There is also some speculation that the ocean basins will continue to get deeper, somewhat negating the likelihood of significant sea level rise to approximate what it was during the cretaceous.
No such geological deepening will have any effect on the sea level rise from AGW. No such "negation" is possible - AGW is far too rapid.
Aha, thanks, something I did not know.
The AGW researchers have always been very familiar with that large scale history.
That is one source of their hubris and alarmism, in discovering that anthro CO2 was changing the climate rapidly and dramatically - or as dramatic as anything in the way of climate change short of a meteor strike can be.
If you look back through this forum, you will find that in addition to bollixing the spacial scales (comparing the local weather around Greenland with the global climate, as equivalent) sculptor has been confusing the temporal scales of geological epochs with the threat of AGW as a matter of routine - 300 year events, 3 thousand year events, 30k year events, 300k, 3 million, are all jumbled together and compared side by side for their outcomes in his posts. (The million year scale searise and shorelines of the Cretaceous have fuck-all to to with the hundred year scale sea rise and shoreline effects of AGW).
For a less camouflaged example: Schmelzer does this as well, a bit less decorated with claims of scientific concern or curiosity. The earth would be better off warmer (Sculptor: wouldn't it be nice ot have forests in Antarctica again?) ; Climate is always changing, this is more of the same; We adjusted before, we will again, no problem.
These guys are all drawing from the same propaganda well - a collection of think tanks, bribed University professors, media feed composers, lobbying setups, etc - an organized attempt to prevent any government response to the CO2 boost, based in the US and currently centered around the Republican Party, funded by people with very large amounts of money on the line.
The net effect, as was the obvious intention of the early fossil fuel funded websites where this schtick originated, is to 1) minimize and downplay the threat of AGW 2) slander and personally denigrate the researchers involved, labeling them "alarmists" and assigning them "hubris" and so forth 3) create a barrier between scientific research in general and public discussions or common information. This barrier is to be political, and controlled by the political representatives of that faction. (W, for example, appointed overtly political officers to mediate and control the release of information from government scientific agencies. He did not hide that - he stated in public that the information coming from government agencies should align politically with his administration's policies. That was an early example of the post-Cold War US borrowing Russian tactics it had formerly despised).
Or, consider how sculptor would answer the question posed above, if he ever bothered to engage in such matters: How should the AGW researchers announce their findings - which are all about the effects of the anthro CO2 boost - without incurring the charge of "hubris" or "alarmist"?
.
