An interesting article on sea levels rising..

[jc456]

BAR (Biblical Archeology Review) 19:03, May/June 1993, as quoted by the following link:
March | 2011 | Leon's Message Board
---
. . . was once the centerpiece of Herod’s palace, the nearly Olympic-sized swimming pool. The rectangular pool measures 115 feet long, 59 feet wide and at least 8 feet deep. Water channels leading into the pool from the shore have led excavators to surmise that the pool, though surrounded on three sides by the Mediterranean, had been filled by fresh water. If they are correct, the pool is further indication that Herod thrived on building in the face of natural obstacles.
---

Now, admitting they've been proven totally wrong yet another time isn't in the realm of possibility for deniers. That kind of honesty just isn't in their DNA.

Hence, I'm waiting to be amused by the contortions they'll go into now. I'm sure it will involve more insults thrown my way, along with other creative evasions on their part. Their own picture shot down their loopy conspiracy theory, as does all the science and all the evidence, and that's got to sting, so they'll be angry. Maybe they'll invite some more deniers and try to mob me, like a pack of jackals going after a lion.

how is that evidence? Highlight the parts that fit your point. Cause here is what I see:
have led excavators to surmise that the pool
If they are correct,

Far from any glaring evidence I'll tell ya.

 

[mamooth]

The seaport dock used 2,000 years ago in Ceaserea. High and dry.

Caesarea Maritima - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
---
today the jetties lie more than 5 meters underwater
---

As failures go, that was a rather spectacular one on your part.

 

[westwall]

BAR (Biblical Archeology Review) 19:03, May/June 1993, as quoted by the following link:
March | 2011 | Leon's Message Board
---
. . . was once the centerpiece of Herod’s palace, the nearly Olympic-sized swimming pool. The rectangular pool measures 115 feet long, 59 feet wide and at least 8 feet deep. Water channels leading into the pool from the shore have led excavators to surmise that the pool, though surrounded on three sides by the Mediterranean, had been filled by fresh water. If they are correct, the pool is further indication that Herod thrived on building in the face of natural obstacles.
---

Now, admitting they've been proven totally wrong yet another time isn't in the realm of possibility for deniers. Honesty just isn't in their DNA. If they were honest, they couldn't be deniers.

Hence, I'm waiting to be amused by the contortions they'll go into now. I'm sure it will involve more insults thrown my way, along with other creative evasions on their part. Their own picture shot down their loopy conspiracy theory, as does all the science and all the evidence, and that's got to sting, so they'll be angry. Maybe they'll invite some more deniers and try to mob me, like a pack of jackals going after a lion.

"Into the pool from the shore"..... Sounds like a climatologist claiming that cold actually makes it warm,....

 

[westwall]

The seaport dock used 2,000 years ago in Ceaserea. High and dry.

Caesarea Maritima - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
---
today the jetties lie more than 5 meters underwater
---

As failures go, that was a rather spectacular one on your part.

Funny how you didn't post the reason for their demise....

Also, large lumps of lime were found in all five of the cores studied at Caesarea, which shows that the mixture was not mixed thoroughly.[33] However, stability would not have been seriously affected if the harbor had not been constructed over a geological fault line that runs along the coast. Seismic action gradually took its toll on the breakwaters, causing them to tilt down and settle into the seabed.[35] Also, studies of seabed deposits at Caesarea have shown that a tsunami struck the area sometime during the 1st or 2nd century CE.[36] Although it is unknown if this tsunami simply damaged or completely destroyed the harbor, it is known that by the 6th century the harbor was unusable and today the jetties lie more than 5 meters underwater.[37]





DOH! That's called a lie by omission doofus.

 

[mamooth]

Weatherman said the port facilities were high and dry.

I pointed out they're under the ocean, hence his story was nonsense and a big fail.

You're now running cover for his embarrassing failure. Poorly, I might add.

Shall I now talk about the Roman fish holding tanks, carefully constructed to be 20 cm about the high tide line (on a stable shoreline), which are now more than a meter below the surface? You really don't want to get into archeology, being how all of it contradicts your conspiracy theories.

 

[Moonglow]

This what gets me is the AGW cult said they eliminated every known variable ...and there was no warming pause..

Yea ok


Yet a little volcano cause a cooling pulse?



The study was performed using a suite of 40 climate change models to determine how the Pinatubo eruption affected seas and the global distribution of water. The scientists estimate as a result that sea level not only fell between 5 and 7 millimeters


Got to love scientist guessetimations

Space aliens are siphoning water from the melted ice and that is why the sea levels are not rising...

 

[Weatherman2020]

Weatherman said the port facilities were high and dry.

I pointed out they're under the ocean, hence his story was nonsense and a big fail.

You're now running cover for his embarrassing failure. Poorly, I might add.

Shall I now talk about the Roman fish holding tanks, carefully constructed to be 20 cm about the high tide line (on a stable shoreline), which are now more than a meter below the surface? You really don't want to get into archeology, being how all of it contradicts your conspiracy theories.

The dock is right there in the middle of the picture to the left of the fence, dufus.
He's referring to the breakwater.
Please, try embracing science.

 

[SSDD]

Weatherman said the port facilities were high and dry.

I pointed out they're under the ocean, hence his story was nonsense and a big fail.

You're now running cover for his embarrassing failure. Poorly, I might add.

Shall I now talk about the Roman fish holding tanks, carefully constructed to be 20 cm about the high tide line (on a stable shoreline), which are now more than a meter below the surface? You really don't want to get into archeology, being how all of it contradicts your conspiracy theories.

The dock is right there in the middle of the picture to the left of the fence, dufus.
He's referring to the breakwater.
Please, try embracing science.
View attachment 85705

Good luck getting that crazy old cat lady to embrace anything other than the warmer cult dogma.

 

[Crick]

So, where do you think these data came from?

And, before you give in to temptation to just call it all bullshit, let me remind you that the RAW and processed data from TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 are all legally required to be (and are) freely available to the public.

 

[jc456]

So, where do you think these data came from?

And, before you give in to temptation to just call it all bullshit, let me remind you that the RAW and processed data from TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 are all legally required to be (and are) available to the public.

I have no fking idea. why don't you give me a location on the globe that can verify it? Can you do that or not? nope.

 

[LaDexter]

So, where do you think these data came from?

 

[SSDD]

So, where do you think these data came from?

And, before you give in to temptation to just call it all bullshit, let me remind you that the RAW and processed data from TOPEX, Jason-1 and Jason-2 are all legally required to be (and are) freely available to the public.

Tell me crick...are your eyes brown?...they must be....one couldn't be as full of $h!t as you and not have brown eyes.

You aren't seeing 3.3mm of sea level rise per year...not in the actual ocean anyway. You are seeing 3.22mm of sea level rise in graphs...and models produced by those who are perpetuating the AGW narrative and raking in the money for it but in the ocean...sorry....just not there. Not that I think you warmers will be interested in seeing actual evidence of the level of fraud happening within mainstream climate science, but let me show an example for the benefit of those who aren't taking their kook-aid intravenously. Observe....the blatant altering of past sea level data in an effort to reinforce the imminent climate disaster narrative. Much like the blatant alteration of past temperatures to support the current narrative, but that's another post....

Luckily, old data is still hanging around to be found to bring the fraud of the climate science modern climate science community into high relief. This is the sea level increase between 1880 and 1980 shown by NASA in 1980. The graph shows an increase of just over 3 inches of sea level increase between 1880 and 1980....NOTE the sharp decrease in the rate of increase after 1950.

You can't really scare people with a 3 inch sea level increase over a 100 year period so the frauds in climate pseudoscience increased the figure to 6 inches per century with nothing more than adjustments.... NOTE the completely FAKE acceleration after 1950.

Here is an overlay of the two graphs on the same time scale. One is scientific in nature...showing actual observed sea level increases...the other is a piece of alarmist propaganda that has nothing whatsoever to do with science and everything to do with supporting a fraudulent narrative.

Then in 2004, the University of Colorado showed 2.8 mm per year rate of sea level increase. This is what the RAW Jason and TOPEX data look like...not similar in the least to what you claim to be the RAW data.

2.8 mm per year? Not very scary...even to alarmists so again, the data is heavily massaged using inappropriate, and completely fraudulent methods to achieve a 3.3mm per year rate of increase. A global isostatic adjustment was applied which is blatantly fraudulent in the context of sea level increase. Such adjustments are correct in the context of calculating ocean depth as the sea floor sinks and have absolutely no relationship to measuring sea level by satellites. Here is what the adjustments look like...recognize the POS graph as the same garbage you posted and claimed to be the RAW data.....what a laugh....and what a liar.

Here is an overlay of the two graphs at the same time scale....one using valid methodology and one using calculations that are not appropriate for determining sea level increase for no other reason than to support the AGW narrative.

So some numbers got a massage and a picture was painted to give the appearance of imminent disaster. Shit happens...right? But when the "spokes agency" for modern climate science repeats the fraud as truth....we have real evidence of deliberate data corruption with the intent to deceive regarding climate change. In 1990 the IPCC said:

Then in 2013 using blatantly massaged data and obviously fraudulent graphs, the IPCC said exactly the opposite of what they said in 1990. You guys are lairs crick...guilty of malfeasance, and deliberate fraud for no other reason than to gain political power. You have damaged the reputation of science so deeply that it will take many many decades after this circus is over to restore the trust in science that you climate wackos have destroyed for political reasons

 

[Crick]

That you should think mainstream science guilty of fraud and malfeasance - having a fair idea of your actual technical competence - worries me not in the slightest.

PS, you might familiarize yourself with the difference removing seasonal signals makes to graphs like these. And how about you point out where I said that UC data was "raw"..

PPS, dude, you are really a pathetic dick.

 

[SSDD]

That isn't what happened crick....they applied a completely unjustified global isostatic adjustment in the case of your POS graph...and do you call completely erasing the obvious slowdown in the rate of sea level rise shown post 1950 in the graph from 1980 a seasonable adjustment?...for that matter, how do you possibly call any of the adjustments shown in the graphs seasonal adjustment...how about showing some data that shows exactly what the seasonal difference in sea level is and then lets compare it to the graphs...

You are a bald faced liar crick...you say and claim whatever you think is necessary to support the AGW narrative...and don't seem to be able to post anything that doesn't include at least one logical fallacy....must suck to be you.

 

[jillian]

Check out this part of the story...

Seas aren’t just rising, scientists say — it’s worse than that. They’re speeding up.



The problem, or even mystery, is that scientists haven’t seen an unambiguous acceleration of sea level rise in a data record that’s considered the best for observing the problem — the one that began with the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite, which launched in late 1992 and carried an instrument, called a radar altimeter, that gives a very precise measurement of sea level around the globe. (It has since been succeeded by other satellites providing similar measurements.)

This record actually shows a decrease in the rate of sea level rise from the first decade measured by satellites (1993 to 2002) to the second one (2003 to 2012). “We’ve been looking at the altimeter records and scratching our heads, and saying, ‘why aren’t we seeing an acceleration in the satellite record?’ We should be,” said John Fasullo, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

In a new study in the open-access journal Scientific Reports, however, Fasullo and two colleagues say they have now resolved this problem. It turns out, they say, that sea level rise was artificially masked in the satellite record by the fact that one year before the satellite launched, the Earth experienced a major cooling pulse.

see, this is the problem with science deniers. "open access" journals mean that the articles aren't vetted and are largely nonsense.....which is why this is where science deniers get their supportive "studies".

thanks though.

 

[SSDD]

Check out this part of the story...

Seas aren’t just rising, scientists say — it’s worse than that. They’re speeding up.



The problem, or even mystery, is that scientists haven’t seen an unambiguous acceleration of sea level rise in a data record that’s considered the best for observing the problem — the one that began with the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite, which launched in late 1992 and carried an instrument, called a radar altimeter, that gives a very precise measurement of sea level around the globe. (It has since been succeeded by other satellites providing similar measurements.)

This record actually shows a decrease in the rate of sea level rise from the first decade measured by satellites (1993 to 2002) to the second one (2003 to 2012). “We’ve been looking at the altimeter records and scratching our heads, and saying, ‘why aren’t we seeing an acceleration in the satellite record?’ We should be,” said John Fasullo, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

In a new study in the open-access journal Scientific Reports, however, Fasullo and two colleagues say they have now resolved this problem. It turns out, they say, that sea level rise was artificially masked in the satellite record by the fact that one year before the satellite launched, the Earth experienced a major cooling pulse.

see, this is the problem with science deniers. "open access" journals mean that the articles aren't vetted and are largely nonsense.....which is why this is where science deniers get their supportive "studies".

thanks though.

What you mean is that they bypass the well documented pal review system put in place by the gatekeepers and present data that is considered to be heresy by the high church of AGW.

thanks though.

 

[Crick]

Well, that's one viewpoint. It perfectly matches the viewpoint of fools griping that the experts are aware they're fools, but take it however you want.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Check out this part of the story...

Seas aren’t just rising, scientists say — it’s worse than that. They’re speeding up.



The problem, or even mystery, is that scientists haven’t seen an unambiguous acceleration of sea level rise in a data record that’s considered the best for observing the problem — the one that began with the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite, which launched in late 1992 and carried an instrument, called a radar altimeter, that gives a very precise measurement of sea level around the globe. (It has since been succeeded by other satellites providing similar measurements.)

This record actually shows a decrease in the rate of sea level rise from the first decade measured by satellites (1993 to 2002) to the second one (2003 to 2012). “We’ve been looking at the altimeter records and scratching our heads, and saying, ‘why aren’t we seeing an acceleration in the satellite record?’ We should be,” said John Fasullo, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

In a new study in the open-access journal Scientific Reports, however, Fasullo and two colleagues say they have now resolved this problem. It turns out, they say, that sea level rise was artificially masked in the satellite record by the fact that one year before the satellite launched, the Earth experienced a major cooling pulse.

see, this is the problem with science deniers. "open access" journals mean that the articles aren't vetted and are largely nonsense.....which is why this is where science deniers get their supportive "studies".

thanks though.

Is that your word of the day sweetheart...vetted?

Vetted by whom...Michael Mann or John Cook?

Who are nourtous for suppressing real science?

This is a damn sattalite that proves there was a cold pulse produced by a little volcano. They keep on saying there was no lull.

 

[jillian]

Check out this part of the story...

Seas aren’t just rising, scientists say — it’s worse than that. They’re speeding up.



The problem, or even mystery, is that scientists haven’t seen an unambiguous acceleration of sea level rise in a data record that’s considered the best for observing the problem — the one that began with the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite, which launched in late 1992 and carried an instrument, called a radar altimeter, that gives a very precise measurement of sea level around the globe. (It has since been succeeded by other satellites providing similar measurements.)

This record actually shows a decrease in the rate of sea level rise from the first decade measured by satellites (1993 to 2002) to the second one (2003 to 2012). “We’ve been looking at the altimeter records and scratching our heads, and saying, ‘why aren’t we seeing an acceleration in the satellite record?’ We should be,” said John Fasullo, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

In a new study in the open-access journal Scientific Reports, however, Fasullo and two colleagues say they have now resolved this problem. It turns out, they say, that sea level rise was artificially masked in the satellite record by the fact that one year before the satellite launched, the Earth experienced a major cooling pulse.

see, this is the problem with science deniers. "open access" journals mean that the articles aren't vetted and are largely nonsense.....which is why this is where science deniers get their supportive "studies".

thanks though.

What you mean is that they bypass the well documented pal review system put in place by the gatekeepers and present data that is considered to be heresy by the high church of AGW.

thanks though.

No. What I mean is that they aren't legitimate

 

[jillian]

Check out this part of the story...

Seas aren’t just rising, scientists say — it’s worse than that. They’re speeding up.



The problem, or even mystery, is that scientists haven’t seen an unambiguous acceleration of sea level rise in a data record that’s considered the best for observing the problem — the one that began with the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite, which launched in late 1992 and carried an instrument, called a radar altimeter, that gives a very precise measurement of sea level around the globe. (It has since been succeeded by other satellites providing similar measurements.)

This record actually shows a decrease in the rate of sea level rise from the first decade measured by satellites (1993 to 2002) to the second one (2003 to 2012). “We’ve been looking at the altimeter records and scratching our heads, and saying, ‘why aren’t we seeing an acceleration in the satellite record?’ We should be,” said John Fasullo, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

In a new study in the open-access journal Scientific Reports, however, Fasullo and two colleagues say they have now resolved this problem. It turns out, they say, that sea level rise was artificially masked in the satellite record by the fact that one year before the satellite launched, the Earth experienced a major cooling pulse.

see, this is the problem with science deniers. "open access" journals mean that the articles aren't vetted and are largely nonsense.....which is why this is where science deniers get their supportive "studies".

thanks though.

Is that your word of the day sweetheart...vetted?

Vetted by whom...Michael Mann or John Cook?

Who are nourtous for suppressing real science?

This is a damn sattalite that proves there was a cold pulse produced by a little volcano. They keep on saying there was no lull.

Aw teddy bear. Was vetted a big word for you.

Science exists whether you believe it or not. It's sad how somewhere anti-intellectualism tells you that the people who know what they're talking about should be ignored but people who don't should be listened to.

It's bizarre