Is the latest sea-level rise unusual? Kurt Lambeck said it was, based on his version of the Holocene seas, calculated with modeled crustal movements (to try to guess the rises and falls of the beaches where the sea levels were changing). Obedient science reporters broadcast his message to the world without asking a single hard question. But when the error bars are 2 meters wide and the dating estimates range over hundreds of years, I thought it beyond silly to think we could estimate 100-year average sea level rises in the time of Moses. Nils-Axel Mörner agrees, and shows data below from 50 years of research which demonstrates that sea levels are always oscillating, and that in Europe, the US, the Indian Ocean past changes are larger than the current ones. Nils has published nearly 600 papers on observations of sea-levels around the world. He calls the Lambeck paper an “insult” to geologists and sea-level researchers. — Jo
————————————————————————————————————–
An insult to geology and sea level research
by Nils-Axel Mörner
Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm, Sweden, (morner AT pog.nu)
In the 60s, there was a vigorous debate whether the postglacial sea level rise occurred as a smooth rise (Shepard, 1963) or an oscillatory rise (Fairbridge, 1961). My own low-amplitude oscillations sea level curve (Mörner, 1969) came as some sort of intermediate solution (Fig. 1). It was derived by the isolations of the isostatic and eustatic component in the spectrum of 40 individual shorelines recorded over 300 km in the direction of tilting in the periphery of the Fennoscandian uplift and dated by numerous C14-dates (Mörner, 1969, 1971). Numerous subsequent records from places scattered all over the world indicate that, indeed, the postglacial rise in sea level occurred in a mode of low-amplitude oscillations (e.g. Pirrazoli, 1991). This is even true for the Late Holocene and the last millennium (e.g. Mörner, 1980; van de Plassche, 2000; Hansen et al., 2012).
Fig. 1. Regional eustatic curve for northwest Europe according to Mörner (1980).
In a recent paper, Lambeck et al. (2014) claim – with respect to the Holocene to present sea level changes –
“a progressive decrease in the rate of rise from 8.2 ka to ~2.5 ka BP, after which ocean volumes remained nearly constant until the renewed sea-level rise at 100–150 y ago, with no evidence of oscillations exceeding 15– 20 cm in time intervals ≥200 y from 6 to 0.15 ka BP”.
This is a grave insult to painstaking sea level research and observational facts presented by numerous sea level specialists from sites all over the world. Let me just refer to a few records (which I know well):
- in the Maldives, there were 7 sea level oscillations in the last 5000 years, as illustrated in Fig. 2 (Mörner, 2007).
- in Connecticut, there were 3 sea level oscillations in the last 1500 years (van de Plassche, 2000) as illustrated in Fig. 3a.
- in the SW Sweden – Kattegatt Sea region there were 16 oscillations in the last 10,000 years (Mörner, 1971, 1980) with 4 oscillations in the last 3000 year (Fig. 3b).
- in the Kattegatt and the Baltic, sea level oscillations are recorded in response to the Medieval Warm Optimum and the subsequent Little Ice Ages (Åse, 1970; Mörner, 1980, 1999; Ambrosiani, 1984; Hansen et al., 2012).
- the world is full of other records indicating the presence of Late Holocene sea level oscillations (e.g. Pirazzoli, 1991).
Fig. 2. The Late Holocene sea level changes in the Maldives (Mörner, 2007) including 7 transgression peaks in the last 4000 years with 3 peaks in the last millennium.
Fig. 3. Late Holocene sea level fluctuation:(a) from Connecticut (b) from Stockholm (see below)
Fig. 3. Late Holocene sea level fluctuation:
- (a) from Connecticut by van de Plassche (2000) with removal of 1.0 mm/yr subsidence. Note that the AD 1000 peak was larger and faster than today’s rise.
- (b) from Stockholm, Sweden, by Mörner (1980, 1999) with removal of 4.9 mm/yr uplift.
Note the rates and peaks of previous eustatic peaks. Both curves show ups and downs (as usual) and nothing unique at present. It is a grave insult to claim that there is an absence of oscillations prior to 1800. What detailed field observations indicate cannot be cancelled by model outputs.
References
Ambrosianli, B., 1984. Settlement expansion – settlement contraction: a question of war, plague, ecology and climate?. In: Climatic Change on a Yearly to Millennial Basis, N.-A. Mörner & W. Karlén, Eds, p. 241-247, Reidel Publ. Co.
Åse, L.-E., 1970. Kvartärgeologiska vittnesbörd om strandförskjutningen vid Stockholmunder de senaste ca. 4000 åren. Geol. Fören. Stockholm Förh., 92, 49-78.
Fairbridge, R.W., 1961. Eustatic changes in sea level, Physics Chemistry of the Earth, 4, 99-185.
Hansen, J.M., Aagaard, T. and Binderup, M., 2012. Absolute sea levels and isostatic changes of the eastern North Sea to central Baltic region during the last 900 years, Boreas, 41, 180–208.
Lambeck, K., Rouby, H., Purcell, A., Sun, Y. and Sambridge, M., 2014. Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene. PNAS Early Edition, p. 1-8. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1411762111
Mörner, N.-A., 1969. The Late Quaternary history of the Kattegatt Sea and the Swedish West Coast: deglaciation, shorelevel displacement, chronology, isostasy and eustasy. Sveriges Geol. Undersökning, C-640, 1-487.
Mörner, N.-A., 1971. Eustatic changes during the last 20,000 years and a method of separating the isostatic and eustatic factors in an uplifted area. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclim. Palaeoecol., 9, 153-181.
Mörner, N.-A., 1980. The northwest European “sea-level laboratory” and regional Holocene eustasy, Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclim. Palaeoecol., 1980, 29, 281-300.
Mörner, N.-A., 1999. Sea level and climate: rapid regressions at local warm phases. Quaternary International, 60, 75-82.
Mörner, N.-A., 2007. Sea level changes and tsunamis. environmental stress and migration over the seas. Internationales Asienforum, 38, 353-37.
Pirazzoli, P., 1991. World atlas of Holocene sea-level changes. Elsevier Ocenogr. Ser. 58, 1–300.
van de Plassche, O., 2000. North Atlantic climate-ocean variations and sea level in Long Island Sound, Connecticut, since 500 cal yr A.D, Quaternary Res., 53, 89–97.
Shepard, F.,P., 1963. Thirty-five thousand years of sea level. In: Essays in Marine Geology in Honour of K.O. Emery, T. Clements, Ed, p. 1-10. University of California Press, Berkeley.
————————————
Jo Nova’s post on the Lambeck paper: Sea level rise “unprecedented” when modeling the ancient past
The climb or descent of water: who cares ! And it is for this reason that fake scientists have imagined the melting of the ice. And, even though melting ice loses volume, according scientists false… it in would win ! With a volume of water 10,000 times higher than that of ice ! Hahaha !
In reality, if there may be an increase or a decrease in oceanic, this comes that there are earthquakes that go so far as to emerge of the Islands. But then, attention ! There are islands that are and Islands lend to emerge but that are still 200 or 400 m from the surface of the water. And, as these islands are indeed rather mountains taking into account the dimensions of the base, these mountains centers are – indeed – to fit water or during a snorkeling earthquake there are vulnerabilities that open, absorb water and: the sea level goes down. But all this figure in 10th of mm ! No more !
——————
De la montée ou de la descente des eaux: on s’en fout ! Et, c’est pour cette raison que de faux scientifiques ont imaginé la fonte des glaces. Et, même si la glace fondante perd du volume, d’après les faux scientifiques… elle en gagnerait ! Avec un volume d’eau 10.000 fois supérieur à celui des glaçons ! Hahaha !
En réalité, s’il peut y avoir une hausse ou une baisse océanique, cela vient du fait qu’il y a des tremblements de terre qui vont jusqu’à faire émerger des îles. Mais là, attention ! Il y a des îles qui se voient et, des îles prêtent à émerger mais qui sont encore à 200 ou 400 m de la surface des eaux. Et, comme ces îles sont en vérité plutôt des montagnes compte tenu des dimensions de la base, ces montagnes soumarines font – effectivement – monter les eaux ou, lors d’un tremblement de terre soumarin il y a des failles qui s’ouvrent, absorbent l’eau et: le niveau de la mer descend. Mais, tout celà se chiffre en 10ème de millimètres ! Pas plus !
60
What has always puzzled is the lack of sea level rise each year. The many European cities on the oceans look utterly unchanged over the last decades. Where is the panic? All you see is harbour side redevelopment.
Having traveled across Siberia in summer and not seen ice or snow and spent years in Colorado from winters at -40C to summer at 40C and seen the ice melt in Canada and huge Lake Baikal water flows North, you wonder what happened to all the snow and ice and the northern ice sheet. Why don’t the seas rise?
The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen is never in trouble, nor are people drowned in summer tsnumais in Scotland or Norway. If the fear is that an average temperature rise of 2C will drown the planet, how does that work again? The summer in the Arctic can reach 25C and I have enjoyed 30C in places like St.Petersburg at 60 North. Where are the 100 metre tsunamis of ice melt?
There are many questions. Why is Antarctica so much colder? Why is the CCF driven ozone hole only over the South Pole when only 2% of world population lives South of the Tropic of Capricorn? Why is antarctic ice at a record? There is much about temperatures and sea levels and the weather which is not explained at all and the lack of temperature driven sea level rises each year is amazing, but we are supposed to believe an increase of 2C over a century will drown the planet?
So by the time the fossil fuels might produce a slight change in an average, they will be exhausted anyway. Why has no one pointed out the obvious? From summer to winter, the ice melt in the Northern Hemisphere is massive but nothing happens to sea levels. Still, I am sure our ABC Science has all the answers and the 100 metre sea level rises are coming soon because our minister assures us that the ABC are not politically driven anarchistic Green activists out to wreck the joint.
470
TdeF,
You ask why the CCF ozone hole is greater in the south than in the north. Perhaps because the ozone hole has little or nothing to do with CCF. Each pole attracts particles of different charge because they are different poles of a magnet. Different charge means different reactivity therefore it is reasonable to ask whether these differently charged particles cause the ozone “hole”?
190
Can’t quite visualise this. Magnetic poles don’t attract charged particles, but magnetic fields change the trajectory of moving charged particles. That plus the Coriolis effect might work. Or not.
This is a new theory to me, and, I think, everybody.
50
What we need to apply, is Flemings back-hand rule.
120
It would certainly wake up a few of the proponents of ‘unprecedented sea level rise” !!!
KK
90
Very funny, but only if The Western Grip is used.
Tony.
90
OK
Now I’m confused.
KK
00
Sorry Keith,
Rereke made a joke based upon the two of Fleming’s Laws, both of which deal with magnetic fields, (The Right Hand Rule for Generators, and the Left Hand Rule for Motors) and I just expanded on his humour with a Tennis reference.
Tony.
30
“..and I just expanded on his humour with a Tennis reference.”
Yeah you really gave it a serve !
But I think we should let this joke set for a while.
50
Hi Tony
Yes I got he tennis reference but my comment related to how complicated it was.
I could never play tennis because I couldn’t work out the rules!
KK
10
Tennis rules are easy… You hit the ball over the net and inside the lines…;)
20
Sorry, I just thought it was about time that somebody told the other Electrical Engineering joke.
40
I can be said our ‘Hole’ in the South is larger and more attractive than the North however the ‘Hole’ in the North whilst being mostly negative has a unique ability to attract a certain ‘Partycle’ which itself is attracted by negativity when the ‘Hole’ moves left of center forcing out any positive ‘Electron’ results, this is known as the ‘Electrosocialism’ effect.
This effect can be flipped with the introduction of some positive ‘Poles’ creating more energy to correct the ‘Moral’ compass thus ‘Amping’ up the rhetoric towards a ‘Positive’ outcome, this seems much more ‘Annealing’ than the current ‘Flux’ up.
171
Look at the geographic distribution of biogenic production of methyl bromide and the like. (Sorry, no link at this time. Got to run.)
10
the relative ozone lack or ozone hole is a seasonal event which occurs every southern spring when the polar vortex breaks down and finally allows infilling of ozone to the high latitudes, where none has been produced for the last 7 months.[ no winter sun so nil ozone produced by action of sunlight on stratosphere.]
20
97% certified Tim Flannery 15 Nov 2009
“The thing about sea level rise is that its inexorable, it strikes at all coasts at the same time.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-11-14/250000-homes-at-risk-from-rising-seas/1142156
97% certified Tim Flannery 06 June, 2005 (SMH)
“In three years we will know whether I’m being alarmist or not, for that’s about how long Sydney’s water supplies will last under the conditions that have prevailed since 1998.”
. . .
Apologies. I’m not sure Tim Flannery is the most reliable source.
260
Of course Flim-Flam’s reliable. He’s “clinically proven”, like everything else these days. Padded walls and all..
70
—————————-
Sea levels were 1.5 meters higher than now during the mid-Holocene, when atmospheric CO2 levels were under 300 ppm:
—————————–
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GC005272/abstract
Upon correction for isostatic island subsidence, we find that local [relative sea level] was at least ~1.5±0.4 meters higher than present at ~5.4 [thousand years ago]. Later, minor amplitude variations occurred until ~2 [thousand years ago], when the [relative sea level] started dropping to its present position with a rate of ~0.4 mm/year.
—————————–
Sea levels were 5 to 9 meters higher than now during the last interglacial, when CO2 levels were under 300 ppm:
—————————–
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v6/n9/full/ngeo1890.html
During the last interglacial period, 127–116 kyr ago, global mean sea level reached a peak of 5–9 m above present-day sea level. Accounting for glacial isostatic adjustment and localized tectonics, we conclude that eustatic sea level rose to about 9 m above present at the end of the last interglacial. We suggest that in the last few thousand years of the interglacial, a critical ice sheet stability threshold was crossed, resulting in the catastrophic collapse of polar ice sheets and substantial sea-level rise.
—————————–
Sea levels rose faster during the first half of the 20th century than they have since 1950, even though atmospheric CO2 levels only rose from 300 ppm to 312 ppm between 1900 and 1950
—————————–
http://www.psmsl.org/products/reconstructions/2008GL033611.pdf
The fastest sea level rise, estimated from the time variable trend with decadal variability removed, during the past 300 years was observed between 1920– 1950 with maximum of 2.5 mm/yr. [E]stimates of the melting glacier contribution to sea level is 4.5 cm for the period 1900 – 2000 with the largest input of 2.5 cm during 1910 – 1950 [Oerlemans et al., 2007]
—————————–
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006GL028492/abstract
Extending the sea level record back over the entire century suggests that the high variability in the rates of sea level change observed over the past 20 years were not particularly unusual. The rate of sea level change was found to be larger in the early part of last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904–1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954–2003).
—————————–
Australia’s coasts have shown an overall trend of sea level rise deceleration trend in recent decades:
—————————–
http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-10-00141.1
The Australasian region has four very long, continuous tide gauge records, at Fremantle (1897), Auckland (1903), Fort Denison (1914), and Newcastle (1925), which are invaluable for considering whether there is evidence that the rise in mean sea level is accelerating over the longer term at these locations in line with various global average sea level time-series reconstructions. The analysis reveals a consistent trend of weak deceleration at each of these gauge sites throughout Australasia over the period from 1940 to 2000.
—————————-
http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/k3xg21881l4k0161/
There is a claim that, by the end of this century, Australian coastal communities will experience rising sea levels of up to more than 1 metre because of the anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions causing global warming. The paper shows that locally and globally measured data, collected over short and long time scales, prove that the claim of sea level sharply accelerating is false.
—————————–
http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/jaeger/Moerner_Parker_ESAIJ2013.pdf
We revisit available tide gauge data along the coasts of Australia, and we are able to demonstrate that the rate may vary between 0.1 and 1.5 mm/year, and that there is an absence of acceleration over the last decades. With a database of 16 stations covering only the last 17 years, the National Tidal Centre claims that sea level is rising at a rate of 5.4 mm/year. We here analyse partly longer-term records from the same 16 sites as those used by the Australian Baseline Sea Level Monitoring Project (ABSLMP) and partly 70 other sites; i.e. a database of 86 stations covering a much longer time period…gives a mean trend in the order of 1.5 mm/year. Therefore, we challenge both the rate of sea level rise presented by the National Tidal Centre in Australia and the general claim of acceleration over the last decades.
——————————
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378383912000154
The government of Australia is supporting the statement that sea levels are rising faster than ever before as a result of increased carbon dioxide emissions. Consequent to this, low-lying coastal areas, where the majority of Australians are concentrated, have been declared at risk of sea level inundations. Maps with 0.5, 0.8 and 1.1 m sea level rise have been proposed for Sydney, the major Australian city. However, long term tide gauges, recording sea levels worldwide, as well as along the coastline of Australia, and within the bay of Sydney, do not show any sign of accelerating sea level rises at present time.
———————
http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/q7j3kk0128292225/
For the last 40-50 years strong observational facts indicate virtually stable sea level conditions. The Earth’s rate of rotation records a mean acceleration from 1972 to 2012, contradicting all claims of a rapid global sea level rise, and instead suggests stable, to slightly falling, sea levels. Best estimates for future sea level changes up to the year 2100 are in the range of +5 cm ±15 cm.
221
Kenneth Richard, many thanks for your brilliant summary of rising sea level data. The Aussie focus is particularly useful.
Can’t wait to dine out on that when my ABC brainwashed friends start spouting CAGW garbage!
Does anyone have a similarly neat summary debunking CO2 driven a) ocean acidification and b) extreme weather events?
30
Extreme Weather Events
IPCC AR5, Chapter 2 summarizing statements:
a) “The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados”
b) “The absence of an attributable climate change signal in losses also holds for flood losses”
c) “There is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century”
d) “Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century”
e) “No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin”
f) “In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale”
g) “In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms because of historical data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems”
h) “In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century.”
i) “AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated.”
j) “In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low”
———————————–
Ocean Acidification
Considering that CO2 levels were 5 times as high as today (2,000 ppm) 250-100 million years ago (Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous ages), and that marine life actually evolved and then continued to thrive and develop during these very-high CO2 periods, how is it that the oceanic biosphere was able to do so (evolve, thrive) back then if CO2 levels that are now 80% lower (400 ppm) are said to be causing unquenchable and fatal acidic harm?
Also, when ocean waters warm, they release CO2. They don’t absorb more of it. The physics of the entire theory of ocean acidification due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions is therefore challenged by the well-accepted phenomenon of ocean out-gassing upon warming.
——————————–
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006GL0…
[T]here would not be accentuated changes in either seawater salinity or acidity from the observed or hypothesized rises in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
——————————–
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S…
Recently ocean acidification as a major threat for marine species has moved from a consensus statement into a much discussed and even challenged conception. A simple meta-analysis…marine biota may turn out to be more resistant than hitherto believed.
———————————
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S…
Ocean acidification has been proposed to pose a major threat for marine organisms…Here we show, on the basis of meta-analysis of available experimental assessments, differences in organism responses to elevated pCO2 and propose that marine biota may be more resistant to ocean acidification than expected
———————————
http://www.nature.com/ismej/journal/v6/n9/full/ismej201219a.html
We found that pH did not have a significant impact on the composition of associated microbial communities in both coral species. In contrast to some earlier studies, we found that corals present at the lower pH sites exhibited only minor physiological changes and no microbial pathogens were detected. Together, these results provide new insights into the impact of ocean acidification on the coral holobiont.
———————————
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01955.x/abstract
Despite increasing scientific and public concerns on the potential impacts of global ocean warming on marine biodiversity, very few empirical data on community-level responses to rising water temperatures are available other than for coral reefs. Plant and animal communities at 136 rocky reef sites around Tasmania (south-east Australia) were censused between 1992 and 1995, and again in 2006 and 2007. Despite evidence of major ecological changes before the period of study, reef communities appeared to remain relatively stable over the past decade.
———————————
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n8/full/nclimate1473.html
Using a model of pH regulation combined with abiotic calcification, we show that the enhanced kinetics of calcification owing to higher temperatures has the potential to counter the effects of ocean acidification.
———————————
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2004GL021541/abstract
Our results suggest that present coral reef calcification rates are equivalent to levels in the late 19th century and does not support previous suggestions of large and potentially catastrophic decreases in the future.
———————————
http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/c6481l4677j11333
The supposedly already-degraded state of coral reef ecosystems is sometimes claimed to be a reason why anthropogenic global warming will have a major impact on the reefs, i.e. they are already close to extinction and can easily be tipped over the edge. It is concluded that the work of Pandolfi et al. (2003) cannot be used as justification that the Great Barrier Reef has lost significant resilience, or that it is particularly susceptible to global warming because of its present supposedly degraded state.
31
Like in surface temperature reconstructions in the late 1990s revisionists tried to eliminate the medieval warm period with a bit a modelling, now someone armed with a computer model smooths away natural fluctuations in the level of oceans.
170
I live on a volcanic island, in a string of volcanic islands, and people here are well aware that the crust of the earth is a) not as solid as some scientists would have you believe, and b) is in constant motion — up, down, and sideways.
Any movement in the crust, will obviously be reflected in the water level relative to the exposed crust, so sea levels will appear to go up and down for those reasons.
The whole concept of “sea level” is dubious, as a result, because it is only a relative measurement. A new sea mount appeared recently, in the Pacific Ocean. I wonder if the models will take the volume of this mountain into account when calculating increased sea levels expressed in thousandths of a metre?
This whole climatic driven, sea-level thing, is a container of fertilizer, in my opinion. You only need to know the relative height of the sea compared to the height of the dock you are planning to build.
Perpetrators of the scam know this, which is why they are able to afford beach-front properties, sold by those whom they have frightened into moving.
310
This has been my mantra for years – AGW activists all own beachfront property!
150
On the stock market it would be called insider trading.
140
I would call it creative accounting.
40
Kind of like a negative Pump and dump, that is you release negative information, the short the stock on its fall. Lets call it shock and short…
20
I was hoping to pull together all my assets, cash in everything, and buy a doomed Pacific island to end my days happily retired on a sunny island, with those seas lapping daily higher around me.
But no. Nobody wants to sell their doomed tropical paradise island, instead they continue to expand them. Bigger airports, more hotels, all with money from aid, grants, borrowed money, and gifts given by foolish Western nations. Its all a waste, it really is.
Why, oh why can’t they not see their tropical havens have no future, so why not sell and make me happy before they are inundated? Sell to me, if only for their childrens’ sake, for their future happiness.
270
I was fascinated with the islands disappearing just north of PNG. Allegedly victims of Global Warming sea rises. However some islands have vanished from maps drawn in the 1880s and PNG is repatriating the few people on the few acres left of one island. Charles Darwin suggested that coral atolls were built on sinking volcanoes. He was right. Drilling on Bikini atoll after the bomb blasts showed the coral reached 2km even though coral grows only in shallow water. Then the coral captures shell grit and sand and builds up, as is happening. The sinking islands are not due to rising sea levels and the Maldives are actually growing in height and area. Amsterdam is 800 years old, but then it is well below sea level, like most of Holland. So no one really fears rapid massive sea rises, especially those building airports and hotels and whole cities in the ocean. Tsunamis are a different matter, as Libson found on 1st November 1755 on All Saints Day. It destroyed a city, a country and changed human history and philosophy.
Prof Plimer also pointed out that right before Katrina hit, the area around New Orleans had the biggest sudden subsidence in the world at that time, over 1 metre. Of course dropped the sea wall 1 metre, but this was not mentioned. Global Warming was the problem according to scientist Al Gore. Skeptical? Hardly an adequate word.
210
It’s a source of fascination to me. Whatever the current data, the activists still keep on about “disastrous sea level rise”, which is supposedly happening right now.
It’s also impossible to persuade them that you can’t have “global” sea level rise of several feet in the Maldives and not on the beach at Brighton, England.
As far as I can see, anything less than 2mm per year is unremarkable, and it’s never done even that much since records began.
190
If we didn’t have wind, there would be no appreciable change in sea level, other than from the gravitational affects of the moon and the sun. I was taught this at school.
I would bet dollars to donuts, that Schools in the Western hemisphere no longer teach that.
160
Just don’t tell them, that wherever there’s a high pressure system, there’s a statistically higher amount of CO2 (not concentration tho).
10
A large proportion of us Aussies live on the coast.
We can obviously see this RAPID sea level rise happening in front of our very eyes…
NOT !!
A mate has a boat shed on Port Hacking.
It got flooded in around 1970 in a king tide.
It has not been flooded since.
Fort Denison is showing only 0.65mm/year, with no indication of any acceleration.
221
Just round the corner from me in the Tamar, is the site of a historic ferry which is now a tourist attraction of sorts, pulled up against its old mooring. The date is 1850 something(Id have to go look at it again). The interesting part is this mooring is less than 3km from the mouth of the Tamar as the crow flies yet the mooring level in relation to the water has seemingly not changed. The boat now sits on a bed of silt, but highest of high tide still comes right to the edge of the old jetty/dock and the bollards still sit nicely above the water line at about the height you would expect for tying a boat to them. Go figure??
150
Agreed!
No change at Coffs Harbour either.
It’s all BULL[snip]!!
51
If it’s BULL[snip], it must be a steer.
And a bum one at that.
40
I did a lot of bull snipping as a ringer in The Northern Territory in my late teens…. Humbert River Downs.
30
If you want to see a greenies head explode. Stop the next one that wants to talk AGW and ask them these 2 questions.
1. How are the polar ice caps doing? To which they will of course spout the last 2 minute MSM report they heard and reply “they are stuffed, there is no ice left in the world and even the memory of it is fading”. Which is of course the general belief amongst Joe Public.
Then spring the trap…
2. So where are the catastrophic sea level rises?
Stand back so you don’t get brains all over you.
210
250
A recent conversation with a friend:
“There might not be much CO2 in the air, but it’s really powerful stuff!”
“OK, who told you that?”
“All the scientists say that.”
“Name one?”
[silence]
140
Yup the massive majority of Joe Public believers, (possibly as many as 97%) have about 10 words drawn from MSM that they re-arrange to try and convince their equally stupid peers that they are all over the detail of climate science. Their faux interest is easily revealed with usually no more than one or two probing questions.
I have never been face to face with a warmist who is as well read as I am on the topic, which is revealing as I consider myself a complete novice. I even said to my partner recently that after listening to the Dr. Karl interview I would feel confident publically debating him. If I knew as little as most of these people on a topic I would try to just refrain from commenting.
30
“What detailed field observations indicate cannot be cancelled by model outputs”
Probably could have squashed Lambeck (and a multitude of others, including those unrelated to sea-level) with that single statement, really.
170
Another one of those powerhouse models I guess. If all the assumptions line up and the moon is full then the predictions will be more or less right? Probably it’s less.
Am I the only one who thinks this stuff is getting more and more childish?
150
No.
100
It should be called a “mannian” model – for his prowess at eliminating variations in historical data.
10
Of course their sea level trends are meaningless – they have to fudge them, just as they have to fudge past data and totally ignore natural climate cycles – all in order to fool the world into believing they are right with their greenhouse conjecture.
And it’s about time all lukes and warmists realised that water vapour cools in the real world, as real world temperature data confirms. You could do your own study in less than a day.
As you add more water vapour more of it congregates below the “radiating altitude” (as does more carbon dioxide) because of the density gradient. So that altitude is lowered (not raised) and furthermore we all know that water vapour reduces the temperature gradient and thus the supported surface temperature.
Lukes and warmists have produced no empirical evidence to support the GH conjecture. You have not proved water vapour warms or produced any valid SBL calculations that gel with the observed surface temperatures on Earth or Venus and so you don’t come anywhere near qualifying for the $5,000 reward I’ve offered, because the first requirement is a study with similar methodology to mine but showing water vapour warms, and warms to the huge extent that would be necessary if it were in fact causing most of the claimed “33 degrees” of warming as in IPCC documentation on their website.
Critical to the IPCC “explanation” is the addition of back radiative flux to solar flux when doing SBL calculations for Earth’s surface temperature. The combined requirement for 288K (using emissivity 0.95) would be a mean of 370W/m^2 of thermal energy transferring out of the base of the atmosphere and into the surface. But, after 30% of solar radiation is reflected by the atmosphere, the mean solar radiation entering the atmosphere is about (0.7 x 1360)/4 = 238W/m^2. So how does the atmosphere add 55% to the incident energy and deliver more into the surface?
Earth’s climate cycles correlate compellingly with the 934-year and superimposed 60-year cycles in the inverted plot of the scalar sum of the angular momentum of the Sun and all the planets.
There is no measurable net trapping of thermal energy at TOA, where the difference in flux rarely varies ±0.5%. Carbon dioxide does not act like a blanket, and nor does water vapour which keeps the world cooler.
121
Here are 1350 studies that refute just about everything involved in the CAGW scam. Many very recent PR SLR studies here.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
And ditto with co2 Science. They have many recent PR SLR studies as well.
http://www.co2science.org/subject/s/subject_s.php Also the 2014 Leclerq et al world glacier study shows a slowing of retreat since 1950. So how is that possible with their dangerous SLR?
40
The Royal Society also has this graph of all the IPCC models for SLR from Antarctica and Greenland until the year 2300.
http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/364/1844/1709/F4.expansion.html
Their problem is that this shows that all the models have Antarctica gaining ice for the next 300 years.
And that means it will be negative for SLR. So where is their dangerous SLR to come from I wonder?
61
Could the warming since 1950 be linked to cloud cover and ENSO? Surely not, it’s GOTTA be co2.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/30/new-paper-links-warming-since-1950-to-enso-and-cloud-cover-variations/
31
Sea level Quotes by Al Gore (2006) and Penny Wong (2009).
Gore – “SL will rise by 6 metres in the near future” (as quoted in An Inconvenient Truth).
Wong – “SL will rise by 1.1 metres by the year 2100 and 700,000 sea-side Australian homes will be impacted”.
Bring on reality – eustatic SL in fact keeps rising by ~2-3mm per year and this rate will in all likelihood fall and even go into negative mode, ie a real fall in eustatic SL, during this century as the next LIA takes full hold.
Scare mongering by the likes of Gore, Flannery & Wong have and will only bring great pain to Earth’s population via squandering of US$trillions combating non-existent GW and so called “catastrophic SL rise”.
80
Gore, Flim-Flam and Wrong have caused us much side-splitting pain thus far..
20
When she used to feature on “Our ABC”‘s Q&A Penny Wrong’s mantra was always: “The science is settled”.
Professor Nils-Axel Morner feeis insulted, lots of other scientists also feel insulted, lots of Labor politicians need to open up their minds, lose their fuzzy prejudices, and start listening to the scientific debate on whether carbon dioxide really does have any significant influence on climate.
30
The reason this type of garbage can be run is that the average person is as thick as two bricks and believes what is said in the press and on TV and the NET.
The earth is like a big blancmange,it moves about according to gravitational forces like the moon and sun.
The land heaves and falls,continents move,the vast oceans are moving as well as the vast amounts of subterranean water.
Good luck trying to even use lasers to work out the sea/earth levels.
111
Panzar I agree totally – Gore’s outlandish SL rise prediction with footage from his outlandish fictional movie (“An Inconvenient Truth”) showing the ocean flooding Manhattan has scared the living daylights out of the, as you say, “the thick as two bricks” brigade. Gore’s 6 metre rise was based on melting the Greenland & Antarctic Ice Sheets in a very short period of time. Of course this is preposterous, ludicrous, absurd, delusional …I am running out of adjectives here rubbishing the “unfounded alarmist doomsday predictions” by Gore – this Nobel Prize winner (you have to kidding), Oscar winner (you have to kidding) and former Democrat Vice President – should be certified as “insane”.
90
King Geo – I wouldn’t call him insane ,he saw the chance to make an obscene amount of money from the public and is running with it.
What we are really looking at is selfishness.
Greed on an unimaginative scale,greed for money,power,recognition(the curse of the academic),it gives them the chance to make people follow their will.
The average human wants to have a family and provide for them and to be left alone,but there are those in society who want to control for the various reasons given above.
60
OK – let’s call him an insane clever capitalist b…..
The bottom line is that for a period there he significantly swayed public opinion to believe in this CAGW crap. This alarmism fortunately is having less impact these days as it becomes abundantly clear that Global Temps have flat lined for an extended period – you know Abe Lincoln’s famous saying “you can fool …..”, well that saying applies to Gore – and to think – this guy could have become US Prez – the mind boggles.
50
Oscar winners are good at acting, but not much else it seems..
20
What flavour?
The reason I ask, is that I used to be quite partial to blancmange when I was a boy, and you brought back some happy memories.
10
TdeF asks “where is the panic?”…
in the MSM, for starters.
Flavia loves to hype up a story (previously she did one called “Climate Change’s Links to Conflict Draws UN Attention” (not alleged “link”, mind you), and now she has a religious CAGW denier story that goes on forever, with unsubstantiated, distorted, or exaggerated, claims:
29 Oct: Bloomberg: Get Off the Beach? Hell No. Why Shore People Don’t Get Climate People
By Flavia Krause-Jackson and Fred Pals
When Hurricane Sandy came, Deborah Star Reed stayed home…
So, on Oct. 29, 2012, the retired construction worker was munching on spare ribs with a friend, having ignored the evacuation warnings, when the first wave crashed into her home at the edge of New York’s Jamaica Bay. Hours later, hip-deep in water next to a bobbing piano, she began to pray.
Reed is still relying on the power of hope over experience. Science says she’s fighting in vain against the encroaching ocean. Instead of leaving, the 63-year-old has renovated the interior, rebuilding the kitchen, and erected four bulkheads by her pier and a concrete wall along the water.
“Sandy was something exceptional, some crazy Frankenstein,” she said from her deck with a view of Manhattan’s skyline. “I think we use climate change as a way of saying to people they should leave. I know I am protected.”
Reed’s resistance is borne out by academic studies that say it’s human nature to quickly normalize abnormal weather events…
An overheating planet is melting glaciers, raising sea levels and threatening cities from Mumbai to Guangzhou…
Waters creeped up an average 3.2 millimeters a year between 1993 and 2009; sea levels may rise by between 26 centimeters (10 inches) and 82 centimeters this century, the UN estimates…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-29/new-yorker-prays-god-will-save-her-home-from-rising-seas-cities.html?hootPostID=f960de6c515803c99eb447de530fa01f
20
O/T…but kind of related!
29 Oct: National Science Foundation: Award Abstract #1460714
RAPID Proposal: Psychological distance, risk perceptions and communication behaviors during the Ebola outbreak
Awarded amount to date: $84,110.00
Investigator(s): Z. Janet Yang zyang5@buffalo.edu (Principal Investigator)
Sponsor: SUNY at Buffalo
Abstract: In addition to the issue-specific value of knowing more about risk perceptions related to the Ebola outbreak, findings from this project will inform the design of communication messages related to risk issues that are often perceived to be psychologically distant by the American public, such as climate change and overpopulation…
http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1460714&HistoricalAwards=false
00
Gore’s 6 metres is as weak as water.
The ABC’s top science Guru Williams told Bolt that 100 metres SLR by 2100 was possible.
That’s way over 1000mm a year because he has a lot of catching up to do. I suppose if you’re going to BS your listeners you may as well tell the biggest whopper you can dream up.
71
Wow.. If Williams wants attention he could just fart loudly during an interview. Oh. He did..
40
An insult to geology and sea level research!
Don’t forget intelligence.
~ ~ ~ ~
Climate Change Minister Penny Wong says she too is concerned by this assessment and a national emergency plan needs to be put in place.
She says from now on, every planning and development approval must consider climate change as one of the greatest risks.
“That’s going to take information, it’s going to take work, it’s going to take coordination,” she said.
“This is a very important step in providing the information Australia needs.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-11-14/250000-homes-at-risk-from-rising-seas/1142156
. . .
So how successful is that information providing going?
Here on the original Gold Coast, seems they didn’t get the memo:
Welcome to Sanbano, (from $2.75M)
40
The coastal sea level rises mostly of subsidence at the tide gauge. However it does not accelerate because of the carbon dioxide. As morner said some time ago, the rising seas following the carbon dioxide is the biggest lie ever. Global warming survives only because increase control and expand burocracy and revenue raising is welcomed by every politician except that sometimes when at the opposition.
51
There is a new paper out that will have heads exploding at NIWA.
It is by Chris de Freitas and others.
You can check it out at the Warwick Hughes blog.
The summary: NZ surface temperature trend since about 1910 only 1/3 of that claimed by NIWA. Probably worth a post here as well.
30
Bumper year for Hastings River oysters
The water quality has been so good that we can almost turn the clock back 20 years and see the quality of the oysters coming out of the river
“They’ve grown and grown and grown so we are looking at bigger oysters than we’ve seen for some years,” he said.
He says the volume and quality of local oysters is excellent.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-31/bumper-year-for-hastings-river-oysters/5857428
40
Completely off topic but this gave me a tremendous, albeit sad, laugh tthis afternoon … Turnbull two years ago, while in opposition (from his own web site, no less):
Then there’s the media statement today:
Politicians … they are there for our amusement.
40
Some beachfront real estate in WA is being threatened.
In e.g. Safety Bay, the place where I first lived in this wonderful country, there used to be a jetty for the Yacht Club and fishing boats. In 1968. That is no more. It’s been inundated … with sand.
There’s enough new real estate (satellite image) at North Sands for a premium housing development between the old beach-front and the new beach.
60
Its beyond doubt that sea levels were higher in the Roman era than they are today.
I lived in Kent for several years in a village that is now 3 miles inland. At the time
of the Roman conquest it was an island. Nearby Lympne was the major Roman seaport supplying
the local garrisons. You can still see the sea cliffs behind the settlement. The Channel
is now over a mile away. This in a part of the country where the land is subsiding at a rate
of 1 mm per year due to isostatic rebound.
There is a reason why few historians believe in AGW.
50
Here in Australia on the East Coast we have rock shelves which geologists knew were created by seas that were up to 1.2 metres higher about 3,000 years ago.
The Many instances of higher seas shown in Nils Axel Morner’s graph 2 of the Maldives situation confirms what local geologists knew in the early 1960s
Looking at the accurate work Of Prof Morner it doesn’t take much skill to work out that oceans have been dropping for the last 2,000 years and have in fact fallen by 1.2 metres in that time.
So much for rampant sea level rise.
Here in Newcastle we have local university “Klimate Cadets” from the local University Climate Control Department making hay while the sun shines in the local Newspaper.
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/2656717/forum-to-discuss-newcastle-sea-level-threat/?cs=4173
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/2656425/opinion-who-pays-for-sea-level-rise/?cs=308
I seem to share the views of GeorgeJ
KK
30
Climate historian Tony Brown presents visual evidence and written
records that, ‘after taking land changes into account, sea levels
in Roman times were rather higher than today as measured in a
variety of locations.’
http://judithcurry.com/2011/07/12/historic-variations-in-sea-levels-part-1-from-the-holocene-to-romans/
70
Apologies for double posting.Here’s Tony Brown’s Part 3,
192o’s -1940’s variations in Arctic sea ice. Includes the
Russian evidence for Northern sea route open at times in
the 1920’s , most of the 1930’s and intermittently in the
1940’s.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/04/10/historic-variations-in-arctic-sea-ice-part-ii-1920-1950/
60
Climate historian Tony Brown presents visual evidence and written
records that show ‘after taking land changes into account, sea levels
in Roman times were rather higher than today as measured in a
variety of locations.’
http://judithcurry.com/2011/07/12/historic-variations-in-sea-levels-part-1-from-the-holocene-to-romans/
30
Geologists too, at least that AGW is significant
20
Looking at fig 3a it is obvious that the current lift in sea levels began about 900 years back.
Even within that long slow rise there have been deviations which returned to the general slope.
Very interesting.
KK
40
Nils-Axel
I have studied the official Swedish see level statistics ranging from 1880 to 2014.
Yearly numbers of mean see level is presented. A rise of approximately 2 mm/year can bee seen.
But if You lock at each Year that number varies a lot-randomly. But if You treat the number gently You will find a interesting periodical change ranging from +8 mm/year to -6 mm/year in a nice pattern with 10-12 Years periodicity.
More on that in Swedish:
http://www.klimatupplysningen.se/2013/10/13/angaende-historiska-havsnivaer-vad-doljer-sig-i-siffrorna/
20
Very interesting.
KK
20
To clear up rubbish papers like this we need more of ….
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2014/10/31/15/32/qld-uni-researcher-charged-with-fraud
Sorry to the mods for so many ‘f’ words.
Also in their defence the researchers can say ‘but we followed how they do things in climate séance!’
80
We have to THANK Jo Nova and jennifer mahorasy for this AT LAST!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2813394/Heat-Weather-Bureau-MP-accuses-wiping-118-year-old-temperature-records-justify-claims-climate-change.html
There is a video
Watch the BOM staff scatter in all directions to leave about 2-3 persons wholly responsible for [snip]
60
October 21, 2014:
Bureau of Meteorology officials, meanwhile, told Senate estimates on Monday that Australia was on a clear warming path, with temperatures rising between 0.71 and 0.76 degrees since 1960, depending on the methods used.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/threat-of-air-pollution-to-worsen-along-with-global-warming-warns-climate-council-20141020-118u3k.html
50
Using the self anointed Climate Council for any information about the reality of climate is sort of like asking Dracula to look after a blood bank !!
And the “Climate Authority”.. a pack of Labor/Green appointed rabid alarmist troughers !!
The Liberals disappoint greatly by not disbanding it or at least putting a couple of realists on the panel.
40
That’s accepted geological evidence from Hallet Cove a southern suburb of Adelaide folks-
http://www.sa.gsa.org.au/Brochures/HallettCoveBrochure.pdf
130 metres rise in 9000 years you’ll note is an average of around 1.5cm a year for 13000 years!! WTF was that warmies? Aboriginal cooking fires and burnoffs to flush out game?
It’s in the rocks in the ground in my back yard not the rocks in your heads you maroons. Is it any wonder geologists like Plimer are shaking their heads at the sheer stupidity of these people and their failed predictions based on their GIGO computer machinations?
30
Woops! not the 13000 yrs but even if it was over that period it would have been a cm a year for that time.
20
good fix!
00
And none other than our current Premier Jay Weatherill knows all about Hallet Cove’s international significance in that regard-
https://www.nationaltrust.org.au/Assets/6496/1/PARKS_PDFS_HALLETT_COVE_AND_MARINO_CONSERVATION_PARKS_MP.pdf
Can you explain that 130 metres rise to us all Premier?
20
off topic but thought a good laugh on friday is needed.
Union Of Concerned Scientists Says CO2 Makes Northeast Winters Warmer And Less Snowy
Vs
White House memo saying that global warming makes the Northeast colder and more snowy.
80
Land Below Sea Level
Each pushpin on the map above marks the lowest point in one of Earth’s ten structural depressions with the lowest land elevations
http://geology.com/below-sea-level/
00
31 July, 2013 : ANU launches Australia’s largest supercomputer
“Around 30 per cent of the processing power of this machine – named Raijin after the Japanese god of thunder, lightning and storms – is being used for calculations in the area of Earth system science.
“When the Bureau of Meteorology ramps up to full steam, the use in this area will go to around 50 per cent, which is what it was always intended to do,” Professor Lindsay Botten, director of the NCU told, CIO Australia on Wednesday morning.”
http://www.cio.com.au/article/522400/anu_launches_australia_largest_supercomputer/
~ ~ ~
So, how’s all that BoM computing power going?
July 24, 2014: Worst of winter likely over as warming trend begins
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/worst-of-winter-likely-over-as-warming-trend-begins-20140724-zw7wk.html
31 October, 2014:
The Lithgow City Council is lodging a claim for Natural Disaster funding to help cover an estimated half a million dollar damage bill from a recent snow storm.
Snow clean up bill estimated at more than $500,000: natural disaster application being lodged
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-31/snow-clean-up-bill-estimated-at-more-than-245002c0003a-natur/5857640
. [] [] [] .
It appears the BoM super Computer suffers from the same common denominator all it’s other weather predictions;
“Carbon(sic). It’s worse than we first thought.”
Compare this complete BoM failure to the successful work of Prof. Jennifer Marohasy & Dr. John Abbot.
Unlike the carbon(sic) drenched BoM predictions, Marohasy and Abbot follow the scientific method and produce a much better predictive system to aid Australia’s farmers.
We must be careful not to trash the good work of honest scientists using the latest & best methods when showing up the failures of the BoM.
http://www.nd.com/apps/content/forecasting-monthly-rainfall-australia-0
20
I am a geologist specialising in sequence stratigraphy which amongst many things predicts sea level curve. This tool has always been Used as part of the part of the basic geologist tool box. Such curves have been constructed with great degree of accuracy all the way back to the Cambrian (some 600mln years ago) and sea level movement of of 150-200m is nothing usual. The main controls are: subsidence, sediment input and paleoclimate. Something that I have been doing all my professional life. Now we have a new breed …a climate scientist. A monster that looks at last 50 years with self righteous oracle attitude. The maxim of “the past is guide to the future” completely ignored. Geology ignored. Now I am called a denier, uneducated, bah a person that does not believe in theory of evolution (related not just to humans but to change in geological science).
30
I am a geologist specialising in sequence stratigraphy which amongst many things predicts sea level curve. This tool has always been Used as part of the part of the basic geologist tool box. Such curves have been constructed with great degree of accuracy all the way back to the Cambrian (some 600mln years ago) and sea level movement of of 150-200m is nothing usual. The main controls are: subsidence, sediment input and paleoclimate. Something that I have been doing all my professional life. Now we have a new breed …a climate scientist. A monster that looks at last 50 years with self righteous oracle attitude. The maxim of “the past is guide to the future” completely ignored. Geology ignored. Now I am called a denier, uneducated, bah a person that does not believe in theory of evolution (related not just to humans but to change in geological science).
50
Welcome to the club
KK
20
What is it about their ABC’s science presenters?
100 metres Williams and Dr Karl seem to be about as clueless as they come.
As the Bolter says , why does their ABC employ these hopeless donkeys?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/why_does_the_abc_employ_dr_karl/#commentsmore
00
Steve McIntyre and Jean S continue to question the selection and weighting of proxies in the revised Pages 2K study.
http://climateaudit.org/2014/10/31/the-kaufman-tautology/#comment-739122
Amazing how these donkeys and their PR mates are that ignorant and sloppy that had several attempts before they used some proxies the right way up. But are they really that dumb?
10