Against global warming, will we have to say so long to Los Angeles (Anaheim: movies, earthquake)

[MHarrington]

I've been hearing rumors about Los Angeles being doomed because of global warming and sea level rise. Is it doomed? Be honest now. More importantly, will much of the surrounding area be doomed as well?

[ferretkona]

Life is not like the movie Waterworld.
If all the artic and antarctic glaciers were to melt the sea level would only raise a few feet if any. Ice occupies more volumne than water.

Palo Verdes Peninsula has gradually been dropping into the ocean thru the millenium, different shelves at differing depths show the history there.

[MHarrington]

Well, how high above sea level is LA and the surrounding area? Because I don't think it's that high.

[ferretkona]

This thread is really sad! It seems to be a troll post in fact.
Every city in the world is easily located on so many search engines. Are you that retarted?

Most of LA is at 100 foot above sea level and well above. Downtown LA is probably well above 300 feet.
My wife and I live within 15 miles from the beach and we are at 75 feet above sea level.

Just grow up!
Every thread you have started is about global warming. Do you work for the FOX network?

What are you phishing for?

[JackSparrow]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=Global+Warmi ng+Swindle&hl=en (broken link)

[MHarrington]

Originally Posted by ferretkona

This thread is really sad! It seems to be a troll post in fact.
Every city in the world is easily located on so many search engines. Are you that retarted?

Most of LA is at 100 foot above sea level and well above. Downtown LA is probably well above 300 feet.
My wife and I live within 15 miles from the beach and we are at 75 feet above sea level.

Just grow up!
Every thread you have started is about global warming. Do you work for the FOX network?

What are you phishing for?

No, I don't work for FOX or any other network nor do I have any intention of doing so for a living. It's just that I've seen all the information saying all the dramatic worst-case scenarios of climate change and that the scientists say it's so. And only a small group say that this global warming has only been minimally, if at all, affected by humans. Don't get me wrong, I really want to be on their side, but there also some people on the thread that agree with the scientists (i.e., pessimist irwin) and even "rabble-rouser" Gore . Plus, I've just seen a news article about how the global warming is defrosting the Arctic faster than ever before. Maybe the Arctic was like this around 600 years ago, but don't you think that maybe it will go even further than that? I understand that the earth heats and cools in cycles, as it has always done since the beginning of time, but still, the scientists' dire warnings sound legitimate, regardless of flaws. And said warnings said that like most coastal cities, LA would be a casualty of sea level rise.

And if that's not enough to convince you, then just take a look here:

http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw...=1102524172007

Now, mind you, it focuses mostly on the eastern U.S., but it does touch up on the west, too.

The true reason why I'm all pessimistic about LA is that one of my favorite places to go, namely Disneyland, is in the general area (to say nothing of Hollywood, AKA where movies are made!) and I just can't imagine SoCal being flooded big time, and yet that's kinda what's happening with the rise in sea levels. Maybe you could spread your word to other global warming threads here.

[fastfilm]

I'm much more afraid of http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/recenteqs/
as a lifelong L.A. resident. My across the street neighbors were killed in the 1994 earthquake here. I also prognosticate more danger of being injured by gangmembers or illegals without drivers' licenses here, since I have been.

Not being a meteorologist, I can't quote exact climatological cycles, but I seem to remember in the U.S. landmasses it is about 15 or so years. We're in the middle of one now supposedly, wherein the extremes of hurricanes in the Gulf states have proven so distasterous of late. In L.A.'s now obliterated coastal savannah, we still tend to have consecutive 7year cycles of drought and heavy rains (for us) years as proof.

Having said that, my anecdotal evidence of living here 5 decades matches what real climatologists note about local warming due to urbanization of every square inch. It is in fact getting hotter in L.A. Asphalt and concrete replacing dirt, shrubs and grass = hotter. In the San Fernando Valley as late as the 1980's, summer averages still encompassed 80's F. to 90's F. Now, due to overdevelopment, our summers are mainly 90's to 100's F.

Don't worry about Disneyland, Anaheim is well inland. And movies are made in Burbank, not Hollywood. Overall rare flooding was abated with our useful but entirely hideous L.A. River channel system. The river is surprisingly rapid during rainstorms, due to its intake from faraway mountain stream sources picking up steam. Our lowland immediate coastal areas are in far more danger of liquifaction from our more frequent earthquakes (turning into quicksandy sinkholes) than actual ocean flooding.

Since the entire L.A. basin slopes northwesterly to the ocean from the various mountain ranges, that poses an interesting question for more learned science-minded engineers than someone like me. Our few modern era floods have been dam break disasters (San Francisquito Canyon, Baldwin Hills,) wherein water flowed back to the Pacific Ocean. What would happen with an earthquake-based tsunami versus westerly flooding in Los Angeles?

[johnlvs2run]

Originally Posted by ferretkona

Are you that retarted?

Recovered with tarts?

I've seen reports that when all the glaciers melt and, due to that, the oceans keep heating up, they could rise a minimum of 200 feet. How long that will take is a matter of some conjecture. Some are saying it could happen very soon. Others think it would take much longer, if at all.

There are also things like the proximity of planet X, polar shifts, tidal waves and earthquakes that would greatly influence the process.

[MHarrington]

Originally Posted by fastfilm

Not being a meteorologist, I can't quote exact climatological cycles, but I seem to remember in the U.S. landmasses it is about 15 or so years. We're in the middle of one now supposedly, wherein the extremes of hurricanes in the Gulf states have proven so distasterous of late. In L.A.'s now obliterated coastal savannah, we still tend to have consecutive 7year cycles of drought and heavy rains (for us) years as proof.

I don't think I understand what you're trying to say.

Originally Posted by johnlvs2run

I've seen reports that when all the glaciers melt and, due to that, the oceans keep heating up, they could rise a minimum of 200 feet. How long that will take is a matter of some conjecture. Some are saying it could happen very soon. Others think it would take much longer, if at all.

Exactly. That's the point I've been making. The more the glaciers melt, the more the sea level rises and as a result, the more likely coastal cities will be history.

[fastfilm]

It's hotter in L.A. than it used to be, there are climate cycles to be measured, and urbanization is more responsible for our local warming. Gee, I thought I had to back everything up on this forum so I did!