Former NYT climate author Revkin gets Pwned by fake photo from another climate alarmist

From the “confirmation bias breeds delicious irony” department comes this hilarious moment when one climate alarmist gets pwned by the fake predictions of another.

Back in 2012, Andrew Freedman was working for “climate Central” and published a ridiculous story about sea level rise and New York LaGuardia airport.

I pointed out immediately how ridiculous and wrong his story was…

Quite possibly the dumbest example of ‘Tabloid Climatology’ ever from Climate Central’s Andrew Freedman

Freedman was trying to show that LaGuardia was susceptible to sea-level rise, and beclowned himself in the process with the faked-up photos depicting what it looked like. I commented then:

This is a ‘jumped the shark’ moment for Climate Central. Read the whole story here: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/coastal-us-airports-face-increasing-threat-from-sea-level-rise-16126

Gosh, I never knew that sea level rise was so abrupt that it would catch those speedy airliners off guard so fast they couldn’t move out of the way. The climate change onset was so fast…that maybe future archaeologists will find fossilized passengers with half chewed peanuts still in their mouths.

The problem with Freedman’s article depicting 5 and 10 foot sea level rise is that LaGuardia is 21 feet above mean sea level:

KLGA_MSL

Source: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KLGA

I added then: (with a slight grammar/spell correction added today)

So one wonders if there will be a retraction for the statement “What La Guardia Airport could look like with 5 feet of sea level rise” and of course the photo.

…yet it remains published at Climate Central today, and traps the unwary and the confirmation biased.

Today, it came full circle, and trapped former NYT Climate and Environment editor author Andrew Revkin, when he retweeted this:

The photo, when enlarged, is this:

It wasn’t even the right city.

NYT’s former climate and environmental editor author Andrew Revkin, pwned by Climate Centrals former writer Andrew Freedman over a fake image. It doesn’t get any more hilarious than that.

ADDED about 5 mins after publication…

But Revkin at least has the good sense to own up to the mistake:

Now if only Andrew Freedman can convince Climate Central to get rid of that ridiculous article with the faked images.

UPDATE: Other news sources were taken in by the faked up image as well:

newsinflight-pwned

They write on their website:

Note: Initially Wrong Photo was posted without knowing. We got the photo from the tweet news. After sharing the news on AeroChapter we came to know that the photo is a wrong one. So we changed it on the website, but couldn’t change what posted on FB because FB has no option to change photos. Also the posting couldn’t deleted because within minutes there are hundreds of shares.

Sorry for misleading. Actually it was not our intention to mislead

0 0 votes
Article Rating
131 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 28, 2017 11:41 am

Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy! Revkin still hasn’t smartened up after being on the cutting edge of all this stuff for years.

Bryan A
Reply to  jsuther2013
August 28, 2017 1:20 pm

Interesting given that the height of the airliner in the foreground places the water depth there at 18′,… 5′ of water would barely be licking at the underbelly

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Bryan A
August 28, 2017 2:59 pm

Since there was no impact, if the doors were closed, the fuselages would float. “China Airlines 744 over shot the runway at Kai Tak and was floating in the Bay for a few days. They had to blow the tail [off] the 744.” –Tom Walker, on airliners.net forum.
The image is all too typical of Fake AGW news. Unfortunate that Revkin got misled. Maybe a little more skepticism, Andrew? 🙂

NME666
Reply to  Bryan A
August 28, 2017 8:43 pm

18 “liberal” feet is different than 18 actual feet:-)))

Reply to  NME666
August 28, 2017 9:06 pm

Do they measure feet the way they do tree rings? 🙂

MarkW
Reply to  Bryan A
August 29, 2017 6:49 am

My feet got bigger as I grew older. Maybe theirs did as well.

Reply to  Bryan A
August 30, 2017 9:11 am

The photo shown in this WUWT article is not what Climate Central said would result from 5 or 10 foot sea level rise, but 25 foot sea level rise. They have other photos showing lesser (but also incorrect) degrees of the airport being underwater for 5 and 10 foot sea level rises.

Reply to  Bryan A
August 30, 2017 9:15 am

Although LaGuardia is not as flood-prone as Climate Central makes it appear, it has parts lower than 21 feet, as evidenced by having been flooded by Sandy.

Andy pattullo
Reply to  jsuther2013
August 29, 2017 8:59 am

“Actually it wasn’t our intention to mislead”.
A great example of an statement that negates its own meaning by being stated.

Steve Case
August 28, 2017 11:46 am

I’ve been taken in by fake photos and fake news, but then I’m not a professional journalist.

Kaiser Derden
Reply to  Steve Case
August 28, 2017 7:19 pm

and by professional I assume you mean the street walking kind … inn the case of Revkin …

gnomish
Reply to  Kaiser Derden
August 29, 2017 5:20 am

this is revkin’s sense of humor:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/mar/06/climate-change-deniers-top-10
so funny. what a comedian, eh?

toorightmate
Reply to  Steve Case
August 29, 2017 5:38 am

This particular piece of fake news/photography is no different to all the other fake news/photography.
Let’s open a photo shop!!!!! Business is booming.

Barbara Skolaut
Reply to  Steve Case
August 29, 2017 9:43 am

“but then I’m not a professional journalist”
And neither, I suspect, are they.

SMC
August 28, 2017 11:48 am

Those planes should be United, not Delta. IAH is a major United hub. Of course, they have to get the correct city in the background first. 😄

Keith J
Reply to  SMC
August 28, 2017 1:37 pm

That is Houston Hobby which is south central Houston. IAH is some 35 NM north of Hobby. And about 50 ft higher in elevation.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  Keith J
August 28, 2017 2:33 pm

No, it is not Hobby airport at all.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Keith J
August 28, 2017 5:36 pm

Steve, please re-read the article and focus on the “Update.” Then you’ll understand why Hobby was referenced.

MarkW
Reply to  Keith J
August 29, 2017 6:51 am

Do they call the place where the passengers enter, the Hobby Lobby?

Ben of Houston
Reply to  Keith J
August 29, 2017 6:57 am

No, no we don’t. And it’s just the roads around Hobby that are flooded, not the fields themselves. It’s in an old part of town and the streets are fairly low.

Tom Halla
August 28, 2017 11:48 am

Not quite as silly as the National Geographic illustration of the Statue of Liberty half-submerged.

renbutler
Reply to  Tom Halla
August 29, 2017 5:46 am

For the extremists/alarmists, it’s 99% about tugging on emotions, and a tiny kernel of actual science twisted beyond recognition.

August 28, 2017 11:56 am

Why bother with an obsolete concept like ‘reality’?

Editor
Reply to  Curious George
August 29, 2017 4:38 am

C’mon, we’re in the age of ‘post-modern reality’ where everyone is privileged to have their own, personal ‘reality’.

Clyde Spencer
August 28, 2017 11:58 am

OK, La Guardia is 21′ above sea level. How high off the runway are the cabins?

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
August 28, 2017 1:06 pm

Reminds me of the answer given to a maths question that talked about the pilots of a VC10 observing the sun on the horizon, asking how high was the VC10? Answer: about 42ft to the top of the tail when standing on the tarmac.

Bryan A
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
August 28, 2017 1:22 pm

The water level depicted on the plane in the foreground is about 18′.
The underbelly is between 5 – 6′ off the ground

Latitude
August 28, 2017 12:00 pm

but but I so want to believe………

drednicolson
Reply to  Latitude
August 28, 2017 5:35 pm

clap harder

August 28, 2017 12:01 pm

Tried posting a comment earlier but hasn’t shown up. Indeed, I was taken in by confirmation bias and too-swift RT return key. I tweeted to clarify: https://twitter.com/Revkin/status/902239672772038658 And I will add this to my Medium post on communication in a fake-news world as a great fresh case study: https://medium.com/@revkin/to-see-how-information-flows-online-try-a-backtrack-journal-e5e65e56bf6c p.s. I was never a New York Times editor. I was author of Dot Earth from 2007 through 2016 and a staff reporter from 1995 through 2009.
[Cleared you comment, but sent the first to Trash since it didn’t seem like you needed both. If you want both for the record, feel free to let us know. -mod]

paul courtney
Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 12:24 pm

This appears to be Mr Revkin, posting here! again acknowledging his error, good for you. He says he was never a NYT editor, which I believe because he is acknowledging a substance error (NYT doesn’t play that way, only acknowledge meaningless errors). I hope Mr. R. will continue to read here, and maybe even begin to wonder why propaganda photos are necessary to promote CAGW if it’s “real, it’s here, blah blah blah.”

scraft1
Reply to  paul courtney
August 28, 2017 2:24 pm

I concur with your comment. I’ve followed Andy Revkin for many years, and have found him to be objective and fair-minded. And I didn’t always agree with him. His recent articles in ProPublica have been very good, IMHO.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  paul courtney
August 28, 2017 3:01 pm

Yeah, Andy is pretty good. Maybe a little too trusting?

Latitude
Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 1:26 pm

“communication in a fake-news world”…..but you really really really wanted to believe it

Peter Pearson
Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 2:11 pm

Hey, we Watts fans need to appreciate the grace and civility Mr. Revkin’s reaction to this episode. I, for one, say Thanks.

gnomish
Reply to  Peter Pearson
August 29, 2017 1:17 pm

no, hell no.
you can catch more flies with sugar than vinegar, sure- if you love you some fly infestation.
he has to fix the harm he causes, not just say ‘oopsie’.
i suppose next you’ll be advocating admiration for a water color painter that just happened to run the reich?

bernie1815
Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 2:22 pm

Mr. Revkin: Again you have shown a readiness to acknowledge errors which makes you stand out among other journalists on the climate and environment beat.

gnomish
Reply to  bernie1815
August 29, 2017 1:20 pm

nope. that is not his distinguishing characteristic.
let me refer you to mr macgregor and his goat.
he’s not ready to acknowledge anything he can’t lie about – it’s that he can’t get away with lying this time.
if the unabomber said oopsie you’d be all over him with praise, too?

kramer
Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 3:46 pm

One thing I have to saw about Revkin is, he does at times seem to point out or admit weaknesses in climate science. Gotta respect him for this. But he should be careful, if he points out too many truths, he could end up banished from “the cause” like Roger Pielke Jr.

Reply to  kramer
August 28, 2017 5:53 pm

Or James Hansen. A new kind of skeptic.

MRW
Reply to  kramer
August 29, 2017 1:41 am

Or Dr. Judith Curry.

Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 3:54 pm

Glad to see that your self-confidence as an expert on fake news is unshaken by this episode.

Reply to  anrevk
August 28, 2017 4:51 pm

Andrew,
Kudos for owning up to it. We don’t see that much these days…if ever.
I’d love it even more if you wrote an article stating that it is a FAKE photo, of LaGuardia and not Houston, and indicate the actual author of the fake image and why it’s inaccurate even as a prediction…:)

David A
Reply to  Aphan
August 29, 2017 4:34 am

Bingo!

gnomish
Reply to  Aphan
August 29, 2017 9:21 am

i’d like to win the lotto. fantasies don’t need bridles, right?

Resourceguy
August 28, 2017 12:05 pm

It looks to me like fake news with air brushes to manipulate stock prices.

August 28, 2017 12:10 pm

Not only is La Guardia 21 ft above sea level, but those planes are under 15 feet of water (that’s 36 ft for those keeping score at home). All in a day’s work for 5 ft of sea level rise.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  tim maguire
August 28, 2017 12:30 pm

But Global Warming is making yardsticks shrink. So what WAS 5 feet is now 20.

Ricdre
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
August 28, 2017 5:46 pm

The yardsticks are shrinking because the water is rising so fast; its one of the effects mentioned in Einstein’s General Relativity theory.

NW sage
Reply to  tim maguire
August 28, 2017 3:42 pm

but that 36 ft is easy to get if you just concentrate the water over a small area! 18 ft over half the area equals 36 ft! Easy arithmetic!

commieBob
August 28, 2017 12:12 pm

I suspect that it’s easier being a skeptic than an alarmist. The alarmists have to have the creativity to make things up. All the skeptics have to do is shoot down the more creative crap. It’s like the jokes write themselves.

Leo Smith
Reply to  commieBob
August 28, 2017 12:17 pm

no,all the alarmists do is look at the world through their eco telescope and simply describe what they see.

DonM
Reply to  commieBob
August 28, 2017 2:56 pm

The hard part, for a lot of them, would be to admit that they were wrong.
For that lot, it is easier to continue to make shit up, rather than have their doctor alter their prescriptions.
For the stupid or lazy members of the lot … they just use other peoples made up shit.
(No offense intended Mr. Revkin)

fizzissist
August 28, 2017 12:16 pm

I notice that someone Photoshopped out the polar bears clinging to the wings of the stranded aircraft..

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  fizzissist
August 28, 2017 3:05 pm

Good catch. If you look closely, you can still see the claw marks.

Reply to  fizzissist
August 28, 2017 4:10 pm

What about the missing penguins?

Reply to  HotScot
August 28, 2017 4:53 pm

Well, they only give you a bag of peanuts, so I’m sure the polar bears made quick work of those penguin! But with all that water, at least they got more than half a can of soda to drink!!

Pat Frank
August 28, 2017 12:16 pm

Proper last sentence, Now if only WUWT can convince Andrew Revkin to get rid of that ridiculous AGW-alarm baked on with pseudo-science.

Pat Frank
August 28, 2017 12:20 pm

anrevk, “a fake-news world
Nothing new about that, at least ever since Walter Duranty. You follow a great tradition at NYT, Andy.

gnomish
Reply to  Pat Frank
August 29, 2017 4:45 pm

yafersure.
he’s the baghdad bob of the globalists

August 28, 2017 12:22 pm

shark fins…. how cool to sit in a plane under water and see marine life..

Mike McMillan
Reply to  Scott Frasier
August 28, 2017 12:33 pm

That’s why we have passenger oxygen masks.

Leo Norekens
Reply to  Mike McMillan
August 28, 2017 2:04 pm

In the unlikely event of a 35 ft sea level rise, pull the life vest out of the pouch, put it over your head and whistle Yellow Submarine.

Ellen
August 28, 2017 12:24 pm

A sealed aircraft would float. When they sink, it’s leaks coming through the damage. If nothing else, they would not neatly maintain their positions as the water flowed in — who need the elevation data to know that?

Mike McMillan
Reply to  Ellen
August 28, 2017 12:45 pm

They aren’t sealed against higher exterior pressure. There is a negative pressure relief valve that lets higher outside pressure into the cabin, and that will let water in. The cabin pressure outflow valve, the main regulator of cabin pressure, does not close completely, so that lets in water, too.

Keith J
Reply to  Mike McMillan
August 28, 2017 1:40 pm

The seams also leak. Lose power and pressurization falls fast. Amphibs have bilge pumps for a reason.

paullinsay
Reply to  Ellen
August 28, 2017 2:14 pm

This time one certainly floated, though there may be some pontoons under the slides. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549#

rbabcock
August 28, 2017 12:29 pm

In all fairness, if you check the KLGA link it now says it is at 20.6′. /s

AZ_Scouser
Reply to  rbabcock
August 28, 2017 10:58 pm

In even more fairness it appears that the “FAA official” field elevation of 21 ft is at the high point of the airport.
Elevations of the runway ends are given on the FAA taxi diagram –
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1709/00289AD.PDF
Still fake and misleading though…:^)

Resourceguy
August 28, 2017 12:36 pm

Sharknado 5 or is it 6? It doesn’t take much to make the case for another one.

Iain Russell
August 28, 2017 12:51 pm

You’ve just gotta believe, brothers and sisters!

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Iain Russell
August 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Sure, an’ ye must haave faayth, me boy! The Pope sez so.

Hoyt Clagwell
August 28, 2017 1:19 pm

Now if only you could get all of the media to stop using pictures of water vapor coming from cooling towers to accompany their articles on the supposed threat of CO2.

Robert of Ottawa
August 28, 2017 1:40 pm

Those passengers weren’t delayed, they were drownded.

NW sage
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
August 28, 2017 3:45 pm

I hate it when I find passengers who have drowned on the jetway! Very unpleasant.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Bishkek
Reply to  NW sage
August 29, 2017 9:08 am

By the time water rises 35 feet, people will have adapted to breathing under water.
It puts a new slant on the old question, “How many gills in a noggin?”

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
August 28, 2017 4:58 pm

Hey…they said connecting flights….they didn’t say where, or in what condition, those connections would be made in. They DO provide seat/flotation devices…you were warned.
My pity goes to the luggage handlers….water logged luggage is a hellofalot harder to load than dry luggage.

August 28, 2017 2:12 pm

Lots of BS “flying” here.
“So we changed it on the website, but couldn’t change what posted on FB because FB has no option to change photos.”
This is, of course, wrong.
You can remove and replace FB pictures by editing the post.
You can also add words to an existing post.

Reply to  wallensworth
August 28, 2017 5:00 pm

And very poor grammar:
“Also the posting couldn’t deleted because within minutes there are hundreds of shares.”
Notice they also say WRONG photo instead of FAKE photo.

August 28, 2017 2:22 pm

Come on now! WUWT is better than this. LaGuardia may be 20ft above mean sea level, but what is local sea level? Or just search “Flooding at La uardia” and see that a 5ft increase from current levels would have a significant impact.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
August 28, 2017 5:12 pm

Anthony – Do you think the picture from Gloateus at 3:39pm represents a 20+ft surge? I know the Revkin picture is fake, but again, do you know the actual (relative to MSL) sea level height at LaGuardia? I’m also aware that it’s just as likely that LaGuardia will see 5ft of sea level drop before it sees 5ft of increase, but that’s not the point I’m making either.
The point is that the runways at LaGuardia are clearly not 21ft above the local sea level, and I like to think that WUWT cares about that kind of accuracy.

Greg F
Reply to  Anthony Watts
August 28, 2017 6:27 pm

Rebar,
Everything you want to know about LaGuardia Airport. (Data complements of the FAA)
http://www.airnav.com/airport/LGA
All relative to MSL
Runway 13 – 11.6 ft.
Runway 31 – 6.7 ft.
Runway 4 – 20.6 ft.
Runway 22 – 11.5 ft.

Greg F
Reply to  Anthony Watts
August 28, 2017 8:09 pm

Sea Level Rise Trends:
Battery Park – 2.84 mm/yr +/- 0.09 mm/year
Kings Point – 2.5 mm/yr +/- 0.21 mm/yr
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.shtml

Gloateus
Reply to  Rebar
August 28, 2017 3:39 pm

At present rate of sea level rise, it will take 762 years to get even five feet of flooding, let alone up to fuselages.
Previous flooding at La Guardia:
http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/260330/slide_260330_1703556_free.jpg

Reply to  Gloateus
August 28, 2017 4:14 pm

Gloateus
Serious puddle.
Gene Kelly would have had a field day with his brolly.

Bryan A
Reply to  Gloateus
August 28, 2017 4:25 pm

Looks like a fine place for the Guinea Pig swim off

Reply to  Gloateus
August 28, 2017 5:16 pm

Here’s a storm surge map to go along with the photo
http://www.weather.gov/images/okx/Sandy/Inundation_NHCreport.png
Maybe 6 ft? Does Long Island Sound normally have 15ft tides?

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Gloateus
August 28, 2017 8:45 pm

Rebar,
That was caused by local rains that temporarily ponded on the runway because the storm surge had already saturated the areas where the water would normally run off. A 5 foot rise in sea level would make local flooding like that a little more likely, but would not cause the airport to be permanently under water.

markl
August 28, 2017 2:23 pm

“…Actually it was not our intention to mislead…. ” Really? What is the intention when posting a photo shopped picture?

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  markl
August 28, 2017 3:11 pm

Artistic license?

NW sage
Reply to  markl
August 28, 2017 3:46 pm

sometimes it is called ‘editorial discretion’.

August 28, 2017 2:26 pm

“Sorry for misleading. Actually it was not our intention to mislead”
Yeah, right.

DonM
Reply to  John York
August 28, 2017 3:32 pm

“Sorry for misleading. Actually it was not our intention to mislead”.
Our primary intention was to, through the hype, make money … the “misleading thing” was an unfortunate peripheral requirement.

drednicolson
Reply to  John York
August 28, 2017 5:47 pm

Silly media, the Hilary defense only works for Hilary.

JWurts
Reply to  Caligula Jones
August 31, 2017 12:16 am

I miss Berkeley Breathed, he was the best.

Hot under the collar
August 28, 2017 2:34 pm

“We got the photo from the tweet news.” At last someone has admitted the source of ‘fake news’.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Hot under the collar
August 28, 2017 8:47 pm

Repeating crap you read on twitter is NOT journalism. It’s a damn shame that Revkin and his cohorts think it is.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Paul Penrose
August 29, 2017 7:25 am

Yes, “we got the photo from the tweet news” in an era when “senior writers” of 25 report to “senior editors” of 30…not a good mix.

Gary Pearse
August 28, 2017 2:36 pm

Plus 5 feet, SLR wouldn’t reach up that high on the airliners even if the LaG was at sealevel.

Jim O.
August 28, 2017 2:48 pm

Nice work Andrew.

Jim O.
Reply to  Jim O.
August 28, 2017 2:49 pm

Anthony

J Mac
August 28, 2017 3:06 pm

Yes – It was a photo shopped, alternate reality picture of LaGuardia, but it could have been Houston!
This isn’t ‘fake news’. It’s alternate reality news, provided once again by the AGW alarmists.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  J Mac
August 28, 2017 3:13 pm

That alternate reality must be the one where Socialism works.

J Mac
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
August 28, 2017 3:21 pm

As in an alternate reality Venezuela, perhaps….

Patrick MJD
August 28, 2017 3:08 pm

Being reported here in Aus as “connected” to climate change.

Rhoda R
Reply to  Patrick MJD
August 28, 2017 5:53 pm

Of course it is. If ever the citizens of OZ are convinced that they are the victims of a seriously bad hoax they just may rise up and lynch their political leaders and then their climate scientists.

Steve Oregon
August 28, 2017 3:16 pm

Climate Crazed Polar Bears Riding Sharks Through Flooded Streets of Houston
Details at 11.

Steve Oregon
August 28, 2017 3:17 pm

I meant Film at 11.

RS
August 28, 2017 3:21 pm

Mere ignorance and ideological blindness. Not that intent to lie we normally get.

AP
August 28, 2017 3:34 pm

The “tweet news”! That’s a new one. The tweet news is for twats.

Roger Knights
August 28, 2017 3:57 pm

I read an article saying that air traffic congestion and delays around NY City would be greatly reduced if LaGuardia were closed. It doesn’t handle that much traffic, but the aircraft circulation cone for it cramps those for JFK & Newark airports and complicates routing for controllers.
The article said that elites who frequently commute to Washington DC like it because the driving time to/from Manhattan is much less than that to the other airports. So that’s why it’s still here.
BTW, the Airbus plane that landed in the Hudson (after taking off from LaGuardia and having a bad bird strike) had a feature on the undercarriage to block the inflow of water. It sank only because a passanger opened the rear door.

Reply to  Roger Knights
August 28, 2017 4:16 pm

Roger Knights
First rule of floating.
Don’t let the water in!

James at 48
August 28, 2017 4:21 pm

It’s physically impossible for that to happen at Bush Int’l. Wrong type of terrain.

Vald
August 28, 2017 4:25 pm

And here I had the feeling Twitter was dead.

August 28, 2017 4:36 pm

Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!! *snort* bwaaaahahahaha.
I needed that today!! Thanks Anthony!

Patrick M
August 28, 2017 4:50 pm

I have my plane (a Piper Comanche 250) at Palo Alto airport (KPAO). The highest elevation of the runway is 6.8 feet MSL. The airport has been in existence since the 1930’s. We are still above sea level!

August 28, 2017 5:25 pm

Actually it was not our intention to mislead
Oh, but thanks for showing how easily you are misled.

Mary Brown
August 28, 2017 7:12 pm

Laguardia is 21 ft above sea level and those planes are sitting in about 15 feet of water.Sea level has been rising close to 6″ per century for a long time with no acceleration.
So, actual sea level will reach the level depicted in the picture in 7195 years…assuming the steady rate continues.
I suspect, however, that someone will be smart enough to move the planes by then.

Kaiser Derden
August 28, 2017 7:16 pm

I’m sorry what was his mistake ? Because when he “owned up to it” he didn’t articulate just what he did wrong. He didn’t admit to not following any procedure or process that would have revealed his mistake BEFORE publishing it … I suspect he DOESN’T have any process to ferret out fake news/photos … this is what happens when religious followers make things up on the fly … there is a reason every potato with the face of Jesus on them isn’t declared a “miracle” by the Church …
So no, he didn’t own up to anything … he got caught with his pants down around his ankles and wants to act like it could have happened to anyone … if he wants to get off with AGW porn at least he should do it in the privacy of his own home and mind …

August 28, 2017 9:03 pm

Hey Anthony-
Maybe now they’ll remove the photo???!!!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/08/28/no-the-shark-picture-isnt-real-a-running-list-of-harveys-viral-hoaxes/?utm_term=.27d707f88c66
Or…maybe not! At least it’s now shown as a “hoax “.

Jones
August 29, 2017 12:51 am

“fossilized passengers with half chewed peanuts still in their mouths.”
Not allowed surely due to peanut allergy risk?…..
Elf n safety would have a conniption fit…

Keith
August 29, 2017 1:39 am

Revkin visiting WUWT may be very good for his knowledge, and perspective. For example, Andrew, sealevel rose about 130 metres from the last glacial maximum just over 20,000 years ago, and the planet did that all on its own without any influence from CO2.comment image
The well known sealevel curve at that link shows most of that sealevel rise happened over 10 000 years. 130 m in 10 000 = 13 mm / year.
Church & White 2011 estimate global average sealevel rise from 1900 to present at 1.7 mm / year.
So, natural variability demonstrated by the planet 10 times greater than present rates of change. And of the present measured rate of change, how much can be attributed to CO2?
Where is the alarm?

Keith
August 29, 2017 1:39 am

comment image

Ed Zuiderwijk
August 29, 2017 1:50 am

Where’s the Spruce Goose when you need them?

J.H.
August 29, 2017 2:43 am

Fact check, fact check and fact check….. and before you publish…. Fact check one more time…. You would think that in this day and age of the Internet and photoshop that major media out lets and journos would be a wake up to simple jests and joke photos…. But apparently not.

August 29, 2017 8:02 am

Photo looks like the north side ramp (Cargo and Delta aircraft parking) at ATL.

Craig
August 29, 2017 8:28 am

And if you’ve ever been to Houston, you’d know that’s about a year’s supply of Delta planes for either airport…

August 29, 2017 10:19 am

If you look closely left of center, you can see a polar bear and a penguin huddled together on the tail fin.

%d bloggers like this: