Upcoming tides preview of rising sea levels?

Jonathan Stumpf

I don't care how you fish
So four discussion pages later, you can check out the photos submitted last month during those record high tides in the Sound: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/ipa_hightide.htm

Yes, under the header Climate Change.

From Dept. of Ecology:
Now we have another opportunity to document these seasonal high tides. Those of you who happen to photograph the high tide events February 1 - 3 are invited to submit your images to the Washington State Department of Ecology. We are interested in using these images to help document the coastal impacts our state is likely to face with increasing frequency as sea levels continue to rise.
Images can be submitted via email to ‘[email protected]’ – along with the date, time, and detailed location information. Please provide contact information if you'd like us to send you a release form for future publication of your photos.

Jim Welch

Veni, Vidi, Fishi
Ya gotta help me here. I keep reading that "they" are inventing global warming for monetary gain, but nobody ever says who they is, or how they're going to profit from the hoax. The reports and studies I read are generated by people with government and university salaried jobs. Technology and industry are modernizing power and transportation, but that's been going on since we evolved from riding horses to work and carrying water by hand.

I'm not being argumentative, what is it I'm missing?
This is the "They" you are missing...


Jim Welch

Veni, Vidi, Fishi
Yes it is, but I was trying to answer the question of who "they" were. There are a lot of people profiting and that stand to profit on the Global Warming issue (I would like to know how many scientists get grants or are supported by their peer groups if their study was on global cooling), I personally don't care either way other than I wish the truth would come out rather than data manipulation and people/organizations with hidden agenda's. To date, I have seen few level headed solutions regarding Climate Change. The GW'ers want draconian measures taken (i.e. Cap and Tax, just wait, you are a carbon dioxide creation machine, just wait till they tax each exhale you have, what a novel way to blunt population growth, taxing the number of dependents you have that create carbon dioxide, this would be a Vegan's wet dream, taxing ranchers based on how much cow flatulence is created ) , the deniers want to keep doing what we are doing, which is wasteful no matter how you look at it. Me, I am a go with the flow kinda guy, when change happens, we adapt. Lately I have been checking out how to go solar, not because its ecologically sensitive but because its economical and I am tired of getting higher and higher power bills as well as desiring more independence. Personally I would like to see a few less dam's on the rivers just because I really like to fish. Is this due to a caring for the planet position, nope, its just the market place in action.

I just Googled "Who profits from Global Warming" and got a lot of hits


Just a tidbit for thoughts: If the majority of Seattlites and Western Washington politicians REALLY belive that global warming is inevitable and the seas are going to rise, why are they putting the replacement of the Alaskan Way viaduct underground? Shouldn't the option to raise it above ground even higher be more appropriate, if the seas are rising, then this would make the replacement be useful for a bit longer. It couldn't be that the developers of the real estate along the AWV have any sway over the politicians now could it?

Anyway, just a thought.

I still don't see where anybody is cutting a fat hog by warning of possible effects from climate change. Alternative power is getting some grant money, but compared to the billions of bucks in petroleum and coal profits from doing business as usual, I believe that claiming that the primary motivation is profit is a red herring.
Arguing climate change with the vast majority of conservatives is a waste of time and breath. It's like the "birther" movement. The majority of tea party conservatives believe the president was born in a foreign country. Of course there is no legitimate evidence of any of this, but they start asking the president to "prove" he was born in the US. Evidence is then supplied, but of course this is not enough. What if the evidence is doctored? How do we KNOW he wasn't in Kenya?

They are trying to twist and confuse the argument so the burden of proof is suddenly on the defendant instead of the accuser.

The other analogy is cigarette lawyers. For years they argued people who smoke get cancer. People who don't smoke get cancer. Therefore who could possibly prove smoking causes cancer. They tried to make health care experts and providers PROVE cigarettes are dangerous instead of the other way around. When a new drug or product is introduced it's up to the manufacturer to prove their product is safe, not our responsibility to prove after the fact it wasn't.

I ask the climate change skeptics:
- Prove 570 million cars on the road are NOT hurting the environment
- Prove 6.7 billion people are NOT causing negative changes to our environment
- Prove massive amounts of CO2 from millions of years of history being released in the last 100 years is NOT changing the Earth

You'll notice the party of no thinks by referencing Al Gore's income they can make common sense disappear. If they throw out false charges of conspiracy theories among liberal universities we'll ignore the common sense we see in our day to day lives.

Current generations look back and think "how could people be so dumb to think smoking twenty cigarettes a day was healthy?" History will look as unkindly towards the climate change skeptics.

Tod Fossetta

Sorry, I'm not set up for that.
Typical liberal Blah, Blah, Blah from Tom, can't stay on subject, but has to bring in birthers, smoking, party of NO, etc., to reinforce his weak argument. Anything to take your mind off the actual subject at hand. I believe in none of those things, but still think there is much to be skeptical about in the Global Warming, or is it Climate Change,argument.

Data discovered on NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) website in 2007 revises recorded temperatures for the United States. It is expected that similar revisions will also be made for global temperature recordings. The data is certainly devastating for the Al Gore camp which has based much of their Carbon Credits sales pitch on recent temperatures (e.g. claiming that 1998 was the warmest on record).

Other aspects of the data are just as stunning.

* Only 4 of the top 10 warmest years occurred in the past 10 years (1998, 1999, 2006)
* Out of the top 10 warmest years half occurred before 1940
* The years 2000, 2002, 2003 and 2004 were cooler than the year 1900
* 1996, just two years before what Al Gore called the hottest year in the history of the planet, was actually cooler than average.
* 1921 was the third warmest year in recorded history (behind 1934 and 1998).

We're almost back to the 1970's theory of global cooling! The data clearly changes things.

Had we been living in 1934 we would have heard the same claims of global warming, this is the evidence that we would have heard at the time:

* 8 of the past 10 years had been above average.
* 1934 was the warmest year ever recorded. The warmest in over 54 years!

Shift that to 1944 and you would have seen that 17 of the past 21 years had been warmer than average. It is obvious that in just the past 125 years there have been other periods just as warm, or warmer, than what we are now experiencing. If we could look at the past 1,000 years with the accuracy of the past 100 years we would most likely find that this is not unusual at all.

I suppose NASA is in the pockets of the Party of No, and must bow down to Al Gore's infinite wisdom and have "Faith" in his predictions instead.

Oh, and by the way, the Vikings were able to grow gardens on Greenland when they landed there hundreds of years ago, which is impossible in that same area now due to the cold temperatures, so maybe there is a Global Warming exemption zone put in place for that area, I'll have to check with the U.N.

Go Fish

Language, its a virus
Common sense would indicate that yes we humans do have an
effect on the earths environment. Global clearcuts, pollution, over population...etc.
Do these thing effect the weather? How can they not?!

Call it F-ing Up the Enviroment instead of Global Warming or Cooling
and then tell me there is no problem.


Tod Fossetta

Sorry, I'm not set up for that.
typical rightwingnut lack of logic from tod. so, tod, answer the questions tom posed..............
I have already answered similar questions in earlier posts, I believe we should limit emissions to clean up the air, and we have.

I have one child and that's all, so I am only adding one to your 6.7 billion.

I don't think anyone believes we don't create CO2, and that there is no harm from it. But I don't believe we are the cause of all the world's issues either.

I am a state certified Erosion and sediment control lead, and design, install and maintain systems to protect our waterways from silt and pollution. I have supervised the cleanup of three Superfund sites. I have personally restored several watersheds and creeks as a supervisor, and belong to many conservation organizations, to include DU, RMEF, WFF, RGS, CCA, and some trails organizations too. So, take your rightwingnut and shove it up your @#$, I do more to protect the environment at work every day than most people do in a year. I just don't believe that we have caused all this global warming horse#[email protected]^, and because I disagree, and choose to post contrary evidence, I will be ostracized by you on the left.

Go Fish

Language, its a virus
Tod, Glad to hear that you are not out killing endangered critters and
saving the planet one dump site at a time. So the enviroment is doing fine
and there is no such thing as global (what ever you call it) semi-warmish
thingamabob. Why so cranky that people want to do right by mama earth?
Please call me a left hand wang knut.



You know what it is!
I recently read a fantastic book by Thomas Friedman titled, "Hot, Flat and Crowded". I'm sure some of you have heard of it and its a great read. One of the many points the author brings up is essentially this:

Why not do the very best you can to restore the earth and keep it healthy? If global warming is a farce (which almost nobody believes it is) then we will still be in great shape to continue to prosper with mother earth. If its real and some of the grizzly projections come true then we'll be glad we've done the best we could to offset the changes.

Friedman is by no means a bleeding-heart liberal or a scientist, he's a journalist. What he's done is travel the globe and interview those who know what their talking about.

Todd, I know nothing about you but I thank you for your work to restore our watersheds. I'm sure you've found some incredible damage to some pristine places. What we have to remember is that the damage you're seeing to our watershed is happening all over the world at an accelerated pace and its not just damaged watersheds. We, as a world community, are damaging our air quality, our forests, our native species and our oceans (to name a few) at a rate that has never been seen. This should not be a partisan issue but rather an issue of whether or not the earth can sustain our current levels of consumption. Observations and research show that we, as a whole world society, are consuming more than ever and we can only produce what we consume from a finite amount of resources. Logically, it is foolish to think we aren't making an impact on the earth as we ask more of it every day and give less back to it. Read Friedman's book and see what you think.

Labels and battles between political parties on this issue are divisive and counter-productive. Everyone, do the research and form your own opinions. Don't eat what a political party feeds (about the environment or anything else).


You know what it is!
I do what I can, being young, right handed and a damn good caster. Ok, I lied. I'm a crummy caster, too, but the rest is true, I swear!