NASA Says Three Feet of Sea Level Rise Is Unavoidable

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Here's one that shows from a 1 to 6 foot rise in 1 foot increments. I had seen a global one before that allowed larger ranges, I'll poke around for it.

Sea Level Rise Map

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
By any chance, do you have a map of what the world would look like if the sea levels rose 3 feet?

I gonna wager it would look pretty much the same as it does now.

As for the article, now that it is a done deal can we actually move on to something else?

a reply to: peter_kandra

That is a coastal flood impact map. It shows where I live being impacted and I am on a 400' hill overlooking Manhattan.

Seriously, I read the link, and it cites that three feet is on the high end of the prediction from the IPCC's report, and even the story itself says the rise will be "in the coming decades," not within one decade, and the quote in the OP shows that scientists think the rise could actually take longer than a century.

This whole OP and the title are misleading and misstating what the story actually says.

originally posted by:

jrod
This maybe be a hype story and in 10 years when we only have less than a foot, I can foresee a lot of the naysayers use stories like this as 'proof' man made climate change is bogus.

The story isn't really hype (well, if you believe their predictions, which I don't), it's the OP that is hyped. At least the story only blames humans in the very last paragraph and wasn't the focus, so there is still a little credibility possible in the link.

a reply to: peter_kandra

Cool thanks, I'm going to play with that for a while.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I'm from NJ originally, so depending on exactly where you are, I think you're good at a 400' elevation, but everywhere in NYC and the Newark Bay / Hudson River area would probably be flooded. Obviously areas like Cliffside Park, Edgewater, etc. would be OK given that they're up high, but large areas of Bayonne and Jersey City would be flooded too...but maybe more so at high tide.

originally posted by: Darkblade71
a reply to: Bluntone22

Probably more along the lines of preparation and prevention of a worst case scenario if possible.
I don't think it is avoidable, but maybe it can be slowed down from a runaway situation due to man's helping to speed up a natural process.

I'm sorry, but how is a (possibly as high as) 36" rise in sea level over the course of probably 100+ years equating to a "runaway situation" in your viewpoint? That's plenty of time to adapt as societies are affected.

originally posted by: peter_kandra
I'm from NJ originally, so depending on exactly where you are, I think you're good at a 400' elevation...

West Orange.

...but everywhere in NYC and the Newark Bay / Hudson River area would probably be flooded. Obviously areas like Cliffside Park, Edgewater, etc. would be OK given that they're up high, but large areas of Bayonne and Jersey City would be flooded too...but maybe more so at high tide.

They are fine too, it is a coastal flood surge map, not a sea level rise map. Newark is 72' above sea level.

a reply to: peter_kandra

Nice--humanity will easily survive a three-foot rise in sea level. Thanks for the link.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm talking about more than 3 feet (worst case).
But if you read the articles, what they found is that it all is speeding up way faster than they thought.

As to runaway, I mean everything gets way hotter and EVERYTHING melts.
That could take a while and is what I think the worry is.

I didn't see anywhere other than the yahoo article about 10 years, which seems to fast for 3 feet, but that doesn't mean 100 years either at the rate things are going and appear to be accelerating.

What worries me more is people denying that things are changing and because of that and lack of planning, a lot of people could die. But these are all unknowns, with a hint of OH NO!!

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

As for the article, now that it is a done deal can we actually move on to something else?

Yeah, why sweat the small stuff like killing our planet when we could be discussing issues like is it okay to use the term "anchor baby" and Megan Kelly hurt Trump's feelings.

All those in the denying category will be the one's claiming...."why didn't someone warn us"

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

My bad. The link said Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impact. I would have thought down neck was a lower elevation.

Is Jimmy Buff's still around? I know there was one up in East Hanover (I lived in Whippany for a few years), but loved the one in WO.

originally posted by: angeldoll
Yeah, why sweat the small stuff like killing our planet...

The planet will be just fine particularly now that the sea level rise is a certainty. I just want to stop hearing the moronic doom porn on a daily basis how we need to do something. Now that we know we cannot do something I would like to move on to a more worthy endeavor.

a reply to: olaru12

What is rule 62?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

worthy endeavor

Trying to think what is more "worthy" than our home environment. Please give an example.

originally posted by: peter_kandra
My bad. The link said Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impact. I would have thought down neck was a lower elevation.

No worries, the site does not really make that very clear.

Down Neck is still well above sea level, it only flooded when Sandy came through due to the unusual circumstances revolving around the storm surge.

Is Jimmy Buff's still around? I know there was one up in East Hanover (I lived in Whippany for a few years), but loved the one in WO.

Yup, still there. I was always more of a Falls View and Hot Grill guy.

originally posted by: angeldoll

Trying to think what is more "worthy" than our home environment. Please give an example.

Picking boogers is more worthy than worrying about a done deal. Only ninnies and panty waists worry about the inevitable.

How do you propose to deal with something that the article says cannot be prevented? Hand wringing? New found religion? Hysteria?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Nevermind. I thought we might have a conversation, but that isn't possible when one's only interest is firing back inane comments and childish not-worth-my-time insults. You have a nice day.

originally posted by: angeldoll
Nevermind. I thought we might have a conversation...

We can have a conversation. Tell me how you remedy something that is 'unavoidable'?

If it is a fait accompli why the hell should anyone worry about it?