Global Warming The debbil made me do it

On Mar 10, 4:17 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

What, you;re not worried abou tthe people from new jersey, displaced and
hungry, ravaging the countryside in search of food and shelter?
This isn;'t about disappearing beaches..

Bertie

People from NJ are easy -- they can't shoot for $%it.

But, as an aside, let's consider what the what the IPCC says about
Climate Change:

Global average sea level in the last interglacial period
(about 125,000 years ago) was likely 4 to 6 m higher
than during the 20th century, mainly due to the retreat
of polar ice. Ice core data indicate that average polar
temperatures at that time were 3°C to 5°C higher than
present, because of differences in the Earth's orbit. The
Greenland Ice Sheet and other arctic ice fields likely
contributed no more than 4 m of the observed sea level
rise. There may also have been a contribution from
Antarctica. {6.4}

And again:
Temperature Change Sea Level Rise
(°C at 2090-2099 relative to 1980-1999)a (m at 2090-2099 relative to
1980-1999)
Best Likely Model-based range excluding future
Case estimate range rapid dynamical changes in ice flow
Constant Year 2000
concentrationsb 0.6 0.3 - 0.9 NA
B1 scenario 1.8 1.1 - 2.9 0.18 - 0.38
A1T scenario 2.4 1.4 - 3.8 0.20 - 0.45
B2 scenario 2.4 1.4 - 3.8 0.20 - 0.43
A1B scenario 2.8 1.7 - 4.4 0.21 - 0.48
A2 scenario 3.4 2.0 - 5.4 0.23 - 0.51
A1FI scenario 4.0 2.4 - 6.4 0.26 - 0.59

And again:
Models used to date do not include uncertainties in
climate-carbon cycle feedback nor do they include
the full effects of changes in ice sheet fl ow, because a
basis in published literature is lacking. The projections
include a contribution due to increased ice fl ow from
Greenland and Antarctica at the rates observed for 1993
to 2003, but these fl ow rates could increase or decrease
in the future. For example, if this contribution were to
grow linearly with global average temperature change,
the upper ranges of sea level rise for SRES scenarios
shown in Table SPM.3 would increase by 0.1 to 0.2 m.
Larger values cannot be excluded, but understanding of
these effects is too limited to assess their likelihood or
provide a best estimate or an upper bound for sea level
rise. {10.6}

If radiative forcing were to be stabilised in 2100 at A1B
levels14, thermal expansion alone would lead to 0.3 to
0.8 m of sea level rise by 2300 (relative to 1980-1999).
Thermal expansion would continue for many centuries,
due to the time required to transport heat into the deep
ocean.

The ONLY way to get a "20' rise in 100 (or 200) years" is to accept a
full melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet, which the IPCC says "If a
negative surface mass balance were sustained for millennia, that would
lead to virtually complete elimination of the Greenland Ice Sheet and
a resulting contribution to sea level rise of about 7 m."

See again the word "Millenia"



Dan