"Climate change" or was it "Global Warming"... I can't keep up anymore.
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (11)
sorted by:
To be fair, tides change every day.
Supposedly they’ve gone up by almost a quarter meter since 1898, not just 3 cm: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level
That makes no sense regarding the topic of climate change.
Just for example, and maybe my reasoning is flawed here.
Picture A was taken at different time/tide of day, than picture b.
They just happened to pick a picture b that looked similar enough to picture a and call it a day.
Be more convincing to see a comparison in time lapses or something, but I dont think people did shit like that then.
I may even partially agree with you, only in that it happens suddenly, and not gradually.
But something happens regardless.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/underwater-forest-preserved-since-ice-age-alabama-gulf-coast/
You will actually find stuff like this all over the world....
https://www.seeker.com/11000-year-old-settlement-found-under-baltic-sea-1768322265.html
:shrugs:
like ignatius who wrote atlantis points out, what if when the equator changes, and then so does the bulging of water that happens at the equator. Meaning some lands would rise above the sea, some would sink below it.
Entirely possible one of these days atlantis could rise again, assuming it hasnt been pulled into a subduction zone.
-edit-
And yes im aware that the "tide" line is supposed to be some kind of proof, but are we supposed to be able to tell inches from two different photographs taken at a 1000 yards at slightly different scales with one of them being what looks likes a fucking 512 shades of black and both of them at 320p.
I wouldnt call that definitive proof.
I am also fairly confident they have redone some things to the base as well when they renovated the statue either in the early 1900's or the late 1900's. Couldnt find proof of that though.
Sorry, that's illogical. I posted this picture to show that a higher water level would be visible, if it actually existed. Then you come with examples of landslides... I think your logic is flawed.
Any time of day doesn't compare with flooding the oceans due to climate change. No, the statue wasn't raised to match the current. I don't understand why I have to say this even...
Sorry, but nothing you say makes sense. You simply disagree with photo evidence based on strange theories, to say the least... You should learn more about the sea and the sea level to see how absurd everything you say in your comment is... Sorry, but I can't put it in a more plain manner that is not insulting to you... You are asking why a photo from the 1900s is bad quality? :D Try really hard to figure that one on your own.
Basically what u/freedomlogic is saying. If the 1898 photo were taken closer to high tide and the 2017 photo were taken closer to low tide, and given that the tides vary by over a meter in that area, the rise in sea levels would be hidden in the comparison between these two photos.
OVER A METER!!! For over 100 years... WOW. You must be as smart as freedomlogic.... (the irony)...
How many accounts does freedomlogic has anyway?