It’s not just Miami. Pictures here from recent high tide in Boston.
Wall Street Journal assures us that none of this is happening, its all about fudging the data. Nothing to see here, move along.
Boston’s waterfront saw its highest tide of the year last week, known as “King Tide.” The relative position of the sun and moon created a tide nearly 2 1/2 feet higher than average. Using estimates of recent climate change research, it also showed how the cityscape will look as the average Boston Harbor height around mid-century.
The Union of Concerned Scientists wrote a post with more information about this week’s tidal flooding. It emphasizes that king tides are becoming higher, lasting longer and coming inland.
The Boston Harbor Association shared the following photos around the area. More of them can be found on Facebook.
Holman Jenkins in the Wall Street Journal:
With their latest subpoena to the Obama administration, House Republicans risk descending into a rabbit hole, albeit a useful one.
Lamar Smith, the Texas GOPer who runs the House science and technology committee, has been seeking, voluntarily and then not so voluntarily, emails and other internal communications related to a study released earlier this year by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The study, by adjusting upward temperature readings from certain ocean buoys to match shipboard measurements, eliminated the “pause” in global warming seen in most temperature studies over the past 15 years.
Let’s just say, without prejudging the case, gut instinct has always indicated that, if there’s a major global warming scandal to be discovered anywhere, it will be found in the temperature record simply because the records are subject to so much opaque statistical manipulation. But even if no scandal is found, it’s past time for politicians and the public to understand the nature of these records and the conditions under which they are manufactured.
And, when all is said and done, it’s still not clear that assigning an “average” temperature for the planet for a year is a meaningful way to capture climate change. Or that claims to detect differences from one year to the next of 2/100ths of a degree are anything but exercises in false precision.
Note to Jenkins. One very reliable indicator of planetary warming is sea level rise.
Perhaps you can reassure Bostonians that it’s all being fudged.
At least most deniers have the temerity to acknowledge sea level rise but blame “underwater volcanoes” or “subsidence”. Denying that its actually rising is a whole other level of stupid.
The waterfront will make for a lovely set of tidal pools. Hey, if we act now we can build some tidal pool electricity generating plants. It’s got to be easier to build such a plant on dry land that will become inundated later on, right?
Where’s that link to “always look on the bright side of life”?
https://youtu.be/jHPOzQzk9Qo?t=31s
So that moron Holman Jenkins thinks Lamer Smith is descending onto a “USEFUL” rabbit hole with the NOAA subpoenas? USEFUL? Yes, Jenkins belongs in Wonderland with Smith, The Duchess, and The Red Queen.
Since he is a business writer and a right wing hack and propagandist, rather than someone with any science training, Jenkins says “Let’s just say, without prejudging the case, gut instinct has always indicated that, if there’s a major global warming scandal to be discovered anywhere, it will be found in the temperature record simply because the records are subject to so much opaque statistical manipulation”.
Grasping at straws, but that is sure to get the WSJ readers (who are ALWAYS “prejudging” anything that interferes with the unfettered free market) all atwitter and muttering about “hoaxes” and “conspiracies”. Jenkins and the deniers (including the Repugnant presidential candidates) are the quintessential “this is not happening” cast members.
And we’re to believe that thousands of scientists from around the world working for numerous government and scientific institutions are all in on this hoax. It’s reminiscent of the “moon landing hoax”, that hundreds of scientists working for a number of different institutions and governments could engage in a hoax (not to mention that the Soviets would have immediately blown the whistle on any attempt at a hoax). You have to live in a child’s world of ignorance to believe this stuff.
And of course we’re to believe a handful of “scientists” working for the energy companies aren’t telling us fibs and that they don’t lie for the money (which is a lot more than someone working at NASA).
Even rank careerist motives and “fortune and glory” motives will steer any sane scientist away from conspiracy hoaxes. These guys are guilty of psychological projection at the very most charitable. Anyone in the business knows this – it’s a competitive enterprise.
Ever since the Wall Street Journal was purchased by Rupert Murdoch….it has REALLY gone down the drain.
Maybe they should mention that EVERY OTHER MEASUREMENT OF GLOBAL TEMPERATURE AGREES WITH NOAA.
Of course….that would be “fair and balanced reporting.” And we all know…that Rupert is NOT about to let that happen.
FOX News (and WSJ): “Where truth and journalism are DEAD.”
Everything he touches turns to shit. Allegedly.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/04/rupert-murdoch-national-geographic-staff-cuts-backlash-twitter_n_8470776.html
Dear Dear Rupert
https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/the–i-will-destroy-you—remark-that-cost–655-million-001503384.html
“”Defendant Carlucci made no secret that defendant R. Murdoch was personally instructing him to go after News America’s competitors,” the complaint states. “In fact, according to the founders of Floorgraphics, George and Richard Rebh, defendant Carlucci once told them, ‘I will destroy you. I work for a man who wants it all, and doesn’t understand anybody telling him he can’t have it all.’ The ‘man’ defendant Carlucci was referring to, of course, was defendant R. Murdoch.””
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/20/bernstein-murdoch-ailes-petreaus-presidency
” Why the US media ignored Murdoch’s brazen bid to hijack the presidency”
Carl Bernstein
https://theconversation.com/murdoch-and-his-influence-on-australian-political-life-16752
Rupert – Oilman with his close friend and partner Baron Rothschild
http://nomadicpolitics.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/on-environment-romney-and-hannity-share_12.html
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jul/25/-sp-rupert-murdoch-passive-power-hack-attack-nick-davies
Jenkins: “…eliminated the “pause” in global warming seen in most temperature studies over the past 15 years” I don’t think it serves ANY useful purpose, any longer, for speakers with the readership of a Jenkins to leave out the ‘minor qualification’ that he’s talking about 1% of the actual globe that is subject to ‘global warming’. Arguably, that 1% has seen a ‘pause’ over the last 15 years, but shouldn’t there be some requirement to stop using the words ‘global’ warming when talking about that 1%?? Should we poll Iowa and then claim “America has spoken”? (don’t answer that). It’s just the worst kind of intellectual laziness and his readership is obviously not being disabused of the notion that they really ARE talking about the ‘globe’ when, in fact, they are talking about the atmosphere. Its 15 year pause has been attended by a 15 year ACCELERATION in ocean warming. But, hey, that’s only over 90% of the ‘globe’ so who cares?
Then CEO of Exxon Lee Raymond stated in 1997:
This was in a key speech before…
It seems that it wasn’t just the front groups they funded that were neck deep in the propaganda of climate denial.
Sorry — should have used a close hyperlink tag after “stated” in the first line. A second link exists at “key speech before”.