IPCC Sea Level Rise Estimates

interesting NOAA paper. it gives the Jason I&II results as 1.3mm/yr over jan2005-dec2011. then tallies up ARGO steric and GRACE components to see if they match. they do to a pretty close degree.

but the crazy thing is that over that period of six years it is only 1.3mm/year! back before 2004 the rate was usually given as under 3mm/yr. that leaves the last two and a half years at a huge rate.

I guess the SLR really is accelerating big time. sarc off/

2010-2011, massive rains in Australia create an inland sea there, dropping global sea level sharply. Hence, short-term trends ending in 2011 look low.

Afterwards, the water gradually evaporates and gets back into the oceans, raising sea levels quickly.

So, you've illustrated the problem with using short-term samples.

Yet another weather = climate bit from the AGW cult..
 
Here is UC's latest graph. Three different satellite's data. The 3.2 mm/yr trend is from 1994-2014: 20 years. If I wanted to do some cherry picking, I could look at the rate from 2011 to the present: 18mm in 3 years: 6 mm/yr. Or how about 2011 to 2013: 21mm in 2 years: 10.5 mm/yr.

sl_ns_global.png

CU Sea Level Research Group University of Colorado


Nope here is the graph that you confidently ignored:

sl_mei.png


However cherry picking and starting at 1992 is not a good way to prove that the AGW mindset is correct.
 
Do you have a source for that graph? Do you understand what it means to normalize a data set? How about detrending? Eh? Didn't think so.
 
Good source! Now then, what does it mean to normalize data? What does it mean to detrend a data set? Look it up.
 
Good source! Now then, what does it mean to normalize data? What does it mean to detrend a data set? Look it up.
So I see you aree the data is altered.

per your request form Wikipedia:
"In statistics and applications of statistics, normalization can have a range of meanings.[1] In the simplest cases, normalization of ratings means adjusting values measured on different scales to a notionally common scale, often prior to averaging. In more complicated cases, normalization may refer to more sophisticated adjustments where the intention is to bring the entire probability distributions of adjusted values into alignment"
 
Greenland Ice Sheet more vulnerable than previously thought.

Deeply incised submarine glacial valleys beneath the Greenland ice sheet
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n6/full/ngeo2167.html
---
We detect widespread ice-covered valleys that extend significantly deeper below sea level and farther inland than previously thought. Our findings imply that the outlet glaciers of Greenland, and the ice sheet as a whole, are probably more vulnerable to ocean thermal forcing and peripheral thinning than inferred previously from existing numerical ice-sheet models.
---

Recent sea level rise unprecedented.

Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene
---
Of particular note is that during the ∼6,000 y up to the start of the recent rise ∼100−150 y ago, there is no evidence for global oscillations in sea level on time scales exceeding ∼200 y duration or 15−20 cm amplitude.
---
 
You posted the explanation. Did you fail to comprehend it? More importantly...

Q: why did you expect to see trends in de-trended data?
 
You posted the explanation. Did you fail to comprehend it? More importantly...

Q: why did you expect to see trends in de-trended data?
I'm attampting to understand why past data needs to be manipulated. I stated that a while ago. Still no explanation. Standard protocol for your side. avoid discussion. hahahahahahahahahaha the facts are only in your little world do things you write about occur. Stay there.:badgrin:
 
I'm attampting to understand why past data needs to be manipulated. I stated that a while ago. Still no explanation. Standard protocol for your side. avoid discussion. hahahahahahahahahaha the facts are only in your little world do things you write about occur. Stay there.

These links have been posted before, but I guess you missed them.

Monitoring Global and U.S. Temperatures at NOAA s National Climatic Data Center Monitoring

References National Climatic Data Center NCDC

The USHCN Version 2 Serial Monthly Dataset

Data.GISS GISS Surface Temperature Analysis GISTEMP

Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

From Denier hero Judith Curry
Understanding adjustments to temperature data Climate Etc.
Dr Curry says "Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth; rather, scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years."
 
Last edited:
I'm attampting to understand why past data needs to be manipulated. I stated that a while ago. Still no explanation. Standard protocol for your side. avoid discussion. hahahahahahahahahaha the facts are only in your little world do things you write about occur. Stay there.

These links have been posted before, but I guess you missed them.

Monitoring Global and U.S. Temperatures at NOAA s National Climatic Data Center Monitoring

References National Climatic Data Center NCDC

The USHCN Version 2 Serial Monthly Dataset

Data.GISS GISS Surface Temperature Analysis GISTEMP

Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

From Denier hero Judith Curry
Understanding adjustments to temperature data Climate Etc.
Dr Curry says "Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth; rather, scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years."
Thanks.
 
I'm attampting to understand why past data needs to be manipulated. I stated that a while ago. Still no explanation. Standard protocol for your side. avoid discussion. hahahahahahahahahaha the facts are only in your little world do things you write about occur. Stay there.

These links have been posted before, but I guess you missed them.

Monitoring Global and U.S. Temperatures at NOAA s National Climatic Data Center Monitoring

References National Climatic Data Center NCDC

The USHCN Version 2 Serial Monthly Dataset

Data.GISS GISS Surface Temperature Analysis GISTEMP

Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

From Denier hero Judith Curry
Understanding adjustments to temperature data Climate Etc.
Dr Curry says "Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth; rather, scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years."
ok, so explain to me why you believe the past temperature sets need to be adjusted?
 
Ok, so go read the links you lazy twit. What'd you think I posted them for?
 
I'm attampting to understand why past data needs to be manipulated. I stated that a while ago. Still no explanation. Standard protocol for your side. avoid discussion. hahahahahahahahahaha the facts are only in your little world do things you write about occur. Stay there.

These links have been posted before, but I guess you missed them.

Monitoring Global and U.S. Temperatures at NOAA s National Climatic Data Center Monitoring

References National Climatic Data Center NCDC

The USHCN Version 2 Serial Monthly Dataset

Data.GISS GISS Surface Temperature Analysis GISTEMP

Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

From Denier hero Judith Curry
Understanding adjustments to temperature data Climate Etc.
Dr Curry says "Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth; rather, scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years."


why are you lying? that quote is not from Curry.
 
So you're saying Curry posted an article from a fraudster on her blog, and knowingly defended the fraud? After all, if you read down into the comments, she flat out says how any comment calling the author a liar will be censored.
 
So you're saying Curry posted an article from a fraudster on her blog, and knowingly defended the fraud? After all, if you read down into the comments, she flat out says how any comment calling the author a liar will be censored.


are you insane? Curry often puts up guest posts from authors covering the full range of opinion. she always adds the caveat that boorish comments will not be tolerated.
 
From Denier hero Judith Curry
Understanding adjustments to temperature data Climate Etc.
Dr Curry says "Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth; rather, scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years."

why are you lying? that quote is not from Curry.

Mea culpa, mea culpa. That statement is not from Curry, it is from Zeke Hausfather on Curry's website. That is, Curry chose it and published it. It is an extensive and thorough explanation of a great deal of the justification behind adjustments to the temperature record. I went a long ways into the comments, searching for "curryja" and while she doesn't make a great many comments, what she did say about Hausfather was complimentary and I saw not one word from her in disagreement with the man. Do you believe that she disagrees with his commentary? If so, can you provide a quote in which she voices such opinions?
 

Forum List

Back
Top