Re: [asa] Re: Confirmation bias among GW dissenters, but ...

From: William Hamilton <>
Date: Tue Apr 28 2009 - 11:22:10 EDT

It's not an argument I'm making. I'm only summarizing what Glenn
Morton has told me. And yes, I agree that a 2 meter increase in sea
level would wipe out a lot of places. And I wouldn't want to live in
Phoenix now.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:55 AM, John Burgeson (ASA member)
<> wrote:
> Thanks, Fred, for a good reply.
> Bill wrote: "Geologists (some of them anyway)  are not as likely to support AGW,
> because there have been times in the past where CO2 concentration as
> much higher than it is today."
> That does not seem to be a credible argument, Bill. Yes, CO2 has been
> greater. And at the time the temperature was 6 degrees or so higher
> and the seas were 6 to 7 feet higher too, since the pole ice had
> melted.
> The climate scientists at RealClimate do not appear to deny this.
> Rather, when the subject comes up (there is a plethora of dialog on
> other aspects), it is either assumed or expressly pointed out that a
> sea rise of that magnitude would pretty much wipe out Galveston,
> Sacramento, the Netherlands, Bangledesh, much of Indionesia, the ports
> of New York, the Gpresent Gulf coast, etc. etc. Estimates of death and
> destruction vary depending on how fast this takes place. Estimates of
> refugees likewise (if people survive, they will migrate inland).
> Temperature is the other issue. Will you want to live in Phoenix? Will
> you be ABLE to live in Phoenix?
> Burgy

William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
Member American Scientific Affiliation
Austin, TX
248 821 8156
To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 28 11:22:31 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 28 2009 - 11:22:31 EDT