« June 2007 »
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
about editor
aust govt
big media
contact us
donations to SAM
election nsw 2007
election Oz 2007
free SAM content
human rights
independent media
local news
nsw govt
nuke threats
publish a story
zero waste
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
official indymedia
ecology action Australia
ecology action
Advertise on SAM
details for advertisers
You are not logged in. Log in

sydney alternative media - non-profit community independent trustworthy
Tuesday, 5 June 2007
Andrew Bolt digging an anti science hole for himself on sea rise risk?
Mood:  not sure
Topic: globalWarming


This is a cautionary open letter of advice for green and red baiter Andrew Bolt there at the Herald Sun in Melbourne equivalent of the Sydney Daily Telegraph here:

The Age drowning in hype | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

Dear Bolter 

I saw you scoffing on Insiders , and the scoffing at your scoffing. You scorned this report carrying the picture above: page 1 The Age 2nd June 07 Landmarks at 'high risk' from rising sea levels - National ...

Here is the bad news: Dr James Hansen of NASA (you know, the guys revered for sending man to the moon) has analysed West Antarctica and Greenland with its above sea level ice volume. His advice is that there is accelerated melting via crevasse cracks. It's 1 mm sea rise per year now but NON LINEAR. 1cm in 10years. Then quite possibly double the RATE every 10 years ie 2cms 20 years, 4cm after 30 years. Do the math, by 2100 its 5.11m sea rise. You will see it's right.

A report is here on USA Grist news site  15 May 2007  An interview with renowned climate scientist James Hansen |  

 "I've actually written a paper and submitted it called "Scientific Reticence and Sea Level Rise" [PDF], because it just seemed to me that there was a gap between what scientists really thought and what was in the public knowledge in regards to ice sheet stability and sea level rise."

at the pdf  [bold added] dated 23rd March 2007

"Under BAU forcing in the 21st century, sea level rise undoubtedly will be dominated by a third term (3) ice sheet disintegration. This third term was small until the past few years, but it is has at least doubled in the past decade and is now close to 1 mm/year, based on gravity satellite measurements discussed above. As a quantitative example, let us say that the ice sheet contribution is 1 cm for the decade 2005-2015 and that it doubles each decade until the West Antarctic ice sheet is largely depleted.


That time constant yields sea level rise of the order of 5 m this century. Of course I can not prove that my choice of a 10 year doubling time for non-linear response is accurate, but I am confident that it provides a far better estimate than a linear response for the ice sheet component of sea level rise." :Dr James Hansen NASA.


The report on Grist is right next to their face to face interview with your Big Boss Rupert Murdoch on a similar topic of News Corp embracing greenhouse gas neutrality here: An interview with Rupert Murdoch about News Corp.'s new climate strategy  of 16th May 2007

I understand the IPCC report you quote from early this year was based on year or more old data especially omitting crevasse mechanism of accelerated melting data.

Bolter, you are sounding like Saul on the road to Damascus.


Poscript #1 (as posted on Melbourne Indy Media website)

Do the math, and Mother Jones
by Tom McL Wednesday June 06, 2007 at 10:32 AM


in 10 yrs - 1 cm sea rise - cumulative 1cm
.....20 yrs - 2cm ................- ...............3cm
.....30 yrs - 4cm ................- ...............7cm
......40 yrs - 8cm................- ...............15cm
......50 yrs - 16cm.............- ................31cm
......60 yrs - 32 cm...........-....................63 cm
......70 yrs - 64 cm............-...................1.27 metres

That's 2077, when this writer is well gone (112) and a 20 year old will be 90 years old. On this quite possible scenario under Dr Hansen's advice the ocean has risen 1.27 metres I suppose a bit like the image above.

But then it gets really 'interesting' on the last two doublings ie horrific just at the turn of the century, or maybe a 99 year lease (!?)

.......80 yrs - 128 cm.........-....................2.55 m
.......90 yrs - 256 cm.........-....................5.11 cm

What really worries me is this article by Mother Jones with 250,000 subscribers there in the USA which describes some 12 different climate tipping points from Amazon forest etc clearance, to methane release in the perma frost, to God knows what else.

Here is the article and it really should be PG or MA reading:

"The Thirteenth Tipping Point" dated Nov-Dec 2006.

A useful metaphor for the above would be driving a 4 wheel drive down a steep slope in first gear, and if you haven't done driver training, and foolishly, like fatally, put your left foot on and depress the clutch pedal to change to 2nd gear. At this point if you have enough nouse to realise your danger, you have two choices - die at the bottom of the hill or jump out: The gears will never re engage as you gain acceleration at exponential rate of increase. Nor will the brakes and tyre friction overcome the momentum of the car's weight on the skiding slope. The 4WD will crash - 100% certain. That choice is out of your hands from exponential increase in momentum the moment you put the clutch pedal down in a moment of supreme ignorance.

You have to stay in first gear going quietly until you steer to safety. 

When I did driver training as a zoology student in 1987 our instructor made us fold our left leg under the seat so he was sure we young bloods in training couldn't kill him by accident on a bush trail by depressing the clutch in a reflex action. Do you get it Bolter?

Postsript #2

Apparently influential columnist Andrew Bolt in his column June 6th 2007 

Howard's last gasp 

has called in effect for a 6 week time line on removal of PM John Howard to be replaced by Peter Costello .... who as Treasurer took a grilling from Kerry O'Brien of the 7.30 Report last night

Government welcomes strong economic figures 

on why his Cabinet submission to act on climate change was rejected by PM Howard 4 years ago 2003. Costello was very light hearted and patient saying he had "set his course" sounding very much like "I told you so".

Also climate change sceptic Cardinal George Pell has been roundly and collectively repudiated by the NSW ALP - ostensibly on stem cell research, but also the subtext of climate change? One wonders. It would be interesting to know if Pell is quoted in the PM Howard's so called Clever Climate PR advertising package.

It would be quite orthodox for Pell to be in Howard's PR as a trenchant critic of the Greens and their alleged rival religious belief in global warming.

The ALP (federal and state) presumably know they have to neutralise Catholic cardinal Pell prior to the next federal election vis a vis Catholic voters on global warming let alone stem cell research for medical benefits.

And to underline how the climate is the main game PM Howard is in the news today prefacing attempts on a post Kyoto international deal at the Sept APEC in Sydney:

Let's replace flawed Kyoto: PM

MARK DAVIS | John Howard will use this year's APEC summit to try to forge an international consensus on climate change.

Just as Glen Milne has written about this recently: Glenn Milne: APEC makes heavy weather for Howard | Opinion | The ...

Our sense of this is that it's all too late for long time, allegedly indispensible PM Howard.

Posted by editor at 8:33 PM NZT
Updated: Thursday, 7 June 2007 8:29 AM NZT

View Latest Entries