From the “more proof Walmart is evil” department, comes this bit of serendipity. While looking for a marine deep cycle battery to serve as storage for a solar powered remote weather station and webcam I’m designing, this turned up in the Walmart product search:
Intrigued by the photo, since I had never seen it before, and because it showed a clear view of the sea at Battery Park from the early years of aviation, I set about trying to find the source of it. Usually, photos that are for sale tend to be well protected so that hi-res versions don’t make it onto the net. To my complete surprise, not only did I find the source, but also a high-res version. To my even bigger surprise, it turned out to be in NOAA’s public domain photo collection.
The source:
A flying boat cruising by Battery Park at the south end of Manhattan Island. In: “Flug Und Wolken”, Manfred Curry, Verlag F. Bruckmann, Munchen, 1932.
Image ID: line0987, NOAA’s America’s Coastlines Collection
Location: New York City
Photo Date: 1930 Circa
Credit: Fairchild Aerial Surveys Inc.
Category: Coastline/Mid-Atlantic New York/Historical/
And here is the hi-res version:
Click to enlarge (BTW, since this is public domain, save and print it yourself if you like it. COSTCO offers print services, as Dr. Mike Mann found out) – Anthony_
Available at: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/line0987.htm
(Update: Michael Ozanne writes in comments:
That’s the Dornier Do-X , the biggest plane in the world of its day and one of the worst aeronautical engineering exploits in history. Famous for its mishap ridden marketing flight from Friedrichshafen to New York which ended up taking 9 months. Longer than it would probably take to swim it….. more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_X )
Note in the background, you can see what looks to be the Empire State Building (or possibly the Chrysler building) nearing completion. Empire state officially opened on May 1st, 1931. The Chrysler building May 20, 1930. That puts the photo above around 1930 to early 1931. (any readers that can help identify for sure, leave a comment please).
Now compare that photo to this one taken 80 years later in 2010 from Wikipedia with a nearly identical vantage point:
While there have been a lot of changes, most notably the mature trees now in Battery Park, one thing is clear – the city has not been inundated by sea level rise even though the NOAA Battery Park tide gauge indicates a rise of about 0.22 meter ( 8 3/4 inches):
Granted, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference in sea level from 1930 to 2010 just by looking at the two photos, but that’s the point, especially when we see idiotic stories like this one in National Geographic:
Or this one of La Guardia airport by Climate Central’s Andrew Freedman, which is the all-time dumbest in my opinion, since I’m pretty sure sea level rise can’t catch airplanes:
What La Guardia Airport could look like with 5 feet of sea level rise, an amount that could occur by 2100, according to some estimates. Click on the image to enlarge. Credit: Nickolay Lamm/StorageFront , for Climate Central, using Climate Central data.
As always, I remind our readers:
Freaking out about NYC sea level rise is easy to do when you don’t pay attention to history
Related articles
- From the Scientific Urban Legend Department: ‘AGW Sea Level Rise Made Sandy More Destructive’ (wattsupwiththat.com)





nutso fasst says: September 21, 2013 at 6:55 pm
… The island has become top-heavy and is in danger of capsizing if the wind is strong enough.
That was a different island, not Manhattan. This guy shoulda’ been VP.
The bedrock under Manhattan is indeed what is subsiding in the glacial rebound. The building height on the island parallels the depth of the bedrock, tall buildings in lower Manhattan and near Central Park, where the bedrock is near the surface, and shorter buildings in between, where the bedrock layer is farther down.
http://www.awe-communications.com/Databases/images/manhattan.jpg
Old photos:
1932
http://www.reminisce.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/LadyLiberty.jpg
1931
http://www.nycvintageimages.com/content/blimps-over-lower-manhattan-1931
http://www.flickr.com/photos/39232845@N07/3617298702/lightbox/
1930’s
http://www.justhelicopters.com/HELIARTICLES/tabid/433/ID/4394/Rotorcraft-Pioneers–The-Autogiro.aspx
1920’s
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ckDGhj7WTW4/T-rNPiDN8yI/AAAAAAAAD9s/S3GR89dZMcA/s1600/New_1_DSCF0063.JPG
1922
http://www.vintag.es/2013/05/then-vs-now-1920s-new-york-city.html
1921
http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/492/lowermanhattan19221ca.png
1851
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/image-services/jp2.py?data=/home/www/data/gmd/gmd380/g3804/g3804n/pm005943.jp2&res=2
Forgive me if this has been posted before.
The image also comes from this site:
http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=12383
Where there are 3 images of the area
1913 – http://www.cyburbia.org/gallery/data/6529/0261.jpg
1928 – http://www.cyburbia.org/gallery/data/6529/0331.jpg
1931 – http://www.cyburbia.org/gallery/data/6529/0401.jpg
Worried about LaGuardia flooding? Here’s a reminder:
i.e. The “natural” state of the land is swamp. Well, it was about 100 years ago.
More photos of NYC that I found along the way.
John Spencer says:
September 21, 2013 at 7:44 pm
1851 – http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/image-services/jp2.py?data=/home/www/data/gmd/gmd380/g3804/g3804n/pm005943.jp2&res=2
janama says:
September 21, 2013 at 7:52 pm
1931 – http://www.cyburbia.org/gallery/data/6529/0401.jpg
SEE! From 1851 to 1921 – a short span of only 70 years! – the entire land area around the Fort Clinton was newly exposed to dry land and planted with trees and sidewalks because of receding sea level in the Atlantic Ocean caused by the shortening of the Mississippi River that Mark Twain will notice only 32 years later.
According to [www.badische-zeitung.de/freizeittipps/bewegte-zeiten-am-bodensee–47216005.html] the picture source is “EADS/ Dornier GmbH” and is related with its arrival on 27 August 1931.
(Translation): “… the giant turned its first lap around the Statue of Liberty and splashed down in the Hudson River in New York City, in front of the Manhattan skyline.”
from: http://www.lhup.edu/~DSimanek/twain.htm
Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi 173-6 (1883)
Bart says: “The buildings rest on the bedrock, and that doesn’t subside.”
Are you certain? Do some research on subsidence involving bedrock, and mining or oil/gas extraction, or good old mother nature.
But back to Tidal gauge, it has been reported it sits on fill dirt and is not anchored to bedrock.
AGW in a nutshell:
“One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”
Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi 173-6 (1883)
(quoted at 8:31PM by R. A. Cook, P. Engineer (is the P for “Precious” or “Physical” or “Phenomenal”???)
Nice quote, R. A. — thank you for sharing for the wonderful humor in the entire quote above.
***********************************************************************
And thank you,
John Spencer — your post is a treasure trove.
Janama — intriguing images.
Herr Felsche — GREAT before-after collection.
and
Fernando (the one in Brazil) — beautiful image quality.
Wow! This thread is richly embellished by all that great photography.
And those rotten Envirostalinists want us to go back to the days when tired, old, horses wearily pulled all our goods to market. They really love animals, don’t they? Such kind, caring, people — NOT. (“Build more windmills” — what’s a few dead golden eagles… .)
**********************************************
And, hey, Fernando, we are so glad you are here — clear from Brazil! #(:))
In our little way, all of us promoting truth on WUWT are fighting for liberty, so, even though this little song sung by two Swedish women in 1976 was JUST FOR FUN (to welcome you to WUWT),
I think, on another level, it fits.
Fernando
Keep up the fight for truth!
(however….unlike the guys in that song) —
–Truth will WIN.
YOU GO, WUWT people!
Oh, and Mike McMillan (at 7:30PM) LAUGH – OUT – LOUD.
“Yes, boys and girls, those buildings you see for the next 10 blocks were all 200 stories higher just ten years ago.”
wobble says:
September 21, 2013 at 1:16 pm
No need for an alternative means of dating the photo.
The Do X means the date has to be 1931-32.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_X
Look at the shadows on the buildings, the West sides are in shadow so it is before noon to 1-ish. The buildings seen to the left of the wings have shadows that are closer to noon shadows than 8:00am. What was the tide at at 11:00 am?
I realize this isn’t the main topic here, but its nice to see photos from the golden age of flight. The DO-x wasn’t perfect but it still brings back memories as a kid when I tried to scrounge the school library for information about it (no internet back then). There was just something about it that caught my imagination.
Great detective work, Jeff!
(sorry, not going to research what the tide was… someone will find that out, though, no doubt)
Um, claiming that the photo must have been taken between 1931 and 1932 because the photo shows a Do X flying IS an alternative means of dating the photo.
Didn’t Al Gore say he took the photo so he could post it when “he invented the Internet”?
I had to unlearn something today; or at least consider a modification of an assumption I’ve walked around with for several years.
Previous belief was Manhattan skyline, the clustering of skyscrapers in particular, was dictated by the availability of bedrock close to the surface. Personally, I had taken this ‘theory’ to an extreme in my own mind. I thought there was an absence of suitable bedrock for skyscrapers where there were no skyscrapers.
Checking for documentation of the geology of Manhattan driving the placement of skyscrapers, I discovered this interesting paper: http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/economics/dp2010_09_barr_tassier_trendafilov.pdf
the title of which is “Bedrock Depth and the Formation of the Manhattan
Skyline, 1890-1915∗.”
In this paper they neatly sum up my previous view, along with a more reasonable explanation for skyscraper placement in Manhattan, in their abstract:
So, bedrock placement did have some effect on the locations chosen for skyscrapers, but other factors played a larger role. Other factors included the price of the land, transportation hubs, economic classes of the neighborhoods, etc.
I also noticed no one suggested a huge geological modification project for Manhattan; builders simply adapted to what they had to work with.
It’s a paper at least worth looking at.
EO Peter – thanks very much for sourcing the picture. We may never know who the photographer was, but presumably it was someone employed or temporarily hired by Dorling. I suppose it was taken from another aircraft?
@ur momisugly Graeme M says:
September 21, 2013 at 3:02 pm
I recall a post here at WUWT some time ago about looking at old Admiralty maps – the Royal Navy was making accurate charts back in the 18th C. So a (relatively simple?) comparison between then and now should reveal something, I would have thought. I think the example in this blog was an island in the S Pacific, and also an old watercolour of Valetta harbour compared with a modern photo……
Janice Moore;
thank you
the battle for truth continues.
=================================
I know it has no scientific value.
Just an observation.
the tide chart,
juicy
The Battery, NY
08/27/1931
Station Date Time Pred 6
DCP#: 1
Units: Feet
Data%: MLLW GMT 100.00
Maximum: 5.31
Minimum: 0.19
============================
The Battery, NY
08/27/2013
Station Date Time Pred 6 Vrfy 6
DCP#: 1 1
Units: Feet Feet
Data%: MLLW GMT 100.00 100.00
Maximum: 4.88 4.92
Minimum: 0.77 0.75 ,
==============================
08/27/1931 > 08/27/2013
The Dornier arrived at NYC Aug 27th, 1931.
Fernando (in Brazil): 08/27/1931 > 08/27/2013
However, the low tide value is 6.96 inches higher–2mm/year. That’s about 0.75mm/yr less than NOAA’s estimate for the period.
“Due to local land subsidence, sea level rise is rising faster at The Battery than at 85% of the other GLOSS-LTT tide gauges in the world, but the rate of rise has been nearly constant for over a century…”
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.0146.pdf
Greg Goodman says (September 21, 2013 at 8:09 am): “Out of interest, are marine batteries cheaper than other commerical deep discharge? I would have though that leisure marine market was as much as rip off as camper or solar markets. …”
I can’t speak for current conditions but when I lived aboard a sail boat in the Caribbean during most of the ’90’s most boats used those 6 volt (100 or 200 amp-hour) golf cart batteries as the most reliable and least expensive batteries on a life-cycle basis.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
September 21, 2013 at 12:17 pm
I’ve replied in the open thread in order to not go too far OT: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/22/open-thread-13/#comment-1423638