Senate committee likes slow-rise approach for sea-level forecasts

I was down in Beaufort last month at the Duke University Maritime Lab and the former director said that all their models are pointing to at least a 3' rise in sea level over the next century and that many coastal communities will be under water by 2100. Well, there are some in the NC Legislature who disagree with science.

This quote by Bill Chameides, current dean of the Duke U. Nichols School of the Environment pretty much sums it up:

Some in the state legislature may be feeling a good deal of self-satisfaction for concocting this little gambit, perhaps even high fiving each other and chanting things like “we don’t need no stinking climate scientists.”

Sea Level Rise, Melting Glaciers, and North Carolina Law

You can read more at: Charlotte Observer

Comments

Ain't it funny....

....how the troglodytes are so happy to point to the Duke Study on The Marcellus Shale gas deposits for their fracking arguments....But apparently they think Duke is ignorant when it comes to sea level rise....?

junk science

The libtards use phony studies to take your property even if it is 100yrs from now.What a bunch of crack pots.This Nov the GOP will sweep the nation and return our great nation back to sanity.

NC SLR Law / Real Funny?

National and International media have been criticizing the NC General Assembly, by joking that a Draft NC Law intends to stop Sea Level from rising or accelerating .

Real funny.

Obviously, no one disputes that Sea Level has been rising since the last Ice Age - very slowly; and certainly, if Sea Level Rise (SLR) is or will accelerate rapidly, we need to know about it, and plan for it; but , in short, it seems that the General Assembly want’s actual proof , instead of using an Ouija Board to predict acceleration of Sea Level Rise.

The issue arose because the CRC, Science Panel (SP) and scientists said,

- SL has been rising 18 inches / 100y ,

- 1 foot of SLR would inundate up to 2 miles of tidelands,

and then, using UN IPCC guesstimates, jumped to proposing Planning Policy for 39” SLR by 2100.

However, there are Real world concerns with the SP’s science:

- A visual comparison of post 1850’s US Government Coast Survey surveys of NC tidelands, with recent surveys, don’t show 4 miles ( 150 y @ 18 inches / 100y ), or even 1 mile of inundation.

- Validity of tide gage data presented by the SP was found to be suspect.

- the SP’s Literature Search, was a one sided selection of Pro AGW and Pro SLR reports, with no other viewpoints presented.

When asked about this, the SP , scientists, and an educational institution have refused to answer questions, declined to do the studies, and refused to participate in an Open Public Forum.

Admittedly, I have received a maelstrom of studies on erosion, but none definitively answer the question. Why not ? IF a comparative study of inundation has been done, it should be easy enough to post the pages for everyone to see.

As no one is omniscient, and being responsible to protect the property rights of all the citizens of NC, it looks like the General Assembly is just saying, we need comprehensive verifiable science, before making important public policy decisions.

Bill Price Pine Knoll Shores

Right you are

The most important thing, the thing that really matters in America today, is our god-given property rights. And anyone who advocates "government planning" that includes worst-case scenario modeling is a fucking communist.

Thank the lord with have reasonable people like you watching out for the value of my Emerald Isle condo.

____________________________________

We are not amused