Slideshow: Photos Show Global Warming Overtaking Cities

Edward Mazria wants people to know how rising sea levels -- made worse by global warming -- will affect residents along U.S. coastlines...

Mazria isn't a climatologist. He's not even a scientist. He's an architect who gave up running his company in January to devote his time to a nonprofit group he founded several years ago. Called Architecture 2030, the organization tries to bring attention to the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that the building sector contributes to global warming through inefficient electricity use, lighting, heating and cooling...

To demonstrate Mazria's point, Architecture 2030 has compiled a report that features images depicting the dramatic effects of sea level rise -- from about 3 to 16 feet -- on 21 cities around the country.

Read the entire article here.

See a selection Architecture 2030's images below.

• • • • • • • • New York All Photos from ABC News/2030, Inc./Architecture 2030' and Google

All Photos from ABC News/2030, Inc./Architecture 2030' and Google

Comments

[Doug]

Let's start over.

There is no proof that global warming is man-made.

Every planet in the solar system is experiencing the same warming trend. Read about it, it's well documented, unlike the CO2 theory which has no evidence of causation.

[TomR]

Well that's great Doug. And I suppose if all the neighbor kids were jumping off bridges, you'd do the same.

Whether or not other planets are warming doesn't negate the fact that it's a problem on OUR planet where some of us live and would like future generations to live.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html

- Tom

[Doug]

What?

The planet is warming. I'm not questioning that. The cause is the problem. There is NO evidence or proof that global warming is manmade. The fact that the entire solar system is getting warmer might be a big clue.

[itmaybetoolate]

Sept. 14, 2007

"Bush aide says warming man-made
By Roger Harrabin
Environment analyst, BBC News

The US chief scientist has told the BBC that climate change is now a fact.
Professor John Marburger, who advises President Bush, said it was more than 90% certain that greenhouse gas emissions from mankind are to blame.
The Earth may become 'unliveable' without cuts in CO2 output, he said..."

[anwaya]

As far as I am aware, the consensus that has emerged among scientists over the past 20 years is that there is a large body of proof that greenhouse gases are the proimary cause of global warming.

Where are the contrarian papers you refer to? How well are they received, and how widely are they accepted? How much authority do they have, are they peer reviewed? Or are they blogs and essays funded by oil executives?

[ihavenobias]

As I've said many times, it doesn't even MATTER if you believe in global warming caused by human activity (vs "natural" GW).

Because the treatments, even if they do NOTHING to address climate change, have two enormous benefits that are beyond debate and benefit everyone:

1)-Less pollution. Do you think CO2 is the *only* reason fossil fuels are a potential health risk? Try increased rates of asthma, bronchitis and yes, cancer. Then there's the old issue of mercury in our fish (where do you think that comes from BTW?).

3)-Less reliance on foreign oil. Sure, republicans talk tough about fighting terrorists and how democrats are weak, etc, but how do they ignore the huge issue of funding terrorism? A good chunk of the billions and billions of dollars we spend when we fill up our fuel (in)efficient cars ends up overseas, eventually in the hands of terrorist sponsors.

That reminds me, Saudia Araba, NOT Iran, is the #1 funder of the insurgency in Iraq.

We shouldn't have another ill advised war (talk about disastrous consequences), but the very least it'd be nice if they didn't pick the wrong country to attack twice in a row.

[loki]

My Uncle is one of those people who says global warming is bogus and that all these 'Do Gooders' will only screw things up. He then went on to say , you think this is bad, you should have seen it in the 30's when he was a kid. Everything was covered with soot and crime from all the coal being burnt for heat, power, trains, ect...

That is when I said," Gee Uncle Pete, who was responsible for all that soot and crime from coal being stopped back then?"

He gave me such a dirty look, I think he would have slapped me if he could have. Then he said,'some damn do gooders did" "But that was different"

Yeah right Uncs..

Im sure a lot of the environmentalists go a little over board on their predictions and demands. Just like the opposite side does. Its typical political theater. And Im sure some of the reports out there on the environmentalist side are fudged, to say the least. Just like the report Bush and the GOP use to mention everytime the subject came up. The same report that was said to have been signed by something like 800 plus scientist, many who when ask about their involvement were completely shocked that their names were on that report, said they were never even contacted about it by anyone, and denied having anything to do with it. But, like many things, we tend to ignore and over look the things that we dont want to hear.

Does it matter who or what, caused this apparent problem. What we do need to do is focus on what can be done to slow the problem, or at least maintain some sort of stability and cut our losses of life.
As usual, the people who have the most power, are driven by the ol mighty dollar. If power companies,­automotive manufactures, coal industry or whoever, feels they will lose a single nickel if they have to change or ad one single item to their product, well, I think we all know the results.

[peterg76]

The problem with global warming is that it is a catastrophic climate change that could result in the obliteration of human civilization and the extinction of the human species. Man made or not, we're all just as dead.

There are, in fact, some valid arguments that human activity is only *part* of the problem, which means not only do we have to have to reverse all the damage we've done, but we had better hurry because by itself it won't be enough.

In other words, if global warming *isn't* man-made, or at least entirely man-made, then the need to reduce green house gases and everything else is THAT MUCH MORE URGENT, to buy us time while we figure out the actual underlying problem and its solution.

Plus, other planets have warming trends, but not the *same* trend as the Earth.

[ihavenobias]

Exactly.

If cancer runs in your family (i.e. "natural" cancer) shouldn't you still *try* to reduce the "man-made" part of the risk (i.e. smoking, sun exposure, diet and exercise, etc)?

It's like an obese person, who might honestly have a hormonal/genetic issue, that says "hey, it's all my genes, out of my control. Excuse me while I sit on my ass and chow down on some pizza, ice cream and chips".

Sure, the fattie in question (note: I was overweight as a kid and in my early teen years) is correct in that the base of his problem is "natural" or inherent to his physiology, but so what?

It just means he needs to work THAT much harder to lose fat by reducing the "man-made" part of the equation (instead of reducing CO2 he reduces calorie intake, etc).

Even with that he might never end up on the cover of Men's Health, but the inability to achieve perfection is not an excuse to persist in behaviors that exacerbate an already bad situation.

[Doug]

Erasing the comments?

[anotherplayaguy]

"There is no proof that global warming is man-made."

Well, we know humans are pumping 1000s of tons of co2 into the atmosphere -- co2 that was sequestered 100s of millions of years ago (and which now is back in the atmosphere, something no cyclical theory addresses).

We know that the more co2 in the atmosphere the higher the temperature goes -- no dispute by this as the science is quite clear. Even graphical.

So if we combine those two facts, we come up with, people are putting extra co2 into the atmosphere (by burning fossil fuels) which raises the temperature.

So, from that, it might be said that there is proof that man is aiding and abetting global warming.

[TimmySlagle]

I don't get it.

According to the article: "Architecture 2030 has compiled a report that features images depicting the dramatic effects of sea level rise -- from about 3 to 16 feet -- on 21 cities around the country."

But according to the IPCC report, sea levels will rise no more than 23 inches by the year 2100.

Since there is no science backing up such a ridiculous ocean rise as even three feet, why are they showing us computer images of 16 feet?

To SCARE people.

[godlessclif]

That and the crocodile fossils they find in Hudson's bay. Most of the Carbon came out of the Atmosphere in the Cretaceous Period. Have a look at the map and see if you are under water where you are.
http://www.scotese.com/cretaceo.htm

[dictatortot]

The right understands that manmade global climate change has the potential to re-energize the Left for decades, maybe centuries, to come. That's why Rush and Sean (and that pissant Boortz) are so shrill in their ridicule of global warming science.

At the same time, let's acknowledge that Gore is dead wrong when he says the scientific debate is over--global warming is still a theory. Besides, Al "carbon credits" Gore is about as hypocritical as Rush "dirty, smelly, dope smoking hippies" Limbaugh, the deaf junkie.

As usual, the extremists on both sides are full of shit on this issue.

A simple exercise: manmade global warming can be one of four things:
1.) manmade and consequential
2.) manmade and inconsequential
3.) not manmade yet consequential
4.) not manmade and inconsequential

Regardless of which turns out to be true, it takes a total asshole to laugh it off and go on polluiting with reckless disregard for the potential of (gee, what's at stake?) entire species of life going extinct, millions of human lives being lost, and global chaos...

This one's a no brainer. Those who ignore that fact are no-hearters.

http://www.newsprism.com

[guinganbresil]

CO2 is the snail that bit the dog... It historically it follows temperature since it is in solution in the ocean (like the fizz in a warm soda), and H2O is a much stronger greenhouse gas with a much higher concentration in the atmosphere - It is literally everywhere and completely uncontrollable. Human contribution to TOTAL greenhouse gas (H2O, CO2, CH4) in the atmosphere is negligible. I am not saying that fossil fuel emissions should not be controlled - the volume and toxicity of the waste is incredible.

[BeerHolder]

It's all Al Gore's fault. He started this Global Warming shit. Al Gore drives a car. Al Gore flies a plane, Al Gore uses electricity.

Bwahahahah­ahahahahah­ahahahahah­hahahahaha­haha!

[NeuvoLiberal]

Basic reading material on anthropogenic global warming (AGW):

1. The CO2 problem in 6 easy steps, 6 August 2007, RealClimate.org, Link

2. Graphic Evidence, Open Mind blog, September 5th, 2007, Link

[NeuvoLiberal]

Links still do not to show up when embedded. Hope the site administrators can fix that problem. I will be posting tinyurls shortly.

[NeuvoLiberal]

Tiny URLs (with previews) for the links above:
1. http://preview.tinyurl.com/34pj5e
2. http://preview.tinyurl.com/35ffqu