No, not Atlantis, which has contributed so much to world fantasy literature.
There is, in fact, a sort of lost continent, Zealandia. From Tia Ghose at LiveScience:
The lost continent, which is mostly submerged, with all of New Zealand and a few islands peeking out from the water, is about half the size of Australia. By drilling deep into its crust or upper layer, the new scientific expedition could provide clues about how the diving of one of Earth’s plates beneath another, a process called subduction, fueled the growth of a volcano chain and this lost continent in the Pacific Ocean 50 million years ago. The new expedition could also reveal how that Earth-altering event changed ocean currents and the climate. More.
Research is under way to learn more about continental plates and subduction.
See also: The antikythera mechanism and the design inference. Lots of things we didn’t think possible are actually true but we often don’t get the right ones.
This ain’t “Zealandia”. It’s Mu, and we’ve know about Mu for more than 100 years.
So when some loudmouth starts preaching to you about Sea Level Rise, ask them if they’ve heard of this.
Andrew
Could you elaborate on how subduction is integrated into our understanding of sea level rise? I don’t know anything about geology, but my guess would be that subduction is such a slow process that its effect on sea level only becomes significant over relatively long time scales.
https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/07/cascadia-subduction-zone-a-key-factor-for-pacific-nw-sea-level-rise/
Andrew
Hm. I would think this information would cause even more alarm among the global warming alarmists.
DaveS,
Global Warming Alarmists don’t recognize any information that doesn’t cause More Alarm. That’s what makes them Alarmists.
Andrew
asauber,
Then does this information make you less concerned about the prospect of sea level rise? My reading is that it says that for those on the Northwest coast of the US, sea level rise will be somewhat mitigated until a large earthquake hits, at which point the (local) sea level could immediately rise by about 1 meter.
daveS,
Please point out to me (quote) the specific sentence (or sentences) in your information I’m supposed to be concerned about.
Andrew
asauber,
I’m just focusing on the link you provided here, i.e., your information.
I don’t think it on its own should make anyone much more or less concerned about sea level rise. Those who live near the NW coast of the US are fairly well informed about the problems that will occur when a large earthquake hits. Even in the absence of sea level rise, those problems could be significant.
Does this information make you any less concerned about sea level rise?
No. I can’t be any less concerned than not concerned at all.
Andrew
On side note, daveS, you seems oddly concerned about my concerns regarding sea level concerns, which is concerning. 😉
Andrew
asauber,
Mainly I’m interested in whether a neutral observer should find this subduction/earthquake information to be a cause for more or less concern about sea level rise. I interpreted your comment #2 to indicate that indeed, a neutral observer should find sea level rise to be less concerning in light of the article (assuming they initially had some concern).
A neutral observer wouldn’t find sea level concerning to begin with.
If an observer entered into this discussion pre-concerned about sea level, he or she wouldn’t be neutral.
Andrew
Ok, let’s drop the “neutral” part. Let’s say we consider a person who is concerned about the welfare of other humans, and who is just learning about suggestions made by some that sea level is rising due to global warming.
Should the information you linked to make this person any less concerned that sea level rise will endanger the welfare of humans in the coming decades or centuries?
I would suggest that this person would need to take a scientific approach to the elements of the subject being discussed, so they are able to think scientifically about what is being presented.
I’ve found the best place to start is to obtain scientific definitions for terms being used. In this case, Global Warming and Sea Level Rise need scientific definitions. Can you provide those, daveS?
Andrew
I asked a yes/no question, which you have not answered. If you do answer it with a yes or no, then I will consider responding to your post.
Since your question presupposes a concern about sea level rise, I consider it poorly posed and unhelpful, and therefore a yes/no answer would be as scientifically meaningless as the question.
Andrew