Commercial Crabber Of 50 Years Tells Gore Sea Level Hasn’t Changed Since At Least 1970

[IanC]

Willis over at WUWT put his two cents worth in about SLR acceleration. Sea Level Rise Accelerating? Not.

He likes to use the actual available data, and works things out for himself.

I would also note that the average acceleration of the entire 63-station dataset is 0.014 ± 0.008, still not statistically significant. And if this turns out to be the long-term acceleration, currently the rate of rise is on the order of a couple of mm/yr, or 166 mm (about 7 inches) by the year 2100. IF this increases at 0.014 mm/yr2, this will make a difference of 48 mm (under two inches) this century.

One of the warmer sites found an error in his back-of-the-envelope calculations. What was his response? He acknowledged them, thanked them, and refined his work. Totally unlike their response when the tables were reversed.

Willis was originally responding to another article done by a statistician who has had numerous criticisms of climate science methodologies over the years. The surprising news from scientists about rising sea levels!

There are some tentative signs that the rate of increase is already accelerating, rather than just fluctuating. But the data is noisy (lots of natural variation) and the (tentative) acceleration is small — near the resolving power of these systems (hence the significance of the frequent revisions).

Speaking of revisions, AVISO hasn't been updating for months. The last time this happened we got a reanalysis of the data and the GIA adjustment. Care to make a prediction about the SLR trend when they come back on line? Hahahaha. I think we all know it will be increased.

 

[mamooth]

You think that is a credible, non-political, website?

Obviously, yes, being that Tamino also show exactly where he gets the data, and exactly how it's processed, things that no denier does. Deniers will always lie, but the facts don't.

Facts cause a problem for you. They always contradict your liars' cult and the pathologically dishonest claims it makes, and which you repeat. Since you can't ever address the data, you always have to run from it, invoking a conspiracy theory to cover your panicked retreat.

Always remember the mediocrity principle. Nobody is special. Nobody possesses secret wisdom that the entire world lacks. If the whole planet says you're wrong, it's not because of a VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot directed at you. It's because you're wrong.

If you disagree, state what part of the data or data processing you have a problem with. Be specific. You won't, of course, because you can't, so you'll throw out your conspiracy theory again.

And by the way, the Tamino article shreds the WUWT nonsense by clueless Willis, which is why Ian refuses to look at it. Ian's cognitive bias is extreme, manifesting in how he auto-ignores all data that contradicts his preconceived conspiracy theories. It's the only way he can keep his anti-reality conspiracy bubble intact. That's why he puts me on ignore. I specialize in destroying his WUWT-cult conspiracy yammering, and facing the inconvenient facts that I bring up is just too painful for him.

 

[bripat9643]

You think that is a credible, non-political, website?

Obviously, yes, being that Tamino also show exactly where he gets the data, and exactly how it's processed, things that no denier does. Deniers will always lie, but the facts don't.

Facts cause a problem for you. They always contradict your liars' cult and the pathologically dishonest claims it makes, and which you repeat. Since you can't ever address the data, you always have to run from it, invoking a conspiracy theory to cover your panicked retreat.

Always remember the mediocrity principle. Nobody is special. Nobody possesses secret wisdom that the entire world lacks. If the whole planet says you're wrong, it's not because of a VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot directed at you. It's because you're wrong.

If you disagree, state what part of the data or data processing you have a problem with. Be specific. You won't, of course, because you can't, so you'll throw out your conspiracy theory again.

And by the way, the Tamino article shreds the WUWT nonsense by clueless Willis, which is why Ian refuses to look at it. Ian's cognitive bias is extreme, manifesting in how he auto-ignores all data that contradicts his preconceived conspiracy theories. It's the only way he can keep his anti-reality conspiracy bubble intact. That's why he puts me on ignore. I specialize in destroying his WUWT-cult conspiracy yammering, and facing the inconvenient facts that I bring up is just too painful for him.

Tamino gets his data from the same corrupt sources as all the other warmist cult members get it. I've already post the evidence that the sea level data was corrupted when some cult members "adjusted" the satellite data. They made the older readings lower thereby increasing the slope of the graph. Of course, there was no scientific justification for doing so, and the tide markings on permanent structures indicate no such increases.

Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'