go traverse these control points today, you would get a different closure than in 1970. I think the traverse was 2,000km from memory. I once traversed a level 12 km. That was far enough for me.

Sea level is a function of many things, tides, sun, moon, shaoling, atmospheric pressure, ocean currents. All of these I can see in the bath, magnify them for the . A rise (or fall) could be due to any of these.

This thread began by talking about an SBS documentary. I don't believe that's scientific.

All the factors above would need to be considered. I'm pretty sure they have and I'm pretty sure that sea levels rising would have been abandoned...

Carantoc said...

My point is I don't believe the hype. Or the sensationalism. The things I believe are the things I can see and touch. Even this may not be true as I have been conditioned to see and touch in a certain way.

For 1,500 years the western world was conditioned to see and touch God. People truly believed they could see evidence for God all around them, and in some ways this makes sense.

Since 1641 we have been conditioned to see science, and the evidence for science is all around us. I believe in science, probably with the same conviction my great-great-great relatives belived in God, and for exactly the same reasons.

I try to learn from the past, so I don't brand people heretics for not believeing the fashionable ideas of the times.

I don't believe we can measure long term sea level rises on a year by year basis to very much accuracy.

I don't belive pumping millions tonnes of concentrated chemicals into the atmosphere, sea or ground is a very smart idea. It will have consequences. The consequences may be good or bad. They will not be good for everything, they will not be bad for everything.

Scientists or journalists (journalists being the modern world's conditioners as the clergy were the conditioners in the past) sensationalising anything makes me believe only one thing - I shouldn't listen to them.

I didn't watch the sbs documentary...

Carantoc said...

My point is I don't believe the hype. Or the sensationalism. The things I believe are the things I can see and touch. Even this may not be true as I have been conditioned to see and touch in a certain way.

You better stop using that computer of yours then. You'll never be able to see or touch the subtle electron flows that are said to make it work therefore you cannot believe it does in fact work.

Carantoc said...

I don't believe we can measure long term sea level rises on a year by year basis to very much accuracy.

Just because you don't believe it (or don't understand how) doesn't mean it can't be done. Measuring sea levels is simple in principle. It's just a matter of recording sea levels at regular intervals at one particular site. Pretty soon you'll have a series. Average out the series and you get the mean. Watch the mean over time. If it goes up, the mean sea level has risen at that spot. Vice versa if it goes down. That's simple first year statistics.

If you do this in parallel over hundreds of sites then you can make more widespread observations across the set based on the information from all of them. That's a little more complicated but not an awful lot more.

See http://mhl.nsw.gov.au/www/water.htmlx

sea levels also rise because of the wash of the land/earth down the rivers,

off the foreshore, beaches are becoming flatter, silting up, all the rubbish

dumped out to sea. including uncountable numbers of containers swept

overboard from ships, and indeed sunken ships themselves. Geologists

know that some metals once firmly ensconsed on the land mass, have been

eroded, washed down the streams and rivers into the sea where they have

been remoulded as mass. Indeed huge underwater mining ventures do exist

around the world. It is the ultimate prize. to recover such riches

In Adelaide the main land sailing beach has a VERY slight fall, with about 1m tide drop will give about 1km width of beach i.e.(1000 / 1) fall.
In the past 30 years the difference between low and high tides seem about the same.
I would have expected if there was a "rise of the sea level" this would be VERY evident on this beach... but its not !!!

Yep, you are right. I will accept my ignorance, and apologise.

So, - how much does the sea level rise each year ?

(in inches or mm, I don't mind).

If you tell me "it could be upto 800mm in the next 100 years as the documentry did, and then play some duuum duummm duuuumm music and zoom in and out very fast and have Cpt Mannering running about saying we're all doomed, doomed I tell you and then run an ad for solar panels whilst I go and make a cup of tea", then I will know you have missed my point and I will shut up.

If, however you tell me that there general consensus amongst scientists all over the globe that the sea level is rising / falling at xxx per year, and the calculated rate of change is yyyy per year based on volumetic water change factored for ocean variables, then I will know I missed your point and I will shut up.

Before I shut up, I'll leave you with one last thing for you to use as evidence against me at at my heracy trial: every injury from a shark attack makes the front page. Every injury from a car crash doesn't. I believe it is because one thing sells, one thing doesn't. I am sorry for that belief. It is clearly actually because sharks are more of a threat to the average person's safety than cars, so it is every journalists responsibility to report on sharks and not cars to assit us, the general public in our daily lives.

http://news.sbs.com.au/insight/episode/index/id/171#livechat

Very interesting comments if you missed the show. Honestly, all opinions aside, the levels have been rising for...well, ever! So why all the sudden attention? Maybe we've only just realised that it's going to affect our wallets & lifestyle?

The paranoia surrounding rising sea levels shows the level of public ignorance we have in regard to our natural environment, or maybe just we're just so self absorbed most of the time, and when we catch a glimpse of something that becomes an opinionated debate (global warming/climate change/rising sea-levels/energy crisis, etc.) that we read what is put in front of us, and choose an argument that we relate to...when basically it should be handled & commented on only by qualified professionals that are at the forefront of the research?!?

Then again...if that was the case, there would be no need for most of the discussions on these forums?

if you want to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...

petermac33 said...

if you want to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...

You cant handle the truth!

ahahaha - that was side splitting funny

Today tonight on crack!

Love that middle bit..."ermm they're smarter dan us"

Good to see they're appealing to the lowest common denominator,
aint siiunce demokratik afta all?

petermac33 said...

if you want to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...

It is very convenient how the truth is so readily available in short sound bites on youtube, takes very little effort or time to appreciate and how most of the ideas that are true fit so readily into your belief system.

I don't know why people bother with more arduous ways to acquire knowledge like reading, proper disciplined study and consulting with experts who may have a different view - when it's all there, so clearly, on you tube

doggie said...

cisco said...

The climate is definitely changing, back to what was normal 20 years ago.

How has it changed? I dont think it has changed much at all in the last 20.

Well you Westies have been numbed into dry ass all the time so a change from 50mm rain per annum to 100mm per annum is hardly noticeable.

Fire suit on and extinguishers at the ready.[}:)]

We actually have wet summers and dry winters over here. It is called the monsoonal effect which has come back into effect this year.

Roma, Charleville and other nearby towns (at the top end of the channel country) have just experienced the highest flooding on record and this may just save the Murray/Darling system from the catastrophy it has been facing.

We have just experienced two months of almost solid rain which has not happened for 15 years or more. From 50 years ago till 20 years ago it was normal to get this sort of rainfall every year.

It is quite well known, but not generally publicised that in 1770 when Cook mapped the east coast, the country was in his words "very fair" and the reason for this was that the country was at the tail end of a very wet climate cycle.

This has been confirmed from studies of sediment deposits in drill core samples taken from coral reefs offshore from the Burdiken River.

The Burdiken River has the largest catchment east of the Great Dividing Range.

Climate Change??? Yeah, it is a happening thing for better or worse and unaffected by any human activity short of a world wide nuclear holocaust.

There is absolutely no way that artificially inflateing consumer energy costs, introducing carbon taxes and having carbon trading schemes will have any effect on climate or sea levels.

The sooner everybody realises that fact of life, science and economic reality, the sooner humanity will start better manageing our physical, but more importantly, our intellectual rescources.

cisco said...
Fire suit on and extinguishers at the ready.[}:)]
The sooner everybody realises that fact of life, science and economic reality, the sooner humanity will start better manageing our physical, but more importantly, our intellectual rescources.

I suggest that you manage your own intellectual rescource towards a library.

First title might be "How to estimate the amount the sea should rise when a boat sinks?"

I'll put the other titles out for suggestion.

cisco said...

What about "How to Make Squillions Out of a Global Con Job"

Have to agree !!!!
Hands up if you trust politicians solving global climate problems
They can't even get roof insulation installed correctly

"No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits...climate change provides the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world" Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister.

Extract from: The global warming scam
By Derek Kelly, PhD
http://www.globalwarming.nottinghamshiretimes.co.uk/index.html

Personally I think the concern over rising sea levels is partially caused by the huge number of people living close to the coast and tidal rivers.

I'm not sure but the population of London 1000 years ago was probably not much more than 10,000. As of today there are probably over 5,000,000 people living there now. Similarly the population on an island like Samoa is probably much larger than what it was a reasonably short time ago. So more people are affect by sea level changes.

Related to this is the development and investment that takes place close to the coast. If the sea level rose on a tropical island a thousand years ago then people would have moved their shack a bit uphill. If there was no hill to go up they would have to find somewhere else to live if they could find somewhere else. If sea levels rise today hospitals, houses, shops, roads, railways, airports and all sorts of things will be destroyed. The problem of finding somewhere else still remains.

From what I've read, sea levels are variable. They have been much lower than what they are now. They have been much higher than they are now.

Really all our efforts to stop the ocean from rising or falling seems to be like King Canute's followers telling him he was so powerful he could hold back the tide. Futile.

doggie said...
Hang on we have gone from sea levels to climate change, they are related but what I was refering to was in the last 20 years I havnt seen a rise in the sea level.

In saying that the climate hasnt really changed, I dont think it has been hotter or colder over here, last winter was freezing tho but thats just old age getting to me.

Yeah mate. Pretty much the point I was trying to make.