Sea levels!

[bhsup]

I am going to present a few scenarios and I would like you to vote for the most accurate description for each scenario.

SCENARIO 1
For the last six months, sea levels have been rising at a rate of 4.9% every three months. Again, they are rising, they are not receding.

SCENARIO 2
For the last six months, sea levels have been rising at a rate of 0.6% every three months. In other words, they are going through a period of "growth". Again, they are rising, they are not receding.

SCENARIO 3
Sea levels have remained the same for the last six months. No rising, no receding.

SCENARIO 4
Sea levels are receding at a rate of 0.1% every three months and have been doing so for at least six months. In other words, they are not rising, they are receding.

 

[Abaddon]

Is this really about the sea?

 

[emzie]

0.6%? I SEE THROUGH YOUR CHARADE!

 

[ShannonCT]

The National Bureau of SeaLevel Research (NBSR) has redefined a sea level recession to mean a period of significant decline in the rate of sea level increase.

 

[Perfection]

Just say it goes up, goes down, or stays the same anything else is crap. No need to use dumb words like recession, growth or stagnation, those words are for economicalists and market anals.

 

[Defiant47]

Easy:

Scenario 1: Rising
Scenario 2: Rising
Scenario 3: Stagnant
Scenario 4: Receding

What's your point?

 

[RedRalph]

I've watched the sea for the last twenty minutes now and I have to report thats its going up and down very rapidly. I dont know how htis isnt apparent to the rest of ye

 

[bhsup]

What's your point?

Just wondering if the obvious answer is missed by some, that's all. For the record, you scored 100%

 

[Disenfrancised]

I am going to present a few scenarios and I would like you to vote for the most accurate description for each scenario.

SCENARIO 1
For the last six months, sea levels have been rising at a rate of 4.9% every three months. Again, they are rising, they are not receding.

The sea level has risen 380 metres??!!? My god half of Europe is under water! We're all going to be washed away!!!!

 

[bhsup]

Tibet is still fine, so don't worry about it and just answer the poll.

 

[sourboy]

At least some people understand (hydro?)-economics.

 

[Defiant47]

I'll cut to the chase:

An economic recession is a decrease of growth. Thus, a growth of 4% during a time of 5% growth normally is technically a recession.

So the questions are:

1) What is the normal economic growth for country X?
2) Is the current economic growth lower than the above?

So I'll give you 4 scenarios like you've given us. Suppose normal economic growth is 5%. Is the economy experiencing normal growth, recession, or expansion?

A) Economic growth is at 10%
B) Economic growth is at 5%
C) Economic growth is at 3%
D) Economic growth is at -13%

[/ECON102]

Just making sure that no-one thinks that an economic recession is the same thing as a sea level recession

 

[History_Buff]

In order to define a percent change, you're going to have to tell me what the sea level is right now. Sea levels are rising somewhere from 1.7-3.3 mm/year (historical approximation-satellite altimetry). But that's Mean Sea Level, which does not technically reflect the height of the oceans relative to a land surface. For that you need to also examine Sea Surface Topography, and the effects of gravity on the oceans near the coast. Not to mention the fact that over a 3 months period, there is tidal motion related to Earth motion that will not average out.

Geodesy FTW!

In summary, since you haven't specified the starting 'sea level', percent changes are undefined. 3 months is also too short a time period to look at this. So, toss up between 2 and 3. Abstained from poll.

 

[Mise]

I'd say that someone's been playing with the moon.

 

[Cannae]

The sea level has risen 380 metres??!!? My god half of Europe is under water! We're all going to be washed away!!!!

If we melt enough of the ice caps we could potentially actually do something like that.

 

[Ansar]

I believe ShannonCT hit the nail on the head.

 

[gangleri2001]

Did you say the word recession? I think that recession is like the word beetlejuice: when you say it three times, it appears JerichoHill. Let's see it:

Recession
Recession
...

(Who has the balls to say the last one?)

 

[Leonel]

If we melt enough of the ice caps we could potentially actually do something like that.

I don't know about that. Even if ALL the ice melted (which would result in a cataclysmic event), the sea level would rise around 200-250ft (65m in savage speak ). Which would be around the height of the Coit tower in San Francisco or the Tower Bridge in London. It's still pretty bad for coastal cities but it ain't going to be Waterworld.

 

[scy12]

Recession can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean for what i care. What one word means doesn't help in any conclusions. A significant decline of growth has potential negative consequences. Then you can choose whether to call it a recession of not.

In this example the decline of the rise of the sea levels might have some consequences. It would be easier to describe this scenario (not to mention it will be easier to create newspaper titles) if we agreed instead of the words "decline of the sea levels" , to use one word to describe this. For example recession. Or maybe not if that word has nothing to do with the decline of the rise of sea levels. I don't think the issue of how should something be called is any more important than what i said. Or that it is particularly interesting subject that allows to learn anything about this situation.

 

[Disenfrancised]

If we melt enough of the ice caps we could potentially actually do something like that.

Nope, there's 80 or so tops in all the ice caps put together...380 is rather out of our league .