An interesting article on sea levels rising..

[jc456]

That article makes absolutely NO suggestion that sea levels are not increasing. Besides, as you've been informed several times now, Zwally is by himself on this. Not a single other scientist has come out in support of his work and dozens, both before and after, flatly disagree with his findings.

******* idiot

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

 

[IanC]

That article makes absolutely NO suggestion that sea levels are not increasing. Besides, as you've been informed several times now, Zwally is by himself on this. Not a single other scientist has come out in support of his work and dozens, both before and after, flatly disagree with his findings.

******* idiot

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

Have you now moved on to denying SLR?

Tide gauge data may be getting a massage but it still would show an increase. A lot of ice has melted in the last 150 years. The oceans have also warmed up somewhat. And aquifers have been pumped out.

Where did the water go?

As usual, the difference between legitimate skeptics and the warmers is in the size of the change not the direction. Tide gauges on the shore say about 2mm/yr, satellite data from mid ocean where it cannot be verified is calculated via assumptions to be 3mm/yr.

 

[jc456]

That article makes absolutely NO suggestion that sea levels are not increasing. Besides, as you've been informed several times now, Zwally is by himself on this. Not a single other scientist has come out in support of his work and dozens, both before and after, flatly disagree with his findings.

******* idiot

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

Have you now moved on to denying SLR?

Tide gauge data may be getting a massage but it still would show an increase. A lot of ice has melted in the last 150 years. The oceans have also warmed up somewhat. And aquifers have been pumped out.

Where did the water go?

As usual, the difference between legitimate skeptics and the warmers is in the size of the change not the direction. Tide gauges on the shore say about 2mm/yr, satellite data from mid ocean where it cannot be verified is calculated via assumptions to be 3mm/yr.

Yeah, yeah, yeah and still nothing evidence wise. Dude, I stated, I've been reading, posting what I've learned, and you nothing. Why?

 

[IanC]

That article makes absolutely NO suggestion that sea levels are not increasing. Besides, as you've been informed several times now, Zwally is by himself on this. Not a single other scientist has come out in support of his work and dozens, both before and after, flatly disagree with his findings.

******* idiot

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

Have you now moved on to denying SLR?

Tide gauge data may be getting a massage but it still would show an increase. A lot of ice has melted in the last 150 years. The oceans have also warmed up somewhat. And aquifers have been pumped out.

Where did the water go?

As usual, the difference between legitimate skeptics and the warmers is in the size of the change not the direction. Tide gauges on the shore say about 2mm/yr, satellite data from mid ocean where it cannot be verified is calculated via assumptions to be 3mm/yr.

Yeah, yeah, yeah and still nothing evidence wise. Dude, I stated, I've been reading, posting what I've learned, and you nothing. Why?

You read somewhere that SLR is not rising???

Where did you read that? What period of time was considered and was the globe represented or just certain localities?

I have read quite a bit on the subject but I don't recall anyone stating your position. I think it is more likely that you are confused.

 

[jc456]

That article makes absolutely NO suggestion that sea levels are not increasing. Besides, as you've been informed several times now, Zwally is by himself on this. Not a single other scientist has come out in support of his work and dozens, both before and after, flatly disagree with his findings.

******* idiot

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

Have you now moved on to denying SLR?

Tide gauge data may be getting a massage but it still would show an increase. A lot of ice has melted in the last 150 years. The oceans have also warmed up somewhat. And aquifers have been pumped out.

Where did the water go?

As usual, the difference between legitimate skeptics and the warmers is in the size of the change not the direction. Tide gauges on the shore say about 2mm/yr, satellite data from mid ocean where it cannot be verified is calculated via assumptions to be 3mm/yr.

Yeah, yeah, yeah and still nothing evidence wise. Dude, I stated, I've been reading, posting what I've learned, and you nothing. Why?

You read somewhere that SLR is not rising???

Where did you read that? What period of time was considered and was the globe represented or just certain localities?

I have read quite a bit on the subject but I don't recall anyone stating your position. I think it is more likely that you are confused.

I think you're confused, condescending comments like that are unbecoming. Too bad. I've always answered your question even when you were tried playing gotchyouball

 

[IanC]

That article makes absolutely NO suggestion that sea levels are not increasing. Besides, as you've been informed several times now, Zwally is by himself on this. Not a single other scientist has come out in support of his work and dozens, both before and after, flatly disagree with his findings.

******* idiot

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

Have you now moved on to denying SLR?

Tide gauge data may be getting a massage but it still would show an increase. A lot of ice has melted in the last 150 years. The oceans have also warmed up somewhat. And aquifers have been pumped out.

Where did the water go?

As usual, the difference between legitimate skeptics and the warmers is in the size of the change not the direction. Tide gauges on the shore say about 2mm/yr, satellite data from mid ocean where it cannot be verified is calculated via assumptions to be 3mm/yr.

Yeah, yeah, yeah and still nothing evidence wise. Dude, I stated, I've been reading, posting what I've learned, and you nothing. Why?

You read somewhere that SLR is not rising???

Where did you read that? What period of time was considered and was the globe represented or just certain localities?

I have read quite a bit on the subject but I don't recall anyone stating your position. I think it is more likely that you are confused.

I think you're confused, condescending comments like that are unbecoming. Too bad. I've always answered your question even when you were tried playing gotchyouball

I have spent a fair amount of time over the past few years patiently explaining simple concepts to you. With close to zero effect. I now feel that I am entitled to point out your stupidity.

 

[jc456]

so you think the sea levels are rising, I ask where and you give me zip. wow,

Have you now moved on to denying SLR?

Tide gauge data may be getting a massage but it still would show an increase. A lot of ice has melted in the last 150 years. The oceans have also warmed up somewhat. And aquifers have been pumped out.

Where did the water go?

As usual, the difference between legitimate skeptics and the warmers is in the size of the change not the direction. Tide gauges on the shore say about 2mm/yr, satellite data from mid ocean where it cannot be verified is calculated via assumptions to be 3mm/yr.

Yeah, yeah, yeah and still nothing evidence wise. Dude, I stated, I've been reading, posting what I've learned, and you nothing. Why?

You read somewhere that SLR is not rising???

Where did you read that? What period of time was considered and was the globe represented or just certain localities?

I have read quite a bit on the subject but I don't recall anyone stating your position. I think it is more likely that you are confused.

I think you're confused, condescending comments like that are unbecoming. Too bad. I've always answered your question even when you were tried playing gotchyouball

I have spent a fair amount of time over the past few years patiently explaining simple concepts to you. With close to zero effect. I now feel that I am entitled to point out your stupidity.

And I'll return the stupid back at ya, cause you have now proven without a doubt you can't produce evidence to your equation. Another condescending punk. I owe you shit you fk

 

[IanC]

Hahahaha!!!!!

 

[jc456]

Hahahaha!!!!!

It's exactly what I do when people can't provide backup material required by science. It's why you fail!

 

[SSDD]

Hahahaha!!!!!

It's exactly what I do when people can't provide backup material required by science. It's why you fail!

Ian is starting to feel the same frustration that the big time wackos have been feeling for a good long time now...The climate hasn't been cooperating with them for a good long time now...but the minor wackos...the guys like Ian who believe in the magic...but just believe that it isn't as strong have had a pass because none of the big changes have happened and the were predicting little changes...now even the small changes aren't coming to pass so he is seeing his belief dashed on the rocks of reality....so he is getting frustrated and lashing out...

Maybe it is a sign of progress.....give him a few years and maybe he will give up on his failed hypothesis and be ready to start looking for the actual causes of climate change.

 

[IanC]

jc refuses to say who,exactly, told him sea level wasn't rising.

SSDD goes on a rant against his strawman impression of my position.

These two whackjobs never actually say anything of substance that they are willing explain and defend. They just have 'feelings' about things. Undefined non specific things.

 

[jc456]

jc refuses to say who,exactly, told him sea level wasn't rising.

SSDD goes on a rant against his strawman impression of my position.

These two whackjobs never actually say anything of substance that they are willing explain and defend. They just have 'feelings' about things. Undefined non specific things.

why is that more important to you than you posting up actual figures of sea levels? Maybe post up some coast that is gaining water. Is Antarctica melting? Is Greenland melting? See, in order for there to be sea level rise bubba, you have to have more water. Where's it coming from mr. Whipple?

You post up where either of those land bodies are melting.

 

[SSDD]

jc refuses to say who,exactly, told him sea level wasn't rising.

SSDD goes on a rant against his strawman impression of my position.

These two whackjobs never actually say anything of substance that they are willing explain and defend. They just have 'feelings' about things. Undefined non specific things.

Still waiting for any observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence of the magic you believe in Ian...since none is, or ever will be forthcoming, what else should we talk about?

 

[IanC]

Define this 'magic' that you say I believe in. Preferably with a quote of mine but if you are specific enough we can dispense with that.

 

[IanC]

jc refuses to say who,exactly, told him sea level wasn't rising.

SSDD goes on a rant against his strawman impression of my position.

These two whackjobs never actually say anything of substance that they are willing explain and defend. They just have 'feelings' about things. Undefined non specific things.

why is that more important to you than you posting up actual figures of sea levels? Maybe post up some coast that is gaining water. Is Antarctica melting? Is Greenland melting? See, in order for there to be sea level rise bubba, you have to have more water. Where's it coming from mr. Whipple?

You post up where either of those land bodies are melting.

Are you asking me to bump up some of my old threads?

I have been scoffing at altimetry calibration since they became popular to measure such things as Antarctic ice mass. I was the first to bring up Zwally's contrary findings, well before he finally released them in a paper.

I criticise mistakes and exaggerations. You guys deny basic physics.

 

[SSDD]

Define this 'magic' that you say I believe in. Preferably with a quote of mine but if you are specific enough we can dispense with that.

Back radiation would be a fine magical occurrence to start with. Also you seem to be dodging my repeated question so I will ask again...how many predictive failures do you think a hypothesis should be allowed before it is scrapped?

 

[IanC]

Define this 'magic' that you say I believe in. Preferably with a quote of mine but if you are specific enough we can dispense with that.

Back radiation would be a fine magical occurrence to start with. Also you seem to be dodging my repeated question so I will ask again...how many predictive failures do you think a hypothesis should be allowed before it is scrapped?

What predictive failure of mine are you referencing? I cannot argue against some phantom thought rattling around in your head.

 

[jc456]

jc refuses to say who,exactly, told him sea level wasn't rising.

SSDD goes on a rant against his strawman impression of my position.

These two whackjobs never actually say anything of substance that they are willing explain and defend. They just have 'feelings' about things. Undefined non specific things.

why is that more important to you than you posting up actual figures of sea levels? Maybe post up some coast that is gaining water. Is Antarctica melting? Is Greenland melting? See, in order for there to be sea level rise bubba, you have to have more water. Where's it coming from mr. Whipple?

You post up where either of those land bodies are melting.

Are you asking me to bump up some of my old threads?

I have been scoffing at altimetry calibration since they became popular to measure such things as Antarctic ice mass. I was the first to bring up Zwally's contrary findings, well before he finally released them in a paper.

I criticise mistakes and exaggerations. You guys deny basic physics.

Well Ian, I am a person who needs logical explanations on why someone believes what they believe. If it isn't logical, I can't trust it as fact. Period. It has to pass a smell test for me. So far, there hasn't been one iota's worth of evidence presented in this Environmental forum on CO2 affecting climate. There are many bullshit posts in here on how psuedoscience works, but none on actual science being done. And one simple one for all is, that for science to be done after a hypothesis is developed, one must validate that hypothesis to become an actual theory. So far, there is no actual CO2 theory that I can tell from all the published crap in here.

Back to sea level, in order for sea levels to rise, you must have more water. That seems fairly straight forward don't you think? And the fact is, that until the two land masses covered in ice actually start melting, I have no idea where you think additional water is coming from to raise sea levels. So the discussion doesn't pass my smell test.

The links I've read concern CO2 and affects on ice, which I can't find one source that can claim CO2 melts ice. So, failure number one. Two, since the temperatures at the poles hasn't gone up, from resources I've read on the internet, I don't expect those two land masses to lose ice anytime soon. And finally, since CO2 does not increase warming, I have no idea why anyone would need to shut down power plants and spend trillions of dollars on useless renewable options causing economic chaos.

And i know you like to fall back on physics, physics, physics, but physics is also about validation, and your sources have presented zip validation that CO2 can magically warm the surface of this planet. So I'm not exactly sure I know what you'd need from me. I don't claim anything. I say there is no warming, we've been on a pause for almost 20 years. IPCC even stated so in AR5. I've posted that excerpt many times in the past in here. I say there is no sea level rise cause there is no validation that coast line water levels has risen. The ocean wave cycles that exist makes it impossible to accurately read the levels of the sea. The seas surge, there are tides, and on and on. I trust none of the climate scientists who are funded by governments money. None. It's a scam and a half. Climategate proved them as untrustworthy.

 

[IanC]

Tide gauges have been around for a long time. While I think there has been some 'modifications' to squeeze out the most rise, and to reduce inconvenient past bumps, on the whole I am satisfied that there has been an increase during the last 150 years. Perhaps about a foot in total.

This coincides with the observed glacial loss, presumed but uncertain ocean warming, pumped aquifers, etc. I think SLR is rising, just not at the exaggerated rate put forward by the warmers.

 

[jc456]

Tide gauges have been around for a long time. While I think there has been some 'modifications' to squeeze out the most rise, and to reduce inconvenient past bumps, on the whole I am satisfied that there has been an increase during the last 150 years. Perhaps about a foot in total.

This coincides with the observed glacial loss, presumed but uncertain ocean warming, pumped aquifers, etc. I think SLR is rising, just not at the exaggerated rate put forward by the warmers.

How often do you suppose the oceans are calm for a reading? I believe the oceans are mostly always actively agitating/ moving. How do you believe they squeeze out these inconsistencies? 75% of the planet is water and it's mostly always moving. I highly doubt humankind has figured out how to measure all the sea. I have little faith here. Doesn't seem logical to be able to do that. Depth finders on ships and buoys can tell how deep, but the ocean floor is not flat and it is imperfect. Shorelines can be monitored and measured and IMO the best place to measure the height of the sea. I haven't found much of any level changes anywhere other than sinking islands/ atolls in the pacific ring.

I don't get the glacier mention from you. Which glaciers are you referencing as a source of input?

Me personally, believe that the oceans rise and fall all the time. Storms and river run offs maybe add, but then because there is so much water, evaporation is most likely very high when it is warm. Since much of the ocean is warm, I'd expect quite a bit of evaporation.