Tuvalu flooding FAIL – no supermoon tide of any significance

Propaganda at it’s finest:)….

“No one was swept away but sea-water flooded the compost pits in which people have been growing their root crops for centuries.”
So… if they have been growing in these flood-prone pits for centuries, where’s the problem? F’gawds sake, kiwi journos – THINK!

they don,t tell you that a lot of these islands are sinking naturally

“No one was swept away but sea-water flooded the compost pits…”
I know that in some places an incoming tide can be perilous, but that’s not the rule by any stretch. In researching it a tad, I ran across this story which is really alarming I suppose, but more in an “ashamed to be human” sort of way.
The fifth picture is amazing!
Such incompetent photoshopping.
“It’s a damn wall. Level doesn’t work that way!”
Be scared not.

@Dennis Yes, But the fact that it’s reflecting more light doesn’t have anything to do with the moon’s gravitational pull on the Earth at perigee.
Exactly, plus all the rest of what you penned. Full moon, bfd.

I have to say that since I’ve moved to the Southern Hemisphere (and I love it here) that the local media is particularly prone to Greenish Warmism. When the rest of the world has watched Carbon Trading fail miserably, the Labor Gov in Australia is just about to implement a carbon tax.
I hate to say it but I think we’re a bit behind the times down here!

Hopefully it doesn’t tip over. Do we have an army base there? :/

Talk about stuff and nonsense. All the Bay area radio and TV “news” stories said the moon would be 15% bigger and 30% brighter.
I don’t know about you, but when someone tells me that it means “than last night” or “than tomorrow night.
Even the Volvo ocean Race boats now zipping through the Bahamas on their way to Miami, got into the mega hype, saying that the moon was so bright that they didn’t need the strobe lights to illuminate the sails (so they can trim them for optimum performance). Like they didn’t notice the damn moon was just as bright the night before, and will be just as bright tonight; just not quite round.
These idiots don’t seem to know anything about orbital mechanics, and just how very slightly elliptical, the moon and earth orbits actually are.

“inversesquare says:
May 6, 2012 at 7:12 pm
Propaganda at it’s finest:)….”
Yeah. That pretty much sums it up.
The NZ Herald has lost the plot when it comes to the amount of utter drivel it passes off as Climate Change stories. You’d think the MSM would give it up re Tuvalu and sea levels rises because its NOT a major real issue only in AGW/CC Fantasyland!
Having said that. I suppose you can’t expect anything better from the NZ Herald. Since its part of the Fairfax Media which have investments in Earth Hour organisation!

George E. Smith says:
May 6, 2012 at 10:48 pm
“No way Jose, the new moon and full moon tides are the same on average. There are two tidaal bulges; one on each side of the earth, and it diesn’t matter which side the sun and moon are on, given that you have a certain sun distance and a certain moon distance for the two cases of full moon and new moon.”
Not well thought out, neither was Dennis’ comment. The Earth has a natural oceanic bulge centred on the equator, The Moon and Sun tidal bulges are superimposed on this, but at different angles to the plane of the equator. The two tidal bulges aren’t exactly symmetrical, they’re highest in the direction of the Moon & Sun, most pronounced for the much larger Moon bulge. This is because the Moon doesn’t rotate around the centre of the Earth, both rotate around their common centre of gravity, which is some distance away from Earth’s centre, and the mass of water offsets the monthly wobble the Earth experiences. When the Moon is closer, its bulge is higher, and at full Moon it’s aligned with the Sun’s tidal bulge. This is the time of spring tides, and the Moon’s perigee magnifies the effect when it coincides with a spring tide, the “Supermoon”.

I intended to add that tide predictions are based on tidal mechanics. The final outcome depends on other factors also; the biggest effect is atmospheric pressure. A 1 millibar change results in approximately 1 cm change in sea level; lower pressure, higher sea level. Wind also has an effect, so a deep depression with winds in an unfavourable direction could have resulted in a tide which exceeded the prediction by at as much as 10-20 cm, possibly even more if a strong cyclone was passing. Add in surface temperature which can expand or contract the surface layer to further complicate matters, and wipe the smug grin off some faces.

Just how many failures do we have to endure before they finally own up and tell us they were simply trying to pull the wool over our eyes? Fail, fail and fail again.

It wasn’t too long ago that Oracles who were wrong suffered severe consequences. Especially if their predictions cost the King some embarrassment or treasure. Perhaps that risk should be re-instituted.

Someone has to remove the moon alltogeteher to save us all from future peril scenarios.
It will also stop the earth from wobbling and werewolves and …
/also sarc

“Total predictive failure”.
Could be the motto of the whole eco/green/save-the-XXXes movement(s). Starting with Rachel Carson (if not Parson Malthus). Nothing but doom ‘n’ gloom forecasts, unrelentingly.
And not a SINGLE hit in their favor.
(At least by now we don’t have to wait x decades to that to become obvious. Just 2 days.)

You don’t have to travel to balmy Polynesia to find sea level alarmists. The Washington State Department of Ecology solicits from the public photographs of water levels at the highest tides to be used, they say, in preparation for the impacts of climate change:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/ipa_hightide_map.htm
The department certainly has all the data to necessary to support the analysis they think they need to do, but such an exercise is a good excuse for greenie beach excursions and it yields images useful in warmist propaganda. Doubtless, flocks of high school students herded by concerned educators descend on the beaches on the appropriate dates.

Thanks Ed Mertin,
I should part out that I didn’t make that statement about the highest tides of the year being on the darkest nights based on reading any specific blog, or paper. But simply from the personal perspective of one who lived with the tides for years in a little fishing town on the Willapa Bay in southwestern Washington.
A common local saying there is “When the tide goes out, the table’s set.” The Willapa Bay is Large, and shallow. And those who want to dig for clams, or work their Oyster beds, who don’t pay attention to the tides can run aground, and get stranded for long hours at a time. And since the weather can quickly turn choppy and dangerous while you are stuck on a sand bar out in the middle of the bay, tidal mistakes can get you killed.

“””””
me to re-examine why there are tides at all Dennis.
MostlyHarmless says:
May 7, 2012 at 12:51 am
George E. Smith says:
May 6, 2012 at 10:48 pm
“No way Jose, the new moon and full moon tides are the same on average. There are two tidaal bulges; one on each side of the earth, and it diesn’t matter which side the sun and moon are on, given that you have a certain sun distance and a certain moon distance for the two cases of full moon and new moon.”
Not well thought out, neither was Dennis’ comment. The Earth has a natural oceanic bulge centred on the equator, The Moon and Sun tidal bulges are superimposed on this, but at different angles to the plane of the equator. “””””
Actually quite thoroughly thought out; but reduced to a simple geometry problem of a symmetrical earth, to simply adress the issue of whether the side the moon is on matters. (it doesn’t) Your more elaborate real earth case seems to have forgotten that the earth is not even symmetrical in shape, so the reality is even more complicated than you suggest; not to mention that the non uniform arrangement of the land masses messes it up even more.
Reduce it to the simplest geometrical symmetry, and then explain why it matters which side the moon is on, when aligned.

I’m Irish, born in July under the moon, and DEFINITELY got swept away Saturday night. What a fun event!

“”””” Dennis Cox says:
May 7, 2012 at 1:32 pm
George E. Smith says:
“Reduce it to the simplest geometrical symmetry, and then explain why it matters which side the moon is on, when aligned.”
It matters because when the moon is at perigee and at the same time is aligned between the sun, and the Earth, the gravitational pull that creates the tides is maximized. You can get all anal about demanding a better, more scientific explanation than that if you like. It’s not clear what your definition of “well thought out” is. But when you’ve lived a fisherman’s lifestyle that’s been intimately connected with the rising and falling of the tides for a few years, (and a couple of thousand tides) the simple subjective observation that the highest tides happen on the darkest nights becomes an observation based on years of direct experience. “””””
Well Dennis, being as you are an experienced fisherman; I’m going to bow to your assertion that the gravitational pull of the moon and the sun is maximised when the sun and the moon are on the same side of the earth, and since the moon is closer to the earth than the sun is, that would put the moon between the earth and the sun, so they are both pulling on the oceans in concert.
For most locations on planet earth, that would also make it daylight rather than the darkest of nights.
So if your fishing lifestyle observations are correct, that would imply that on the darkest of nights, with the sun and the moon both being on the opposite side of the earth, then they both must be PUSHING the oceean away under your boat rather than PULLING on the ocean.
Sorry Dennis, you can’t have both the sun and the moon pulling in concert on the ocean closest to them, and have it be the darkest of nights; it has to be daylight; maybe its the brightest of days, with both the sun and the moon illuminating the earth over that maxi tide.

Mr Smith there are two high tides, and two low tides every day.

I’m sorry Mr. Smith. Unfortunately those suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect are always the last to realize it. Even when their lack of expertise is pointed out to them.
But the simple reality here is that you are in fact suffering from an overwhelming case of it. And in spite of your vast self-assumed expertise on the subject, the local village idiot in a typical fishing town or village who’s so thick headed he can’t hold a job, so the only way he can feed himself is to go down to the beach or tide flats twice a day at low tide, understands the tides better than you do.

Mr. Smith,
While the calculation of the tides may be a complex thing. The observation of them isn’t. One notable characteristic of the Dunning Kruger effect is that those suffering from it the worst are always in denial of the fact, including you. But when you’ve spent a few years actually living with the tides, and have some personal subjective observations to provide a valid foundation for your thinking, I might be willing to discuss this with you a little more.
In the mean time, if you want to fabricate a straw man argument that some places only have one tide a day based something you’ve read in a poorly written Wikipedia article, and your own assumption that the simple observation of the tides must be a complex thing, you’ll have to find someone else to pitch your argument to who’s as impressed with your self-assumed expertise on the subject as you are.
I’m not.

MostlyHarmless Said:

"highest perigee spring tides occur for a combination of perigee and NEW moon, not full moon as has just occurred."

Thank you. Please note that a new moon just happens to be one of the darkest nights of the month. So my simple subjective observation that the highest tides happen on the darkest nights isn’t such a stretch now, is it?.
My point in making that statement was simply to show that a Full  moon at perigee is in fact not a BFD at all. But since it’s just another dark night if you don’t live close to the ocean, no one who lives inland ever notices a new moon at perigee, so no media hype from the scaremongers.

“””””Dennis Cox says:
May 8, 2012 at 10:25 am
Mr. Smith,
While the calculation of the tides may be a complex thing. The observation of them isn’t. One notable characteristic of the Dunning Kruger effect is that those suffering from it the worst are always in denial of the fact, including you. But when you’ve spent a few years actually living with the tides, and have some personal subjective observations to provide a valid foundation for your thinking, I might be willing to discuss this with you a little more.
In the mean time, if you want to fabricate a straw man argument that some places only have one tide a day based something you’ve read in a poorly written Wikipedia article, and your own assumption that the simple observation of the tides must be a complex thing, you’ll have to find someone else to pitch your argument to who’s as impressed with your self-assumed expertise on the subject as you are. “””””
Well nowhere in my posts did I ever assert there is just one tide per day, in fact I plainly indicated that the norm is two. And nowhere did I fabricate any strawman argument or anything else based on any wikipedia article, whether poorly written or scholarly; nor did I claim any expertise; just ordinary 4-H Club physics.
But the fact remains, that when the sun and moon are on the same side of the earth and its ocean as the observer (of the tide), with the moon in its normal position between the earth and the sun (for that geometry), it is most certainly daylight for that observer, who is clearly on the side of the earth from which the moon and the sun, are both pulling on the ocean bulge.
It is for you to explain why an observer on the opposite nightside of the earth; from which the moon and the sun, are clearly NOT pulling, the ocean bulge, why there is any tidal bulge at all. I don’t care whether your knowledge of why, comes from fishing observations or from 4-H club science; it is well known that there is (usually) a bulge on both sides of the earth, and moreso in the colinear geometry case.
Yes I know there are places that appear to have one tide daily, and places that appear to have none; all having to do with local anomalies that are fairly well understood for most such places. It was to eliminate those clear anomalies, that I simply proposed a simpler geometrical model for discussion, as anyone can clearly show that for that situation, that the two tidal bulges are the same, since the earth radius is a negligibly small fraction of the sun earth distance and the square of the ratio is even more negligible.
I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to calculate the expected values for that ideal case and then decide whether that difference in the two tides, would be discernable on any number of years of night time fishing excursions.
Maybe your fishing experience has been in locations that DO happen to have a higher night time tide from the associated day time one. Does that exclude all those other places where the exact opposite can occur. I know some pretty serious fisherfolk, who have fished extensively for years in virtually every place on earth that has catchable fishes; and I know they have experienced every imaginable tidal configuration, one could conceive of.
No I can’t say they have more fishing experience or tidal perception than you do; and I’m perfectly happy to believe that the preponderance of YOUR personal experience has been of higher night time tides. I do most of my fishing in places where tides are quite un-noticeable.
The difference between 3,000 feet of water and 3,005 feet of water doesn’t seem to be noticeable to me when floating on it, and when the fishes are in the top 40 feet or the water; they don’t seem to notice it either.

Lessee George Smith,
You’re right it was E.M Smith who brought up the one tide a day thing not you; so wrong Smith. And I’m not clear how it got plugged into a disagreement over a simple subjective observation about Perigee tides at new moon. 
The statement that the sun and moon are on the same side of the Earth does not imply the location on Earth of that observer; only the phase of the Moon. When the Moon is on the same side of the Earth as the Sun, it is a ‘New’ Moon. And it is also the darkest night of the month.       
And in fact the original simple subjective assertion was: “The highest tides happen on the darkest nights.” It’s still my standing assertion. Everything else you’ve piled on it to refute it is pure straw man argument, muddied up with a liberal dose of Dunning Kruger enhanced miscomprehension.
You also said:

“But the fact remains, that when the sun and moon are on the same side of the earth and its ocean as the observer (of the tide), with the moon in its normal position between the earth and the sun (for that geometry), it is most certainly daylight for that observer, who is clearly on the side of the earth from which the moon and the sun, are both pulling on the ocean bulge.”

Really? Are you really that thick? The are two tidal bulges, not just one. The fundamental error in your thinking is evident in your use of the singular, ‘bulge’.  the proper word here should be ‘bulges’. Think plural. There may be locations on Earth where one or the other of them are not felt as much. But nevertheless, at any given time there always two tidal bulges in the world’s oceans on opposite sides of the Earth.  And two high tide perspectives. One on each side of the world.
Whether you like it or not, and no matter whether it makes sense to you, there is no reason whatsoever to assume that a high tide observer must be on the same side of the world as the gravitational attraction that’s causing that tidal bulge. Because even though you find it confusing, and counter intuitive, at the very same time the Sun and Moon are pulling up a tidal bulge on one side of the world, another tidal bulge is facing away from the gravitational attraction of the Sun and Moon on the opposite, nighttime side of the world. The area of low tides is between them, not opposite them. So your statement that it is“most certainly daylight for that observer” is childishly naïve, and uniformed.  It could just as easily be a nighttime tide he’s looking at. And it’s a pretty safe bet that if that observer describes that tide as being on one of the darkest nights of the year he wasn’t talking about a daytime tide.
But aside from that, why not just ad anal retentive to the Dunning Kruger thing. Because in point of fact you are way too desperate to make an anal retentive, nit picking mountain out of a mole hill.
And no, it is not for me to explain the physics of it all for you. It is also not for me to explain why the sun comes up. But it does.
Get yourself a tide chart for someplace on the coast. Compare the times, and heights of the tides to the phases of the moon from a good almanac. And also to your own assumptions and misconceptions. You never know. You might actually learn something.

“””””” Jim Masterson says:
May 9, 2012 at 12:43 pm
>>
George E. Smith says:
May 8, 2012 at 4:41 pm
I wasn’t trying to argue with you George. I think the tidal effect on both sides of an idealized body is the same–if it’s due to a single (idealized) point mass. I also think applying a little limit theory to this problem would demonstrate the mathematics (notice how fast the differences were decreasing in the two examples I presented). But as I said earlier, I don’t have the time at the moment.
Jim “””””
Jim, sorry if my short response may have suggested some criticism of you post. Quite the contrary, and I found your input very helpful. My use of the words “quickie arithmetic” carried no derogatory intent; just that it was a concise input to what the discussion was; pointing out that as Chiefio said, the diurnal tides should be different (and are) because the earth radius is not a negligible fraction of the earth moon distance, particularly in the perigee case. Also if we assume that we have perigee and also a solar or lunar eclipse at the same time (about 7 of those happen each year) then the “maxi tide conditions are even better, and also the orbital inclinations becomes moot.
In any case; accepting that the diurnal tides are different, and favor the case of the moon on the side of the observer who is observing the tide (experimental data), my issue was and is, that because the earth radius IS a negligibly small fraction of the earth sun distance, the new moon versus full moon conditions should result in essentially the same tide, but still with the diurnal tidal difference, that E.M. mentioned. But if one insists that however small the difference between the new moon tides and the full moon tides, actually is, the math should make the SME or EMS tides to be (slightly) greater than the SEM and MES tides, because of the slight remaining non linearity in the idealized geometry situation.
But your analysis shows that the if the observer is on the same side as the moon, the tide is larger than if the moon is on the opposite side from the observer, and with both sun and moon on the observer side, the observer is clearly in daylight; not the darkest of nights.
If I’m not mistaken, the recent maxi all time tide, the fuss was all about was actually a full moon situation, and NOT a new moon situation, thereby providing an existence proof that new moon tides are NOT necessarily the greatest.
So perhaps I didn’t explain it as well as I might have; but clearly, my English language and usage is not on a par with that of Dennis.
But your input is much appreciated Jim.
George

“”””” E.M.Smith says:
May 9, 2012 at 11:19 pm
@Dennis Cox:
There are 2 Mr. Smiths in this discussion, so it wasn’t particularly clear which one you were sneering at above. It looks like it was in response to my pointing out the existence of diurnal tides in some places. “””””
Well EM, your inputs are always appreciated (anyone else’s too) and you know darn well that I am never looking to round up a posse to (go after) anybody, I always trust you to present your honest views based on your experience. I just never bothered to mention that there were normally the two tidal bulges, more or less opposite each other on earth; I considered that true 8th grade science that need not be even mentioned, so neither wiki nor the other cited “treatise” need be referenced.
But as you point out; and Jim added to; one of those bulges is normally larger than the other; or vierse vicea. Thus ONLY ONE of those two daily tides could be in the maxi tide category; the other is just a wimp, and Jim’s analysis argues the larger one is the tide, being observed by the observer, with the moon over his head, and I don’t disagree with that; hey I grew up with the Pacific ocean on one side of me, and the Tasman sea on the other and less than half a mile apart (at their closest point), so I’ve also seen all kinds of tides. So if the moon up tide is a maxi candidate, and the sun enhancement is also greatest with the sun on the same side as the moon, then in my experience, that is a daytime tide; a new moon tide also, and a maxi candidate if it is also a perigee tide, and a solar eclipse tide.
I’ll leave it to others to decide whether a moon up, new moon (both on same side) maxi tide candidate, is a daytime tide or a night time tide.
As for living on a sailboat in SF Bay, I’ve only once sailed on SF bay, in a 25 footer my boss owned.
Actually for my limited sailing experience, in New Zealand, I’ve actually sailed more on America’s Cup class boats, than any other kind of sail boat, and less so in Solings; always monohull. My most recent sailing was done back in march on a Volvo Ocean racer (70+ footer); well more pedantically it was a Whitbread yacht, and no I wasn’t on it when it placed second in that forerunner of the Volvo Ocean race. I was actually out sailing it while the current flock of Volvo boats, were out doing their in-port Volvo race, the day before they all left Auckland for the Southern Ocean mayhem leg. The boats just arrived in Miami, with American Puma winning the two legs from Auckland, and Itaji, Brazil. I was actually able to get aboard the NZ team boat (Camper), while it was in Auckland, but only at dockside. It placed second last night in Miami, an hour behind Puma, skippered by crack American AC skipper Ken Read.
So I did get to experience some of the local tide conditions in Auckland in March, and in fact Camper, Team NZ used local tidal knowledge to ace everybody else out and run away with the in port Volvo race that day.
But I can’t compete with you living on a 27 footer on SF Bay EM; and I doubt that I’ve had as much fishing time as Dennis.