No Sea Level Rise says Isle of the Dead

[RollingThunder]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

Your posts indicate that you are completely brain-dead, Ejakulatra.

In the real world....

Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries
The New York Times
FEB. 22, 2016

Fastest in 2,800 years?
How fast did the sea rise in 1056 AD?

You mean a clueless ignorant retard like you doesn't already know the answer, WitheredMan?

Or are you just employing the denier cult 'argument' of 'ignorant incredulous disbelief' in science? As usual.

Can't tell us how fast the sea was rising in 1056AD? Surprise Surprise

Another idiotic response from the troll WitheredMan.

Your assumption that the scientists responsible for the study I cited don't know what they are talking about is just more denier cult anti-science bullshit.

Temperature-driven global sea-level variability in the Common Era
Current Issue - > vol. 113 no. 11 - > Robert E. Kopp, E1434–E1441, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1517056113

1. Robert E. Koppa,b,c,1,
2. Andrew C. Kempd,
3. Klaus Bittermanne,
4. Benjamin P. Hortonb,f,g,h,
5. Jeffrey P. Donnellyi,
6. W. Roland Gehrelsj,
7. Carling C. Haya,b,k,
8. Jerry X. Mitrovicak,
9. Eric D. Morrowa,b, and
10. Stefan Rahmstorfe(Author Affiliations)

* Edited by Anny Cazenave, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, Toulouse, France, and approved January 4, 2016 (received for review August 27, 2015)

• 
  
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Authors & Info
  • Figures
  • SI
  • Metrics
  • Related Content
  • PDF
  • PDF + SI

Significance
We present the first, to our knowledge, estimate of global sea-level (GSL) change over the last ∼3,000 years that is based upon statistical synthesis of a global database of regional sea-level reconstructions. GSL varied by ∼±8 cm over the pre-Industrial Common Era, with a notable decline over 1000–1400 CE coinciding with ∼0.2 °C of global cooling. The 20th century rise was extremely likely faster than during any of the 27 previous centuries. Semiempirical modeling indicates that, without global warming, GSL in the 20th century very likely would have risen by between −3 cm and +7 cm, rather than the ∼14 cm observed. Semiempirical 21st century projections largely reconcile differences between Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and semiempirical models.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

Your posts indicate that you are completely brain-dead, Ejakulatra.

In the real world....

Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries
The New York Times
FEB. 22, 2016

Fastest in 2,800 years?
How fast did the sea rise in 1056 AD?

You mean a clueless ignorant retard like you doesn't already know the answer, WitheredMan?

Or are you just employing the denier cult 'argument' of 'ignorant incredulous disbelief' in science? As usual.

Can't tell us how fast the sea was rising in 1056AD? Surprise Surprise

Another idiotic response from the troll WitheredMan.

Your assumption that the scientists responsible for the study I cited don't know what they are talking about is just more denier cult anti-science bullshit.

Temperature-driven global sea-level variability in the Common Era
Current Issue - > vol. 113 no. 11 - > Robert E. Kopp, E1434–E1441, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1517056113

1. Robert E. Koppa,b,c,1,
2. Andrew C. Kempd,
3. Klaus Bittermanne,
4. Benjamin P. Hortonb,f,g,h,
5. Jeffrey P. Donnellyi,
6. W. Roland Gehrelsj,
7. Carling C. Haya,b,k,
8. Jerry X. Mitrovicak,
9. Eric D. Morrowa,b, and
10. Stefan Rahmstorfe(Author Affiliations)

* Edited by Anny Cazenave, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, Toulouse, France, and approved January 4, 2016 (received for review August 27, 2015)

• 
  
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Authors & Info
  • Figures
  • SI
  • Metrics
  • Related Content
  • PDF
  • PDF + SI

Significance
We present the first, to our knowledge, estimate of global sea-level (GSL) change over the last ∼3,000 years that is based upon statistical synthesis of a global database of regional sea-level reconstructions. GSL varied by ∼±8 cm over the pre-Industrial Common Era, with a notable decline over 1000–1400 CE coinciding with ∼0.2 °C of global cooling. The 20th century rise was extremely likely faster than during any of the 27 previous centuries. Semiempirical modeling indicates that, without global warming, GSL in the 20th century very likely would have risen by between −3 cm and +7 cm, rather than the ∼14 cm observed. Semiempirical 21st century projections largely reconcile differences between Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and semiempirical models.

I will politely ask a third time.
What was the sea level rise in 1056AD.

 

[RollingThunder]

Tell us, how is it that I can stand on what was a dock 2,000 years ago and the ocean is hundreds of feet away? Caesarea, built by Harod.

Your photo shows the sea still completely filling the harbor, dumbass.

There may be some slight variation depending on whether the tide is in or out, but Caesarea is still right on the coast, you poor delusional troll.

Wow, a sea filling a harbor!
And he calls me a dumbass!

And, indeed, you are a major dumbass, since you were the one trying to claim that the sea no longer filled the harbor but was "hundreds of feet away". DUMBASS!!!

 

[ClosedCaption]

What location has those characteristics?

The house you showed.
Bangladesh you showed.
Any other pic you showed.
All BS anti-science.

Ok, I'm referring to specifically where you asked "I asked how an ocean can rise 10 feet in one location but not 100 miles up the coast."

If you have a location where that is happening then let me know, but it sounds like another storytime campfire tale you made up.

It's your claim the sea rose 10 feet. Back it up.

I never made that claim.

Now when I ask you to quote where I said that will you run? I can quote exactly where YOU DID. Here it is:

I'm just curious about your physics that allows oceans to rise 10 feet in one location but not a hundred miles away.
Please, tell us of this newly discovered law of nature.

Now who made you say that? And why dont you know the location of this mysterious phenomenon?

Oh, so your photos you posted were BS.
Who woulda thunk.

So I didnt say it like you claimed. Good boy! Now stop lying

 

[Weatherman2020]

Tell us, how is it that I can stand on what was a dock 2,000 years ago and the ocean is hundreds of feet away? Caesarea, built by Harod.
View attachment 74256

Your photo shows the sea still completely filling the harbor, dumbass.

There may be some slight variation depending on whether the tide is in or out, but Caesarea is still right on the coast, you poor delusional troll.

Wow, a sea filling a harbor!
And he calls me a dumbass!

And, indeed, you are a major dumbass, since you were the one trying to claim that the sea no longer filled the harbor but was "hundreds of feet away". DUMBASS!!!

Find the inner harbor.
View attachment 74275
- Weatherman, educating Leftards since 1978.

Tell us, how is it that I can stand on what was a dock 2,000 years ago and the ocean is hundreds of feet away? Caesarea, built by Harod.

Your photo shows the sea still completely filling the harbor, dumbass.

There may be some slight variation depending on whether the tide is in or out, but Caesarea is still right on the coast, you poor delusional troll.

Wow, a sea filling a harbor!
And he calls me a dumbass!

And, indeed, you are a major dumbass, since you were the one trying to claim that the sea no longer filled the harbor but was "hundreds of feet away". DUMBASS!!!

Well, General Dumbass, find the inner harbor.

-Weatherman, educating leftards since 1978

 

[Weatherman2020]

The house you showed.
Bangladesh you showed.
Any other pic you showed.
All BS anti-science.

Ok, I'm referring to specifically where you asked "I asked how an ocean can rise 10 feet in one location but not 100 miles up the coast."

If you have a location where that is happening then let me know, but it sounds like another storytime campfire tale you made up.

It's your claim the sea rose 10 feet. Back it up.

I never made that claim.

Now when I ask you to quote where I said that will you run? I can quote exactly where YOU DID. Here it is:

I'm just curious about your physics that allows oceans to rise 10 feet in one location but not a hundred miles away.
Please, tell us of this newly discovered law of nature.

Now who made you say that? And why dont you know the location of this mysterious phenomenon?

Oh, so your photos you posted were BS.
Who woulda thunk.

So I didnt say it like you claimed. Good boy! Now stop lying

I agree, you're just full of lies and deception. Everything a Gorebal Warmer requires.

 

[elektra]

Did you post in the right thread? Could you quote and link, cause the post you replied to contains nothing you attribute to it?

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

Its your second link:

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

I still do not see that picture in the link?

The link is not mine, the MOD added it after I made the thread, I had forgotten to add my link so they did me a favor, right? You can tell it is the mod's because he added the big red letters.

Yes, that article in a link that was not part of my OP, states what you claim, "Possible". It is possible? Is it likely? Will it definitely happen? If it does it will have nothing to do with CO2, that is clear.

The photos is Texas and what it looks like when oceans expand into areas they werent previously.

But if you say that is possible then you cant at the same time say that the waters have to "rise" over that mark as proof either, right?

I did not say those two things at the same time.

I know, I said if its possible then you cannot present no rising as proof of anything since you already said the rising COULD occur as expansion.

Either way, the mark stands on the Isle of the Dead as proof that oceans have not expanded or rose.

NO...See what you did there? The water mark proves it did not RISE. NOT that it did not expand. You just threw that in once it was shown to you.

Your pic is of flooding from rain, you claim it is from the ocean expanding in texas? Bet you can't link to that.

If the Oceans are expanding they are expanding all over. Not just Texas. Something has happened in the picture below. Either the ocean moved or the house moved.

Nice try, idiot. The Sea Level on the Isle of the Dead is set in stone, it is not something Scientists can manipulate, maybe you can start a thread when the Sea Level rises and the mark can no longer be seen. Until then it is enough for me to see that it is ignored by the Government Funded Scientists.

 

[elektra]

If the Oceans are expanding they are expanding all over. Not just Texas. Something has happened in the picture below. Either the ocean moved or the house moved.

??? You equate seasonal beach erosion as sea level rising, in the picture the sea level is the same, and the sand is piled up next to the road?

I imagine if you posted a recent picture, we would see more sand and beach, hence the cherry picking of pictures over 12 years old.

Either way, the level of the sea in the picture has not changed, not in the least, unless you are telling us you can see an 1/8th of an inch difference in the picture which only proves you got some seriously ignorant bias going for you.

 

[elektra]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

Your posts indicate that you are completely brain-dead, Ejakulatra.

In the real world....

Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries
The New York Times
FEB. 22, 2016

Thank you, for validating my post, by attacking me personally and deflecting from the content of my thread.

 

[elektra]

Did you see the link that said oceans can rise through expansion or not? As far as your question you cant show that happening you just made it up. If you didnt make it up what are the locations you speak of?

And there you have it, the new Global Nut reasoning, if it can possibly happen, then Man-Made Global Warming did happen.

Can the Ocean rise through expansion, sure, but it would result in a rise that is imperceptible. The Earth is huge, which the "run, the ocean is rising" nuts fail to comprehend.

Even a difference of 150 degrees would not be noticeable.

 

[elektra]

Tell us, how is it that I can stand on what was a dock 2,000 years ago and the ocean is hundreds of feet away? Caesarea, built by Harod.
View attachment 74256

Your photo shows the sea still completely filling the harbor, dumbass.

There may be some slight variation depending on whether the tide is in or out, but Caesarea is still right on the coast, you poor delusional troll.

A slight variation is not sea level rise. Thank you for helping.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

Your posts indicate that you are completely brain-dead, Ejakulatra.

In the real world....

Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries
The New York Times
FEB. 22, 2016

Fastest in 2,800 years?
How fast did the sea rise in 1056 AD?

You mean a clueless ignorant retard like you doesn't already know the answer, WitheredMan?

Or are you just employing the denier cult 'argument' of 'ignorant incredulous disbelief' in science? As usual.

Can't tell us how fast the sea was rising in 1056AD? Surprise Surprise

Another idiotic response from the troll WitheredMan.

Your assumption that the scientists responsible for the study I cited don't know what they are talking about is just more denier cult anti-science bullshit.

Temperature-driven global sea-level variability in the Common Era
Current Issue - > vol. 113 no. 11 - > Robert E. Kopp, E1434–E1441, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1517056113

1. Robert E. Koppa,b,c,1,
2. Andrew C. Kempd,
3. Klaus Bittermanne,
4. Benjamin P. Hortonb,f,g,h,
5. Jeffrey P. Donnellyi,
6. W. Roland Gehrelsj,
7. Carling C. Haya,b,k,
8. Jerry X. Mitrovicak,
9. Eric D. Morrowa,b, and
10. Stefan Rahmstorfe(Author Affiliations)

* Edited by Anny Cazenave, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, Toulouse, France, and approved January 4, 2016 (received for review August 27, 2015)

• 
  
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Authors & Info
  • Figures
  • SI
  • Metrics
  • Related Content
  • PDF
  • PDF + SI

Significance
We present the first, to our knowledge, estimate of global sea-level (GSL) change over the last ∼3,000 years that is based upon statistical synthesis of a global database of regional sea-level reconstructions. GSL varied by ∼±8 cm over the pre-Industrial Common Era, with a notable decline over 1000–1400 CE coinciding with ∼0.2 °C of global cooling. The 20th century rise was extremely likely faster than during any of the 27 previous centuries. Semiempirical modeling indicates that, without global warming, GSL in the 20th century very likely would have risen by between −3 cm and +7 cm, rather than the ∼14 cm observed. Semiempirical 21st century projections largely reconcile differences between Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and semiempirical models.

We present the first, to our knowledge, estimate of global sea-level (GSL) change over the last ∼3,000 years that is based upon statistical synthesis of a global database of regional sea-level reconstructions.

 

[RollingThunder]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

Your posts indicate that you are completely brain-dead, Ejakulatra.

In the real world....

Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries
The New York Times
FEB. 22, 2016

Fastest in 2,800 years?
How fast did the sea rise in 1056 AD?

You mean a clueless ignorant retard like you doesn't already know the answer, WitheredMan?

Or are you just employing the denier cult 'argument' of 'ignorant incredulous disbelief' in science? As usual.

Can't tell us how fast the sea was rising in 1056AD? Surprise Surprise

Another idiotic response from the troll WitheredMan.

Your assumption that the scientists responsible for the study I cited don't know what they are talking about is just more denier cult anti-science bullshit.

Temperature-driven global sea-level variability in the Common Era
Current Issue - > vol. 113 no. 11 - > Robert E. Kopp, E1434–E1441, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1517056113

1. Robert E. Koppa,b,c,1,
2. Andrew C. Kempd,
3. Klaus Bittermanne,
4. Benjamin P. Hortonb,f,g,h,
5. Jeffrey P. Donnellyi,
6. W. Roland Gehrelsj,
7. Carling C. Haya,b,k,
8. Jerry X. Mitrovicak,
9. Eric D. Morrowa,b, and
10. Stefan Rahmstorfe(Author Affiliations)

* Edited by Anny Cazenave, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, Toulouse, France, and approved January 4, 2016 (received for review August 27, 2015)

• 
  
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Authors & Info
  • Figures
  • SI
  • Metrics
  • Related Content
  • PDF
  • PDF + SI

Significance
We present the first, to our knowledge, estimate of global sea-level (GSL) change over the last ∼3,000 years that is based upon statistical synthesis of a global database of regional sea-level reconstructions. GSL varied by ∼±8 cm over the pre-Industrial Common Era, with a notable decline over 1000–1400 CE coinciding with ∼0.2 °C of global cooling. The 20th century rise was extremely likely faster than during any of the 27 previous centuries. Semiempirical modeling indicates that, without global warming, GSL in the 20th century very likely would have risen by between −3 cm and +7 cm, rather than the ∼14 cm observed. Semiempirical 21st century projections largely reconcile differences between Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and semiempirical models.

We present the first, to our knowledge, estimate of global sea-level (GSL) change over the last ∼3,000 years that is based upon statistical synthesis of a global database of regional sea-level reconstructions.

View attachment 74279

And the denier cult retards laugh at the scientific language that they are too stupid and far too ignorant to even begin to understand.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Did you see the link that said oceans can rise through expansion or not? As far as your question you cant show that happening you just made it up. If you didnt make it up what are the locations you speak of?

And there you have it, the new Global Nut reasoning, if it can possibly happen, then Man-Made Global Warming did happen.

What would guys have if you didn't make up what others say? I didn't say it was happening. I said that if expansion can happen then looking for a rise on a water mark can't be the only option. Since expansion is possible. If you're confused, you need to start at a lower level.

Can the Ocean rise through expansion, sure, but it would result in a rise that is imperceptible. The Earth is huge, which the "run, the ocean is rising" nuts fail to comprehend.

So you're saying the same thing that it's possible? Well using your logic above you're saying IT IS HAPPENING, right? Oh your words are different, right?

So if expansion is possible why would you only say one outcome would show rising and ignore the possibilities you say can happen?

 

[Weatherman2020]

A slight variation is not sea level rise. Thank you for helping

Dumbass gets busted in his lack of knowledge and his best response ends up mocking closed captioned.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Did you see the link that said oceans can rise through expansion or not? As far as your question you cant show that happening you just made it up. If you didnt make it up what are the locations you speak of?

And there you have it, the new Global Nut reasoning, if it can possibly happen, then Man-Made Global Warming did happen.

What would guys have if you didn't make up what others say? I didn't say it was happening. I said that if expansion can happen then looking for a rise on a water mark can't be the only option. Since expansion is possible. If you're confused, you need to start at a lower level.

Can the Ocean rise through expansion, sure, but it would result in a rise that is imperceptible. The Earth is huge, which the "run, the ocean is rising" nuts fail to comprehend.

So you're saying the same thing that it's possible? Well using your logic above you're saying IT IS HAPPENING, right? Oh your words are different, right?

So if expansion is possible why would you only say one outcome would show rising and ignore the possibilities you say can happen?

All of the oceans disappearing tomorrow is possible too, is that your next alarmist rant?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Tell us, how is it that I can stand on what was a dock 2,000 years ago and the ocean is hundreds of feet away? Caesarea, built by Harod.

Your photo shows the sea still completely filling the harbor, dumbass.

There may be some slight variation depending on whether the tide is in or out, but Caesarea is still right on the coast, you poor delusional troll.

Wow, a sea filling a harbor!
And he calls me a dumbass!

And, indeed, you are a major dumbass, since you were the one trying to claim that the sea no longer filled the harbor but was "hundreds of feet away". DUMBASS!!!

-Weatherman, demonstrating rampant dumbassery since 1978

As you continue to demonstrate.

Oh boy, editing what people say. Sure sign you're a loser who doesn't have anything to stand on but fiction.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Did you see the link that said oceans can rise through expansion or not? As far as your question you cant show that happening you just made it up. If you didnt make it up what are the locations you speak of?

And there you have it, the new Global Nut reasoning, if it can possibly happen, then Man-Made Global Warming did happen.

What would guys have if you didn't make up what others say? I didn't say it was happening. I said that if expansion can happen then looking for a rise on a water mark can't be the only option. Since expansion is possible. If you're confused, you need to start at a lower level.

Can the Ocean rise through expansion, sure, but it would result in a rise that is imperceptible. The Earth is huge, which the "run, the ocean is rising" nuts fail to comprehend.

So you're saying the same thing that it's possible? Well using your logic above you're saying IT IS HAPPENING, right? Oh your words are different, right?

So if expansion is possible why would you only say one outcome would show rising and ignore the possibilities you say can happen?

All of the oceans disappearing tomorrow is possible too, is that your next alarmist rant?

That's impossible. See the difference?

And if you say that is possible are you saying it's happening? Or this time it's different?

 

[elektra]

And the denier cult retards laugh at the scientific language that they are too stupid and far too ignorant to even begin to understand.

Ha, ha, rollinblunder, the language you use is very scientific, thank you much for such technical responses. How about a nice wikipedia quote with big fonts and fancy colors. Dazzle us once again.

 

[elektra]

Since expansion is possible. If you're confused, you need to start at a lower level.

So you're saying the same thing that it's possible? Well using your logic above you're saying IT IS HAPPENING, right? Oh your words are different, right?

So if expansion is possible why would you only say one outcome would show rising and ignore the possibilities you say can happen?

What are you, a words-smith, hammering out convoluted interpretations, of cherry picked sentences, ignoring what is relevant.

If the average ocean temperature is raised by 1 degree, the expansion will be impossible to measure, if the ocean temperature is raised by 10 degrees, it will be impossible to measure. Will expansion occur, sure, absolutely, will it raise the level of the ocean 1 inch, no, not at all. Will it raise the level of the ocean by a 1/8th of an inch, no, not at all. Raising the temperature of the ocean a few degrees, ten degrees, will do nothing to the level of the Ocean. Nothing detectable but certainly, in theory.

Care for an experiment?