General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Sky News Australia
comments

Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "‘Climate change’ now means rather than dams dying up they will be ‘really wet’" video.

Most people are surprised to learn that, just as the surface of the Earth is not flat, the surface of the ocean is not flat, and that the surface of the sea changes at different rates around the globe. For instance, the absolute water level height is higher along the West Coast of the United States than the East Coast. You may have heard the term “global sea level,” which refers to the average height of all of the Earth's ocean basins. "Global sea level rise" refers to the increase in the average global sea level trend. "Local sea level" refers to the height of the water measured along the coast relative to a specific point on land. Tide stations measure local sea level. "Relative sea level trends" reflect changes in local sea level over time. This relative change is the one most critical for many coastal applications, including coastal mapping, marine boundary delineation, coastal zone management, coastal engineering, sustainable habitat restoration design, and the general public enjoying their favorite beach. I hope this clears up your ignorance.
6
Sea level is the base level for measuring elevation and depth on Earth. Because the ocean is one continuous body of water, its surface tends to seek the same level throughout the world. However, winds, currents, river discharges, and variations in gravity and temperature prevent the sea surface from being truly level. So the surface of the ocean can be used as a base for measuring elevations, the concept of "local mean sea level" has been developed. In the United States and its territories, local mean sea level is determined by taking hourly measurements of sea levels over a period of 19 years at various locations, and then averaging all of the measurements. The 19-year period is called a Metonic cycle. It enables scientists to account for the long-term variations in the moon's orbit. It also averages out the effects of local weather and oceanographic conditions. Sea level is measured in relation to the adjacent land. Just like the ocean, the elevation of land may rise and fall over time. For example, the tremendous weight of a glacier on land pushes the land down, closer to sea level. That same land bounces back (a process called postglacial rebound) if the ice retreats, or melts, and its weight is removed. Local mean sea-level measurements are a combination of sea-level variations and movement of the land. Again I hope this helps as this is common public knowledge. If you wish, I could reference you thousands of published peer reviewed scientific papers that show this is an observable phenomenon. Or remain ignorant,your choice.
2
@southern-samurai By 2021 90% of the Maldives have suffered severe erosion. 97% of the country no longer has access to fresh water and 50% of the national budget is being spent on efforts to adapt to the rising sea levels. You really should have picked a better example to support your opinion.
2
@stevelozevski8151 You explicitly stated you are not interested in the science. You fallaciously insist on anecdotal evidence which is nonsensical idiocy. Is that all you have?
2
@ThatGuy-ze5kk President Obamas house in Martha’s Vineyard is 4m above sea level at the current rate of rise it will be 180 years before it is inundated. He will be long gone. You are factually wrong. Look it up.
2
@ThatGuy-ze5kk Al Gore's home in Montecito, California is 400 ft above sea level, again you are factually incorrect.
2
@stevelozevski8151 So your suggestion that unless I personally have conducted experiments of sea levels then my claim of the overwhelming scientific opinion is not valid is nonsensical garbage. I have answered your questions repeatedly and in detail. I have sort clarification and you have not provided it. What is your next nonsensical comment?
2
So finally so Steve understands the repeated calls for personal experience are fallacious garbage. It is illogical nonsense to suggest unless you personally witness something then it can’t be factual or true. I am perfectly willing to continue to discuss this until Steve understands. It is the least I can do.
2
@chrismo2922 Average global sea levels have been rising since 1880 (the earliest available robust estimates), largely in response to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the consequent changes in the global climate. Global average sea levels have risen by around 25 cm since the late 19th century. Half of this rise has occurred since 1970. There are two main processes behind long-term sea-level rises that are a direct result of a warming climate. Firstly, as the ocean has warmed, the total volume of the ocean has increased through the thermal expansion of water. Thermal expansion has contributed about one third of the sea-level rise observed globally. Secondly, water has been added to the oceans as a result of melting land-based ice. Ice loss from glaciers and polar ice sheets, together with changes in the amount of water stored on the land, contribute two thirds of global sea-level rise. The rate of sea-level rise since the mid-19th century has been larger than the average rate during the previous 2,000 years. Global-average sea levels are currently (from 1993 to 2019) rising at around 3.5 mm per year, faster than the 1.5 mm per year during the 20th century. Rates of sea-level rise are not uniform around the globe and vary from year to year. Since 1993, the rates of sea-level rise to the north and southeast of Australia have been significantly higher the global average, and rates of sea-level rise on other coasts of the continent have been closer to the global average. Melting ice from Greenland, Antarctica and glaciers due to anthropogenic climate change has been the main cause of global sea-level rise since the early 1990s. Natural variability of the climate system also contributes to variations in sea level. For example, global sea level fell during the intense La Niña event of 2010–2011, partly due to the exceptionally high rainfall over land that resulted in floods in Australia, northern South America, and Southeast Asia. This was compounded by the long-term storage of water across inland Australia. However, recent observations show that sea levels have rebounded in line with the long-term trend in rising sea levels.
1
@judithjames4522 Sea level is the base level for measuring elevation and depth on Earth. Because the ocean is one continuous body of water, its surface tends to seek the same level throughout the world. However, winds, currents, river discharges, and variations in gravity and temperature prevent the sea surface from being truly level. So the surface of the ocean can be used as a base for measuring elevations, the concept of "local mean sea level" has been developed. In the United States and its territories, local mean sea level is determined by taking hourly measurements of sea levels over a period of 19 years at various locations, and then averaging all of the measurements. The 19-year period is called a Metonic cycle. It enables scientists to account for the long-term variations in the moon's orbit. It also averages out the effects of local weather and oceanographic conditions. Sea level is measured in relation to the adjacent land. Just like the ocean, the elevation of land may rise and fall over time. For example, the tremendous weight of a glacier on land pushes the land down, closer to sea level. That same land bounces back (a process called postglacial rebound) if the ice retreats, or melts, and its weight is removed. Local mean sea-level measurements are a combination of sea-level variations and movement of the land. Changes in Sea Level. Again I hope this decreases your ignorance of sea levels.
1
If the best you have is personal slurs and you think that is a mature or intelligent response to information on the science of sea levels, then simply admit you literally haven’t got a clue about what you are talking and refuse point blank to be educated and wish to remain stupid. No problem by me.
1
@southern-samurai This is the definition of anecdotal evidence and is fallacious nonsense when discussing the science of sea levels. Can you please reference some data or a scientific paper that shows sea levels are constant. Thanks.
1
Do you consider personal slurs an argument or normal in a discussion?
1
@Diponty Evidence for Century-Timescale Acceleration in Mean Sea levels and for Recent Changes in Extreme Sea Levels. Published 1Feb 2011 Philip Woodworth, Melissa Menendez, & Roland Gehrels. When you have read that get back to me.
1
@judithjames4522 I am not wrong. This isn't my opinion it is the scientific opinion of thousands of scientists. All you have shown is further evidence of your own inability to understand science or educate yourself.
1
@Diponty Here is one that is a study of sea level studies. The evolving landscape of sea-level rise science from 1990 to 2021. Published in July 23, and
1
@mrman1536 Thanks to satellite and tide gauge data, we know that sea level is rising about 3.3 millimeters (0.13 inches) a year, a rate that grows by another 1 millimeter (0.04 inches) per year every decade or so. Each year, global warming is currently adding about 750 gigatonnes of water to the ocean – enough to cover the state of Texas about 1 meter (more than 3 feet) deep. We can’t really eyeball a few millimeters of sea level rise a year just by looking at the ocean because of waves, tides, etc. But we can definitely see the effects of it, both short- and long-term.”
1
@rhyno1740 Yes it is and it is observable. The overwhelming scientific opinion from thousands of studies clearly shows it has.
1
@Diponty OMG. It was a study of sea level studies from that time period. The actual studies aren’t restricted to that time frame.
1
@stevelozevski8151 That is a nonsensical argument called anecdotal fallacy. The fact you aren’t interested in science or reading the data and educating yourself seals the deal.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Are you suggesting rising sea levels don’t cause erosion. Have you ever seen a beach after a particular severe storm.
1
@judithjames4522 No you are wrong and this was clearly explained to you in my previous posts. Gravity alone means the oceans aren’t level.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Fair enough, however the erosion I cited in the Maldives is directed attributable to the rise in sea levels as measured over the last 120 years.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Since the 1950s, sea level in and around the Maldives has been rising at a rate of 0.03–0.06 inches (0.8–1.6 millimeters) per year. Because of the Maldivian topography, small changes in sea level translate into extensive land inundation. If I confused you by using the word erosion my apologies.
1
@stevelozevski8151 It most certainly is a fallacious argument. In fact it is the definition of an anecdotal fallacy. Are you seriously suggesting you don’t accept anything unless you have personally witnessed it.
1
@rhyno1740 I have contradicted nothing. Rising sea levels have directly caused higher levels of coastline erosion, in particular the Maldives.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Again an inane attempt at a anecdotal fallacious argument.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Do you analyse your own blood samples at your annual medical examination? Did you do all the plumbing, carpentry, and electrical work in your home? Do you regularly conduct surgery on your family or if required leave interpretating a brain scan to a neurologist. The concept that if I don’t personally conduct the experiments that show sea levels rising then I have no evidence is fallacious nonsense.
1
@ThatGuy-ze5kk Please quote the person and their address. Thanks.
1
@stevelozevski8151 These are not my claims they are the claims of the overwhelming scientific opinion and of numerous scientific studies that show an observable rise in sea levels from 1900 to present of approximately 20cm.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I didn’t ask you to prove a claim I asked you a simple question.
1
@ThatGuy-ze5kk Decaprio has so many properties it is hard to know which one you are referring to but considering he owns many in the Hollywood hills that are under no risk whatsoever he could probably afford to loose one or two. Again your comment has been completely debunked.
1
@stevelozevski8151 No I asked for a reference or some data. I did not ask for proof.
1
@stevelozevski8151 What do you mean by test?
1
@stevelozevski8151 What then do you understand or mean by test?
1
@stevelozevski8151 You are the one insisting on asking a nonsensical fallacious question without being specific what do you mean by a test.? Because published peer reviewed scientific papers that show observed sea level rise have themselves been subjected to peer reviewed testing of their conclusions. Is the angle you are trying to get at is my opinion of any value then I completely agree it is worthless as is yours. What only counts is the science and that is very clear the sea level is rising. This is not my claim, it is the claim of the overwhelming scientific community.
1
@drew6194 Because the person in question keeps repeatedly doing it.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Once again personally collected data is fallacious by nature. I would not use it in argumentation. I can’t see the moon tonight and even if you were standing next to me I couldn’t show it to you. By your logic it therefore doesn’t exist. I could show you a photo and provide data that it exists, but you have rejected that as evidence. Your entire argument and line of questioning is fallacious nonsensical garbage. Do you understand this yet. If not I’m happy to keep trying till you do.
1
So finally the repeated calls for personally collected data are a nonsensical fallacious garbage. I can’t see the moon tonight so by Steve’s logic it doesn’t exist. If he can’t personally witness it then it isn’t true. This is the definition of anecdotal fallacies. If Steve doesn’t understand this then I’m happy to keep trying until he does.
1
@stevelozevski8151 So now you are constructing strawman arguments which is piling fallacious garbage on top of of fallacious garbage. Im not sure if you understand how science works. History showed us that usually vaccines do provide a level of protection of communicability. Scientific studies now show the Covid vaccines were not overly effective in this, however they were very effective in reducing mortality if you did get it.
1
@stevelozevski8151 You have dismissed published peer reviewed scientific papers as evidence. You obviously dismiss NASA and their satellite measurements and the IPCCs numerous reports. You ask for proof and I have provided it as per the meaning of proof in the dictionary ie evidence of a fact. That evidence being NASA satellite measurements of sea levels and the last IPCC report. Do you now understand what proof is? If not I am happy to continue till you do.
1
@stevelozevski8151 You do understand that science is a process and it continually questions itself. It's called learning. That's why it's conclusions often change over time.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have repeatedly. I will continue to answer your absurdly fallacious questions until you do understand. The data that shows the sea level is rising is continually fact checked by scientific review. Happy to keep explaining this to you till you do understand how evidence and proof works.
1
@stevelozevski8151 No you explicitly asked for proof, and by the dictionary meaning of that word “proof” I provided the evidence which is the data included in NASA measurements and the scientific research that supports the IPCC reports on climate. Your opinion on the validity of the data is worthless and I have already explained my opinion on sea level is not my opinion it is the overwhelming scientific opinion. You neither understand what evidence is or what proof means. I am of course willing to continue to explain this to you until you do understand it.
1
@stevelozevski8151 It is a wholly false statement to claim that the information and knowledge of the Covid-19 virus and the knowledge of vaccines did not change as we learnt more about it and it’s effects. Measures were taken in precaution some of which proved not particularly effective and so we modified our response. You seem to think science is a fixed thing. Science is a process and as we learn more or observe better, our scientific opinions change.
1
It is a completely false claim to suggest the medical advice in regards to Covid-19 and vaccine did not change as the scientific community learnt more as time moved on. Processes changed precautionary measures were adjusted. You statement on how Covid-19 was handled is factually incorrect.
1
It is a completely false claim to suggest our knowledge of Covid-19 and the vaccines we used against were fixed. Right from the beginning as medical science learned we adjusted our precautions and use of vaccines. The vaccines created did not prove to be as effective as we hoped and the studies show this. Sorry Steve you a factually incorrect on your statements in this regard.
1
@stevelozevski8151 By definition, peer reviewed published scientific papers are evidence or proof as you call it, that the data is correct.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have answered all your questions accurately and completely. The data has been repeatedly checked in the peer review process of the scientific process. You are unable to understand this but I'll keep trying.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I understand you don't understand science, but to claim other people don't understand how to understand data from scientific papers is factually incorrect. No doubt some people don't or ever will as they choose to remain ignorant. Most people however learn.
1
@stevelozevski8151 In relation to your comment about the medical advice during Covid, again you are factually wrong. Right from the beginning as medical science learnt more about the virus the advice and precautions changed, and continue to. Recently one of the vaccines was removed as the injuries it caused were to great. Studies have also shown the vaccines were not particularly effective at preventing communicability. We are still learning and adjusting our responses and resources. No scientist is claiming everything was perfect. Many places are conducting investigations into what we did right and what we did wrong, again ita called the scientific method. You seem stuck in religious dogma.
1
@rhyno1740 Who claimed the Maldives would be underwater by 2018? Can you provide a scientific paper that said this or are you referring to a media report?
1
@rhyno1740 To say you tried to follow the science but couldn't is just an argument from ignorance. I fully understand your fallacious logic. Now that you have exposed your conspiracy theory. Where did the money leed you to?
1
@rhyno1740 How many of the thousands of scientists and scientific papers on sea level rise did you prove wrong. Could you provide the detail on one scientific paper you have refuted or debunked. Thanks.
1
@judithjames4522 Studies have shown prayer to be completely ineffective, but thankyou for your thoughts as disingenuous as they are.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have answered all your questions fully and accurately.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Yes the data has been fully proven by the standards you set.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have explained in detail why the data is accurate.
1
@stevelozevski8151 You said prove the data. I used the dictionary definition of proof and provided that detail. It's not my fault you didn't like the answer and changed the goalposts. Your logic isn't sound.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I used the explicit dictionary meaning of proof. If you are unable to understand that, we'll that's not my fault.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have proved the data correct, literally as per the meaning of prove. You are just unable to understand it. Would you like me to go back through the meaning of proof?
1
@stevelozevski8151 As explained earlier the information itself is proven to be accurate via the scientific process. You are unable to understand this, so would you like me to explain how science works. Would that make it understandable for you?
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have explained in detail the tests I have conducted. You are unable to understand them. Would you like me to explain them to you again?
1
@rhyno1740 Happy to accept whatever evidence you have. That is what science is.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Look up the dictionary meaning of test. That is exactly what I have provided you to prove the data collected by scientific papers is true. Again your words proof and test as per the dictionary have been meet. What else have you got?
1
@stevelozevski8151 So now it's personal slurs. I didn't say reading something was proof. That is another fallacious strawman comment from you.
1
@rhyno1740 I asked nobody for proof. I asked specifically for evidence of your claim, and as earlier stated happy to accept whatever you have.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Again as per the dictionary meaning of proof and evidence I have explicitly provided this detail to you. You refuse to accept it. Would you like me to explain it to you again?
1
@stevelozevski8151 So more personal slurs, is this how you normally conduct a discussion? Would you like me to explain how science works and what a test is? I can provide the definitions of proof and evidence as well if you wish, or as I suspect you would immediately change the goalposts again to avoid having to face reality.
1
@ThatGuy-ze5kk Go back through the 180 odd posts they are there somewhere.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Exactly how do personal slurs add to the discussion? Do they make you feel superior? As explained earlier I have never said me reading anything is proof or evidence. This is a continuing strawman fallacious argument from you and is nonsensical garbage. Now ask your question again.
1
@stevelozevski8151 So now you are using an argument from authority fallacy to add to your strawman and anecdotal fallacious arguments.
1
@stevelozevski8151 The scientific method shows the data is correct. Do you need me to explain the scientific method to you? Also what's with the personal slurs, a bit immature, don't you think?
1
@stevelozevski8151 As explained earlier, the scientific method proves the data correct. Would you like me to explain the scientific method for you?
1
@stevelozevski8151 Using the definition of your word "prove" I have shown you the data is correct.
1
@stevelozevski8151 No factually incorrect. I quoted published peer reviewed scientific studies. I understand you don't accept science as proof , but that is because you don't understand language. Would you like me to explain the dictionary meaning of the words you are using.
1
@stevelozevski8151 The peer review system as part of the scientific method proves the data to be correct. Again you fail to understand how science works. It is illogical nonsense to suggest I need to personal control the lasers on the satellites that have measured the rise in sea level. Your insistence on this is absurd. Would you like me to teach you how the scientific method works?
1
@stevelozevski8151 And 100 time I have provided that proof. Using the dictionary meaning of the word “proof”.
1
Sea level continues to rise at an increasing rate. Extreme sea level events that are historically rare (once per century in the recent past) are projected to occur frequently (at least once per year) at many locations by 2050 in all RCP scenarios, especially in tropical regions (high confidence). The increasing frequency of high water levels can have severe impacts in many locations depending on exposure (high confidence). Sea level rise is projected to continue beyond 2100 in all RCP scenarios. For a high emissions scenario (RCP8.5), projections of global sea level rise by 2100 are greater than in AR5 due to a larger contribution from the Antarctic Ice Sheet (medium confidence). In coming centuries under RCP8.5, sea level rise is projected to exceed rates of several centimetres per year resulting in multi-metre rise (medium confidence), while for RCP2.6 sea level rise is projected to be limited to around 1m in 2300 (low confidence). Extreme sea levels and coastal hazards will be exacerbated by projected increases in tropical cyclone intensity and precipitation (high confidence). Projected changes in waves and tides vary locally in whether they amplify or ameliorate these hazards (medium confidence).{Cross-Chapter Box 5 in Chapter 1; Cross-Chapter Box 8 in Chapter 3; 4.1; 4.2; 5.2.2, 6.3.1; Figures SPM.1, SPM.4, SPM.5}
1
@stevelozevski8151 No they didn’t there was a element of the medical community that argued against mass vaccination. Science has now proven that the Covid vaccine wasn’t particularly effective at reducing transmission. It was effective at reducing symptoms and mortality. Why have you moved away from climate science?
1
@stevelozevski8151 No they didn’t. Many doctors advised against mass vaccination.
1
@stevelozevski8151 And 100 times I did using the definition of your word proof.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Yes there are. Could you please provide the details of one of them. Thanks.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Because you don't understand it, is an argument from ignorance and is a fallacious statement. You are wrong and don't understand argumentation. Would you like me to teach you the fundamentals of argumentation?
1
@stevelozevski8151 100 times I provided proof as per the definition of proof in the dictionary.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Are you saying you disagree with the dictionary. In that case take it up with the publisher of the dictionary.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I quoted nothing. I referenced data from published peer reviewed scientific papers and organisations that continually check their data as pervthe scientific method. You are wrong again. Edit on that, I did quote some data from a science journal about sea level and the damage in the Maldives. Is that what has you all twisted. Again data about sea levels is continually checked by numerous sources. I don't care if you don't recognise those sources. All you are doing is denying science. Good luck with that.
1
@stevelozevski8151 So if you already presuppose the data can't be correct why are you continually asking for data you already believe without looking at as wrong. All you have shown is you again don't understand science. I can help you with this. There ways you can learn how science works.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I'm not sure you have a grasp on reality here. Are you saying that typing words and communicating to me your ideas/arguments/discussion isn't you actually saying stuff. What sort of weird philosophical stuff is that? Again do you what to learn how science works?
1
@stevelozevski8151 I provided references to scientific journals, reports, and papers. That's not quotes. I did provide some data from science journals.
1
@stevelozevski8151 No, the words quote and referenced although similar have different meanings and are not exactly the same.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have proved the data correct as explained earlier. According to the dictionary meaning of prove I have proven sea levels have risen.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have a fairly good understanding of exactly what your voice sounds like. Back with the personal slurs. That isn't an argument that is just childish immaturity. That's how a bully acts. Now what else have you got?
1
@stevelozevski8151 Why do you repeatedly keep asking for something you believe I can't possibly do? Seems a little strange.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Yes, so why insist on me providing something to already believe I can’t provide?
1
@stevelozevski8151 Nice use of emojis.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Oh yeah, definitely triggered. Has that been the point of repeatedly asking me to do something you believed was not possible?
1
@stevelozevski8151 Interesting that in a discussion about sea levels it seems your intention was not one of genuine debate but to see if you could get a reaction. It was you that started with the personal slurs, not me.
1
@stevelozevski8151 You certainly established a few things , but not what you think. I provided evidence of the rise in sea level since 1900.
1
@judithjames4522 Again thankyou for disingenuous remarks. Once again happy for you to provide evidence ocean levels have remained steady since 1900.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I didn't. I asked for evidence. You don't have much of a grasp of language.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Once again, as per the strict dictionary meaning of evidence I provided independent data, again as per the strict definition meaning of data an independent. You don't understand language.
1
@stevelozevski8151 Again you don't understand language. I asked Judith for evidence. I will accept the same level of evidence that I provided which is published peer reviewed scientific papers. Thankyou for your interest in this discussion. Would you like me to explain the scientific method to you or spend some time explaining the use of language?
1
@stevelozevski8151 Again you don’t understand language. I politely asked Judith for evidence. I will accept the same level of evidence that I provided, which is published peer reviewed scientific papers. I have asked for others the same on this thread and none have replied (I assume they have none). Would you like for me to again reference the 25000 odd scientific papers on sea levels?I can run you through the basics of the scientific method as well. Let me know.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have.
1
@stevelozevski8151 I have
1
@stevelozevski8151 I did!
1
I did!
1