Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

hotdogbo t1_j8k243y wrote

There’s a climate change skeptic subreddit. On there, they keep sharing sea level monitors that show little to no change. I wish someone had a good retort to their data.


helm t1_j8k7n8n wrote

There's no defense against goal-oriented cherry-picking.


Bucky_Ohare t1_j8kc20a wrote

So, fun fact, there are places where sea level is remaining neutral or even gently receding.

The part that goes along with this, however the deniers wanna gloss over it, is that there is also significant crust uplift going along with it. Since we measure from our shore markings this looks like it’s going ‘down’ in some places despite overall sea level continuing upwards.


Ixneigh t1_j8n7jwa wrote

I’m also in a very geologically stable area. 6 inches.


Kalapuya t1_j8ki2iq wrote

Sea level rise is not linear and is not rising uniformly or at all in some places. Many places are experiencing zero or even negative sea level change. This variance can occur even on a kilometer-by-kilometer basis. It is primarily driven by changes in ocean currents, wind, sea surface temperatures, and tectonic and other hydrological dynamics.

On the Oregon Coast for example, some low-lying areas will likely experience 12-18”+ of SLR by 2050. Other areas (primarily in the south), are undergoing rapid tectonic uplift that will outpace sea level rise until at least the mid 2030s, and may experience few impacts because of the high continental freeboard.

These systems are highly dynamic and variable, but it is clear that overall global sea level is rising on average at a MUCH higher rate compared to the historical record and will lead to costly impacts for many communities.


midclassblues t1_j8kdrli wrote

There are plenty of sea level gauges around the United States, some having been in operation over 100 years. NOAA has analyzed these quite a bit and they show some sea rise over the years. I estimated an 8 inch rise at Key West over 100 years based on their data.

I believe the point of all these studies is not to look at what happened, but what will happen well in to the future. The past 100 years is not a good way to estimate future changes in the ocean. That's not a good retort, but the biggest changes have not happened yet. A 6" rise in the last 100 years is still not insignificant.


jfuite t1_j8ke1of wrote

It’s difficult to retort because sea levels are not rising quickly. The tidal gauge records from harbors around the world are centuries long, and they mostly indicate very slow linear sea level rise since before modern industrialization.


Ixneigh t1_j8n7fhr wrote

I have lived in the same estuary for four decades now, much of it spent in the water. I’m familiar with the tides, passes, channels and bars. Every marginal area I have to have a certain water depth to make it over. This is my life. As a child I frolicked on a bedrock shoal that bared at low water. That area no longer dries out. 6 inches m’dears.


Peter_deT t1_j8m9ohl wrote

Tide gauges give you a historical baseline. Satellite radar altimeters give you sea-level at any place to within a few millimetres. That's how they know about the dips and rises. They now have records over several decades.