Here is a classic from 1986. Experts were certain of one foot of sea level rise by 2016, and 1,000 feet of beach loss.
SIGNIFIGANT RISE IN SEA LEVEL NOW SEEMS CERTAIN – NYTimes.com
The beach at Fort Lauderdale is identical to how it was 55 years ago
1960
2014
These academics are morons on choom and steroids.
“Experts Predict 1000 feet Of Beach Loss In The Next Nine Months”
500 people leaving 😉
Hilarious… “Where the Boys Are disproves 1000 feet of Beach Loss…”
Yep… Total shit… Look at the road to better gauge the Beach… Hmmm… Looks like MORE Sand… Another stunning 180 from the bogus predictions these shitheads make..
“Grantologists Predict 1000 feet Of Beach Loss In The Next Nine Months”
This is a wonderful business model. Lie till your pants are on fire and let the federal grants roll in. Many people are using this model.
I know that beach in the pictures.
There has been a lot of sand added to it.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-07-27/news/fl-beach-widening-plans-20130725_1_beach-renourishment-broward-beaches-dump-trucks
http://www.fortlauderdale.gov/departments/public-works-/public-works-department/beach-renourishment
Sand moves. That’s what beach communities do.
Did they build the road up and put the buildings up on stilts also? SMH
Of course not. The sea level has not increased much in Florida.
sfx, Above, Tony linked to an article with a “certainty” prediction of one-foot sea level rise by 2016.
If I recall correctly, he posted the sea level for Miami very recently. I think it was NOAA data, and was virtually the same in 1960 as it is today.
Daily waves and storms will erode beaches, without there ever being sea level rise. Communities will put the sand back, especially where there is lots of use. So, just because you see communities replenishing sand, that is not a reliable indication of sea level rise.
You can forget about the beach, the inland waterway there has old buildings and a lot of docks and moorings. If the sea level was rising, they would have to adapt faster than the beach area. None of the Marinas are being flooded yet.
I know it’s a bit ‘technical’ and I suspect like a lot of true believers that you don’t have much of a scientific education, but any addition of sand would be to repair erosion caused by ‘longshore drift’.
Though I guess that anyone who believed that the 1/25th part of ONE PERCENT of the atmosphere which is CO2 is causing catastrophic global warming could be fooled into believing that a few dump trucks full of sand could ‘hide’ a 1 foot sea level rise!
I’m still waiting for the West Side Highway to be underwater.
I’m still waiting for the UN to be under water. Of course, when that happens I had better have headed for the hills because I live at sea level.
This is a HUGE point about the beach, and famous one, being THE SAME as it was 55 years ago. The point should be made by all again and again. And of course it’s not just one single beach where the sea has not risen. All over the world The Sea Remains the Same.
And Steven, a good point to keep in mind when coming up with your headlines is that I and some others may look to use Real Science linked headlines in our comments where the main point can be expressed in just the headline, like https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/03/13/no-net-change-in-arctic-sea-ice-thickness-since-1940/
But when the content is not largely self-evident from the URL link I tend to shy away from promoting the post, such as this: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/03/14/beware-the-ides-of-march/
Because I’ll just a leave a Real Science link in a hotair comment if I can’t think of anything else to say on agw. But in fact most Real Science headlines do not meet the requirement so I often have to search for a while to find a good headline.
Nothing is wrong with the standard headlines, but if you just happen to think of way to make the headline more of a stand alone promotable thing, cool.
Any sand poured on the beach didn’t raise it any further above sea level than before. Sand is VERY prone to being moved by this thing we call ‘currents’.
Bingo
I just left this comment at hotair:
But also, Vatican to UN: authorize global UN hegemony to stop global warming er “climate change.”
On globull warming:
Experts Predict 1000 feet Of Beach Loss In The Next Nine Months: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/03/14/experts-predict-1000-feet-of-beach-loss-in-the-next-nine-months/
An excerpt:
Here is a classic from 1986. Experts were certain of one foot of sea level rise by 2016, and 1,000 feet of beach loss.
The beach at Fort Lauderdale is identical to how it was 55 years ago
1960
[image]
2014:
[image]
Having spent my life on Florida beaches, and understanding oceanography, one thing that most people just don’t know, and it’s huge.
Hurricanes, and erosion from them, causes the beach, the dunes, the land on barrier islands, to increase. The wind and waves blow sand onto the beach, not away from it. After a hurricane the problems is the roads are covered with sand. Swimming pools are filled in with sand, building and parking lots are buried with it.
The natural beach in Florida gets bigger after a storm. Where people live on the beach, they have to truck sand away after a storm. Nobody wants the highway to be 10 feet higher, or their property to be 40 feet higher than the beach. The natural dunes (for example Canaveral national seashore) are huge things. Forty, fifty feet high. And a big storm will build them higher, and the sand will fill in behind the dunes, this raises the land up. The Mangroves growing in the low area behind the dunes (on the inland waterways) also builds up the land. Barrier island grow to stay ahead of sea level changes.
It’s only where people truck the sand away after a storm, where the dunes don’t keep getting higher. Ancient dunes (the sand hills) in Florida are hundreds of feet high. Even if the oceans were rising, the beach will just get higher. Except where they truck the sand away.
Florida is also actually rising higher due to ground water removing so much limestone all the time. It is actually rising higher, estimated at an inch a century before man started pumping groundwater out.
These are all true facts.
Should have been “Having spent my life on Florida beaches, and understanding oceanography, there are a few things that most people just don’t know, and they are important”
The land rises up because water is lighter than the sandstone and limestone it erodes away. The mass removed by the underground rivers in Florida is so huge, it makes Florida lighter, and this causes it to rise up, gaining height.
This is estimated to have been going on for a very long time.
You’re getting yourself in a real twist now; an occupational hazard for Warmists, I know!
But hey, instead of ever more daft assertions why don’t YOU simply show us all, two pictures which demonstrate 1 foot of sea level rise?
No matter what you say, factual or not, you cannot justifiably defend or excuse the misinformation that was pumped out by the “Many scientists” in the NYT article that MRC and Steve have pointed out so well. In fact your arguments only serve to point out how ignorant they were to make such a statement of doom and gloom.
Bad science is bad science. PERIOD! The rise in sea level has remained pretty much constant and over all has not accelerated. You should have freely acknowledged that fact right off the bat and the fact the article in question is a prime example of bad science hyped to scare the public. If you had perhaps your points made later would have been considered a little more seriously. Just sayin.
Large storm move sand around. They remove sand from some areas and deposit it in others. Barrier islands can be over washed and new channels cut.
While sand will be found piled up in roadways in some places, in other places the road and roadway will be washed away entirely.
Houses on the beach will often have so much sand removed from under them, that they are way up in the air on their pilings in the aftermath. It seems to be less common to have a house become buried in sand during a hurricane or other large storm.
More generally, gentle waves will tend to take offshore sand and deposit it on the beach, while larger waves and rough surf will remove sand from the beach and deposit it offshore.
This is why many beach renourishment projects simply suck sand up from a few hundred yards offshore and pump it onto the beach.
Many beaches on the East Coast of the US will tend to have wide and gently sloping beaches in the Summer, and narrow steep beaches in the Winter, without any sand being trucked in or out. This is a normal pattern which will be seen to repeat year after year
” estimated at an inch a century before man started pumping groundwater out.
These are all true facts.”
Logically speaking, is this not more like an “estimated fact” then, that like a “true fact”?
If they say “we estimate”, that is the true fact. It doesn’t mean the estimate is correct, which is real science. Some areas that pump a lot of water out might be sinking, other areas might gain more. There is little good data.
But the sand that washes away from the beach usually is headed inland, and naturally would increase the barrier islands or back areas of the dunes. The huge problem after a long storm that moves a lot of sand, is getting rid of it. (they almost never ever put it back on the beach however)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/one-year-after-hurricane-sandy-many-homes-still-bear-storms-scars/2013/10/29/1b686c8a-40dd-11e3-a751-f032898f2dbc_story.html
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/images/65960
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/31/article-2225865-15C81409000005DC-554_470x560.jpg
If you ever actually live through a hurricane, you know about the sand problem. Right on the beach may lose, but further inland the problem can be everything is buried by sand, and all kinds of trees and buidling materials. And cars and roof parts and even reef rock.
The coastal highway might be under so much sand you can’t see it at all.
CBS and NASA say “climate change” is changing the waves. The Cape is threatened. (the MSM is going full throttle)
You’re contradicting yourself. Your article above was about naturally *removed* sand, from storms and erosion, which was replaced – that was *not* a Florida beach situation where people have to “truck sand away after a storm.” Your article said it was trucked in to be replenished.
So, although it is true that currents deposit sand on some beaches, it is just as true that some currents remove sand from other beaches.
Neither of which has a thing to do with sea level rise, which is not happening at Miami, Florida beaches .. as you acknowledged.
The above was to sfx
(Charles Nelson, yes, he is twisting himself in knots, as his original example in answer to Tony’s OP was about replaced sand (not sand that had to be trucked away after a storm).
My father was a seventh generation Floridian, and I have relatives on both coasts, and the Keys. None of them have seen any sea level rise on properties that have been in the family for generations.
Gator, my father was born and raised in Miami. I have family in Miami, Naples, Venice and St. Pete. No sea level rise on their properties, either. It would be major news. Warmists know that.
Dad was also born and raised in Miami, married in Coral Gables, lived in Gainesville and later retired to Micanopy. I have a relative who has a home on a canal in Coral Gables with a concrete boat dock built in the 1902’s designed to accommodate the long dresses of the day. It still functions as designed.
Wow Gator, it is a small world.
Dad went to Miami Senior High. I believe he said back then they played football games at the old Burdine Stadium (later named the Orange Bowl), sharing it with the ‘Canes. I may have ‘misremembered’ that little detail. He’s long gone now, and that conversation was over 20 years ago. I have wanted to ask him so many things since he left this planet.
Yep, dad graduated high school there as well, and after graduation worked as a janitor at the school to pay for his college education, that’s when he met my mother. His father was a navy man who died four months before dad was born, from injuries sustained in a plane crash.
The property where my mother now lives is only a few miles from the original homestead my ancestors were granted, for agreeing to take up arms and fight the Indians. Tough SOB’s.
We have a family property on the Big Sur coast in CA. There’s been zero rise in sea level there as well, over at least 4 decades at least.
those 1000 feet beach loss have been predicted as accurate as the global warming,just missed it a little bit,
by 99.95%.
How to solve the problem?
Just scream a little bit louder my global warming fanatics,defame a little bit more,pretend a little bit more,
implement some more “politically correct”- terms to protect the one&only truth.
-it has worked very well untill now and only one truth is acceppted in green communism
as global warming is the only possibility to create a global tax and consolidate and centralise even more controle that way.
“How to solve the problem?”
I think if we institute an international sand tax along with a new system of sand credits which allow those most responsible for the current Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Sand
IncreaseDecreaseChangeDisruption to pay for their crimes againstthe beetch GaiaGaia’s beaches.HuffPost article by Aaron Packard (“Oceania region coordinator for 350.org. Confronting climate change from New Zealand, Australia and the Pacific Islands.”) From his twitter re: Cyclone Pam
Aaron Packard @AaronPackard · Mar 12
Is the #climate bearing down on Kiribati?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-packard/the-unfolding-crisis-in-kiribati-and-the-urgency-of-response_b_6854386.html
1. La Nina/El Nino, 2. King Tides
“….3. Climate change is causing sea level rise
At the same time, underlying sea level rise caused by climate change, continues to push tide level higher. That contribution caused by climate change while relatively low at present, is as the graph below shows, on track to becoming significantly more devastating. It’s this concoction of forces that is wreaking serious havoc in South Tarawa and across many atoll islands But whether life on the atolls become untenable depends depends on our course of action now….”
Basically the plan is to make half of North America and parts of Europe under a mile of ice to save tiny atoll islands.
LOL. +1
LOL
Orrin H Pilkey is 80 years old now. According to Wiki, he is “Professor Emeritus of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Nicholas School of the Environment, at Duke University…. Pilkey has received numerous awards, among them the Francis Shepard medal for excellence in marine geology in 1987.”
How about that… he wins a medal the year after his scary prediction was made. I wonder if he could be contacted for comment? Any chance that he has become a wee bit skeptical?
Personally I ‘blame it on the Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce’.
After Hurricane Sandy, which was a tropical storm by landfall, the barrier island Long Beach off Long Island was pretty buried in sand. People had pictures of having to shovel it like snow in order to get out their doors. All that sand, which was everywhere in the streets and yards, was trucked away because it was considered contaminated. The sewers were under water, the sewage treatment plants were under water and had failed and leaked. It was probably a health hazard.
They did eventually replace the sand from the beaches, they had to. They have jetties to help stop erosion, but that storm had a big surge during a high tide, the water crossed the whole island. I’m about 20-30 minutes from there with no traffic.
“After Hurricane Sandy, which was a tropical storm by landfall, the barrier island Long Beach off Long Island was pretty buried in sand. ”
I can’t find them, but there used to be pictures online of the aftermath of the 2004 hurricane season in Florida. The sand that was removed from the beaches ended up all over everything, and if they hadn’t scooped it up and trucked it away (to be later sold to a golf course in the Bahamas), the dunes would have been 30 feet high in places.
The government of course scraped everything back down to the ten foot high “dune” that was there before. Killing all plant life in the process of course.
The excerpt includes a partial quote by Orrin H. Pilkey. I think it may paint Orrin H. Pilkey in the wrong light. He seems rather reasonable and well grounded.
In the article: “Most of the world’s shorelines are already receding, according to geologists who estimate that the seas worldwide have climbed an average of about 4 inches over the last century. This is attributed to the slow melting of midlatitude mountain glaciers, still retreating since the last ice age. But the total change in sea level around the United States during the last hundred years has been greater, about one foot, because much of the country is gradually sinking even as the ocean rises.”
“The objectivity of the IPCC documents is laudable. But the fact that the group recognizes its model weaknesses and is trying to improve them doesn’t make its conclusions stronger or more believable.” – Orrin H. Pilkey
“If a model itself is a poor representation of reality, they write, determining the sensitivity of an individual parameter in the model is a meaningless pursuit.” ?Orrin H. Pilkey
“For more than twenty-five years we have monitored beach nourishment projects around the United States. In order to secure federal funding and justify the enormous costs of these projects, anyone undertaking one must make a prediction of how long the sand will last on the replenished beach. The predictions are based on mathematical models that are said to be sophisticated and state of the art, and yet are consistently, dramatically wrong—always in an optimistic direction. In the rare instances when communities questioned the models after the predictions of a long healthy replenished beach clearly failed, the answer typically was that an unusual and unexpected storm caused the error. Well, the occurrence of storms at any beach is neither unusual nor unexpected. Eventually we became interested in how models were used in other fields. When you start looking into it, you find that a lot of global and local decisions are made based on modeling the environment. There are some fascinating (and discouraging) stories of model misuse and misplaced trust in models in the book. ” Orrin Pilkey & Linda Jarvis-Pilkey
I’m sure you remember this:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/11/miami-drowning-climate-change-deniers-sea-levels-rising?CMP=share_btn_tw
“A drive through the sticky Florida heat into Alton Road in Miami Beach can be an unexpectedly awkward business. Most of the boulevard, which runs north through the heart of the resort’s most opulent palm-fringed real estate, has been reduced to a single lane that is hemmed in by bollards, road-closed signs, diggers, trucks, workmen, stacks of giant concrete cylinders and mounds of grey, foul-smelling earth.
It is an unedifying experience but an illuminating one – for this once glamorous thoroughfare, a few blocks from Miami Beach’s art deco waterfront and its white beaches, has taken on an unexpected role. It now lies on the front line of America’s battle against climate change and the rise in sea levels that it has triggered.
Climate change: why the Guardian is putting threat to Earth front and centre
Read more
“Climate change is no longer viewed as a future threat round here,” says atmosphere expert Professor Ben Kirtman, of the University of Miami. “It is something that we are having to deal with today.”
Reblogged this on makeaneffort and commented:
There was even an idiot that painted a bright yellow line through San Francisco where the bay was going to rise into the city… it never stops.
Is the line still there? I would love to see picture of that.
This line?
http://www.john-daly.com/deadisle/bbc-dead.jpg
Fig.1 – The benchmark at mean tide
Recent publicity arising from a study by the Universities of Southampton and Tasmania [1] of an old sea level benchmark at Port Arthur, Tasmania, claims `dramatic’ sea level rise of about 13cm since the mark was first struck back in 1841.
These claims are based primarily on statistical probability models and are unsupportable when viewed in the context of other physical and documentary evidence available surrounding the benchmark. The study claims the benchmark was originally set 44.5cm above the mean level of the sea (as it then existed in 1841). Since it now sits at 31.5 cm above (see fig.1), the difference – 13cm – is claimed to be evidence of sea level rise.
However, the man responsible for putting the mark there, explorer Sir James Clark Ross stated explicitly and several times in his 1846 book [3] that the mark was placed at MSL (as he estimated it to be), not at a point 44.5cm above, near the high tide point, as claimed by the study.
If you use somebodies work, it’s good form to link to the source.
http://www.john-daly.com/deadisle/
Maybe the past predictions are overraterd, but you should admit that there are many areas where you can see that beach loss is real and even severe. Last summer, I visited the Black Sea, I went to some small towns by the sea, in places were I used to go when I was younger, and I noticed that the beach was very thin, just a few meters of sand in places where 10-15 years ago people used to stay and to take sun baths.