We continue to find laughable errors in the state-by-state climate impact report released yesterday. Today we have this claim in the White House climate impact report for Georgia about coastline for the State of Georgia being threatened by sea level rise: (h/t Ryan Maue)
For comparison, California has 840 miles of coastline.
Map from NOAA US Tides and Currents website
According to the U.S. International Borders: Brief Facts”, by the Congressional Research Service, Table 3 lists the value for Georgia:
It took me about 20 seconds to locate this data. Georgia has 100 miles of coastline, not 707.
If you use the NOAA method, where they measure the outline of every estuary, inlet, peninsula, etc that touches water, we get a value for Georgia of 2344 miles:
Source: http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/mystate/ga.html
No matter which method you use, you can’t get 707 miles.
Add this to the list of laughable data claims already discovered, such as the claim that the president’s home state of Hawaii has 31 counties (it actually has 5), it seems to me that that the White House doesn’t know how to do basic research using a search engine.
Besides, Savannah, GA seems to not have disappeared in the face of its measured sea level rise:
Source: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8670870
Surely it must be embarrassing for the White House that a “flat earther” blogger like me has to point these factual errors out to them.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is a very very big story
Rudd is expected to dump the carbon tax
Has someone told that ejit president of yours yet? LOL
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/06/28/01/58/rudd-expected-to-dump-carbon-tax
Re previous its big because if he promises to he couldl probably win the next election (he is much more liked than Abbot) due to the simple fact that he abolishes the carbon tax
Of all the administrations I’ve observed in my 60+ years, this the most fact free one.
(and for NSA – Wounds my heart with a monotonous languor.)
How about the simple explanation? The 707 was an accident, due to writing that up while figuring which jet to charter for the next week-long “team building exercise” in Vegas. (And aren’t you glad they’re cutting back the expenses. Wow, that Sequester is really starting to hurt.)
“Hard to get accurate measures when you wrap that flat earth map around a globe.”
[Phil Jourdan 10:38 AM 6/27/13]
Well put.
So what fractal surface area of the earth is used in the climate models to calculate Boltzman radiation out?
Found a paper referencing 707 miles of Georgia that cited usgs as the source. The USGS link drops it as an excel file(broken up into small parts and I’m not adding that up but it looks about right) and an interactive flash map(working on an ipad, no dice)of about 22k-mile total US coastline. Used google to do it. Someone feel like checking the flash map or the data? Just google “Georgia coastline” “707 miles” and follow citation #14 from the map. EZPZ. But hey you guys knew that right? Because you figured out how to use google, yes?
REPLY: and it only took you how many hours of search (cuz your’re a troll on a mission)? When you are looking for the data, you don’t Google for specific numbers, you do it for the length of coastline. Strawman fail on your part.
For example: Go tell Wikipedia they are wrong on both counts – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_coastline
-Anthony
The typo of 85 tons of carbon per year from all of the power plants and industrial facilities is much more significant than the coastline number, particularly since you can legitimately find ways of measuring the fractal coastline to get the stated number. OTOH, missing a whole bunch of zeroes on emissions deserves an update to the headpost.
(and for NSA – Wounds my heart with a monotonous languor.)
[EW3 12:43 6/27/13 — WOW, even the name-time-date is a poem!]
D-Day IS coming, you Enviro-na-ah-tz-ees!
(I’m assuming you were referring to (not sure if French is correct, pardon): “Les sanglots longs des violons de l’automne. Blessent mon coeur d’une langueur monotone.”)
48 hours. You have now less than 48 hours until your latest verbal salvo is defeated, buried in a barrage of FACTS. Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaa!
Nice one, Allan (sp?). And, thanks (again), for your service (NOT in WWII — I mistakenly assumed that last time we “spoke”) protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States of America.
It seems that they are applying maximum of Mark Twain: “Get the facts first. You can distort them later”… just in reverse. 😛
…but if they’ve been assuming 707 miles of coastine, and the sea level rise is 2 metres in the next 35 years, squashing all that rise on to Georgia’s actual coastline will mean at least 14 metres of sea level rise.
I love the assumed non-sequiturs and false logic that runs rampant through this ‘report’.
CO2 == pollution & pollution causes Asthma > CO2 ( climate change ) is responsible for ALL cases of Asthma.
“How about the simple explanation?” [K.D. at 12:43] LOL, no doubt.
Perhaps, though, this is the simplest (when it comes to explaining anything “scientifically” – Dope in below video):
“… above my pay grade… “
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=%22above+my+pay+grade%22+Obama&view=detail&mid=518959B3119511012494518959B3119511012494&first=0&FORM=NVPFVR
They aren’t worried about facts. Neither is their intended audience. After all, 97% of the scientists agree and the debate is over because we don’t have no time for stinking skeptics. How would the White House know? I’m sure a very few of them took any science after the 8th grade and none of them took geography after about the 7th grade.
Bob Rogers says, “Just look at a detailed map. California has mostly straight coastline […]”
Yes and no. What about the San Francisco Bay? I’ve lived there. One wonders how an exact measurement of the salt flats and man-made extensions there might might be made, and how the necessary assumptions might affect the coastline metric in other ways if applied all along the coastline.
My main point was that what is good for Georgia is good for California. That is, if one assumes that the claim that the Georgia coastline is 707 miles long is not simply the result of sloppy copyediting, then at least two conclusions can be inferred: 1) the California Coastline is not 840 miles long and 2) that this idiosyncratic method for coastline measurement did not originate with the authors of the President’s climate “plan.”
I, for one, would like to know where the authors of the climate “plan” got that number. As I said before, I suspect that it was not a typo but rather just the result of a passage being lifted carelessly from an activist group’s pamphlet.
Ryan,
The link to the paper you mention is here:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fsmartech.gatech.edu%2Fjspui%2Fbitstream%2F1853%2F42897%2F1%2Frestrepo_ana_c_201112_mast.pdf&ei=TaHMUcPCNJHS9ASOxYD4Ag&usg=AFQjCNEuG5HlNrbGZoGbUxN64hQMFKNbug&sig2=qYuX-SjE5qW_Jz_LhAF70w&bvm=bv.48572450,d.eWU
I expect there is a way to get a normal link out of that but I’m not figuring it out at the moment. Anyway, here is the link in citation [14]:
http://stateofthecoast.noaa.gov/vulnerability/welcome.html
It /does/ say that Georgia has 707 miles of coast. There is a “download” link on the page. The file has 1266 rows and a “sum_length” column with a values ranging up to about 100. I’m guessing it’s a list of counties, but the rows don’t seem to have any ID field. The file has the following source in it:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds68/htmldocs/data.htm
That page says you can download files with ” 1:2,000,000 shoreline at 3 minute resolution ” I didn’t bother to download the files, but I believe obtaining shoreline lengths is straight forward in ARC GIS and it is likely the GA Tech student who wrote the paper you found got that part right.
Erik Jacobs says, “Yes and no. What about the San Francisco Bay?”
Go to google Earth and look at the Bay at any given “eye altitude” Compare it to Savannah at the same altitude. There is far more coast in Savannah. Most of Georgia’s coast is similar, but large portions of California are relatively straight.
I think I have these at the same scale:
https://maps.google.com/?ll=31.930603,-80.971985&spn=0.312061,0.22934&t=m&z=12
http://goo.gl/maps/UzEID
Add this to the list of laughable data claims already discovered, such as the claim that the president’s home state of
HawaiiKenya has3147 counties…There. Fixed.
Maybe they used a tree ring to determine Georgia’s coastline back when the Midwest was an inland sea?
(I’m defending them because I’m trying real hard to get my name off “The List” ever since I used the word “Constitution” in a previous comment.)
What is with these Climate Change Obama advertisement banners they are EVERYWHERE all TV stations blogs etc must cost millions whose paying for it?
Zhorgon says:
June 27, 2013 at 10:14 am
“Carbon pollution”?? He must be referring to graphite, diamonds, soot. No mention of carbon dioxide.
Sorry guys, but Zhorgon is right. You are all confused.
Nobody said anything about carbon-dioxide, it is only about graphite, diamonds and maybe soot. Even if soot is a bit less carbon then the other two.
Wondering what is the proportion between the 3 in the pollution table? And since when are diamonds causing extreme weather?
In my various discussions with warmists, they do not know how to do simple google searches. For instance, once I suggested that it appears there is a 60 year climate cycle. The warmist asked for a url. I refused and suggested they simply do a google search, as I wasn’t going to spoon feed them. I bet if they did a search, but it was probably on what “spoon feed” meant.
“it is likely the GA Tech student who wrote the paper you found got that part right.”
My thoughts exactly. It would be an enormous coincidence otherwise. The vulnerability page also lists an odd in-between length for Virginia’s coast, so I think it’s obvious hat another, more-updated coastline measurement is in play. The question is: will the post be updated to reflect this?
REPLY: Why? we aren’t the one making the error. The White house could have used either the Congressional Research Service value or the NOAA more detailed value. Pulling values out of masters thesis doesn’t cut it. If I’d posted it and claimed it was 707 miles, people would be all over me. -Anthony
This thing was obviously cut and pasted together by Gvmt Interns. It’s a joke.
DD More says:
June 27, 2013 at 11:57 am
“Just did some looking due to the Maryland post below and found this. […]”
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001801.html#ixzz2XRWdo3KN
============================================================
Nice find, DD. I liked the two measures for Georgia; 100 miles for the general coastline and 2344 for the tidal coastline. Those numbers make sense to me.