An aerial view of the Ari Atol, Maldives. (NEWSCOM)
Faced with rising sea levels, the Maldives seek new homeland
By Eoin O'Carroll | 11.11.08
Many scientists believe that, given enough political will, humanity can still manage to avoid catastrophic climate change. But the president-elect of the Maldives isn’t taking any chances.
Mohamed Nasheed, who was sworn in Tuesday as the Maldives’ first democratically elected president, says that rising sea levels threaten to inundate the tiny Indian Ocean island nation. He has announced plans for a fund to buy land elsewhere in the region, where the country’s population, estimated to be about 386,000, could rebuild their lives.
In an interview with the Guardian, Mr. Nasheed said that he is preparing for the worst:
“We can do nothing to stop climate change on our own and so we have to buy land elsewhere. It’s an insurance policy for the worst possible outcome. . . We do not want to leave the Maldives, but we also do not want to be climate refugees living in tents for decades,” he said.
Nasheed said that he is looking at land in India and Sri Lanka, because they have climates, cultures, and cuisines similar to that of the Maldives. He is also considering Australia, which has land to spare.
To pay for it, Nasheed says his government will set up a sovereign wealth fund, with revenues coming from tourism, the country’s most lucrative industry. The Guardian notes that 467,154 people visited the country, which is famed for its placid beaches, in 2006.
According to the CIA World Factbook, some 80 percent of the 1,192 coral islets that make up the Maldives are one meter or less above sea level, making it the world’s lowest country. The UN climate panel predicts that, unless greenhouse emissions are curbed, sea levels could rise by 25 to 58 centimeters by the end of the century. More recent studies, such as this one published in the journal Science, sharply increase the projected sea level rise, to as high as two meters.
If this happens, the Maldives would be uninhabitable. But Maldivians wouldn’t be the first population displaced by global warming.
That distinction probably belongs to the half million residents of Bangladesh’s Bhola Island whose homes were swallowed in 1995 by rising sea levels. In 2005, the 1,600 residents of Papua New Guinea’s Carteret Islands began evacuation, as the advancing sea contunued to destroy gardens, sink homes, and contaminate freshwater supplies. Also that year, 100 residents of Vanuatu’s island of Tegua had to be evacuated as their homes became permanently flooded.
Other low-lying Pacific islands that could disappear in this century include those in Tuvalu, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, and Fiji.
Were these countries to be evacuated, the legal status of the global warming diaspora would be unclear. The same goes for that of a submerged country’s sovereignty. No nation in recorded history has peacefully relocated its entire population and remained intact, and, as National Geographic pointed out in 2005, environmental refugees are not recognized by international law.
<< Climate change threatening lemmings | MainComments
2. David | 11.11.08
I wonder if a better solution wouldn’t be to allocate a “budget” for each resident to relocate and let people disperse as they will. Maybe Maldivians (?) would ultimately prefer the Florida Keys to India. Use the sovereign wealth fund to subsidize free movement, rather than buying a piece of land for “New Maldivia.”
3. Alice Strayhorn | 11.11.08
Putting aside all the he said/ she said, what exactly is wrong with intentionaly becoming better stewards of our environment, including protecting wild life, preserving wetlands, converting to renewable energy, improving our health and embracing sheer beauty for the welfare of ourselves and future generations?
4. sell | 11.11.08
The people in these parts of the world can begin to help themselves by reproducing less. They are severely overpopulated and have become a burden on the rest of the world. How about a deal: 1st world country’s will pay 3rd world country’s to NOT reproduce.
5. Gerry Quinn | 11.11.08
The Science study referenced clearly does NOT “project” a sea-level rise of 2 metres. Check the abstract linked. In fact, it rules out a rise of more than 2 metres, placing this as the limit of what is physically possible based on the most extreme conditions. It offers another scenario, based on “more plausible but still accelerated conditions” in which the sea level rise is 0.8m. Nowhere does it contradict current projections, as your article implies.
6. Manny B | 11.11.08
The evacuation of Bhola Island was due in fact to heavy levels of erosion of the soil. The island was literally washed away - a fact which is readily available.
It is noteworthy that “the first democratically elected president” should make the sudden declaration that sea levels are rising when the research of Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner who has done his research in the Maldives for the last twenty years has shown that sea levels are LOWER than a century ago.
7. Nelson | 11.11.08
The Maldives have approximately (mathematicly) 200 years before their country goes under water.
The Lord may come before then. Wake-up Maldives Global warming is a MYTH!!!
8. Guy Thompto | 11.11.08
Good luck finding a new homeland. Let’s hope that this isn’t some group standing out in the rain waiting for the Mothership. Oh, and by the way, perhaps they should check out Detroit. Lots of empty land to be had for the asking.
9. sdfhsdf | 11.11.08
Israel has relocated many times. And has been conquered many times. Still standing today.
11. Brad Taylor Miller | 11.11.08
This is only the first of many displacements to come. What is needed is a world wide effort to install coastal desalination plants to produce fresh water. The fresh water needs to be transported by pipe inland to fill lakes and recharge aquifers. The benefits are obvious here. In addition, in sunny costal regions, large banks of solar cells need to be erected to power electrolysis plants to decompose sea water (H2O) into oxygen (O2) and hydrogen gas (H2) due to an electric current being passed through the water. The O2 should be allowed to be released into the atmosphere to counteract deforestation and the H2 should be captured to use in fuel cells. We need to consume the seawater at the rate it is rising!
12. PeterSD | 11.11.08
So, exactly how much has the sea risen? Odd how this article left that out. In particular, how much has it risen vis a vis a stable land mass, one that isn’t actually sinking, like Venice Italy.
13. Vidya R. | 11.11.08
The international court of law should allow these nations to sue for compensation from countries that have been generating green-house gases. And, to be fair, the time-frame considered should start from the start of the Industrial revolution.
Industrial revolution may have pioneered rapid growth and development. Nations and populations benefited from that growth. But they did not pay a penalty for the destruction of natural resources. Retrospectively applying penalty to the growth that started over 2 centuries ago will ensure that new thinking and innovation is always done responsibly and sustainably. That way we will not have a whole generation of ‘achievers’ followed by a generation of ‘left-holding-the-baby’ and then a generation of ‘problem solvers - solving problems created by earlier generations’.
If the argument is that this will curb the pace of growth and development, so be it. The aim should not be just ‘getting things done’, but ‘getting things done right’.
14. Jerome Thomas | 11.11.08
No, environmental refugees are not recognized by international law. So consider the consequences of an armed country whose borders become inundated. It is too frightening to contemplate: a doomed country, armed to the teeth, and desperate for living space for its flooded citizens. Would any nation be safe? Our choices include stopping global warming at devastating costs and beginning serious international discussions to deal with displaced populations and devastated industries - including much of our own. Given the record of international cooperation, I am not optimistic about the world’s likelihood of avoiding death, destruction and bloodbaths. One thing for certain: I am glad America will face these problems under the leadership of Barack Obama, and not John McCain and Sarah “Clothes Horse” Palin.
15. Bill Bixby | 11.11.08
What a bunch of BS. So far the sea-level hasn’t risen one Ioda. Mathematical models fail to take into account how much water will be absorbed into the air in the for of precipitation. Green houses are humid fools. Expect more rain. Invest in umbrellas.
16. Just Human | 11.11.08
The official law of the Maldives is based on Islamic law and forbids any none Muslim from being a citizen,how ironic is it that the people of the Maldives will soon have to beg non Muslims for a place to live?
17. Dave Mann | 11.11.08
What a load of rubbish.
With only a metre of height to spare, these islands are bound to be marginal. They have been this way for millennia and to hype this up into ‘catastrophic global climate change’ is ridiculous.
Good on the Maldivians for having the forethought to act before they are forced to leave. This shows more intelligence than your biased, fearmongering ‘journalism’.
18. Jim Berry | 11.11.08
Please be a little more open minded and print some science articles (there are thousands of them) that show the worries about climate change are highly exaggerated.
Also, it is time to start following the money. Who will be the winners and losers in the fighting of global warming? I’m concerned that the same government and NGO people promoting carbon caps and trade systems have investments tied or related to these programs. Especially beware of so called “blind trusts”. They are only blind to you and me. Let’s instead have transparent trusts so that we can see where these people are putting their money.
Jim Berry
19. Davey | 11.11.08
Absurd..shows that if enough people say something is true..long enough..everyone will believe it is fact! Environmental refugees! Cmon folks this is normal cyclical changes.
20. Cool it, Chicken Little | 11.11.08
Why not mention that the Bangladeshi government has said Bhola is losing land as a result of being in the Ganges River Delta, thus subject to the eroding forces of both the river and the tides? It seems misleading to blindly attribute the loss of land on an island to “rising sea levels,” when there are many other potential causes. Also, Tegua in Vanuatu has been known to be seismically subsiding for many years, while other islands in the region are rising from the sea. Surely one would not claim that the rising islands are evidence that sea levels are falling?
21. oldjnani | 11.11.08
There is not one scrap of objective evidence in this article. Just
hype. How can I possibly accept this? Is there an actual rise in sea
level? Or is the island sinking? Or is it all speculation?
Some proof, please!
22. richard aulenti | 11.11.08
The U.S. can and willbail out large corp’s with billions of dolars , why can’t we help islands that are going under because of our lack of concern about global warming. Call Obama now
23. Daniel | 11.11.08
This article’s author, Eoin O’Carroll, needs to check the facts. The study in Science did not project sea level increases of up to two meters. The study said such an increase is physically possible but is improbable. An increase of 0.8 meters is the more plausible number. Just click on the link you provided to read the journal abstract.
24. Kevin Graham | 11.11.08
Uh what? Sea levels of neighboring islands aren’t rising? Ever heard of plate tectonics?
26. David | 11.11.08
Those who refuse to acknowlege global warming, and continue to contribute to global warming by their ignoramous life style, should be shipped off to Madlives. When the sea level reaches their shack, they can climb the nearby tree. Then they can evolve back to being monkeys because the environment forces them to that nature.
28. Harlock | 11.11.08
And many people still doubt global warming. Inconceivable lack of intellectual curiosity and integrity.
29. Major Mike | 11.11.08
The journal Science study proposes a two-meter rise by 2100 only in a very unlikely worst case scenario. Several other recent studies project an increase in sea level of six inches by 2100, approximately the same as in twentieth century. The IPCC projects a rise of 4 to 21 inches. Lost in all this is the simple fact that the average rise per century for the past 100 centuries since the last Ice Age has been over two feet per century, as sea levels have risen over 400 feet. Also, previous interglacial periods show sea levels several meters higher than current levels. Unfortunately for mankind, the solution to rising waters is near at hand. The next glacial period will begin soon, and sea levels will fall drastically once more as huge glaciers form a mile deep over Chicago and other northern cities.
30. John Mesa | 11.11.08
I do feel sorry for anyone displaced from their home; however the current proven average rate of sea level rise is approximately 1.5 millimeters per year. 15 CM in 100 years, 6 inches of water, it would not be easy to get swept away in that flood.
To conclude that the ocean rises there but not on another coast else ware is ridicules. The possiblilty that their islands are sinking would be a much more scientific conclusion. Climate change is expected. It has occurred, is occurring, and will continue to occur with or without us delusionally tilting at windmills. It is simply the way the planet works.
Help the people move. Don’t waste recourses trying to refreeze ice when what they need is a higher sand pile and some stilts.
31. Garry Davis | 11.11.08
Given the interdependence of the world community, it is self-evident that all residents of planet earth are already de facto world citizens. The right to declare oneself a world citizen is the primordial right of freedom of choice, the principle by which all nations are created in the first place.In our 21st century, sovereignty has transcended the nation-state level due to the collapse of time and distance between humans globally. Also, as of August 6, 1945, the date humanity entered the so-called Nuclear Age, each and every human “entered” into a dynamic contract with humanity itself, a species which faced the ultimate danger of omnicide. Our choice thus became world government or world destruction. In short, all relative differences were negated by the overarching question of human survival itself. On December 10, 1948, the UN General Assembly proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The 30 articles provide a legitimate mandate for world government and world citizenship. Islanders faced with submergence of their land must claim world citizenship as a legitimate right visavis arts. 15(2) and 21(3) of the UDHR. The World Government of World Citizen is already 55 years old. Check out the above web site.
32. DrDave | 11.11.08
More hysterical nonsense resulting from the unwarranted assumptions of Al Gore and other climate change alarmists. Regardless of whether the approx. half degree Celsius increase in average temperature over the past century (which appears to have ended in 1998) is anthropogenic or natural in origin, the rate of rise in sea level is unlikely to exceed the growth of these coral atolls. Nor is the rate of rise in ocean temperature likely to be so great as to exceed the ability of corals to adapt. It is much more likely that a gradual increase in ocean temperature will speed coral growth. Although badly damaged by a sudden five degree increase in water temperature due a severe El Nino event, reefs in the Maldives are recovering rapidly, the surviving corals having adapted to even such rapid change with an apparent increase in growth rate (Darwinian evolution at it finest.) In addition, Hilbertz & Goreau have succeeded in generating healthy and diverse coral reefs in areas of the Maldives where corals were absent, employing weak electrical currents from recycled solar panels to rapidly grow large limestone structures populated by living coral. The leaders of the Maldives would be better advised to spend their sovereign wealth establishing a sustainable fishery to feed their growing population when the tourist industry tanks due the coming global recession (which will be made deeper and longer by imposing draconian measures to limit atmospheric CO2.)
33. Peter | 11.11.08
Absolutely disgraceful in case they would have to pay for new land, when the climate change is definitely not their fault if anyone’s.
For instance, Australia, as said, has territory to spare.
34. Doug Ingersoll | 11.11.08
This may upset some people who write alarmist columns about catastrophic global warming, but I do have my own opinions on sea level rise and it’s based not only on my reading but also real world observations of the sea and it’s effects on the islands. I have to admit up front that I’m not much of a believer in the doom and gloom global warming stuff, especially when they say it’s caused by humans, so feel free to disagree. I just don’t believe that man can produce enough green house gases to even come close to what one volcano can do, or the ocean itself on a daily basis. And don’t get me started on cow ****!!
To me this is just one more fad that will go the way of the Ozone hole or the coming ice age argument. Just because it’s repeated a thousand times and governments create schemes to tax people based on it, doesn’t make it true.
Remember the story about the well meaning environmental activists in the Maldives that whacked down a centuries old tree sitting at sea level and right at the waters edge because it got in the way of their sea level rising argument? I do! This is the kind of stuff that makes me a skeptic of all these environmental fears. By the way, many islands in Fiji are well into the thousands of feet in elevation. Most are well over 100 feet in elevation and of the very few low elevation islands, very few of those are inhabited.
And lets take your own reference to the article in the journal Science. Quote: “On the basis of climate modeling and analogies with past conditions, the potential for multimeter increases in sea level by the end of the 21st century has been proposed…” Proposed??? Analogies??? I know I’m not the only person on earth that reads and comprehends full sentences, but doesn’t anyone see this????
They load up every sentence with cleverly crafted language to make it sound absolute without actually saying that at all. That is not Fact, it is a hypothesis.
But even if I gave in to this for argument’s sake and say that even if global warming is raising the sea levels, it’s doing it very, very slowly over many, many years. So I’ll use the science article’s reference of 2 meters over the next 90 years as an example. This is roughly three quarters of an inch every year on average for the next 90 years. Now apparently we’re starting this measurement next year because it sure hasn’t happened as yet. And next year when it hasn’t happened, I’m sure the doom and gloomers will issue a perfectly logical reason as to why their prediction hasn’t come true AND that it’s all our fault. But I digress…
The islands sited in your article have no proof of sea level rise and moreover there is mch more evidence of those islands actually sinking due to several natural AND manmade causes rather than sea level rise.
The forecasters of doom and gloom love to report that the islands will soon be covered in water. We the consuming public, sit at home watching TV and absorb this entire predicted catastrophe without asking some basic questions! Seems to me the doom and gloomers are conveniently forgetting several very important variables.
The first and most obvious is the Human Element. They don’t bother mentioning that man just might do something to help himself, rather than standing there watching his island disappear. The natural maintenance of your beach and surroundings over the years will easily keep up with this.
Second, Islands are always changing just a little bit every day with the currents, storms, rainfall (or lack of), falling leaves, growing coral, the shifting of the earth’s crust. They don’t need global warming to have these issues, they happen all the time naturally, every second of every day of every year. It’s so interesting to look at an island at different times of year. Sand, coral, and vegetation is moved from side to side naturally with the currents. Islands grow, and then recede. Some have sand bars that appear at certain times of the year but disappear the rest of the year. Some are continuously growing, some are eroding. Come visit islands with us. I’ll happily show you brand new islands that appeared just this year. It’s fascinating and really shows you that the sea is constantly changing things.
Third, and maybe most important, is looking at it from a real world perspective. Get out of your easy chair and take a look for yourself. It’s easy to tell that the sea and land masses change all the time. The sea is constantly washing up sand on the beaches. As the level rises, it brings in more sand. It doesn’t take it away. This is a fact that isn’t even debatable. For me, this is particularly evident during the month of October and November in Belize when the tides are naturally 8-10 inches higher during this time. Anything that’s light enough to be washed around in the waves (ie; sand, vegetation, bits of coral, seaweed, and yes, garbage!) finds its way on shore on the low lying islands. The higher the tide, the farther in the debris gets washed in. This is also when new islands tend to appear. During other months those new islands may tend to erode. But largely over the years, the added tide height around October gradually builds the land mass, rather than erode it. This is in addition to what Mangrove roots naturally collect. So in my humble opinion, it’s safe to say that added sea level ADDS to island elevation while a sea level decrease will erode an island.
Here’s a question to ask your self; why do archaeologists usually have to DIG to find their treasures? Answer, because the land mass is always being added to naturally.
The fact is, there are islands in Belize AT sea level with Mayan ruins on them! Think about it. What exactly does this mean? Does it mean that the sea level hasn’t risen in thousands of years? Or does it mean that the island grew in elevation with the sea level?
So if we take the “Science” article’s rather weak proposition of roughly .75 inches per year and also take into consideration the tide naturally moves in and out every single day by 8 inches PLUS the high month or two out of the year that it varies naturally by an additional 8 inches, I believe that an island naturally adjusts to the height of the sea. I’m sorry but I still look at this from a real-world, man on the ground perspective. I’m not a scientist but simple logic has always served me well enough. An island is an island for a reason. I have no idea why, but the earth moved things in such a way that the island was created, and it continues this movement to this very day.
Movies like “The Day After Tomorrow” are not realistic. A permanent wall of water will not wash in and wipe everything out. If I’m wrong, I’ll happily eat my words, but not until after I finish paddling back to shore!!!
35. Elef | 11.12.08
Global warming was first proposed as a scientific theory in the 19th century. By 1030’s scientist had the first clear scientific evidence supporting this theory. In the 1980’s the evidence became overwhelming. Like Russian roulette the question is not if but when the catastrophe will take place.
36. DrDave | 11.12.08
Reply to Alice Strayhorn: Nothing is wrong with all of those things. They are admirable and perfectly sensible, but what has that to do with the subject here? The problem is the apocalyptic predictions fostered by the alarmist faction (95% it seems) of the global warmers and the drastic interventions they would have us take immediately, reasonableness and common sense be damned. Anthropogenic global warming, if it is real, is a potentially very serious issue which demands action, but thoughtful, wise, and effective action, not reduce CO2 now at any cost. If the warmers were less alarmist, they would have fewer skeptics.
(Reply to Doug Ingersol: If you want to write a book, get a publisher. Sorry, but brevity is a virtue.)
37. Jan van Beilen | 11.12.08
Lots of climate change sceptics around… I would advise these people to buy property on the Maldives (or coastal property in Florida) if they’re so sure. But don’t complain if you get flooded out or can’t get insurance.
Without CO2 in the atmosphere we would have a permanently frozen earth (about 30 C colder). As we’ve already added 35% (280 to 387 ppm today) it has started to become warmer. This is a slow process, delayed by cold oceans and (melting) icecaps, but we’ve already added enough CO2 for a 2 C increase. And every year we add another 2 ppm of CO2. The last time it was 2-3 C warmer, sea levels were 25-35 meters higher than present.
At the end of the last ice age, sea levels rose by 20 m in 400 years, or 1 m per 20 years, showing that icecaps can melt rapidly. Worst case is a 2 m increase already in 2050!
The real possibility that it could happen should force us to act immediately, even if we won’t be sure completely until it happens. But, we have only one earth to experiment with. If we break it, it’s over. Nobody in his right mind steps in a car knowing there’s a 1 % chance that the brakes might fail. We’re stepping on the gas, knowing there’s a real chance that we will hit a wall. This is the scientific consensus. A few loud climate sceptics don’t change this.
38. Paul | 11.12.08
Sea levels are currently rising about 2mm per year. However uneven thermal expansion (and other factors) results in some areas of the earth experiencing higher rises or even drops in sea levels.
2mm may sound small, but the horizontal erosion of beaches is i think something like 100 times that of the vertical rise.
Sea level rises are dependent on thermal expansion and land based ice depositing into the seas. Given that Antarctic ice, Greenland ice and Glaciers are at risk in many cases of depositing some if not all their mass into seas then it is possible for much more substantial rises in sea levels.
Also recent German research shows that Atlantic nations may see greater sea level rises (The US would get the worst of it) if there is a major dumping of Greenland and/or Atlantic ice into the seas, at least for the first few decades after such a catastrophic event.
39. Paul | 11.12.08
Doug Ingersoll said:
“Third, and maybe most important, is looking at it from a real world perspective. Get out of your easy chair and take a look for yourself. It’s easy to tell that the sea and land masses change all the time. The sea is constantly washing up sand on the beaches. As the level rises, it brings in more sand. It doesn’t take it away. This is a fact that isn’t even debatable.”
Paul says:
Oh really!
What planet do you live on?
I live in the UK and i also live near the sea (actually just about everyone in the UK lives within about 50 miles of the sea). The ‘white’ cliffs of Dover drop tonnes of material into the sea every year due to erosion by the pounding waves of the English Channel and many homes on the east coast of the UK are being lost due to EROSION.
Sure that means it gets deposited somewhere else. But that doesn’t help people that lose their homes and the fact that it gets deposited somewhere else doesn’t mean that the place it gets deposited is of much use to anyone.
Sea level rises are a destructive factor for humans because land is lost. OK some geological factors mean land is gained in some places or taken away, but when water rises, it’s going to take land away.
I find it amusing that sceptics want to keep the debate on climate change going but at the same time use duff science and suggest that there is no debate about something they have written.
I don’t mind if you want to keep the climate change ‘debate’ going, that’s how the science is strengthened. But don’t dictate what is debatable and what isn’t, on something as basic as the erosion or depositing of material by the seas.
40. Jeff08 | 11.12.08
CNN says that the Maldives are “sinking islands.” No, the islands are not sinking; it’s not some problem with their substrate. The islands are being drowned, because the ocean is rising. The ocean is rising because all over the planet, ice is melting. The ice is melting because for 150 years, and increasingly so, humankind has pumped almost inconceivable amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere…billions upon billions upon billions of tons of GHGs every year. WE are drowning the Maldives, because we refuse to seriously attempt to understand and change the ways in which we live. There is a global system of energy generation and use that we were born into, so that’s our one excuse: it’s hard to change something you’re born into. But to the extent we do not take responsibility for something that is now undeniable, we are complicit in the drowning of the Maldives. It’s only a matter of time before other countries (Bangladesh comes to mind) will also be drowning. Ours is not immune. Do something to help. This is a systemic problem, and it will require a systemic response.
41. Jeff08 | 11.12.08
I submitted my first comment before reading others previously submitted. It appears that science “deniers” have invaded the site. The science is overwhelming, folks. There are many thousands of professional climate scientists whose primary, full-time responsibility is to study and understand the causes, dynamics and effects of climate. Their professional lives are based on their objectivity and their commitment to the scientific method. For the past 15 years or so, the almost uncontested consensus among these scientists is that global warming is real and that it is driven by human production of greenhouse gases. This is reality. Even Bjorn Lomborg, the former darling of global warming deniers, has publicly stated that global warming is occurring and that human activity in releasing GHGs is primarily responsible.
42. Pithy Opiner | 11.12.08
Why can’t they just build a 4 foot wall around their islands. That way they can just stay where they are. Do I have to think of everything around here??
If the Dutch can do it, so can they. Get busy, Maldivers. You don’t have much time.
43. Ali | 11.12.08
Adaptation is the solution, we could big build bigger and raise islands. Polluters in the industrialized world must take the responsibility of the human induced climate change and sea level rise. News islands can be built in seven different zones.
44. Josephus | 11.12.08
Build a ****! Ask countries with lots of rocks to bring a ton every time they come near. Learn to build a windmill. Ask the Dutch!
45. Gerg Nosirab | 11.13.08
The Maldivians amended their constitution recently to outlaw all religions except Islam. This evil act is bringing punishment upon them!
46. Eoin | 11.13.08
Gerg, there’s some truth in what you’re saying: The Maldives’ new constitution, approved on Aug. 7, bars non-Muslims from becoming citizens. It’s unclear whether the country’s small non-Muslim minority will be stripped of their citizenship.
I’ll remain silent on whether I think there exists a deity who makes people suffer for such choices, but I would like to point believers to the ninth chapter of Genesis, in which God promises not to punish people by flooding them:
“When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh.”
47. Aish | 11.19.08
All this debate about whether sea levels are rising or not rising doesn’t matter to people living one metre above sea level. If there is a possibility of sea level rise then why not prepare for the future. Some people have written that instead of waiting to see their island sink they should do something about it. I understand Maldives have been talking about global warming and climate change whereever international forums they can get access to, other than that I doubt there’s much they can do.
I say go for it.
48. Maxham | 11.19.08
The previous president was concerned about the environmental threats to Maldives, rather than finding a solution. Mr. Maumoon brought attention to the leaders world wide about this issue several times. His small mind couldn’t think of a solution to workout which he could have taken action years back.
I strongly beleive Mr. Nasheed (present president) had made a bright decision for a worst case scenario. This is not a punishment from God, its a global threat facing to almost every country. The difference is the effects varies based on the country’s nature. This is common sense Mr. Gerg Nosirab (who have commented above), and this law has been there since Maldives was converted to Islam long ago (during Sultans ruled the country).
I am not only concerned about my country, but throughout the world every country should take action to have a better life on Earth. Everybody should make a contribution to save our environment.
49. Paul | 11.19.08
Gerg…
It seems a bit odd that god would punish the innocent around the world as well as the alleged guilty Maldives.
I don’t think personal views about the Maldives counts as being an act of god.
Sea levels all around the world are rising, they have been doing so for years.
If Gerg is living near the sea, it is just as much punishing them.
The reality is that most religious NGOs and aid organisations (at least in the UK) are campaigning to cut CO2 emissions.
They include - Christian Aid, CAFOD, tearfund, Islamic Relief, Commitment for Life, BMS World Mission.
50. Azhan | 11.19.08
As a Maldivian I Agree with Maxham (above comment), and i blame the over proud countries which is making the world meltdown (global warming). The world is being destroyed by these people. There is a very good documentary about this watch http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/ “An Inconvenient Truth” which gives the statistics and proof that this is no laughing matter. It was gods mercy that we even survived the Tsunami in 2004.
51. glenncz | 11.25.08
all of this rise bacause there is one extra molecule of CO2 for every 10,000 molecules of air. That is the climate science which all this rubbish is based. Sure it rose from 280 to 380 but that is PPM, one extra CO2, (not carbon), but carbon dioxide, what i am not breathing out.
52. Canadian | 11.26.08
I heard that Greenland is melting. There’s an island with lots of space they could have.
53. Anonymous | 12.16.08
Our religion teaches us that, God is most gracious. God is most merciful. I wonder if God would forgive those who blame him.
I remember the time when a Time magazine was destroyed at Male’ International Airport in the late 80s because for the first time Maumoon brought up the Global Warming issue at a UN conference. Apparently it said “SMALL MAN WITH BIG MOUTH”. I give the man some credit for his BIG MOUTH.
If sea level has been rising for several years now then why is Maldives not under water already. Is sea level really rising. What if there is another big Tsunami or an earthquake? Man. I am so afraid.
Buying land abroad is no guarantee that Maldivians will not perish come a worldwide Tsunami. May be instead of buying land money should be spent on building some luxury underwater housing so we can all live happily ever after.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Faced with rising sea levels, the Maldives seek new homeland « Xenophilia (True Strange Stuff) | 11.11.08
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. mahinda | 11.11.08
sri lanka generously welcomes all Maldives citizens……