This may sound like a bad joke but it could be that one reason the sea levels are rising in the Cook Islands is that the Cooks are not included in the Sea Frame project so one way to stop the seas rising in the Cooks would be for our government to pay for them to join. Good cost benefit exercise.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The land at the Manukau boat ramp may well be rising at the same rate as the sea.

Just as the land in Hawkes Bay is rising somewhat faster than the sea – which is why the sea level there is “falling”
On the other hand the land subsidence at Auckland wharf area is possible adding to the sea level rise.
The North of the UK is bouncing back from the last real ice age but the UK is rotating so that the South of the UK is being forced down – adding to the warming expansion rise. The whole of the European plate is generally bouncing back with a few local variations. That is why it is hard to panic the Dutch.
Measurement is the key.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“I think I spot a flaw….”

Its called AGW hypocondria

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

So Tuvalu is being flooded by rising sea levels…

But no other pacific island is….

I think I spot a flaw….

Like or Dislike: 0  2 (-2)

Trevor29,

Not applicable to the Pacific Islands as their mass is small conmpared to New Zealand. If NZL rises 1cm, the water it displaces is far greater then that of a Pacific Island sinking. So while seal level may be neutral, the affect may not.

Looking at the ocean floor on google earth, the physical mass that is New Zealand (above and below the water level) is far far greater then that of the Pacific Island atolls.

BJ,

Yes, I take your point and agree, the interpretation of the scientific data is woeful in the media.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The scientific community ? Surely you jest. The scare mongering is the media beat ups, taking selected scariest sound bites out of the minimal stuff that the reporters think they understand and using it to build their stories.

“If it bleeds it leads” is the watchword. The IPCC report isn’t mostly about sea levels.

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Gerrit,

Unless the volume of the Earth itself is changing, New Zealand can only rise if another area falls, so the net effect on sea levels is approximately neutral. The satellites are measuring a global average sea level rise. Don’t expect any more land to be exposed soon.

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Are you on the Pacific plate or the Australian. I think I want to be on the Australian side. Maybe. Plate tectonics not being a specialty of mine. Seems to me that the idea of more water sitting on the Pacific plate and depressing it somewhat will make it sink rather faster and the Australian plate sit higher… maybe. OTOH, I’d expect more vulcanism on the Australian plate side of the subduction.

Won’t be me though. I hope my kids are smart enough to stay out of trouble.

BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Trevor29,

That was my argument with Samiula earlier, that it could quite be possible that New Zealand is rising and she consider that in her argument.

As New Zealand rises it will displace the water so that sea level rises in the Pacific Islands could be attributted to normal plate activity, not partly or solely due climate change.

So why are we not hearing about this, if satalites can measure sea level rises, so will they measure land rises?

And on the mind expanding fun “thinking about the consequence senario”.

Who will claim “rights” to this newly accessable land. Maori or the crown?

Oh the fun one can have. Might delay the pint of Guiness to think about that and the fact that my dream of having my property closer to the foreshore, due to rising se levels, being dashed.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Many years ago, I read a book called “Nemesis: the Death Star”. This was not science fiction. Rather it described the history of a scientific theory put forward by Walter Averez (sp?) that there could be a brown dwarf star (too small to ‘ignite’ and therefore almost invisible) in a 26 million year elliptical orbit around our sun which periodically disturbed the orbits of the comets in the cluster outside the orbit of Pluto, sending some of them towards the inner solar system. Some of the comets could strike the earth and cause a “nuclear winter” effect leading to some species extinctions and a redistribution of some of the water closer to the poles, increasing slightly the speed of rotation of the Earth and disrupting the flows within the Earth’s core that generate the Earths magnetic field temporarily. When things settle, the Earth’s magnetic field restarts but not always with the same orientation, casung N-S pole reversals (and increased high-energy particle bombardment from the sun while the magnetic field is down). Interestingly, the geological records support this timing including some dips where the magnetic field might not have reversed direction.

Could this happen with increased temperatures?

We futz with things we don’t understand at risk of our peril.

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Gerrit

One of the possible explanations for the rising sea levels measured at some islands is that the islands are sinking. Have you considered that this might also apply in reverse? New Zealand is tectonically active, so how do you know that the land around Manukau is not rising at a similar rate to the sea level?

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BJ,

Problem with the sea level rise KPI is that the perception is out there is that it will happen sooner rather then later. As seen by the brain imploding statement shown on this piece of tripe.

http://www.architectureanddesign.com.au/article/sydney-opera-house-at-risk-from-climate-change/493220.aspx

If rising sea levels are the end game why is the scare mongering scientific community pushing the rising sea level agenda when every sea going person can see that it is rubbish?

It is this type of activity that gives the climate change proponents such a bad image.

You can certainly have fun (not really funny haha, but in a mind teasing exercise way fun) with different scenarios.

How about this one. The volume of water on the pacific plate becomes so great tha the plate actually sinks away from its surrounding plates. This opens up the ring of fire around the Pacific and lets billions upon billions of water down onto the magna layer.

Creating a steam cloud so great that the sun is behind a permanant water vapour layers and the earth surface cools. Leading to another ice age.

Think I go down the pub and have a pint of Guiness while I still can.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Gerrit

There are rising sea levels in the sense that scientists measure them and then there are the impressions of the people who live on a vulnerable Island. The first are what I noted earlier, real enough but not rapid nor significant in terms of the island. The latter are easy pickings for the media beat-up which then can be thought of as discrediting the science. Which never said it.

The sea level CAN rise 20 meters, and it very likely will if we do nothing. It takes a long time for that to happen. The last time we had 390 ppm there was no “we”, it was 3 million years ago, it was at least 3 degrees warmer and the oceans were 20 meters higher.

The point I’ve made, repeatedly though, is that the sea level is the LAST act in the tragedy. That means that the current rises are slow and not going to affect most people in their lifetimes. This is expected in the science of it.

There is still some time to enjoy your dacha on the beach and see if you can sell it in a decade or two to some greater fool who will experience more trouble.

The water will distribute around the geoid based on the mass distribution of the land under it as shown in the geoid entry in wikipedia, which is as good a treatment as any.

The mass movement from the poles will be uneven. The WAIS and GIS are offset from center. What will happen can be modeled but I haven’t heard of it being done. I suggested it once or twice, but the anticipated disaster is already great enough that something worse won’t mean anything at all.

http://www.uwgb.edu/DutchS/PSEUDOSC/IceCaps.HTM

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=global-warming-shortens-day

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BJ,

Totally disagree with you that it is an rgument about nothing. Risingf sea levels are used all the time as a sure indicator that we are on a doomed planet unless we reduce our carbon foor print.

Was in Sydney last week where a Australian Green party member loadly claimed that the sea level would rise 20 metres (and cover the steps of the Sydney Opera House).

The rising sea levels are almost always used in the climate change discussion as a surefire indicator that ice is melting due to climate change.

Yet in anyones practical terms we dont see any.

So it is not an argument about nothing, it is in fact the very nub of the argument.

Sea level rises are one of the KPI’s used to promote climate change.

Trying to find a scientific paper on the effect potential sea level rises will have on the earths rotation. Currently much of the ice is at the poles and very close to the axis of the earth. If this ice melts and flows to the Pacific, its weight will be tranferred to equator and further from the axis. Potentially reducing the rotational spin of the earth as the weight is redistributed.

Could we get a wooble? Will the water actually flow to the Pacific or will the centralfrugal (sp?) force keep it up and closer to the poles.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Trevor29,

The satellite data says that the global average sea level is rising.

Makes the Manukau a very special place as the sea level here has not risen one mm. Guess the Manukau non sea level rise must have been allocated to the South Pacific. Tasman Sea might be immune from sea level rises?

When I see high restrictions being reduced under major bridges such as the Auckland , Sydney, etc Harbour bridges due to rising sea levels, then I will take it more seriously.

See “scientific” data says one thing, and practical applications such as clearance measurements under obstructions over waterways say quite another.

When that happens I prefer to believe that what I see in practical terms. The high tide mark has not shifted.

Go down to your nearest boat ramp or harbour facility and ask the locals. “Is the high tide mark getting higher?” The answer will be in conflict with the “scientific” findings.

So who do you believe?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Trying to use pacific islands as tide-gauges for the planet isn’t really a good idea. Attributing the problems of those islands to AGW alone isn’t a good idea either. The people there will do so… being able to correctly assess causation is difficult when the apparent effect is that the sea is rising. Purely human tendency, but that will be the perception.

However, this is a “Seinfeld” argument… it is an argument about nothing (Seinfeld said his show was a “show about nothing”). Not a good example of anything at Tuvalu. Not good for the people there but not easy to attribute to any one thing.

BJ

BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Trevor,
Alternativly, it could be argued that by not taking the actions neccacary to prevent the negative effects we are seeing here, actions easily pursuable, and by profitering off the actions of those using the contributing chemicals, and using them themselves, they have sealed their own fate and do not deserve any such assistance due to their lack of forplanning and action.
We have no obligation to them what-so-ever.

Like or Dislike: 0  1 (-1)

Gerrit

The satellite data says that the global average sea level is rising. The island may or may not be sinking as well, but at least some of the cause of their increased flooding is sea level rise.

AGW may also be causing increased storm surges.

They are right to point some of the blame at AGW, and since we have taken advantage of fossil fuels to achieve where we are today and therefore contributed to that AGW, it is only right that we should help them now.

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

The sea water has to go somewhere. If one coastline rises so the relative sea level drops, the average sea level will rise slightly as the displaced water dispurses. Therefore it does make sense to speak of a global average sea level.

I get suspicious when people refer to data that is already several years old. Does the more recent data show more evidence of sea level rises?

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Samiuela,

I guess it does not matter what argument Owen, or anyone else for that matter, brings forth.

In your eyes the sea levels are rising, in everyone elses eyes the island is sinking.

Do you think, just possibly, that over population of the island and the dropping of the fresh water table due to overuse could have even the tiniest, minutest contibuting cause for the island to sink?

Not to mention the plate that floats on a mantle of magna might be forced down as Owen has pointed out?

If we were argueing AGW you would be called a denier.

But hey, here on the Manukau we are sweet, no changes in the sea level in over fourty years (certidfed and peer reviewed).

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)