What Will Sea Level Rise Look Like in Real Life?

Because who needs South Beach and Harvard anyway?

What Will Sea Level Rise Look Like in Real Life?
By Nickolay Lamm
Apr 05 2013

Have you ever wondered how the rise in sea levels will impact our surroundings? Here, we have projected the outlook of three major locations: Washington D.C. and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, Miami and South Beach, and New York City and the Statue of Liberty.

The inspiration for these sea level rise photos came from What Could Disappear from the New York Times. Because the maps shown were not in a high enough resolution to figure out exactly which places would be flooded, I got in touch with Remik Ziemlinski from Climate Central who gave me access to more precise versions of the same maps that New York Times used.

The following process was used to illustrate what sea level rise looks like in real life: see article for details!

Here's Harvard. For more gifs, go to Rising Seas Swallow 8 Cities in These Climate Change GIFs

:rofllol

Yeah, you didn't hear me complaining about parts of DC going under water either. Harvard's just a damn shame, but Stanford is better anyway. :thumbsup: Unfortunately, I do like MIT...

So this is a subject that the contrarians never bring up - sea level rise. It's happening, we can't stop it, the only question is how much and how fast? It's pretty obvious that it'll wreck thousands of square miles of currently high-value land and structures, harm our economy, force hundreds of thousands of people (millions eventually, some entire countries) to relocate...so do we not care? Do you think that the cost of switching over to renewable energy sources and reducing our fossil fuel use as much as possible will be more than the loss of land, homes, and businesses over the coming decades? Curious minds wish to know...

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: "What Will Sea Level Rise Look Like in Real Life?"

Bunk... just like the warming trend over the last 20 years going the way of the dodo? Come back when you have some hard science. And while you're at it... look up Dyson and climate change.

The last 20 years? How about the last 150? If all global warming proponents had to say was "it's warmed for only the last 20", you'd laugh them out of the room. I've provided the hard science, you have yet to provide any hard science refuting it.

This Freeman Dyson? Freeman Dyson and the irresistible urge to be contrary about climate change
By David Biello | Apr 30, 2009

As he said: "I know a lot about nuclear weapons and nothing about climate change."

"I like to express heretical opinions," Dyson said, with an impish gleam in his eye. "They might even happen to be true."

The Danger of Cosmic Genius
Kenneth Brower Oct 27 2010, 3:30 PM ET

Among intelligent nonexperts who have weighed in on climate change, Freeman Dyson has become, now that Michael Crichton is dead, perhaps our most prominent global-warming skeptic. Charlie Rose began his interview with questions about the climate. Dyson answered that he remained very skeptical about the dangers of global warming. He did not believe the pronouncements of the experts. He did not claim to be an expert himself, so he would not argue the details with anybody; he had not given much time to the issue and did not pretend to know the real answers, but what he knew for sure was that the global-warming experts did not know the answers, either.

Dyson did not deny that the world was getting warmer. What he doubted was the models of the climatologists, and the grave consequences they predicted, and the supposition that global warming is bad.

The problem with his assumption that the predictions of climatologists is built solely on computer models - it is not. He's hardly a model to hold up as evidence that your skepticism is valid. He even dodges direct questions ...

OmniScience, weather is not climate, short-term local patterns are inherently more susceptible to variability than long-term climate trends...