Get used to it.

1970 - "Miami will be underwater in ten years!"
1980 - "Miami will be underwater in ten years!"
1990 - "Miami will be underwater in ten years!"
2000 - "Miami will be underwater in ten years!"
2010 - "Miami will be underwater in ten years!"
2020 - "Miami will be underwater in ten years!"

ENOUGH WITH THE GOREBULL WARMING ALREADY! AOC SAYS WE ONLY HAVE 3 YEARS LEFT BEFORE WE ALL DIE ANYWAY!!!

 

Launching a massive preemptive strike on China and leveling their economy would do wonders for reducing global carbon emissions.

Why won't you support that?

 

Maybe what they really meant were the Miami Dolphins. If you take it that way all but the first prediction is close to accurate.

 

No one has.

 

The prediction under discussion was in the NYT in 1995, and has proven spectacularly inaccurate. That's shallow hype.

 

The point being, IT WASNT THEN.
You are STILL using outdated science to prove a current situation.
And one you yourself call wrong!
Why not move forward 30 years and look at some cutting edge modern science, and at what is actually happening NOW?
You haven't understood a word I have been posting here because if you did you wouldn't keep repeating your mistake.

 

It was indeed shallow hype then. It is merely ridiculous now.

 

Here's some 2022 science.

New Paradigm-Shifting Study Finds Annual CO2 Flux Is Driven By Temperature-Dependent Sea Ice Flux
By Kenneth Richard on 7. November 2022

Share this...
Annual carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) change rates lag behind changes in sea ice extent by 7 months and 5 months, respectively. This robust correlation is consistent with the conclusion that CO2 (and CH4) changes are responsive to temperature, not the other way around.
It is commonly believed that the annual “squiggle” of the Mauna Loa CO2 cycle variations are driven by hemispheric seasonal contrasts in terrestrial photosynthesis.

But scientists (Hambler and Henderson, 2022) instead find it is variation high latitude temperatures affecting sea ice extent changes that dominate as drivers of the CO2 (and methane) annual fluxes, not photosynthesis.

They affirm temperature (T) changes lead CO2 change rates by about 7-10 months, suggesting the causality direction is T→CO2, and not CO2→T.

Temperature also drives sea ice peak melt vs. accumulation rates. This cause-effect directionality can also be clearly seen in analyses of sea ice flux vs. annual CO2 rate changes.

“The phase relationship between temperature and carbon dioxide has been examined to help elucidate the possible direction of causality and the lags we find between timeseries are consistent with carbon dioxide being the response variable.”
“Carbon dioxide is very strongly correlated with sea ice dynamics, with the carbon dioxide rate at Mauna Loa lagging sea ice extent rate by 7 months. Methane is very strongly correlated with sea ice dynamics, with the global (and Mauna Loa) methane rate lagging sea ice extent rate by 5 months. Sea ice melt rate peaks in very tight synchrony with temperature in each Hemisphere.”


Image Source: Hambler and Henderson, 2022

 

The boy cried, "Wolf!" again.

Despite Predictions, 2022 Hurricane Season Nears End with Below Normal Activity
EXTREME WEATHER NOVEMBER 2, 2022

 

Perhaps.
But that does not erase the fundamental fact that greater rainfall due to climate change has caused the same thing. Loss of property, income and life.
The history of science may contain mistakes but because they are known mistakes they do not affect the present.
I have no idea why you think such a mistake which, BTW was meant to warn against rising waters and which has come to be, is so important. It doesn't make an iota of difference to what the facts are today.
Nor does it indicate a general rule that climate predictions are wrong. Many predictions in the past are coming true today just as described.

 

There has been no greater rainfall due to climate change.

 

This does not address the fact I posted earlier.

FOR WHATEVER REASON that temperatures are going up, and the fastest rise is in the Arctic,

The melt of more than usual cold water, which sinks below warmer water, is not only causing faster melt as warmer water melts pack ice faster, but is moving the normal ocean currents ,

Causing WEATHER to change.
Oceanic currents affect weather because warmer water evaporates faster into rain bearing clouds , which causes more rain and more flooding. Plus changes in atmospheric currents like the jet stream.

Information about time lag in effect is not germane to this discussion.

 

Ah but it is. It suggests that temperature rise is not driven by CO2, and the whole AGW edifice collapses.

 

There is no evidence for any of that.

 

For heavens sake Pakistan has suffered catastrophic floods just this year!

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicat...on has,increases in precipitation than others.

 

So? Almost every place on Earth suffers massive floods EVERY YEAR!!

 

I never mentioned CO2
But your report only notes a 7 month delay in effects, which is not relevant nor does it deny that CO2 doesn't have an effect.
You really should get up to speed if you want to discuss this.

 

Look at the graphs in the link.
Global rainfall has increased steadily.

 

Yes, and . . . ?

Pakistan has been subject to regular flooding throughout history. This year's flood is the country's sixth since 1950 to kill over 1,000 people. These disasters have encouraged numerous attempts at flood risk management.Sep 20, 2022

Pakistan's floods are a disaster – but they didn't have to be

 

But if CO2 is not driving temperature (and in fact the reality is the other way around) then all the climate change mitigation measures based on AGW are feckless wastes of energy and resources.

 

Many would say this is a good thing.

 

Is sea level rising?

Yes, sea level is rising at an increasing rate
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html

2022 Sea Level Rise Technical Report
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/sealevelrise/sealevelrise-tech-report.html

 

That is not what your report says.
It says the effect of CO2 is delayed by a matter of months.
It ASSUMES the presence of CO2 but cibclud3s that the correlation between temp change and CO2 is not immediate.
Who would have assumed it was??
So what when the issue covers a century??

 

Good. That means the beach will be closer.

 

The sky is falling yet again.