Eastern U.S. Sea Levels Rising Far Faster Than Rest Of World

All those record-breaking McMansion sales in places like Martha’s Vineyard and “The Hamptons” are going to seem even more ridiculous if sea levels start drowning their land and their mortgages. From CBS News:

From Cape Hatteras, N.C., to just north of Boston, sea levels are rising much faster than they are around the globe, putting one of the world’s most costly coasts in danger of flooding, government researchers report.

U.S. Geological Survey scientists call the 600-mile swath a “hot spot” for climbing sea levels caused by global warming. Along the region, the Atlantic Ocean is rising at an annual rate three times to four times faster than the global average since 1990, according to the study published Sunday in the journal Nature Climate Change.

It’s not just a faster rate, but at a faster pace, like a car on a highway “jamming on the accelerator,” said the study’s lead author, Asbury Sallenger Jr., an oceanographer at the agency. He looked at sea levels starting in 1950, and noticed a change beginning in 1990.

Since then, sea levels have gone up globally about 2 inches. But in Norfolk, Va., where officials are scrambling to fight more frequent flooding, sea level has jumped a total of 4.8 inches, the research showed. For Philadelphia, levels went up 3.7 inches, and in New York City, it was 2.8 inches…

[continues at CBS News]


Majestic is gadfly emeritus.

Latest posts by majestic (see all)

37 Comments on "Eastern U.S. Sea Levels Rising Far Faster Than Rest Of World"

  1. lost me at: “U.S. Geological Survey scientists call the 600-mile swath a “hot spot” for climbing sea levels caused by global warming.”

    Call me crazy, but that’s a big load of BS.

    • JohnFrancisBittrich | Jun 25, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

      you’re crazy.

      • But it’s still bullshit.

        • Warrenite1000 | Jun 25, 2012 at 11:45 pm |

           What scientist is going to just make up data to fool people into thinking global warming is real when it isnt?  you, sir, are making false connections toward a prejudiced conclusion.  Wake up and smell the coffee. The globe is warming, the sea level is rising, if you don’t think so by this stage of the game you are pretty much retarded.

          • You seem to me to be one of those people who are only familiar with one half of the subject, or worse yet, claim that there is no other viable perspective at all.

            You “Anthropogenic Global Warming” Pukes are even more thin skinned than those fucking insecure religious fundamentalists and their mirror image stroke buddies the atheists.

            Are you willing to concede the point that you’re wrong if I’m able to provide proof that one scientist has faked data?

            How about one scientist having faked data specifically in climate science?

            Please, please say yes you brainless twerp.

          • Warrenite1000 | Jun 26, 2012 at 12:19 am |

            I take it that you have a grudge to bear against people who like listening to other people who make their career off of collecting empirical data.  That’s just what I take away from the name-calling.

            It would be the silliest thing for me to admit that I am “wrong” upon the back of ONE scientist’s faked data.  I have a minor in Enviro Studies.  It would take a MOUND of data to get me to change my mind, just like it took a MOUND of data for me to realize where we are.

            However, I will take into account any theory you have for why the ice caps are melting, coral colonies are dying, oceans acidifying, droughts intensifying, species changing habitat, rainfall patterns changing, sea level rising, tundra retreating, etc.  Please do tell.

          • I’m not interested in trying to change your mind on the subject of global warming.

            Not interested at all.

            However, I’m happy to treat with the things you said.

            First, you started the name calling with the use of “retarded”. I just continued in that vein.

            Second,  your question was why ANY scientist would fake data, specifically climate data. If you do have a minor in some sort of Environmental Studies (and I have no reason to believe you don’t) then you’ll surely understand that people have all sorts of motivations to falsify data. Further, you know that people are frequently caught doing so.

            Therefore, you made some sort of vague and disingenuous appeal to authority when you knew better.  Probably supposing that I didn’t know better.

            Shame on you for that.

          • Warrenite1000 | Jun 26, 2012 at 12:51 am |

            I actually would like to apologize for implying that you are retarded.  It is obviously not true, although those who engage in this line of thought are generally more mentally handicapped than those who understand the reasoning behind the theory.  I suppose a much more accurate adjective to use in the situation would be “delusional.”

            In fact you have completely evaded any call to accountability for your previous comments, which I will take as a forfeiture of veracity.  

            Since you neglect to explain how Global Warming theory is incorrect, I infer you cannot deny it, which I also infer means you renege your original comment that the data are: “bullshit.”

            Pending further comments, I declare thee vanquished.

          • Your post here is a perfect example of the high handed approach taken by so many AGW proponents.

            I never said, in relation to this article, that global warming was either true or untrue and if it is true, whether or not humans are the cause or not.

            Because I opined on Sallenger’s claim that Anthropogenic Global Warming was going to raise the sea level on certain parts of the Atlantic coast by more than 4 feet  by the year 2100(bullshit), you made a whole series of fallacious assumptions about which opinions I hold. Then you dismiss me as “vanquished” because I’m unwilling to apologize (and I mean that in the formal sense) for a position which you have attributed to me but which I don’t actually hold.

            Certainly you can see not only how I would be annoyed by your overweening arrogance but how anyone who did not already share your conclusions on this subject would be alienated by your behavior in much the same what that I’m sure you were alienated when I called you an “Anthropogenic Global Warming” Puke.

            So, refute Dr. Robert Dean’s assertion, which was related in this article. Failure to do so means that YOU renege on your assertion that Anthropogenic Global Warming is the One True Theory and that the only way to save the Earth is to wipe out half the the Human Population on the planet.

          • Warrenite1000 | Jun 26, 2012 at 3:50 pm |

            I don’t need to refute Dr Dean’s assertion.  I can use it to disagree with your original statement with which you have never broken conviction.  Contrary to the data being “bullshit,” he says the data are bulletproof, but aren’t necessarily part of a trend that will always point upwards.  Anyone can see why this statement has proponents among politicians (not a USGS expert and an ocean professor in Potsdam like Sallenger’s theory).

            You will have to excuse me for inferring that your original statement was more broad than it was intended to be, although I  further infer that you disagree with the theory as a whole from your deprecation of those who uphold it.  

            I concede that the data in this article seem kind of absurd given that water will always flow toward the lowest point.  The idea that a single body of water can have multiple elevations due to ocean currents is novel to me as well.  But the fact that these data are filling out and strengthening a pre-existing theory further shows how likely it is that the data are not indeed “bullshit.”

    • How would you know if you stopped reading?

  2. Strangethinker | Jun 25, 2012 at 10:54 am |

    Does anyone ever consider that the more “shit” we put onto or into the water the more water gets displaced, hence the rise in sea level. 

    Years and years of building aircraft carriers and submarines has to account for at least a mm of sea level rise… 

    And what if they are building underwater bases too… 

    • emperorreagan | Jun 25, 2012 at 11:28 am |

      Volume of the earth’s oceans – Approximately 1,300,000,000,000 cubic meters.

      A 100-ton freighter displaces 100 tons of water by weight (it displaces 100 tons of water no matter the density of water, so it displaces more water, by volume, in fresh water than in the ocean) – for the sake of simplicity, round it to a 100 cubic meters of displacement by volume.

      A single 100-ton freighter displaces in the neighborhood of 7 x 10^-9 % of the volume of the ocean.

      Ships are wholly irrelevant to sea level rise.

  3. learn to swim

  4. Does this have the potential to rid us of the Jersey Shore?

  5. paint texas white. Lol 

  6. Hadrian999 | Jun 25, 2012 at 1:47 pm |

    how do you have localized sea levels when it’s really all one sea? 

    • mysophobe | Jun 25, 2012 at 2:40 pm |

      From reading the article, I gather that when coastal heat expands the water faster than it can be displaced out to sea, it creates a localized rise in sea level. It can be compounded by shore-bound surface currents preventing that displacement. I was surprised to learn that, due to currents and temperature variations, the ocean has nothing close to a uniform worldwide level even if you discount the tides and the bulging at the equator.

    • Its a conspiracy! the moon(AKA the deathstar) is controlling the tides! everyone run!

      • mysophobe | Jun 26, 2012 at 3:02 pm |

        “That’s no moon…it’s a *bleep*erfucking space station!” – Sir Alec Guinness

  7. Righteousnessisme | Jun 25, 2012 at 5:29 pm |

    I’m sure it will balance out before long. Oops, looks like the rest of the world caught up with the east coast as I wrote this. 


    • How is he making billions on the air I breathe?

      • Simiantongue | Jun 26, 2012 at 12:08 pm |

         I think it’s a reference to cap and trade, it’s a little vague though.

    • Warrenite1000 | Jun 26, 2012 at 12:02 am |

      If you weren’t sure if you needed surgery and went to 200 doctors, 195 of them say “you don’t need surgery” but 5 of them say “yes you do need surgery,” would you listen to the 5 and go get surgery?

      Likewise if you asked 200 scientists “Is the globe warming?” and 195 of them said “yes it definitely is” but 5 said “no it isn’t” would you listen to 5 and go on believing everything is fine?

      At some point in the face of overwhelming evidence and consensus, you have to realistically reassess your viewpoint.  Are the 5 scientists right and “someone” is paying off the other 195?  If you seriously think that is the case, you should try psych drugs or stop visiting jackass-conspiracy websites. or both.

      • mysophobe | Jun 26, 2012 at 12:36 am |

        Shit, now you’ve done it, the dreaded argumentum ad populum. Here come the hackneyed YouTube videos again. Make sure to watch them in their entirety before commenting.

        • Warrenite1000 | Jun 26, 2012 at 12:59 am |

          if you consider professionals “populum” then I think you better look that word up.  Its an appeal to authority, i.e. if anyone knows, its them. (not conspiracy theorists, politicians, or you and I)  

          wtf youtube videos are you talking about? i would be interested to know.

          • mysophobe | Jun 26, 2012 at 1:57 am |

            At the risk of further poisoning the well and in the name of fair play I will reluctantly remain cryptic for the time being.


  9. my
    co-worker’s mother-in-law makes $84/hour on the laptop. She has been out
    of a job for 10 months but last month her pay was $20580 just working
    on the laptop for a few hours. Here’s the site to read more


  10. SChmidjohn123 | Jun 26, 2012 at 4:30 pm |

    sea rise is almost undectable in a specific location. it has to be measured on broad scale. of course the land could be sinking. both results are a result of gravity.

  11. Y’know, if the global warming scientists are ‘ making it up ‘, what a conspiracy congress is missing !  But the bottom line is: limited resources & land – uncontrolled population growth. I doubt that humanity is adding nothing to the problem, while humanity’s own problems grow (Isn’t that continent-sized & growing Great Pacific Debris Patch just a hoot ?). And we know all the answers about how the weather systems work when affected by us, don’t we ? Oh, & don’t believe those news stories about carbon emissions, urbanization in flood plains, higher temps & rain-floods. Wow, even Bush called for a halt to emissions in 2008. What did he know ? And sea levels are rising in my state Maryland at twice the global average. Who cares ? For all you twenty-somethings, its your problem now . . .

  12. Sea levels can’t rise more in one area than the other unless that part of the continent is sinking due to an abduction zone..

Comments are closed.