Sea Level Rise by Satellite Altimetry

[IanC]

Im having a hard time trying to figure out what you are saying here.

are you suggesting that glass mercury thermometers are the same class of proxy as tree ring widths or 18O cores?

Of course he is. These people have such a skewed world view that they can apparently only see flat surfaces.....hell, he tried to argue with me that anonymous posters on this board suggesting that warmers hold their breath indefinitely to cut down on the CO2 is the same as a public figure, calling for the summary imprisonment and execution of skeptics.

hahahaha. he does seem to have a rather warped sense of proportion with proxies so I can believe his political beliefs would be just as skewed.

 

[SSDD]

Im having a hard time trying to figure out what you are saying here.

are you suggesting that glass mercury thermometers are the same class of proxy as tree ring widths or 18O cores?

Of course he is. These people have such a skewed world view that they can apparently only see flat surfaces.....hell, he tried to argue with me that anonymous posters on this board suggesting that warmers hold their breath indefinitely to cut down on the CO2 is the same as a public figure, calling for the summary imprisonment and execution of skeptics.

hahahaha. he does seem to have a rather warped sense of proportion with proxies so I can believe his political beliefs would be just as skewed.

Hell, he can't even see a difference between a suggestion to hold his breath and his own musings that it would be more effective to simply kill skeptics.

 

[Crick]

Dense Ian. You're being dense.

I'm saying that the distinction between instrumented data and proxy readings is, in a stretched and hyperbolic sense, an artificial one. They are both measures of temperature based on physical and chemical reactions to temperature changes. For instance, if you're interested in recording temperatures, you might have a great deal more luck with an ice core than a stand along mercury thermometer (sans pen and paper). One involves a recording and one doesn't. Both involve proportionality constants. Both have ranges over which they can be used and both have non-linearities.

Now don't be stupid and suggest I don't know the difference between an instrument and a proxy. That would be the sort of puerile crap SSDD would attempt in his ongoing process to create a better world in his own perceptions by simply lying to himself.

Your earlier posts suggest we should toss all proxy data as you believe (in your opinion and, as far as I can see, with no supporting experts' opinions) that it is just too unreliable. Is that correct? Do you believe the value of paleo-climate data is outweighed by the likely range of errors involved? Do you believe the actual experts in the field are unaware of the actual range of errors involved? Do you believe you know something they do not or that they refuse to consider out of vanity and pride? Do you believe they have all been lying? Are there error bars falsely small?

For christ's sake get real.

 

[SSDD]

For christ's sake get real.

Speaking of getting real, why would you accept manna proxy study over literally hundreds of proxy studies that have found that the medieval warm period was warmer than the present and global in nature? Prior to mann's hockey stick, the IPCC said that the recent temperature history of earth looked like this:

the ipcc apparently overturned all of those previous studies performed all over the world in favor of mann...what sort of sense does that make?

 

[IanC]

Dense Ian. You're being dense.

I'm saying that the distinction between instrumented data and proxy readings is, in a stretched and hyperbolic sense, an artificial one. They are both measures of temperature based on physical and chemical reactions to temperature changes. For instance, if you're interested in recording temperatures, you might have a great deal more luck with an ice core than a stand along mercury thermometer (sans pen and paper). One involves a recording and one doesn't. Both involve proportionality constants. Both have ranges over which they can be used and both have non-linearities.

Now don't be stupid and suggest I don't know the difference between an instrument and a proxy. That would be the sort of puerile crap SSDD would attempt in his ongoing process to create a better world in his own perceptions by simply lying to himself.

Your earlier posts suggest we should toss all proxy data as you believe (in your opinion and, as far as I can see, with no supporting experts' opinions) that it is just too unreliable. Is that correct? Do you believe the value of paleo-climate data is outweighed by the likely range of errors involved? Do you believe the actual experts in the field are unaware of the actual range of errors involved? Do you believe you know something they do not or that they refuse to consider out of vanity and pride? Do you believe they have all been lying? Are there error bars falsely small?

For christ's sake get real.

you really dont read for comprehension, do you?

I have repeated stated that proxy data and reconstructions from that data are useful but are a different type of information. it is alright to show proxy reconstructions, it is not alright to chop out the pieces of a proxy reconstruction that agrees with your premise, and then append instrumental data on the end of it to give a false impression of commensurate uncertainties. most, or all proxies are simply wrong. look at the individual components of any reconstruction. the proxies do not agree with each other. you cannot remove error and uncertainty by averaging. and yes, I think the accuracy and precision ranges given in most reconstructions are wildly optimistic.

 

[Crick]

That's probably why every graph in existence that sports both varieties uses different colors or line types to indicate which is which and provides a handy legend.

When you get your doctorate in dendrochronology or the like, feel free to come back and correct all the misunderstandings I've received at the hands of all the other dendrochronologists.

 

[jc456]

Im having a hard time trying to figure out what you are saying here.

are you suggesting that glass mercury thermometers are the same class of proxy as tree ring widths or 18O cores?

Of course he is. These people have such a skewed world view that they can apparently only see flat surfaces.....hell, he tried to argue with me that anonymous posters on this board suggesting that warmers hold their breath indefinitely to cut down on the CO2 is the same as a public figure, calling for the summary imprisonment and execution of skeptics.

Elected official at that.

 

[Crick]

I just think it is foolish to believe that they can forecast the future with any skill whatsoever in a nonlinear chaotic system. but getting them to agree with the past to a closer degree is certainly an honourable goal.

Then talk to all your buddies that think the paleo record somehow proves that CO2 always follows temperature.

I don't see anyone on my side of this argument (that would be the mainstream science side) attempting to use proxy data to predict the future. I see them using it to get the best possible estimation of the past. Have you got an example of some of these predictions you're talking about?

 

[mamooth]

Speaking of getting real, why would you accept manna proxy study

"Manna proxy study"? We don't speak your cult's secret lingo. Please switch to English.

over literally hundreds of proxy studies that have found that the medieval warm period was warmer than the present and global in nature?

Such proxy studies don't exist. You've pretended they did, and then only provided us with a list of carefully selected cherrypicks that generally didn't say what you claimed, and which often contradicted each other. Please don't make me look up the previous debunkings of your mass cut-and-paste from your "CO2 Science" cult website.

Prior to mann's hockey stick, the IPCC said that the recent temperature history of earth looked like this:

the ipcc apparently overturned all of those previous studies performed all over the world in favor of mann...what sort of sense does that make?

Of course it makes no sense, being it's one of your conspiracy theories.

No, the IPCC did not say that. That graph comes from Lamb (1982), and is called a schematic, not a temperature reconstruction. A guess, that is. It represents only central England, and a 50-year smoothed and shifted average. It was in the 1990 report because they didn't have much else. It was gone by 1992. Nothing was "hidden"; old incomplete data was replaced by better data. Here's what that plot looks like with data up through 2007 added on, and it's gotten warmer since then. This is from page 34 of Jones et al (2009).

http://shadow.eas.gatech.edu/~kcobb/jones09.pdf

So, even in a spot where the MWP was strongest, it's warmer now than it was during the MWP.

 

[SSDD]

Speaking of getting real, why would you accept manna proxy study

"Manna proxy study"? We don't speak your cult's secret lingo. Please switch to English.

Hey, you caught an auto spell error...congratulations. To bad you are to stupid to read the sentence for context and mentally correct the error like the rest of us. Guess when you are as "special" as you, any chance to be right is cherished....I will try and remember that in the feature and when I speak too you, eye will throw you a bone or too....or three.

idiot.

 

[mamooth]

Hey SSDD, explain this to us.

You claim the MWP was massive and global.

Sea level rise during that period was ... zilch.

How is it that a massive global temperature rise lasting centuries resulted in zero sea level rise?

 

[SSDD]

Hey SSDD, explain this to us.

You claim the MWP was massive and global.

Sea level rise during that period was ... zilch.

How is it that a massive global temperature rise lasting centuries resulted in zero sea level rise?

I never claimed that sea level was zero during the MWP. Here is one graph from one of many studies conducted all over the world examining sea level history...This one is from the Maldives. There is a clear spike in the sea level during the MWP. Clearly the MWP was a global phenomenon. One must wonder why you tell such blatant lies.

 

[mamooth]

You're cherrypicking again, which is how you try to disguise your lying. It doesn't work. Everyone sees right through it.

Now, back to what you're running from. Why wasn't there a global sea level increase during what you claim was centuries of extreme heat across the whole globe?

 

[jc456]

You're cherrypicking again, which is how you try to disguise your lying. It doesn't work. Everyone sees right through it.

Now, back to what you're running from. Why wasn't there a global sea level increase during what you claim was centuries of extreme heat across the whole globe?

Dude/ dudette, everything is fnn cherry picked.

 

[mamooth]

Being you're a denier, I understand how you could believe cherrypicking is normal, since it's all your side does.

You just need to understand that most people don't share the ethical failings so common to your cult.

 

[SSDD]

You're cherrypicking again, which is how you try to disguise your lying. It doesn't work. Everyone sees right through it.

Now, back to what you're running from. Why wasn't there a global sea level increase during what you claim was centuries of extreme heat across the whole globe?

You f'ing idiot....again, I never claimed that there was no sea level rise during the MWP...if you believe I did, then prove that you aren't a blatant liar by bringing forward the quote by me....you claim to have read it so lets see it. If anything, I said that there was a sea level rise...of course there would be during a warmer time....I already provided one study from the Maldives, lets see some others.

Here is one from Holland

I suppose that if you had any inkling of history, you could derive some information on sea levels during that time as well. For example, in 1066 when William the Conquerer defeated Harold II at the battle of Hastings, he occupied that is now known as Penvensey Castle. At the time it was located on a small island in a harbor on the south coast of England. it was connected to the mainland by a drawbridge. Penvensey castle is infamous for that "sea gate". Prisoners were thrown into it and were, in turn, washed out by the tide. Penvensey castle is now located a mile from the coast.

Then there is the Italian city of Pisa...ever hear of it? During the Medieval period, Pisa became powerful due to maritime trade....sailing ships could sail right up to the city...after1300, and the onset of the little ice age, the city's prominence fell sea levels which dropped and ships could no longer reach the city.

Here is another multi proxy graph of sea level for the past few thousand years...

Figure 13.3: (a) Paleo sea level data for last 3000 years from Northern and Southern Hemisphere sites. The effects of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) have been removed from these records. Light green = Iceland (Gehrels et al., 2006), purple = Nova Scotia (Gehrels et al., 2005), bright blue = Connecticut (Donnelly et al., 2004), blue = Nova Scotia (Gehrels et al., 2005), red = United Kingdom (Gehrels et al., 2011), green = North Carolina (Kemp et al., 2011), brown = New Zealand (Gehrels et al., 2008), gray = mid-Pacific Ocean (Woodroffe et al., 2012).

I could go on, but you have proven over and over that you are impervious to any evidence that runs contrary to the dogma your cult preaches.

 

[Crick]

Speaking of getting real, why would you accept manna proxy study

"Manna proxy study"? We don't speak your cult's secret lingo. Please switch to English.

Hey, you caught an auto spell error...congratulations. To bad you are to stupid to read the sentence for context and mentally correct the error like the rest of us. Guess when you are as "special" as you, any chance to be right is cherished....I will try and remember that in the feature and when I speak too you, eye will throw you a bone or too....or three.

idiot.

He spent five seconds on your meta-error. The rest he spent debunking the content of your post. You guys live so far from reality its a long distance phone call, isn't it.

 

[Crick]

Here is another multi proxy graph of sea level for the past few thousand years...

Figure 13.3: (a) Paleo sea level data for last 3000 years from Northern and Southern Hemisphere sites. The effects of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) have been removed from these records. Light green = Iceland (Gehrels et al., 2006), purple = Nova Scotia (Gehrels et al., 2005), bright blue = Connecticut (Donnelly et al., 2004), blue = Nova Scotia (Gehrels et al., 2005), red = United Kingdom (Gehrels et al., 2011), green = North Carolina (Kemp et al., 2011), brown = New Zealand (Gehrels et al., 2008), gray = mid-Pacific Ocean (Woodroffe et al., 2012).

You see a massive and global rise in sea level in this graph during the MWP? ! ? ! ? Better give me your car keys...

I have to also say I'm more than a little surprised to see you so reliant on proxies after so many of your other comments.

 

[mamooth]

I've mentioned the contradictions in SSDD's cherrypicks before, and here's what I'm talking about.

This graph shows a sea level rise from 1000-1300

This graph shows a sea level rise from 700-1000, then a fall from 1000-1200.

That is, the periods of sea level rise don't match at all. So, SSDD has conclusively disproved any global sea level rise during the MWP, but has shown that significant local fluctuations in sea levels are common all over the earth during many different eras.

He fails just as laughably at historical geography.

On Pevensy:
1013379 - The National Heritage List for England English Heritage
---
During the Roman and medieval periods the spur formed a peninsula projecting into a tidal lagoon and marshland, but coastal deposition and land reclamation have gradually built up the ground around it so that it is now completely land-locked
---

On Pisa:
Ruins and How They Get That Way A visit to Roman monuments recalls the price empires pay for the power to build themselves by Gray Brechin
---
When Florence conquered Pisa in 1406, it acquired a losing proposition as Pisa's harbor was rapidly silting up with the remains of Florentine farmlands and pastures.
---

While we're talking historical geography, let's talk of the fish ponds of Rome, built around year 0. These were fish holding tanks immediately adjacent to the ocean, constructed of masonry and Roman cement, made for keeping a supply of fresh fish close at hand. They were engineered so the tops of the walls were about 20cm above the highest high tide mark, to prevent the fish from escaping.

The walls of those tanks are still there, with the tops of them now being one meter under the sea.

 

[mamooth]

An interesting way of verifying historical sea levels is by looking at the spin rate of the earth.

Because ancient astronomers kept very detailed records, we know the exact date and time of ancient solar and lunar eclipses.

We also know the rate at which the earth's rotation is slowing down. We know how sea level affects that. Rising seas will send mass away from the poles and towards the equator, and that slows down the spin of the earth.

The earth's rotation rate through history, as cross-checked by those ancient eclipses, matches accepted sea levels. It's not even close to the SSDD fantasy.