It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tuvalu Island asks for help (global warming)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   
The country of tuvalu looks to be going underwater in the next 50 years, rising sea levels threaten to wipe them out news.bbc.co.uk...

their foreign ministry wants to the developed world to pay to save them becuase they are resposible for global warming. Should rich nations foot the bill to save the island?



[edit on 24-1-2008 by yeti101]




posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


This is one the errors in al bores "movie"

The tuvalu islands are not drowning, and even if they were, the cause is the dynamiting of reefs by local fishermen.


There have been no mass evacuations of populations of islanders as suggested by Gore, though some residents of Tuvalu have asked to be moved to New Zealand, even though the tide-gauges maintained until recently by the National Tidal Facility of Australia show a mean annual sea-level rise over the past half-century equivalent to the thickness of a human hair. The problem with the Carteret Islands, mentioned by Ms. Kreider, arose not because of rising sea levels but because of imprudent dynamiting of the reefs by local fishermen.

source

The propaganda never ends - no offense to the OP, they are using gw as an excuse to get money for nothing.

[edit on 24/1/2008 by budski]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski

even though the tide-gauges maintained until recently by the National Tidal Facility of Australia show a mean annual sea-level rise over the past half-century equivalent to the thickness of a human hair.

source

The propaganda never ends


Nope it doesn't...

It's 5.8mm every year for the last 13-14 years at Tuvalu since the newer measures began. But as the manuscript states, using such data for these short periods is risky.

www.bom.gov.au...

Then there are other estimates of around 1mm (0.8mm and 1.6mm) per year for 50 years. But I think the data on these had issues with subsidence.

link 1

link 2

So I guess Monckton has some very thick hair.

However, I do think Gore overplayed the evacuation angle. Some have left, but it's not like a real official evacuation. However, they are leaving nonetheless and the government have asked NZ to let an evacuation happen if need be.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Which is all very well, bu the biggest cause of flooding is the dynamiting of the reefs that surround and protect the islands.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Which is all very well, bu the biggest cause of flooding is the dynamiting of the reefs that surround and protect the islands.


I think that's rather simplistic.

I can see that maybe destroying a reef that provides a degree of protection from tidal surges by blast fishing is not going to help, but the issue here is that the sea levels are rising, and pretty swift over the last decade or so if the new data is reliable.

So, to say that sea level rises are not an issue is clearly wrong. The issue of dynamiting reefs ain't so clear. I suppose we should blame it for all the other islands being flooded (e.g., Togoru).

For the Carteret Islands, I don't see how losing a reef is going to see islands completely submerged. A reef ain't a dutch-like dyke. I can see how it would protect from surges, but it won't be to blame for total submersion in 10-20 years.

There will be sea levels rises and erosion with reef destruction from various factors contributing. But sea levels are going to feed into erosion, storm surges, and flooding, with lack of reef protection allowing greater impact from its effects.

The complicating factor is that some islands are probably rising, some probably falling, and some might stay level. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Caterets is one of the few who are sinking physically.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 10:49 AM
link   
as far as i can tell, islands vanish over time, just think of the Hawaii chain, as long as these volcanoes are active, big mountainous islands, but once they remain silent, erosion kicks in and reduces the island to dust. (sediment ?
)

anyways, it shouldn't be too hard to come up with examples of 'drowned' ie. vanished islands.


the Hawaii - Midway - Wake chain is of course *the* prototypical example, let me bring a generic Wiki site to your attention.

aynway you slice it, the burden of proof lies on their shoulders and there's a very good reason that these islanders (and their lawyers) are simply a bit late to the scam game.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join