Sea level rise linking to global warming

Chris

Gold Member
May 30, 2008
23,154
1,967
205
A consistent link exists between changes in global mean surface temperature and sea level, resulting in a greater rate of sea-level rise along the U.S. Atlantic coast than that of the past 2,000 years, says an international research team.

“Sea-level rise is a potentially disastrous outcome of climate change, as rising temperatures melt land-based iced and warm ocean waters,” says Benjamin Horton, associate professor and director of the Sea Level Research Laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania.

Horton and Andrew Kemp, fellow postdoctoral now at Yale University’s Climate and Energy Institute conducted the research which was published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on June 20.

The team constructed a new 2,000-year history of seal level elevations, which will help scientists refine the models currently used to predict climate-change-induced sea level rise.

By combining the sea level changes through time with the already established temperature record for the past 1,000 years, researchers were able to create a model that is partly based on observations, and matches what occurred historically. Future changes in sea level can therefore be predicted.

Results from the study showed that sea level was relatively stable from 200 B.C. to 1,000 A.D.

Sea level rose by almost half a millimeter a year for 400 years starting in the 11th century, known as the Medieval Climate Anomaly, when the climate started to warm, say researchers.

Then a second period of stable sea level associated with a cooler period known as the Little Ice Age occurred and lasted until the late 19th Century.

The study says that since the 19th Century, sea level has risen by more than 2 millimeters per year on average, which is considered the steepest rate for more than 2,100 years.

Increasing Temperatures Linked To Rapid Sea Level Rise - Science News - redOrbit
 
At the current rate of increase, we expect the Bahamas to disappear under a heap of bullshit 5 miles deep within a decade. Other effects of chronic bullshit deepening include pasty Minnesotans not getting suntans, steaks in Kansas City tasting like crap, and Detroit continuing to smell awful.
 
yet another staggering failure of peer review! M Mann has produce yet another Hockey Stick graph, and to make things even worse he is STILL using the upsidedown Tiljander cores!

how is the ordinary layperson supposed to know that papers like these are contaminated with the voodoo science of Mann and the rest of the hockey team when peer review wont even stop the same errors from being used time after time?
 
yet another staggering failure of peer review! M Mann has produce yet another Hockey Stick graph, and to make things even worse he is STILL using the upsidedown Tiljander cores!

how is the ordinary layperson supposed to know that papers like these are contaminated with the voodoo science of Mann and the rest of the hockey team when peer review wont even stop the same errors from being used time after time?





But Ian,

If they actually reverted to real peer review they couldn't get the grants they want. If they had to do real science they would starve.
 
at least the Medieval Warm Period is being acknowledged even though they find it necessary to call it 'M Climate Anomoly'. hahaha
 
yet another staggering failure of peer review! M Mann has produce yet another Hockey Stick graph, and to make things even worse he is STILL using the upsidedown Tiljander cores!

how is the ordinary layperson supposed to know that papers like these are contaminated with the voodoo science of Mann and the rest of the hockey team when peer review wont even stop the same errors from being used time after time?
Maybe because they aren't errors.

Hell, they've now resorted to citing advocacy groups like Greenpeace as "peer reviewed'.

As everybody now knows, the headlines from IPCC WGIII report on renewable energy appear to have been written by Greenpeace. When the Summary for Policy Makers was published last month, I was one of many who noted the role of Greenpeace, and the extent to which the SPM's authors were involved in the renewable energy industry. Steve McIntyre's discovery has caused further criticism of the IPCC's letting such overt agendas near its evidence-making for policy-makers, even from the green camp, albeit only because it is such bad PR. But there is yet more to this story.

The European Renewable Energy Council (EREC), who co-authored the report with Greenpeace, claims to be an 'umbrella organisation of the European renewable energy industry, trade and research associations' of the renewable sectors. 'EREC represents an industry with an annual turnover of EUR 70 billion and providing over 550.000 jobs'. They consist of a number of partner organisations, each representing one technology sector within renewable energy, such as wind, geothermal and solar, and each of these has as many as hundreds of members. As Mark Lynas points out, then, it is no surprise that the EREC 'are of course enthusiasts for renewable energy’s prospects because they make money from selling wind turbines and solar panels, so hardly count as an unbiased source'.

- Bishop Hill blog - Ideological money*laundering
 
What's up with THIS!

Sea level rose by almost half a millimeter a year for 400 years starting in the 11th century, known as the Medieval Climate Anomaly, when the climate started to warm, say researchers.

Did we have another round of purging from the eco-left Bible? I've only heard this called this called the Medieval WARM Period..
 
At the current rate of increase, we expect the Bahamas to disappear under a heap of bullshit 5 miles deep within a decade. Other effects of chronic bullshit deepening include pasty Minnesotans not getting suntans, steaks in Kansas City tasting like crap, and Detroit continuing to smell awful.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate
 
Isn't having Michael Mann continuing to do "scientific research" a lot like hiring Bernie Madoff as your CFO?
 
Se level is not rising, the land is sinking becuase we are drawing the oil out from under it.
Well that combined with the increasing weight of people on the land.
 
here is a paper done by the US Corps of Engineers. http://www.jcronline.org/doi/full/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-10-00157.1

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses do not indicate acceleration in sea level in U.S. tide gauge records during the 20th century. Instead, for each time period we consider, the records show small decelerations that are consistent with a number of earlier studies of worldwide-gauge records. The decelerations that we obtain are opposite in sign and one to two orders of magnitude less than the +0.07 to +0.28 mm/y2 accelerations that are required to reach sea levels predicted for 2100 by Vermeer and Rahmsdorf (2009), Jevrejeva, Moore, and Grinsted (2010), and Grinsted, Moore, and Jevrejeva (2010). Bindoff et al. (2007) note an increase in worldwide temperature from 1906 to 2005 of 0.74°C. It is essential that investigations continue to address why this worldwide-temperature increase has not produced acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years, and indeed why global sea level has possibly decelerated for at least the last 80 years.

I recommend reading the paper as it covers many of the topics, with links to other paper's abstracts. the actual data from the last 100+ years doesnt seem to align very well with the doomsday scenarios sent out to the public.
 
Last edited:
At the current rate of increase, we expect the Bahamas to disappear under a heap of bullshit 5 miles deep within a decade. Other effects of chronic bullshit deepening include pasty Minnesotans not getting suntans, steaks in Kansas City tasting like crap, and Detroit continuing to smell awful.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate

LOLOLOLOL......how true....one idiot's moronic bullshit can only be properly "peer" reviewed by another idiot, I suppose....LOLOLOL.... and you two are definitely "peers" in the worldwide fraternity of ignorant retards....
 
YAAAAAAAWWWWWWNNNN Wake me up when this crisis proves to be a false alarm just like the whole string of crises that go back to the founding date of the green movement.

The oceans are not acidifying. They are becoming ever so slightly more neutral. The oceans are a buffered solution that can not become acidic. Further, the present PH is well within the natural norms and paleohistory tells us that life in the oceans thrived in a more neutral ocan.
 
At the current rate of increase, we expect the Bahamas to disappear under a heap of bullshit 5 miles deep within a decade. Other effects of chronic bullshit deepening include pasty Minnesotans not getting suntans, steaks in Kansas City tasting like crap, and Detroit continuing to smell awful.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate

LOLOLOLOL......how true....one idiot's moronic bullshit can only be properly "peer" reviewed by another idiot, I suppose....LOLOLOL.... and you two are definitely "peers" in the worldwide fraternity of ignorant retards....

We have Consensus that you Warmers are lying EnviroMarxists.

You know, Dear, it's only a matter of time now before the real scientists at labs and universities start asking why they continue to have you people bringing their reputation down -- think "Ghostbusters" only not funny.
 
YAAAAAAAWWWWWWNNNN Wake me up when this crisis proves to be a false alarm just like the whole string of crises that go back to the founding date of the green movement.

The oceans are not acidifying. They are becoming ever so slightly more neutral. The oceans are a buffered solution that can not become acidic. Further, the present PH is well within the natural norms and paleohistory tells us that life in the oceans thrived in a more neutral ocan.

No one said the oceans were becoming acidic, as in below 7.0, just MORE acidic as in the difference between 8.0 and 7.9. If you don't acknowledge that one is more acidic than the other despite their both being above 7.0, then you're just playing with words and not using standard scientific constructs, further putting into doubt your dredentials and that you know what you're talking about. :doubt:
 
YAAAAAAAWWWWWWNNNN Wake me up when this crisis proves to be a false alarm just like the whole string of crises that go back to the founding date of the green movement.

The oceans are not acidifying. They are becoming ever so slightly more neutral. The oceans are a buffered solution that can not become acidic. Further, the present PH is well within the natural norms and paleohistory tells us that life in the oceans thrived in a more neutral ocan.

No one said the oceans were becoming acidic, as in below 7.0, just MORE acidic as in the difference between 8.0 and 7.9. If you don't acknowledge that one is more acidic than the other despite their both being above 7.0, then you're just playing with words and not using standard scientific constructs, further putting into doubt your dredentials and that you know what you're talking about. :doubt:

A Warmer talking about "standard scientific constructs"! How cute!!
 
yet another staggering failure of peer review! M Mann has produce yet another Hockey Stick graph, and to make things even worse he is STILL using the upsidedown Tiljander cores!

how is the ordinary layperson supposed to know that papers like these are contaminated with the voodoo science of Mann and the rest of the hockey team when peer review wont even stop the same errors from being used time after time?

No link, no credibility. Just a bs statement.
 

Forum List

Back
Top