If you fell down and broke your legs and they healed to be 20% longer and stronger than before, yes.
I encourage you to take your own advice and actually read the links to get a full picture of the available science and data. Climate change is real and a serious problem, but not every single thing you are fed by your algorithms is the ground truth. Nitpicking one example and ignoring the entire body of science is just as dishonest as folks who deny climate change.
Here's a paper you can read and not just dismiss as something that I didn't read [1]. Some islands will vanish, some will grow, it's not as simple as everything is doomed everywhere. Have fun reading :)
> This record comprises 568 islands from 42 atolls spanning the western to the central Pacific Ocean from the Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Kiribati and Tuvalu, and is one of the first robust attempts to statistically attribute the drivers of observed island changes within the past half-century. Our analyses demonstrate that island change and a range of its potential controls, including oceanographic, climatic and local-scale morphometric characteristics of reefs and islands, are not correlated, underscoring that no single variable could predict a uniform response across the study islands. The lack of association between sea-level rise and shoreline change on this large sample of islands addresses the common notion of a linear relationship between rising sea levels and magnitude of erosion in reef island systems.
> Analysis of 568 islands across the Pacific indicates that most islands have exhibited significant morphological changes over the timescale of analysis (1944–2018). Accretion was observed on 39% of transects, while 27% of transects showed erosion. Aggregated at the island scale, the balance of erosional and accretionary changes indicates a predominance of accretion on islands, with an average shoreline change of 0.51 m/decade resulting in a net expansion of 444.63 ha (~ 2.25%) of land area.
[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10113-023-02103-5
I encourage you to take your own advice and actually read the links to get a full picture of the available science and data. Climate change is real and a serious problem, but not every single thing you are fed by your algorithms is the ground truth. Nitpicking one example and ignoring the entire body of science is just as dishonest as folks who deny climate change.
Here's a paper you can read and not just dismiss as something that I didn't read [1]. Some islands will vanish, some will grow, it's not as simple as everything is doomed everywhere. Have fun reading :)
> This record comprises 568 islands from 42 atolls spanning the western to the central Pacific Ocean from the Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Kiribati and Tuvalu, and is one of the first robust attempts to statistically attribute the drivers of observed island changes within the past half-century. Our analyses demonstrate that island change and a range of its potential controls, including oceanographic, climatic and local-scale morphometric characteristics of reefs and islands, are not correlated, underscoring that no single variable could predict a uniform response across the study islands. The lack of association between sea-level rise and shoreline change on this large sample of islands addresses the common notion of a linear relationship between rising sea levels and magnitude of erosion in reef island systems.
> Analysis of 568 islands across the Pacific indicates that most islands have exhibited significant morphological changes over the timescale of analysis (1944–2018). Accretion was observed on 39% of transects, while 27% of transects showed erosion. Aggregated at the island scale, the balance of erosional and accretionary changes indicates a predominance of accretion on islands, with an average shoreline change of 0.51 m/decade resulting in a net expansion of 444.63 ha (~ 2.25%) of land area.
[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10113-023-02103-5