Claim: Climate Threatens the Statue of Liberty


Image from the WUWT story: National Geographic’s Junk Science: How long will it take for sea level rise to reach midway up the Statue of Liberty?

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Climate alarmists have broadened their desperate search for a way of engaging people’s attention, by compiling a list of iconic tourist attractions and national icons which they claim are “threatened” by climate change.

For example;

Statue of Liberty, U.S.A.

This statue has stood in New York Harbor welcoming millions of immigrants and tourists to America from around the world since 1876. That was when the statue, designed by sculptor Frederic Bartholdi and engineer Gustave Eiffel, was given to the U.S.A. by France in celebration of the 100th anniversary of American independence. The statue is vulnerable to sea level rise and extreme weather. It was closed for nine months following damage from Hurricane Sandy in 2011.

Dozens of iconic tourist destinations including Venice, Stonehenge and Old Town Lunenburg, N.S., are threatened by risks linked to climate change, from rising sea levels to extreme weather, says the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

Climate change-related threats to 31 World Heritage sites in 29 countries are highlighted in a new report released by UNESCO, the United Nations Environment Program and the Union of Concerned Scientists today.

Read more:

The article also claims lots of other important icons are threatened, such as Komodo National Park (Komodo Dragons), the Easter Island Statues, Stonehenge, Yellowstone – a real grab bag of high profile heritage sites.

Coral reefs, which have featured a lot in recent press, barely get a mention.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 27, 2016 1:05 am

It would get more traction if the island and water around it did not look unchanged from my visit there about 43 years ago… call me in another 50 years and we’ll see if it is starting to show… or not.

george e. smith
Reply to  E.M.Smith
May 27, 2016 7:59 am

Did they say how long for the sea level to get half way up Mt Everest ??
That’s a more familiar landmark.

Bryan A
Reply to  george e. smith
May 27, 2016 12:12 pm

That’s that Costner Flick “Waterworld”

Reply to  george e. smith
May 27, 2016 3:39 pm

I thought ‘Waterworld’ turned prodigious amounts of gold into, well, umm, water.
Not the most profitable film imaginable . . .
Auto – no expert on Hollywood
PS – given the rising plant-food in the atmosphere, improving crops, etc., may that become Hollyweed?

george e. smith
Reply to  george e. smith
May 27, 2016 8:19 pm

Well Hollyweed would be all curled up and prickly. There’s a lot of people in climate science who behave sort of prickly.

David A
Reply to  E.M.Smith
May 28, 2016 6:39 am
May 27, 2016 1:10 am

Just checked my OS map. Stonehenge is 100m above sea level.

Reply to  Jeff Cummings
May 27, 2016 3:11 am

Nah, it’s the little furry critters that will do well in a warming climate and topple Stonehenge by burrowing under it. Watership Down on steroids

Reply to  Kevin Paul Wright
May 27, 2016 2:05 pm

Neil Jordan wrote on May 27, 2016 at 11:06 am
“Not moles. It’s “the blood-lusting Mole People storming from their subterranean caverns!””
More like these? The Underminers? Where’s Mr. & Mrs. Incredible when you need them?

Reply to  Kevin Paul Wright
May 27, 2016 2:51 pm

Ooops.. Clicked on the wrong “Reply”.. Should be placed a few comments below.. You’ll figure it out..

Dave Ward
Reply to  Jeff Cummings
May 27, 2016 3:53 am

Stonehenge isn’t at risk of sea level rise – it’s something far more sinister:
“At Stonehenge, warmer winters are likely to boost populations of MOLES that could disturb archaeological deposits and destabilise stonework”

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Dave Ward
May 27, 2016 4:28 am

Those bastard moles, out to destroy mankind! 😉

David Smith
Reply to  Dave Ward
May 27, 2016 4:55 am

It’s not the moles that are the problem; its the mole hills. There are mountains of them.

Reply to  Dave Ward
May 27, 2016 5:18 am

moles… you mean nubile dancers… right?

Reply to  Dave Ward
May 27, 2016 5:29 am

I’ll take my Australian shepard to Stonehenge and she will dig all those moles out of their holes. She’s good at it.
The CAGW Alarmists are really getting desperate when they tell us we need to start worrying about moles around Stonehenge.

Reply to  Dave Ward
May 27, 2016 6:55 am

Varmint- cong

Neil Jordan
Reply to  Dave Ward
May 27, 2016 11:06 am

Not moles. It’s “the blood-lusting Mole People storming from their subterranean caverns!”

Reply to  Jeff Cummings
May 27, 2016 7:11 am

What is worse is, a mere 22,000 years ago, Lady Liberty’s island was under a MILE of ice.

Bryan A
Reply to  emsnews
May 27, 2016 12:14 pm

More Margaritas please

Reply to  emsnews
May 27, 2016 5:08 pm

“Lady Liberty’s island was under a MILE of ice.”
Just anti-Siants propaganda, pay it no heed, the High Holy Modelers have thoroughly debunked all such urban legends about unpleasant climate variations in pre-dirty energy times . . Weather perhaps, a dusting of sacred snow . . a spilled ice chest maybe . .
I short there’s simply not, a more congenial spot, for happy ever aftering than in Mann’s Climalot

Reply to  emsnews
June 1, 2016 8:47 pm

“a mere 22,000 years ago, Lady Liberty’s island was under a MILE of ice.”
I had a guy tell me that was pure BS the other day because the ocean couldn’t support a mile of ice so it must all be a righty-tighty lie. No ice ages. We don’t got no ice ages. We don’t need no stinking ice ages! thanks very much…
Maybe he thought it would sink?

Richard G
Reply to  Jeff Cummings
May 27, 2016 8:49 pm

And sea level would need to rise 100m just to get Lady Liberty’s feet wet.

Richard G
Reply to  Richard G
May 27, 2016 9:12 pm

Actually that should be almost 50m. 100m would extinguish her torch.

Reply to  Richard G
June 1, 2016 8:48 pm

I have the same problem converting feet to meters.

May 27, 2016 1:13 am

Is there anything on this world that’s not affected by climate ?

Craig W
Reply to  Robert
May 27, 2016 2:26 am

Is there anything in this world that doesn’t change?
Even global warmest have change their name a few times to accommodate blown theories..

Reply to  Craig W
May 27, 2016 5:32 am

Yes, all things change. Nothing remains the same.

Reply to  Robert
May 27, 2016 5:39 am

Shouldn’t proving climate stasis is possible be a precursor to saying climate change is dangerous? I don’t believe there is any indication of static climate ever.

Reply to  CraigAustin
May 30, 2016 9:22 am

“Shouldn’t proving climate stasis is possible be a precursor to saying climate change is dangerous?”
Yes. Wake up when the alarmists cabal announce how they intend to engineer a static climate on earth.

Reply to  Robert
May 27, 2016 6:08 am

No its all powerful , indeed it can travel through time and space too , but only of course ‘ and this is very important , the type caused by man . The type that ripped apart countries under ice , created deserts and filled oceans is a weak as a kitten in the modern era , for a reason they simply never explained .

Reply to  knr
May 27, 2016 6:32 am

ClimateChange™ Ate My Homework.

george e. smith
Reply to  Robert
May 27, 2016 8:03 am

Well every place has one. I only have to drive ten miles to get back to the local 1852 global climate.

Reply to  Robert
May 27, 2016 2:59 pm

Climate catastrophism is an effect of stupidity and cupidity, not a cause.

Reply to  Robert
May 28, 2016 11:51 am

Not that anyone has found yet, but I’m sure if they do, a quick study will be done and it will be shown that climate change really was involved.

Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 1:16 am

I seen that, there is literally no science involved.
Grauniad also ran with it and provided no link to the actual report too, sneaky devils

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 1:17 am

Called it “UN sponsored report” Cos UNESCO is obviously not a valid source of anything climate

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 1:18 am

and didn’t allow comments too
They are literally a propaganda outlet, not even trying to hide it

Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 6:20 am

Aw, c’mon. “Math is Hard.”

george e. smith
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 8:06 am

You have a choice: You want science, or you want literature ??

Reply to  george e. smith
May 28, 2016 11:52 am

Most want social media.

Mr Green Genes
May 27, 2016 1:18 am

I’m glad you mentioned Stonehenge, I’d be sad to think that we could be excluded from the apocalypse.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mr Green Genes
May 27, 2016 1:33 am

Claim, Stonehenge was straightened and set in concrete to save it from future damage

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 1:33 am

“Most of the one million visitors who visit Stonehenge on Salisbury Plain every year believe they are looking at untouched 4,000-year-old remains. But virtually every stone was re-erected, straightened or embedded in concrete between 1901 and 1964, says a British doctoral student. “

Mr Green Genes
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 2:30 am

Yes indeed, but is that concrete mole proof?

george e. smith
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 8:14 am

Unless the concrete was made using the secret Chinese Great Wall mortar (cement), Stonehenge will just fall down anyhow.
You have to mix in 3% of sticky rice into the mortar to get it to really hold the rocks together. It was one of the earliest Chinese uses of nano-technology, used to bind the mortar to the bricks.
Today my favorite fly rod manufacturer, uses nano-titanium particles to bond the carbon fibers to the resin so the fibers stay in the same place.
Science on the street !

Richard G
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 8:56 pm

I saw Chevy Chase back his auto into Stonehenge and knock it down. Now they have it back up only to have the mole people try to undermine it. Look at the bright side of life and think of all the shovel-ready jobs that can be created.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 31, 2016 7:33 pm

19th Century paintings of Stone henge by Constable and Turner:comment imagecomment image
Punch line: Most of the stones have been moved quite recently.

Reply to  Mr Green Genes
May 27, 2016 7:13 am

When Mole teams up with Ratty and Badger, English people better watch out for that trio of desperadoes.

UN Impressed
May 27, 2016 1:31 am

Stonehenge is 104m or 330feet above sea level…the water has to be another 15 feet above Liberty’s torch before it stones get wet.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  UN Impressed
May 27, 2016 1:34 am

The UN say Moles will dig out the foundations because of “global warming” 😀

Nigel S
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 2:26 am

Or something out of ‘Tremors’ once they’ve hybridized with Godzilla.

Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 6:28 am

Then when they mate with those wicked pythons in Florida the godzilla-mole-python will be unstoppable.

Bryan A
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 12:23 pm

sounds as sciencey bad as Sharknado, and PihranaConda and Sharktopus

Mr Green Genes
Reply to  UN Impressed
May 27, 2016 2:50 am

This is a comfort to me – I’m only a few miles from Stonehenge and I’m 110m above sea level. When the water is lapping around the bottom of the stones, I’ll have enough time to take to my boat.
PS When I was a lot younger, we used to hold free festivals in the fields next to the stones. In those days we could go and walk around and touch the stones whenever we wanted. The English Heritage decided that a few stoned hippies would wear them all away so they put up fences and built a visitors centre. Oh yes, and free festivals were “discouraged”, mainly by large men with batons. Hey ho.

Reply to  Mr Green Genes
May 27, 2016 7:34 am

Remember the hippie attempt at levitating Stone Henge?

Steve C
Reply to  Mr Green Genes
May 27, 2016 8:06 am

@emsnews – Yes, and not only that one. Years ago the DJ John Peel (of fond memory) got some people together to have a go at levitating St. Pancras railway station. And the bad news for the Statue of Liberty is that neither attempt, er, got off the ground.

Reply to  Mr Green Genes
May 27, 2016 9:16 pm

My goodness! Free festivals at Stonehenge! There’s a few memories of (slightly misspent) undergraduate years. Scrumpy in Amesbury and Hawkwind playing….. I recall barbed wire around the stones and a heavy police presence too……..and a few Druids inside the cordon.

Reply to  UN Impressed
May 27, 2016 6:37 am

ClimateChange™ will cause varying water levels, even locations that are relatively close together. For example, the Statue of Liberty’s torch could be submerged but New Jersey might be 97 feet below (former) Sea Level simultaneously. Yes, ClimateChange™ is just that powerful and mysterious and man-made and evil and fixable and…

Reply to  UN Impressed
May 27, 2016 11:29 am

There isn’t nearly that much water in all the glaciers in the World.

Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 1:38 am

How much Green depression are the UN creating, now that is a paper worth writing

May 27, 2016 1:41 am

“Coral reefs, which have featured a lot in recent press, barely get a mention.”
More to that than meets the eye

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  jhuddles
May 27, 2016 1:48 am

Makes me laugh, those are sps corals, they are not dead, they have expelled their algae, now the recovery as El Nino collapsed, and the regrowth will be even more dense and more diverse when it all recovers.
Plus of course, all that coral skeleton is Aragonite, basically a calcium source, which buffers acids and maintains dKH (calcium hardness)

May 27, 2016 1:46 am

They are desperate to get the populace on board. They need us all… and they are losing us at a greater rate with every day that passes. This is going to upset their plans. Quite simply, they wouldn’t try so hard to convince the masses otherwise.

Monna Manhas
May 27, 2016 1:57 am

The article comes from the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). Enough said – they are totally on board with global warming/climate change.

May 27, 2016 2:00 am

Eric Worrall,

Coral reefs, which have featured a lot in recent press, barely get a mention.

Not to be alarmist or anything, but All the Things in a single article might run to a few hundred pages of print.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  brandonrgates
May 28, 2016 6:58 am

“Not to be alarmist or anything…”
Back with yet another screen name, but starting off true to form.

Reply to  Alan Robertson
May 29, 2016 4:59 pm

You appear to be right where I left you as well.

Andrew Harding
May 27, 2016 2:03 am

The collective intelligence of the human race should never be overestimated, but to believe this you would have to be totally stupid.

May 27, 2016 2:06 am

Well, if the end of the most recent interglacial, the Eemian, or the Holsteinian (4 cycles back in the record), are anything to go by, then we have between 1 and 2 more thermal excursions to go, assuming the recent grand solar maximum is the first such. The 2nd thermal excursion at the end-Eemian netted somewhere between +6 to +52 meters above present sea level. The 3rd thermal excursion at the end-Holsteinian is reported to have reached +21.3 meters above present.
So we have a long way to go, anthropogenically, assuming we are all that crash-hot at the end extreme interglacial climate change game.

Reply to  William McClenney
May 27, 2016 11:32 am

“The 3rd thermal excursion at the end-Holsteinian is reported to have reached +21.3 meters above present”
Yes – it is reported to have reached that altitude, but there is damn-all evidence for it.

Reply to  tty
May 30, 2016 9:56 pm

The ‘money” quotes from both:
From the abstract of the first link, we have this:
“A small, protected karstic feature exposed in a limestone quarry in Bermuda preserved abundant sedimentary and biogenic materials documenting a transgressive phase, still-stand, and regressive phase of sea-level in excess of 21.3 m above present during Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 11 (400 ka) as determined by U/Th dating and amino acid racemization. Cobbles and marine sediments deposited during the
high-energy transgressive phase exhibit rim cements indicating a subsequent phreatic environment. This was succeeded stratigraphically by a still-stand deposition of fine calcareous lagoonal sediments containing bioclasts of red algae and benthic and planktonic foraminifera that was intensely burrowed by
marine invertebrates, probably upogebiid shrimp, that could not be produced under any condition other
than sustained marine submergence. Overlying this were pure carbonate beach sands of a low-energy regressive phase containing abundant remains of terrestrial and marine vertebrates and invertebrates. The considerable diversity of this fauna along with taphonomic evidence from seabird remains indicates deposition by high run-up waves over a minimum duration of months, if not years. The maximum duration as yet to be determined but probably did not exceed one or two thousand years. The most abundant snails in this fauna are two species indicative of brackish water and high-tide line showing that a Ghyben-Herzberg lens must have existed at >þ20 m. The nature of these sediments and fossil accumulation is incompatible with tsunami deposition and, given the absence of evidence for tectonic uplift of the Bermuda pedestal or platform, provide proof that sea-level during MIS 11 exceeded þ20 m, a fact that has widespread ramifications for geologists, biogeographers, and human demographics along the world’s coastlines.”
and the abstract from the second link:
“The Marine Isotope Stage 11 interglacial, centred at ~400 ka, appears to be the best candidate for understanding climatic changes in the context of low insolation forcing such as that of our present interglacial. Direct correlation between terrestrial (pollen) and marine climatic indicators and ice volume proxy from deep-sea core MD01-2447 (off northwestern Iberia) shows for the first time the phase relationship between southwestern European vegetation, sea surface temperatures in the northeastern Atlantic mid-latitudes and ice volume during MIS 11. A warmest 32,000 years-long period and three following warm/cold cycles occurred synchronously on land and ocean. The end of the warmest period sees the glacial inception which coincides with the replacement of warm deciduous forest by conifer (pine-fir) expansion in northwestern Iberia and, consequently, with the southward migration of the tree line in high latitudes in response to declining summer insolation. As weak insolation changes alone cannot account for ice growth, the associated vegetation changes must now be considered as a potential major feedback mechanism for glaciation initiation during MIS 11.”
There are many more sources if you wish.

Tim Daw
May 27, 2016 2:11 am

Stonehenge was built around 4500 years Before the Present (BP). An English Heritage report says: “Interestingly, the changes predicted for the 4000-4500BP period by the Bridge CGM are actually quite similar to the predictions of future climate change in the UK (Wilby et al 2006), which implies that we are moving back to a 4000-4500BP climate in the UK.”

Mr Green Genes
Reply to  Tim Daw
May 27, 2016 8:13 am

Tim Daw
That is an excellent paper. I live in a village on the Kennet, just east of Hungerford and I know the whole area, right to Silbury Hill (which I have climbed), well. Thank you so much.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Tim Daw
May 27, 2016 5:53 pm

Well, it was started ~4500bp, but the Stonehenge we all love is two or three thousand years younger than that. Still an awesome thing, but to say it was “built 4500bp” isn’t exactly correct.

Patrick MJD
May 27, 2016 3:04 am

It’s all over the MSM here in Australia like a nasty itchy rash. And people are angry that the Australian Govn’t asked the UN to excluded any mention of Australia. Hilarious!

James of the West
May 27, 2016 3:21 am

If a reasonable size space object 250m across or bigger impacted Antarctica in the right spot ….. Sea level might reach the Nat geo mark in a few weeks……life is fragile when you start thinking about big impact events.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 27, 2016 3:52 am

Eric are you saying that because of CAGW a meteorite is going to hit Antartica ? Oh my god it’s worse than we thought much worse .

Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 27, 2016 6:23 am

“Their” issue is one of control. Like the health freaks who need to believe we control our date of death via kale and treadmills, the alarmists HAVE to believe the human race holds the thermostat for climate. The idea that we’re all at the mercy of nature and always have been and will be just fries their egotistic minds.

May 27, 2016 3:51 am

The only thing threatening to the Statue of Liberty bye this AGW rubbish is it’s lose of meaning ie as a symbol of liberty, freedom and progress. How dare they.

May 27, 2016 3:55 am

Wasn’t Canal St. In NYC supposed to be under 20 ft. of water by 2010? Maybe it’s under 10 ft. of water. What? No! Then surely 5 ft.? Not even 1 ft. ? It’s high and dry? How can that be? The models are right and the observations are wrong. We just can’t see it. Any day now the ice sheets of Antarctica will slide off into the ocean. It could happen. More likely Yellowstone blowing up or a large asteroid hitting the earth. Or worse a large asteroid hitting Antarctica. Or Yellowstone and a large asteroid at the same time. Will the disasters never end?

Reply to  rishrac
May 27, 2016 7:17 am

Another Ice Age which is due sooner rather than later, is the real scary creature in the closet of science.

Reply to  emsnews
May 27, 2016 12:51 pm

In every single case there was a run-up in temperature before an ice age began. Then the bottom dropped out. Propaganda serves many purposes. Selling ice cream when it’s 50 F and telling people how warm they are. They don’t have any plans for global cooling. I’ve often thought that the hype from global warming is a smoke screen and an effort to kill off, by accident of course, ( we didn’t anticipate this level of cold) as many people as possible before the cold sets in. Al Gore bought a house he knew would be under 4 ft. of water by now according to CAGW. He bought it for an entirely different reason, it’s warm there.

May 27, 2016 4:10 am

Donald Trump says wind power is ‘killing all the eagles’

Reply to  Russell
May 27, 2016 4:18 am

Obama gave wind turbines immunity from prosecution for killing endangered species and protected birds, in violation of international treaty and law.

Reply to  papiertigre
May 27, 2016 5:47 am

Obama doesn’t care about the law.

May 27, 2016 4:14 am

My favorite unesco world heritage site: the Itsukushima Shrine is a gate built over a bay, designed to present the illusion that it floats above the water during high tide.
Originally constructed in the 6th century.
My favorite because how did Japanese carpenters know so well what the sea level would be today back during the dark ages (between the 5th and 15th century)?

Reply to  papiertigre
May 27, 2016 4:29 am

Thank you.

Reply to  papiertigre
May 27, 2016 9:55 am

According to your link, the current gate was built in 1875 … Still, your point is well-taken.

May 27, 2016 4:38 am

Classic PR hit-piece designed to grab headlines but has zero substance. Yet more outright lies from alarmists.

Reply to  CheshireRed
May 27, 2016 6:26 am

Yeah, but you’d be surprised at the numbers of otherwise-intelligent people who believe it. Got in a debate about it the other night and got stared at like I had three heads. Wouldn’t you think folks would be HAPPY to learn there’s no impending apocalypse?

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Goldrider
May 27, 2016 5:58 pm

Otherwise intelligent people believe in a lot of loony stuff, they have since humans existed. Nothing changes.

May 27, 2016 4:48 am

The UNESCO report doesn’t claim that the Statue of Liberty will be inundated. (I’m having trouble highlighting text in the pdf so I can’t quote small sections of text.)
What they say is that the 0.5 meter increase in sea level since 1850 greatly increased the damage (from superstorm Sandy) to the facilities near the base of the statue (not to the statue itself). They say this will get worse as the sea level continues to rise.
They also say that the warming Atlantic water will increase the frequency and severity of hurricanes.
As is usual, when you drill down into their claims, what you find is not nearly as alarming as what the media puts out. As well, the claims are somewhat dubious.
1 – Sea level will continue to increase even without AGW.
2 – Warmer ocean waters probably won’t increase the frequency and severity of hurricanes.

Reply to  commieBob
May 27, 2016 9:57 am

“the 0.5 meter increase in sea level since 1850 greatly increased the damage (from superstorm Sandy) to the facilities near the base of the statue”
Well, for one thing, the sea level rise from 1850 is meaningless, since the Statue wasn’t even built until 1885, with construction of the foundation in 1883. The island previously had an Army base on it constructed around 1807, so they would have had a pretty good idea of the sea level rise of the previous 76 years, and what to expect for the future.
NOAA’s tide gauge at the NY Battery shows a Mean Sea Level Trend of 2.84 +/- 0.9 mm/yr., going back to around 1860 and no acceleration since mankind has been blamed.
The damage from Sandy wasn’t to the Statue, but to the docks used by the ferries, i.e., the “facilities near the base of the statue”. Those docks have been rebuilt and upgraded many times. The thought that even relatively modern docks might be damaged by storm surge and high tides should not surprise anyone.

Paul Courtney
Reply to  BobM
May 27, 2016 3:20 pm

BobM: And just up the coast, construction in Boston Harbor area uncovers a shipwreck from 1800’s, in area under hi tide water before it was filled in long ago before the AGW sea level rise somehow failed to wash over the filled area. Would love to see AGW science explain how man-caused sea level rise avoids NY and Boston, but…turns out, no science allowed.

Leon Brozyna
May 27, 2016 5:13 am

And still they leave out the most horrific danger .. the sky .. the sky, it’s falling !!

Tom Halla
May 27, 2016 5:14 am

Great illustration on the Statue of Liberty.

May 27, 2016 5:28 am

Movieplot terror …
Today’s release of Rise of the Planet of the Apes brings remembrance of the 1968 original and its . . . well, monumental ending. Here’s a look at several films in which the Statue of Liberty is destroyed, damaged, or otherwise dirtied.
Including this Apes icon …

Reply to  rovingbroker
May 27, 2016 5:48 am

That was always a fun image for me. Just imagine, that assemblage of dissimilar metals survived long enough in a saltwater environment for the land to literally rise around it. Those French engineers were good!

Reply to  rovingbroker
May 29, 2016 3:19 pm

You maniacs! You blew it up!!

May 27, 2016 5:37 am

I’m very worried about Mt Everest…

Dave O.
Reply to  jones
May 27, 2016 5:43 am

The last refuge.

Reply to  Dave O.
May 27, 2016 8:43 am

I’m selling sites on Mt Everest. It’s first come first serve.
Get there before the water does.

Reply to  jones
May 27, 2016 8:45 am

I thought that Mount Everest was rising about 10 mm per year due to tectonics so with luck it’ll keep ahead of the lapping waves.
Sir Edmund Hillary had it so easy when he went up.
Although that earthquake in Napal apparently moved it sideways.
We need to get funding for some stout rope and figure out how to tie it down.

May 27, 2016 5:53 am

“This statue has stood in New York Harbor welcoming millions of immigrants and tourists to America from around the world since 1876. That was when the statue, designed by sculptor Frederic Bartholdi and engineer Gustave Eiffel, was given to the U.S.A. by France in celebration of the 100th anniversary of American independence.”
In 1877 Bartholdi was still working on the statue’s head in France. The whole statue arrived in New York in 1885. The pedestal was completed in 1886. UNESCO, the United Nations Environment Program and the Union of Concerned Scientists can’t even get history right. Much less predicting future catastrophes.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Dr. Strangelove
May 28, 2016 7:05 am
Raymond Swenson
Reply to  Dr. Strangelove
May 29, 2016 10:06 am

Same thing I was going to point out. Those of us who were arund for the 1986 centennial celebration know this, but apparently nobody in UNESCO is old enpugh to have a personal memory of this basic fact. Nor are they old enough to remember that the last hurricane to devastate the Gulf Coast of Mississippi was Hurricane Camille in 1969, deep in the middle of the cooling dip in global temps that ran from 1935 to 1975.

May 27, 2016 6:06 am

if you run the calculations, sea level will only rise by 74cm… centimeters

Reply to  prjindigo
May 27, 2016 9:10 am

Apparently Americans are not the only ones who have trouble with the metric system. 🙂

Reply to  prjindigo
May 27, 2016 4:30 pm

It’s much worse than that! sarc

May 27, 2016 6:25 am

If only we could re-film…”Those damn apes killed us with global warming!”

May 27, 2016 6:30 am

It’s true. I saw it in that documentary “The Day After Tomorrow”.

May 27, 2016 6:52 am

Last time I looked, Yellowstone was geothermally heated, and it’s lowest point (near Gardiner, MT) is about 1 mile above current MSL. Certainly they aren’t trying to imply that climate change will trigger a caldera eruption, as has been happening about every 600,000 years for a few million years.

May 27, 2016 6:56 am

Venice? VENICE? They’re seriously blaming VENICE on climate change? The subsidence of Venice has been well understood for a long time and climate change has nothing to do with it. Considering what the Venetians did to Byzantium, I won’t be entirely sorry if the buildings slip under the waves.

May 27, 2016 6:58 am

I thought sea level rise was going to destroy my home, I went down to my mud room and there was water every where. Then I realized it was just my washer had over flowed the slop sink again. Darn I was hoping for a government bailout.

Reply to  Bob Boder
May 27, 2016 7:22 am

Next, Bob, you de-ice your freezer and it flows all over the floor. Double the money!

john harmsworth
Reply to  Bob Boder
May 27, 2016 11:15 am

That’s what’s so insidious about global warming! It knows to go after appliances!

Bob Martin
May 27, 2016 8:23 am

Long time reader, this is my first post to WUWT.
They had a cover picture for an issue a few years ago, with the water that high on the statue.
That was the last straw for me. Cancelled my subscription after more than 25 years. NatGeo is shameful in the way push junk science.

May 27, 2016 8:26 am

CBC is a disgrace. They spew biased agitprop day in- day out.

john harmsworth
Reply to  TomRude
May 27, 2016 11:16 am

+1000! Harper should have chopped it up when he had the chance!

May 27, 2016 8:47 am

Parasitic journalism and politics grows on top of wealth creation centers like algae. It blooms out into the surrounding countryside from time to time, usually with disdain by the locals.

Isha Abbit
May 27, 2016 10:27 am

Erh… before all that ice is melt this statue of liberty will be already gone, forgotten, and fossilized..

May 27, 2016 10:50 am

In case anybody is interested, the UNESCO report can be found here.
It is 108 page PDF (8.6 MB) of global warming doom and gloom models.
World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Cam_S
May 27, 2016 10:57 am

“This publication was made possible with financial support of the Ministry for Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy, France”

Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 11:05 am

Did they include Ministry of Truth in there?

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 12:15 pm

Might as well have, you with the awesome name.

Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 12:29 pm

I can’t take credit for the name.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Cam_S
May 27, 2016 11:04 am

From the “report”comment image

john harmsworth
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 11:20 am

AUUGH! Real information! Take it away! It burns! It burns! Oh! It’s not so bad!

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 12:16 pm

Accurate information is caustic to alarmism you are right there

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 12:19 pm

When I post things like this on the Grauniad comments, the mods delete them. One of the mods is the main protagonist in the comments and he deletes all your replies that debunk his nonsense, called Rockyrex or something.

David Chappell
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 27, 2016 12:45 pm

The percentage splits in that colour coding are strange; they vary from 4% at the bottom end to 24% at the red end and unevenly spread in between. Well designed to make it look more alarming

Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 28, 2016 12:56 am

Interesting chart, particularly if you are interested in specific threats to these sites. However, I think there are a few problems:
a) Israel does not exist, unless it has become part of the “Arab World” (pandering to the Palestinians now in the UN?), Europe, or Africa. Also, what happened to non-Pacific Asia? Australia?
b) The claim that illegal activities is/has affected only 22% of sites in the Arab World: even if it is only counting through 2013 (a lot of Daesh looting has occurred since), I have a hard time believing that looting has not been a bigger problem. I cannot wait to see the deliberate destruction and illegal activities numbers for 2014-2016. I am sure it will be way more than 20% of sites.
c) Identity, etc only has a negative effect on 2% of European and North American sites? With the demographic changes over the last few decades, I doubt this is true. If anything, historic preservation in the US is becoming more difficult as money is spread more thinly and sites connected with “dead white men” are vilified.
d) Are they seriously trying to claim that 0% of sites in the Caribbean/Latin America and Asia-Pacific were affected by war between 1979 and 2013? Even if there were no “official” wars (doubt it), there have been plenty of conflicts.
UNESCO needs to get themselves together. Even their non-climate related numbers appear fuzzy. I suppose we should be grateful that “Table 1” is not just a box containing the words “Climate Change is destroying 100% of sites”. Notice that the highest percentage of sites negatively affected by a cause that could (sort of) be considered AGW related is only 16%. Of all the actual threats, why are they (and the media) focusing on something that is so minor? Imagine how many sites could actually be better preserved and protected if UNESCO and the like worked on the big problems. More casualties of the AGW movement, though if you hate humanity, losing cultural sites is something to celebrate.

Reply to  Cam_S
May 27, 2016 1:27 pm

The report erroneously mentions Hurricane Sandy striking New York and causing damage. Sandy was not a Hurricane when it made landfall in NJ, it was downgrades to a Tropical storm. Why would anyone trust a document with such inaccuracies and gross errors errors.

D.J. Hawkins
Reply to  Catcracking
May 27, 2016 1:57 pm

It was, if fact, a tropical storm when it first made landfall in the US, somewhere around the Carolinas.

May 27, 2016 10:58 am

She’s standing up on that perch for a reason. She knew what was coming.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Dobes
May 27, 2016 11:05 am

Yup, the French sent it knowing it would be a tide gauge in 2100.

May 27, 2016 11:08 am

We should be looking down on the high rises in Miami by now.
“For FIFTY YEARS scientists have known about global warming. This exerpt is from the well known educational documentary “Unchained Goddess” produced by Frank Capra for Bell Labs for their television program “The Bell Telephone Hour.” It was so well made, that it went on to live a continued life in middle school science classrooms across the nation for decades.”

May 27, 2016 12:21 pm

From the looks of that sea-wall and the high water mark, there’s about 5 feet to spare.
At 12 inches of sea-level rise per 100 years, we’ve got about 500 years to do something.
What, me worry?

May 27, 2016 12:32 pm

“This statue has stood in New York Harbor… since 1876.”
1886 (not 1876)…

May 27, 2016 12:34 pm

For any Americans that are unsure of Stonehenge’s location – which the authors of the report must be assuming is most – it’s 30 miles from the coast and over 300 feet above sea level.
Need one say more ?

Billy Liar
Reply to  richardbriscoe
May 27, 2016 2:48 pm

How does the distance from the sea affect the moles, rabbits and badgers than the UN thinks will cause its demise?

Johann Wundersamer
May 27, 2016 12:50 pm

Venice, Italy
Venice is a city known for its beautiful Byzantine, gothic, renaissance and baroque buildings built amid a network of canals and 338 bridges. It’s one of the world’s most popular tourist destinations, with 10 million overnight visits in 2013 and at least twice as many day visitors, the report says. However, it’s one of the World Heritage sites most at threat from sea-level rise.
What’s endangering Venice :

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
May 28, 2016 6:06 am

heck of a lot of displacement to add to the fact it is sinking

May 27, 2016 1:01 pm

I once calculated w current sea level rise rate, it would take 90,000 years to cover the statue and 75,000 years to get up to her neck, aka, National Geographic pic level. I got scared, very scared. Ok, not really. My reaction was really disappointment I won’t live 75,000 years to see this.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Donald Kasper
May 28, 2016 6:07 am

More than likely humanity will be either a remnant of today numbers wise or totally extinct by 75000 years so no worries 😀

M E Emberson
May 27, 2016 1:58 pm

They will move the Statue of Liberty when the sea rises! It’s only a Statue not a geological feature.

Reply to  M E Emberson
May 27, 2016 2:41 pm

They completely tore it down in order to clean it about 30 years ago. It can be done again if need be.

Reply to  M E Emberson
May 28, 2016 12:58 am

If the Park Service can move lighthouses, they can move or raise the Statue. I have faith in our engineers, less in sea level rising enough to be a problem while the Statue exists.

May 27, 2016 2:38 pm

For detailed understanding of actual Sea Level Rise in NY Harbor, see my earlier piece on Hurricane Sandy at @ .

May 27, 2016 6:30 pm

Liberty is in danger, but not from rising sea levels.

May 27, 2016 6:43 pm

While it’s not terribly scientific, and there are many confounding factors, my minimal survey of modern and 1930s low-tide photos of Liberty Island indicate *remarkably* little change, I almost wonder if something about the bay or the island itself have mitigated normal sea level rise.
It really looks like there’s been zero. Again, unscientific, tides vary, etc.

Ed Zuiderwijk
May 28, 2016 4:04 am

Shouldn’t that be: “Climate pseudoscience threatens liberty”?

Mark - Helsinki
May 28, 2016 6:11 am

I’ve read from alarmist blog that the fact greenland was green was a Viking lie to get people to move there.
The bloke to owns this blog is a resident Grauniad mod who is also the main “debunker” in Grauniad comments. He deletes your replies so it looks like he wins

Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
May 29, 2016 8:26 am

I remember being told in grade school, late 50s early 60s, that Iceland and Greenland were misnamed by confused Vikings who thought Iceland was Greenland and vice versa.
[Rather, blame Viking real estate agents who wanted to sell land in Greenland, to clients who would not be able to get back to Iceland and Norway and complain once they had landed in Greenland …. .mod]

May 30, 2016 6:03 am

Surely the tilt of the tower of Pisa is correlated to NASA’s preferred Neo-Obamian dataset? Why wasn’t it included?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights