went to the beach,but saw some on topic machines

we went to Seaside heights NJ,,And I did see something on topic a dozer used to push dunes up along the beach behind this dune was another

Good to see them old Cat's still working. The green one looks like it saw military duty at one time. Must not be very cool if you have your shorts on!

Is that down at the Island Beach State Park end? We used to go to Seaside for a few days every year but then my wife got livestock . . . .

Ah yes, your tax dollars at work. Push up those dunes until the next storm rolls around. I wonder why this is necessary, as everyone here is convinced the sea level isn't rising.

I am wondering why federal tax money is used to replenish beaches for rich folk who can afford
summer beach homes. The sand has been moving for millions of years. The beach will be there even
if the Condo is gone.

(quoted from post at 01:13:35 10/12/15) Ah yes, your tax dollars at work. Push up those dunes until the next storm rolls around. I wonder why this is necessary, as everyone here is convinced the sea level isn't rising.

Click to expand...

because of storm surges, high tides, and even just wave action on a static level will eventually erode the sand. Think!! But then you would realize the truth and not believe that global warming crap.

(quoted from post at 20:13:35 10/11/15) Ah yes, your tax dollars at work. Push up those dunes until the next storm rolls around. I wonder why this is necessary, as everyone here is convinced the sea level isn't rising.

Click to expand...

Yeah Mark, you're probably right. Sea levels are rising, and the best way to stop it is to move some sand around on a beach in NJ, that'll hold it back. The gov't is really on top of this one.

Bkpigs, google "Orrin Pilkey". He's been predicting sea level rise and beach erosion for over thirty years, and his predictions have been painfully accurate.
What Pilkey had to say about the New Jersey coast

>Yeah Mark, you're probably right. Sea levels are rising, and the best way to stop it is to move some sand around on a beach in NJ, that'll hold it back. The gov't is really on top of this one.

The "government", in this case the US Congress, is doing exactly what wealthy beachfront property owners and businessmen want it to do. Not necessarily what the federal government's own geologists, hydrologists and climatologists recommend.

makes me cringe thinking about operating any machine in salty sand.

The sea levels are not rising. It just that stupid people are building more closer to the beaches and the same storms that used to wipe out a few trees and a dock are now knocking out million dollar houses that have insurance subsidized by US taxpayers.

>The sea levels are not rising. It just that stupid people are building more closer to the beaches and the same storms that used to wipe out a few trees and a dock are now knocking out million dollar houses that have insurance subsidized by US taxpayers.

That's an interesting theory, but one which is totally unsupported by facts.

Perhaps you'd like to explain why it was necessary to move the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse. It was originally a quarter mile from the beach when constructed in 1870, but it had to be moved in 1999 so it didn't topple into the ocean.

I observed beach erosion firsthand when I lived on Topsail Island, NC in the eighties. At the time, my house was in the third row from the beach. It's now in the second row. Most of the first-row houses that were washed away were built in the sixties, with some structures dating back to the fifties. The idea that houses are being built closer to the beach than in the past is simply not true: Current setback laws require them to be further from the water than before.

Beach erosion does not mean the oceans are rising. Beach erosion has been changing coast lines since there were coast lines.

As for homes being built closer to the ocean - COMMON SENSE and financial risk used to dictate that you don't build an expensive home close to ocean that could be wiped out be a storm because no insurer would write policy to cover it. Now the government subsidizes the insurance for those homes so millionares are free to build as big and expensive as the want because the home will be covered if it gets destroyed.



Recent article in Forbes:

On the morning after Hurricane Sandy, homeowners along the Atlantic coast awoke to a new reality. Homes were flooded and much of their property ravaged. Not long after, many faced another shock ? their insurance premiums were skyrocketing. Gone were much of the subsidized insurance programs in flood-prone areas sold mostly by the federal government, through FEMA?s National Flood Insurance Program. After footing the bill for much of Sandy?s losses (and ending up with a tab of $24 billion ), Congress two years ago decided to phase out the subsidized insurance, instructing FEMA to draw new flood maps and increase premiums.


Painful, to be sure, but smart public policy. The intent was to remove the senseless prop of government incentives ? through subsidized insurance ? to build in oft-flooded and increasingly erodible coastal land. But, policy has changed, for the worse, once again. With bi-partisan support, Congress has decided to reverse itself in the face of a storm of complaints from homeowners facing much higher rates. President external_link is set to sign the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act. This will put back in many of the subsidies ? and likely set off again risky development in sensitive areas.





How did we get here? Flood insurance policies in flood-prone areas are sold mostly by the federal government. The destruction caused by recent storms, and the ensuing multi-billion dollar coverage charges paid by FEMA, underscored what was long known: flood policies were priced at bargain basement prices.

Dauphin Island off the coast of Alabama is a banner example. Home to 1300 residents, it has been rattled by nearly a dozen hurricanes since 1979. The cost of this serial reconstruction enterprise is largely paid for by the federal government (already totaling over $150 million). Is the rush to redevelop the New Jersey?s Sandy-ravages beachfronts?a sitting duck for the next big storm?a grand scale repeat the Dauphin Island fiasco?


http://www.forbes.com/sites#/sites/realspin/2014/03/25/washington-is-encouraging-the-next-hurricane-sandy-by-creating-new-subsidies-for-flood-insurance/

Over each of the past several centuries, including the last one, sea levels rose by about 7 inches (18 cm).

Accordingly, neither the overall warming trend or sea level rise began with the fossil-burning Industrial Revolution? nor have they changed in any detectable way due to human influences. And we can?t even really know that the second follows the first. Sea levels rose during the Little Ice Age from about 1400-1859 AD? a period which was considerably colder than now.

Unlike floating sea ice (the Artic) which doesn?t influence sea level when it melts, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is part of the land mass. When it melts, it adds to sea level just as melting glaciers do. The end of the last Ice Age 18,000 years ago caused the sea level to rise by a huge amount?about 400 feet. This change happened rapidly at first, caused primarily by the melting of huge ice sheets covering North America and Eurasian land masses which disappeared about 8000-5000 years ago.

The West Antarctic Ice sheet began to melt at that time also, but at a much slower rate, and that melting continues today. We might expect this melting to continue until it is gone in another 7,000 years or so? or until the next Ice Age, whichever comes first.

Well Mark, I'm stumped. If you witnessed beach erosion firsthand, then I really don't know how anyone could deny that man's powerful control over weather is making sea levels rise. I wonder why I haven't seen your observations documented? Being as compelling and irrefutable as you consider them to be, perhaps you should offer them to NASA or NOAA?
Hey, I have an idea. I like the midwest, but my wife misses living by the beach. Maybe we could speed up the process so that our drive to the water wouldn't be so far from Missouri?

Yes, beach erosion happens in the absence of a rising sea level. But it's a back-and-forth process: Beaches and dunes build up, storms wash them away, they build back up and so on. But when the sea level is rising rapidly, that equilibrium is disturbed and we get rapid beach erosion without any reversal. Now the amount of sea level rise we'll see due to global warming isn't clear, but it will be significant. Significant enough that the Navy is building taller docks and piers in preparation for the rise.

As for subsidized flood insurance encouraging coastal development, yes that's a fact. If you don't like it, tell your congressman. It's Congress that makes the rules for federal flood insurance.