Climate change falsehood

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by gonzo, May 26, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 436
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    If you had read the provided links (and the links within the links) you might have saved yourself the trouble of posting the irrelevant data above.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/01/29/nyregion/preliminary-flood-zones.html?ref=nyregion

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  2. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Balderdash. The islands on the subduction side are the ones about which people are alarmed.
     
  3. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

  4. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 436
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    I find nothing in your links to support the idea that the Mariana Islands are at risk of sinking beneath the waves due to plate subduction. The main chain of the Mariana Islands are on the "buoyant" plate side (Mariana Plate) of the plate boundaries, not the subduction plate side (Pacific Plate). As your link did suggest, many of the Mariana Islands are active volcanoes, and living on or near an active volcano can be hazardous to your health -- as those living near Mt. St. Helens found out a few decades ago (Mt. St. Helens is also a plate-boundary volcano, located on the 'buoyant' side, not the subduction side).

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  5. rwatson
    Joined: Aug 2007
    Posts: 6,163
    Likes: 495, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1749
    Location: Tasmania,Australia

    rwatson Senior Member


    Hoyt, I would like to apologize for my rude words towards you. It was very bad behavior, and totally unjustified. My sincere apologies.
     
  6. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Apology accepted(though I did not ask for one). You have a right to your opinion, no matter how absurd.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2013
  7. Herr Kaleun
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 15
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: United Kingdom

    Herr Kaleun Junior Member


    Hoyt, Please refer to yours and others diagrams for assistance. A brief lesson on Tectonic Process [example: The Americas, The Pacific] and the plight of those on coastal margins.

    The Juan De Fuca, Eastern Pacific, Cocos, Nazcan and a portion of the Antarctic plates are all subducting beneath their adjacent counterparts - The North & South American plates, [...actually things are a bit complex around your mid-western seaboard - San Andreas, Eastern Pacific Trench etc. where there is transform faulting and subduction in process], the barbs point in the direction of tectonic subduction [Dia#404 refers... "barbs on up-thrown side"], therefore, if one has the 'triangles pointing toward you', you are better off staying put, because your plate is being thrown upwards by the subducting adjacent counterpart.

    In addition, both North & South American plates are slowly [...about the growth of a fingernail], being shunted westward and upward by sea-floor spreading from the constructive plate margin of the Mid Atlantic Ridge. This effectively squeezes the Americas, particularly where they interact with the mighty Pacific plate resulting in volcanism and the orogenesis [mountain building by folding and upthrust] of The Rockies, the Cascades, the Pacific Coastal Ranges and the Andes. Subduction is synonymous with land and mountain building, along with constructive plate margins [sea-floor spreading], lithospheric rebounding [post glacial depression] and the formation of volcanic sea-mounts [sub-crustal hot-spots].

    The Pacific Plate, being the largest at around 103 million km2, by this very nature makes it boss, thus is relatively stable, but powerful and inexorable... It is believed [through tectonic modeling - see thumbnails], that ultimately the Pacific plate will overcome the forces of mid Atlantic construction and shunt the Americas back eastward [engulfing the Mid Atlantic Ridge] and closing the Atlantic [see thumbnails]; a new super-continent will then exist.

    Of the islands of the Pacific, those that are not coral-accretion, are formed by volcanic activity, specifically a number of shallow lithospheric/asthenospheric hot-spots that the westward moving Pacific plate moves over, creating volcanic island chains, Hawaii being the largest and thus oldest volcanic sea-mount.

    Tectonic forces are the most powerful forces that exist on the planet. They are as certain in their movement, as the inevitability of death is in ours. One little groan of a fault, can wipe out millions of lifeforms [eg: tsunami]. Ultimately, global warming has nothing on this. Just be grateful that the process, at least to our mercurial existence - is extremely slow...

    Any specie living on minor islands, in complex tectonic zones of the South-Western Pacific [the Marianas/Caroline/Philippine minor plates etc.] - that are actually placed on the subducting plate [and thus consumed by subduction], will have plenty of time to migrate to the new [more substantial] land-forming arc of volcanic islands forming on the up-thrown adjacent counterpart. But in the short-term, those species [and the human islanders...] on coral atolls are most at risk, as these islands are extremely low lying and slow building - coral will not grow quicker than sea-level rise [...especially if it is stressed/bleached]. Whether you live on a rock or coral-based island, sea level rise will ultimately, through inundation cause distress, extinction and populace relocation.

    All islands of the world, including mine, are under threat from sea-level rise, my capital and birth place is under threat [...not that I care too much:rolleyes:]. London, one of the lowest lying cities, has had problems with sea-level rise and the threat from storm surge since the inundation of Doggerland; the Thames Barrier was conceived with this in mind. It is the rate of sea-level rise that is of urgent concern, scientific conjecture and ignorance. We cannot at this point in our understanding, get past the barriers of chaos theory [fluid/geo/dynamics?] and very long-term geological and climatic processes, making accurate prediction - especially over several generations - very awkward. Hence why our whether reports are, even given the use of super-computers, still only relatively accurate over a very short time frame. Fluid-dynamics; a tough nut to crack...

    Current belief in geological time - specifically the Quaternary Period, our period [holocene], places us in an inter-glacial [eustasy]. Given that sea levels have been higher than present during previous inter-glacial's; the notion being that there was vastly reduced ice on Antarctic and Greenland during some of those periods; a current concern over those same land masses might suggest that sea-level rises are inevitable. Add to this the positive feedback that we humans are adding to the model [assisting in global warming through our industrious nature...], a vector that up to a several hundred years ago did not exist, can only one assumes, accelerate that inevitability.


    Checkout:http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/ice/lec09/lec9.htm

    Point to ponder, when sitting on the head...

    HMS Ark Royal[circa 1946-1979] - on which I served as a 'sparker' - it was said, cost £250k a day to run, it consumed tonnes of FFO per day [not to mention the Av-cat kerosene for the flights] and its sulfur-rich and dense exhaust plume was visible from one end of Norfolk [Virginia] Naval Base to the other... It is still fact, that ships produce more CO2 emissions than the combined emissions from both aviation and vehicular use.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,386
    Likes: 1,042, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    Is that correct, ships produce more CO2 emissions than vehicles and planes combined ? Seems like an under-publicized fact if true.
     
  9. powerabout
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 2,944
    Likes: 67, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 719
    Location: Melbourne/Singapore/Italy

    powerabout Senior Member

    it might be but if you then divide it by freight tonnes then you will see they are 100x less polluting per ton than any other form of transport besides sailing ships
     
  10. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 436
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    :rolleyes:
     
  11. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 436
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    WIKIPEDIA | Energy efficiency in transportation
     
  12. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 436
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    THE WEATHER CHANNEL | Cuba Girds for Climate Change by Reclaiming Coasts
    p.s.
    Don't worry, Hoyt. Tampa Bay is a long, long way from Cuba...
     
  13. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

  14. powerabout
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 2,944
    Likes: 67, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 719
    Location: Melbourne/Singapore/Italy

    powerabout Senior Member

    global warming is designed to reduce the population so why interfere?
     

  15. Herr Kaleun
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 15
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: United Kingdom

    Herr Kaleun Junior Member

    Funny you should comment on that fact, I was quite surprised to hear it too. We were told of this fact by a program televised in the UK called Mighty Ships. The fact was exposed when the Emma Maersk was profiled. The Emma Maersk was the largest container ship afloat [one of a number in her class], she still is one of the largest, but she was designed to be relatively 'green' [as green as a 170,794GRT ship can be...], she is fitted with an exhaust recombination system and her hull is coated in a hydrodynamic efficient silicon paint, amongst other measures... This fact was further corroborated two weeks ago, by a marine engineer colleague and friend.

    On looking back on my days on the 'Mighty Ark', in hindsight, I am now not so surprised that heavy fuel or large diesel powered vessels [the Ark was a quadruple FFO steam turbine powered A/C... and was very inefficient], would produce so much CO2. I shudder to think what crap the Ark actually poured into the atmosphere on a daily basis. I once had to do aerial maintenance on our main broad-band antenna, which entailed me hanging inverted over the funnel from the main mast. I had to wear a smoke mask, even then I was coughing up sulphurised phlegm for days after...

    If anyone has any further light to shed on this factoid, I am happy to stand corrected.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.