Today’s comment comes from a reporter for The Register. His name is Lewis Page. In an unresearched and unsubstantiated rant in his article about sea level rise, he makes this stupid statement.
“It should be borne in mind here that in most places the sea rises and falls every single day on a scale measured in metres, and even more during unusual events (big storms from certain directions when the moon is in certain positions etc). Existing human infrastructure that can cope with these comparatively everyday occurrences will not be much affected by rises on the 30cm scale, and it doesn’t cost a lot to cope with such rises or indeed much bigger ones.”
Yes, Lewis, the tide comes in and the tide goes out and people and communities cope with it. And when big storms come in we generally cope with it. But here’s the thing idiot. Put those storm surges on top of the sea level rise. Do you actually expect that storms are going to stop? Not to mention that with the extra heat in the ocean that will be causing SLR, we can reasonably expect stronger storms and cyclones. Storm surges will be higher again, compounding the effect. What would New Orleans have been like with even more water coming over the levy? What about Cardwell in far north Queensland, Australia when Cyclone Yasi devastated the area?
You then go on to talk about how the USA will be able to build their way out of rising sea levels so it’s all good. Tell that to the people of Bangladesh where annual flooding already displaces millions. Tell that to the people of Tuvalu. The irony here of course is that you claim that curbing greenhouse gas emissions will result in “serious misery and hardship for billions of people”. This is not only completely unfounded but even if it were true, have you asked how many billions of people will suffer when all the other expected outcomes from AGW kick in? I’m talking here about food shortages, ecosystem collapse, altered rainfall regimes, disease range shifts, water shortages. This last one is especially important. Do you know, Lewis, how many people rely on annual glacier melt for their drinking water? That can be your homework. You might be surprised. Unlike you, I am not going to rely on this…
“It’s more than likely that new construction materials or floating cities or flying cars or some other development will have made sea-level rises largely irrelevant”
I would suggest, Lewis, you spend a little less time watching Jetson’s cartoons and a bit more time actually researching the science into AGW. Idiot.