History Channel Amelia Earhart program debunks Marshall Islands sea level rise claim

Don’t know whether History Channel’s Amelia Earhart hypothesis is correct, but it certainly shows that changes in sea-level at the Marshall Islands are not due to CO2 emissions.

According to last night’s History Channel program, Earhart’s plane crash landed at the Northern shore of Mili Island. The Japanese then hauled the plane down the then shoreline (i.e., between the blue lines) to a waiting barge. Today the area between the blues lines is obviously jungle. But in 1937, it was shoreline. Mili has clearly grown (not shrunk, as per global warming sea-level rise hysteria) since 1937.

12 thoughts on “History Channel Amelia Earhart program debunks Marshall Islands sea level rise claim”

  1. Leftoids ignore history, ignore archeology and geology, but love models.
    “One cannot and must not try to erase the past merely because it does not fit the present.” Golda Meir

  2. Of general interest: More from World Surf League about Amelia Earhart. Hard man, Martin Daly is an adventurer, surf explorer, diver, marine salvager, oil & gas boat contractor, whose exploits and his boats Indies Trader (I, II …) around SE Asia are well known in the surf community. Great guy, if he likes you (ha ha). People say he discovered the Mentawai Island surf spots, but that honor should go to Danny Madre, my old mate, who told Martin about them.
    http://www.worldsurfleague.com/posts/260548/surf-explorer-martin-daly-may-have-made-his-greatest-discovery-yet

  3. I belive man made sea level rise is real, but had the same question when i saw the show. About 10 min of web surfing turned up a possibility. Its coral atoll. This wiki states that the Coral grows on these atols to maintain height above sea level.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoll

  4. Considering how much the producers of that program screwed up on every thing else I would not take what they said as fact for anything.

    The shoreline loss in Pacific atolls is more likely due to subsidence and coral loss than some large change in global ocean level. Since some atolls are only a few feet above sea level regardless this would be a problem for island residents.

    Climate change is the normal state for dynamic earth, what that long-term change is I believe is still not shown by the data regardless of attempts to claim it is all anthropogenic or King Canute like moves to affect it.

  5. I noticed the same thing about Iwo Jima. My dad fought there in WWII. In my youth I saw many maps and pics of the island as it was in 1945, so I was very familiar with its look. A couple of days ago I went on Google Earth to look at the island again, and it’s bigger. No question that the island has grown a bit.
    Interesting.

  6. Please don’t rattle the “believers” with observable facts. Their “climate change” is not a theory it is a theology.
    These people need a “higher calling” to dedicate themselves to. That way it males them superior to us, the hoyfilloy. They don’t actually have to do anything. They need only to pontificate, and remind us of our unscholarly ignorance.

  7. I remember watching one originally made in the 70s which was looking at some markings on a rock in Scandanavia. they had something to do with the original sea level and it distinctly said there was no evidence at all that sea level had risen in the 20th century so the rock itself must have moved.

    wouldnt get that today. every other doc i have seen since says sea levels have risen. so they must have been wrong back then.

Comments are closed.