Wednesday, March 24, 2010 - 10:17 AM
From Africa to the Himalayas, everyone's worried about global warming's potential to drive world conflict. But what about the disputes it will solve? A long-running argument between India and Bangladesh over a small island in the Bay of Bengal has just been resolved: the island's not there anymore:
New Moore Island [also known as South Talpatti] in the Sunderbans has been completely submerged, said oceanographer Sugata Hazra, a professor at Jadavpur University in Calcutta. Its disappearance has been confirmed by satellite imagery and sea patrols, he said.
"What these two countries could not achieve from years of talking, has been resolved by global warming," said Hazra.
Wikipedia
Even more amusingly, despite obvious geological changes like this we still have a strong sentiment that the entire concept is a hoax. Some areas may have been overhyped but I think it's time we admit that this is happening.
Without anthropogenic global warming, how would the modern "educated" person explain anything?
In this case, try geology/sedimentology. South Talpatti was created as recently as 1970 by a cyclone (wiki). This island is temporary by nature. Due to the natural compaction of underlying recent deltaic sediments there is constant relative sea-level rise in these regions. This natural subsidence combined with wave action will cause a small sediment pile such as South Talpatti to be wiped out in a geologically-short time frame.
Sea level rise over the last century (man-made or otherwise) would have accelerated the process, but this island was doomed the day it was born. All exposed coastal deposits are transitory by nature.
This topic was just gobbled up by the AGW doomsters out there, thereby exposing their ignorance of a natural process that should be clearly understood if one wants to pontificate on the topic of sea level. The problem is scientifically illiterate reporting in the media, (this passed through at least two journalists), and the lack of discerning minds in the public. Educate yourselves!!!
(BTW, I don't fault journalists for being clueless and uneducated since it is treated as an asset in their line of work, but I do fault them for muddling up genuine scientific issues in order to fit it into the topic of the day)
This just gives deniers rhetorical ammo. Just because hacks can score a few political points with the ignorant by pointing outside in the winter and saying "see it's COOLING, not warming!" doesn't mean those concerned about the human effects on global warming should point to every case of delta shifting/beach erosion and say "see the oceans are rising!". Deniers really want this to become a rhetorical debate rather than an organized scientific effort because that's where their power lies (they have lots of money to pay debaters in think tanks).
Thanks, CJ, that was excellent. I'm glad there are still real scientists out there who can go beyond the standard lament that all problems in the world are caused by global warming.
What is most amusing isthe fact that everything that happens, from snow storms to earthquakes gets blamed on AGW, confirming to the idiots that the sky is falling.
What is most amusing isthe fact that everything that happens, from snow storms to earthquakes gets blamed on AGW, confirming to the idiots that the sky is falling.
Don't suppose any of you would like to explain the Northwest Passage then?
I find it fascinating that adverts on credit loans and colon cleanse get into FP articles on global warming. Love Freeda2's comments. She's absolutely right!
If this is indeed AGW-induced ...
Can we finally agree to stop interfering in events that result in massive losses of human life? It's time we come to see that mass exterminations of human beings, the cause of global warming (or so I'm told), is the only hope we have. Half-measures will not do, and besides, it's impossible to get everyone to agree, as Copenhagen definitively proved. If indeed humans are the ultimate cause, the most potent climate forcing bring lethal warming to our planet, then, obviously, growing global population is working counter to any counter-warming policies. Ergo, the more humans who die, the better off the planet, right?
This casual promotion of planet-wide genocide takes us to the heart of the AGW issue. People who respect the rights of others vs. people who only treasure their own rights. If you're in the former camp, advocating genocide/murder is bad. If you're in the latter group, you're a wannabe mass-murderer who deserves to live under a regime that treats them the same. Let's assume all the readers here respect fundamental human rights, such as the right to life.
There is a simple solution to the ethical dilemma of right to life vs. overpopulation. Suicide. Act locally, think globally. And there is nothing more local than you. I'm sure the example of the AGW doomsters will inspire the rest of the planet to follow suit.
If you aren't into self-killing, then you're either a hypocrite or a genocidal maniac. Take your pick.
Tortured logic for the purposes of satire; nothing beats it.
Nice work CJ. Mohair put it in there, you snapped it off. And in the form of a rebuttal; outstanding. You've likely carried the day with: "If you aren't into self-killing, then you're either a hypocrite or a genocidal maniac. Take your pick."
I await Mohair's surrebuttal.
Mohair should indeed test the strength of his own argument by killing himself. I await the death notice.
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
(12)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE