So the Oceans are rising are they?

[RollingThunder]

the tide gauge data from a recent journal paper show no acceleration.

one thing I think many people dont realize is that sea level change is not the same in every part of the world.

new and presumably better technology shows an increased rate during the last warming period but it is flattening out since the ocean temps have gone flat as well.

the cry of "ocean sea level rise is accelerating" that we all have heard proclaimed as fact in the media is not exactly as advertised.

The limitations (small set of tide gauges only around US coastline) of the tide gauge study cited in the OP have already been discussed.

Anyone who has looked into this issue knows that sea level changes vary geographically for a variety of reasons. One is that in some places the coastline, the land itself, is either rising or sinking slightly, independent of the sea levels. For example, Alaska is rising a bit as the weight of the ice is removed.

Look at just the left half of the graph and draw a straight line through the blue line, then do the same for the right hand half of the graph. Notice a difference between the angle of the two lines? That's the increase in sea level rise in the last half century.

Figure 1: Global corrected tidal station data (Church 2006 updated to 2009-dark blue, and Jevrejeva 2008- red)


Have "ocean temperatures gone flat"? Or did a strong El Nino bring colder temperatures to the surface last year?

NOAA: 2010 Tied For Warmest Year on Record
January 12, 2011

Global ocean surface temperatures for 2010 tied with 2005 as the third warmest on record, at 0.88 F (0.49 C) above the 20th century average. The range of confidence associated with the ocean surface temperature is +/- 0.11 F (+/- 0.06 C).

and so what s0n??

The folks think the "man-made" part is total BS, so who cares? The k00ks get real proud posting up this stuff, but in the bigger picture, it doesnt add up to a hill of beans.

Senate Democrats Kill Ambitious Climate Legislation - Ecocentric - TIME.com

Kim Strassel: Cap and Trade Is Dead - WSJ.com

Cap-and-Trade Is Dead. Long Live Cap-and-Trade | Patrick J. Michaels | Cato Institute: Commentary

Thanks for posting the picture of yourself. I kind of thought that was how you look.

As for the rest of your demented rant.....LOLOLOLOLOL.

"The folks" apparently refers to your denier cult and small portions of the general public who've been fooled by the fossil fuel industry's propaganda campaign. Intelligent people on the other hand, still understand that the science is clear and the planet is warming up at an increasing rate and they care deeply about our future. It is only you denier loons who don't care. Your statements highlight the fact that for you denier cult dummies, the argument is political, not scientific.

 

[skookerasbil]

The limitations (small set of tide gauges only around US coastline) of the tide gauge study cited in the OP have already been discussed.

Anyone who has looked into this issue knows that sea level changes vary geographically for a variety of reasons. One is that in some places the coastline, the land itself, is either rising or sinking slightly, independent of the sea levels. For example, Alaska is rising a bit as the weight of the ice is removed.

Look at just the left half of the graph and draw a straight line through the blue line, then do the same for the right hand half of the graph. Notice a difference between the angle of the two lines? That's the increase in sea level rise in the last half century.

Figure 1: Global corrected tidal station data (Church 2006 updated to 2009-dark blue, and Jevrejeva 2008- red)


Have "ocean temperatures gone flat"? Or did a strong El Nino bring colder temperatures to the surface last year?

NOAA: 2010 Tied For Warmest Year on Record
January 12, 2011

Global ocean surface temperatures for 2010 tied with 2005 as the third warmest on record, at 0.88 F (0.49 C) above the 20th century average. The range of confidence associated with the ocean surface temperature is +/- 0.11 F (+/- 0.06 C).

and so what s0n??

The folks think the "man-made" part is total BS, so who cares? The k00ks get real proud posting up this stuff, but in the bigger picture, it doesnt add up to a hill of beans.

Senate Democrats Kill Ambitious Climate Legislation - Ecocentric - TIME.com

Kim Strassel: Cap and Trade Is Dead - WSJ.com

Cap-and-Trade Is Dead. Long Live Cap-and-Trade | Patrick J. Michaels | Cato Institute: Commentary

Thanks for posting the picture of yourself. I kind of thought that was how you look.

As for the rest of your demented rant.....LOLOLOLOLOL.

"The folks" apparently refers to your denier cult and small portions of the general public who've been fooled by the fossil fuel industry's propaganda campaign. Intelligent people on the other hand, still understand that the science is clear and the planet is warming up at an increasing rate and they care deeply about our future. It is only you denier loons who don't care. Your statements highlight the fact that for you denier cult dummies, the argument is political, not scientific.

meh..............

The "science" is effectively IMMATERIAL s0n!!!


Why? Because homeowners like me, werent all that enamoured with having our electric rates DOUBLE under a Cap and Trade system and indeed, the politicians arent giddy about having 2.3 million more people on the unemployment lines in exchange for 600 million green jobs.


And on the science being "clear"??? Its only clear to the sheep................or elase Cap and Trade would be a slam dunk now wouldnt it??!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Just another thing to point out that is beyond compellling.............

Its fascinating but the k00ks fail to recognize the political ramifications in all of this!!!!. They label the skeptics as "fringe".............yet Cap and Trade is dead and buried. And they're still talking about fcukking temperature graphs as if anybody gives a fcukk!!!!


Huuuuuuuuh!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

LMAO........even the kid students know it.


Its not 2006 anymore assholes!!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

CLASSIC....................



( ok.......OK, I'll admit it. When the opponents are getting decimated, I do tend to go for the additional ball kick or two!!)

 

[RollingThunder]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....cartoons, drivel and denial of reality....is that all you morons have?

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

 

[westwall]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....cartoons, drivel and denial of reality....is that all you morons have?

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

No, we have the simple fact that Cap and Trade is dead and the global warming hysteria is dying all over the globe. In a few years people will look at you and your kind and ask "how could you be so effing dumb?"

What you got bucko?

 

[skookerasbil]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....cartoons, drivel and denial of reality....is that all you morons have?

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

No, we have the simple fact that Cap and Trade is dead and the global warming hysteria is dying all over the globe. In a few years people will look at you and your kind and ask "how could you be so effing dumb?"

What you got bucko?

Whats he got???????????????????????????????



dick

hysterical people for the gay...............

 

[RollingThunder]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....cartoons, drivel and denial of reality....is that all you morons have?

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

No, we have the simple fact that Cap and Trade is dead and the global warming hysteria is dying all over the globe. In a few years people will look at you and your kind and ask "how could you be so effing dumb?"

What you got bucko?

I've got a little thing called 'REALITY', something you're obviously not very familiar with.

It is hilarious that you cretins imagine that the observed climate changes and the dangers they pose for our world are unreal and 'not a problem' because of some political/economic development or change. LOLOL You just demonstrate how much this debate for you has always been motivated and informed by your political and economic beliefs rather than any actual scientific facts.

The educated and intelligent people of the world have, for some time now, been looking at you anti-science denier cult dingbats and asking "how could you be so effing dumb?".

 

[wirebender]

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

Sorry guy, you have been duped. Here, have some published, peer reviewed material regarding sea level.

ScienceDirect - Global and Planetary Change : Geocentric sea-level trend estimates from GPS analyses at relevant tide gauges world-wide

Journal of Coastal Research online journal - Sea-Level Acceleration Based on U.S. Tide Gauges and Extensions of Previous Global-Gauge Analyses

Multi-Science Publishing - Journal Article

Multi-Science Publishing - Journal Article

For a group who beleives that the science is settled and on your side, you sure don't have much in the way of published, peer reviewed material to support your claims. You seem to operate almost entirely from a set of unpublished, pronouncements from your high priests. It seems that there is a wealth of peer reviewed materials that contradicts everyting you have to say.

The published material suggests that sea level isn't cooperating with your doom and gloom prognistacators any more than global temperatures and a host of other failed predictions.

 

[wirebender]

No, we have the simple fact that Cap and Trade is dead and the global warming hysteria is dying all over the globe. In a few years people will look at you and your kind and ask "how could you be so effing dumb?"

What you got bucko?

It will be eugenics all over again. When eugenics was in vogue, it was settled science and the consensus was that it was the way of the future. Today, you have a tough time finding anyone beyond those convicted for crimes against humanity who were onboard. Same for the ice age scare in the 70's. Those of us who are old enough to have been around and scientifically aware remember what it was like. Today, they are scrambling to erase the fact that they were wrong.

What is funny is that they use the total number of published studies as evidence that the scare never happened. When you look at the number of peer reviewed, published papers today, there will be a strong case to be made in the future that no one actually believed in the greenhouse hypothesis today because more published material rejects the IPCC view than endorses it.

As with the ice age scare, the media attention is on a few wack jobs who are warning of crisis while the bulk of science is actually looking at the observable facts. Note which side posts the most published peer reviewed material in support of its position and which relies on blogs.

 

[wirebender]

I've got a little thing called 'REALITY', something you're obviously not very familiar with.

You have wiki and beleive you have reality? I am laughing very loud and spewing my morning coffee in your face. Are you unaware that wiki is about as credible where climate science is concerned as the national enquirer is for political news?

Have you never heard of william connolley? He used to work for wiki. He used wiki as his personal propaganda machine. He created or rewrote over 5,400 articles regarding climate "science". He deleted over 500 articles that he simply didn't like and banned over 2,000 wiki contributors.

When you consider the sheer volume of material he altered, deleted, and banned from the site, it becomes clear that the majority of the material available was of a skeptical nature. As always, the kooks are in the minority.

The educated and intelligent people of the world have, for some time now, been looking at you anti-science denier cult dingbats and asking "how could you be so effing dumb?".

The educated are looking at the demise of the klimate kooks. The educated actually know about william connolley and his corruption of wiki and wonder at the level of ignorance it must require to continue to reference wiki. The educated daily note that the klimate kooks typically reference blogs and wacko sites in lieu of peer reviewed materials. The educated know you for who you are and every day the evidence against you grows.

One must wonder how long before you and yours, like the eugenicists and ice age wackos begin to deny that you were ever onboard the AGW crazy train?

 

[skookerasbil]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....cartoons, drivel and denial of reality....is that all you morons have?

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

No, we have the simple fact that Cap and Trade is dead and the global warming hysteria is dying all over the globe. In a few years people will look at you and your kind and ask "how could you be so effing dumb?"

What you got bucko?

I've got a little thing called 'REALITY', something you're obviously not very familiar with.

It is hilarious that you cretins imagine that the observed climate changes and the dangers they pose for our world are unreal and 'not a problem' because of some political/economic development or change. LOLOL You just demonstrate how much this debate for you has always been motivated and informed by your political and economic beliefs rather than any actual scientific facts.

The educated and intelligent people of the world have, for some time now, been looking at you anti-science denier cult dingbats and asking "how could you be so effing dumb?".

fail................and fAiL!!!!

The k00ks never got lessoned that reality is 95% perception. Always has been...............always will be. The k00ks cant fathom this for some reason, thus, they are k00ks!!!!


From Mirriam-Webster.....................


kook noun \ˈkük\


Definition of KOOK:

one whose ideas or actions are eccentric, fantastic, or insane : screwball
See kook defined for English-language learners »
See kook defined for kids »




Listen up s0ns...........is not 2006 anymore. Like Bin Laden..........your time has come and gone. Time to accept it and move on to some other OCD "cause".

 

[skookerasbil]

Poll: Belief in Man-Made Global Warming Still Dropping

By Bob Ellis on October 22nd, 2009

According to the Pew poll, the number of people who believe there is solid evidence of global warming (of any kind, natural or man-made) is down from 71% a year and a half ago to 57% this month. That is a huge drop, especially considering the “mainstream” media and the socialists in our government haven’t slowed down in the slightest in their propaganda campaign.

According to the same poll, the percentage of Americans who believe any global warming is anthropogenic (man-made) has dropped from 47% to 36%. Bad news for Al Gore.


http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/10/poll-belief-in-man-made-global-warming-still-dropping/


















Oh............and ummmmmmmm, a smiliar poll conducted by Rasmussen a month ago identified the exact same numbers!!!

36% s0ns!!!!!!




"Reality" sucks..................

[/IMG]

 

[westwall]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....cartoons, drivel and denial of reality....is that all you morons have?

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

No, we have the simple fact that Cap and Trade is dead and the global warming hysteria is dying all over the globe. In a few years people will look at you and your kind and ask "how could you be so effing dumb?"

What you got bucko?

I've got a little thing called 'REALITY', something you're obviously not very familiar with.

It is hilarious that you cretins imagine that the observed climate changes and the dangers they pose for our world are unreal and 'not a problem' because of some political/economic development or change. LOLOL You just demonstrate how much this debate for you has always been motivated and informed by your political and economic beliefs rather than any actual scientific facts.

The educated and intelligent people of the world have, for some time now, been looking at you anti-science denier cult dingbats and asking "how could you be so effing dumb?".

The REALITY is there was a window when the world was cooperating wih whatever ridiculous statement the alarmists made. That window closed about 10 to 12 years ago when the planet stopped the latest phase of warming. Then, when REALITY started to bite them in the ass, the alarmists had to resort to falsifying their data and were caught.
That's when the REALITY of the pseudoscience was realized for what it is. A hoax.

The twelve year olds, such as yourself, cover their ears and go "la la la" but the rest of the adults have moved on to beat down the next pseudo scientific fraud the alarmists are cooking up next.

That's the REALITY of the situation bucko. You are no longer relevent.

 

[IanC]

the world is getting tired of the gross exaggerations of CAGW. the 'chicken littles' have 'cried wolf' so often that reasonable people can no longer muster alarm over predictions that are shown to be unrealistic in every case. that backlash may be unfortunate in the future when real problems may be ignored as just another hysterical horror story.

 

[IanC]

the tide gauge data from a recent journal paper show no acceleration.

one thing I think many people dont realize is that sea level change is not the same in every part of the world.

new and presumably better technology shows an increased rate during the last warming period but it is flattening out since the ocean temps have gone flat as well.

the cry of "ocean sea level rise is accelerating" that we all have heard proclaimed as fact in the media is not exactly as advertised.

The limitations (small set of tide gauges only around US coastline) of the tide gauge study cited in the OP have already been discussed.

Anyone who has looked into this issue knows that sea level changes vary geographically for a variety of reasons. One is that in some places the coastline, the land itself, is either rising or sinking slightly, independent of the sea levels. For example, Alaska is rising a bit as the weight of the ice is removed.

Look at just the left half of the graph and draw a straight line through the blue line, then do the same for the right hand half of the graph. Notice a difference between the angle of the two lines? That's the increase in sea level rise in the last half century.

Figure 1: Global corrected tidal station data (Church 2006 updated to 2009-dark blue, and Jevrejeva 2008- red)


Have "ocean temperatures gone flat"? Or did a strong El Nino bring colder temperatures to the surface last year?

NOAA: 2010 Tied For Warmest Year on Record
January 12, 2011

Global ocean surface temperatures for 2010 tied with 2005 as the third warmest on record, at 0.88 F (0.49 C) above the 20th century average. The range of confidence associated with the ocean surface temperature is +/- 0.11 F (+/- 0.06 C).

kudos to you for a post that is not a rant of ad homs.

I think your memory is selective if you are calling 2010 a La Nina year. it started with an El Nino and with the lag time that pretty much wipes out all but the last 2 months.

I think you misunderstand my position on flat ocean temps and sea rise. I am talking about roughly 2004 and later. as usual, when new and better technology is introduced the alarmist claims are shown to be exaggerated. ARGO is showing less warming than called for, even with a concerted effort to find 'adjustments'. likewise for the altimitry results. better precision in the instruments is making it more difficult to push the results in the 'right' direction although there will always be wiggle room. eg. the satellite altimetry is calibrated against tide gauges. does anyone think the selected tide gauges are ones showing less rise rather than ones showing more rise?

you complained about the report that used mostly US tide gauges, Old Rocks complains when US only temp data is highlighted. the information from the best measured and most completely reported areas always show less alarming statistics. could this be a fluke? yes, but it should be taken seriously as a signal that there is a problem in the certainties accorded to different data sets.

 

[RollingThunder]

Sea levels are still rising and that still poses a serious problem for humanity even if you ignorant clowns are in denial.

Sorry guy, you have been duped. Here, have some published, peer reviewed material regarding sea level.

ScienceDirect - Global and Planetary Change : Geocentric sea-level trend estimates from GPS analyses at relevant tide gauges world-wide

Journal of Coastal Research online journal - Sea-Level Acceleration Based on U.S. Tide Gauges and Extensions of Previous Global-Gauge Analyses

Multi-Science Publishing - Journal Article

Multi-Science Publishing - Journal Article

For a group who beleives that the science is settled and on your side, you sure don't have much in the way of published, peer reviewed material to support your claims. You seem to operate almost entirely from a set of unpublished, pronouncements from your high priests. It seems that there is a wealth of peer reviewed materials that contradicts everyting you have to say.

The published material suggests that sea level isn't cooperating with your doom and gloom prognistacators any more than global temperatures and a host of other failed predictions.

Here's something more recent that was published this year in the JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 116, C02020, 16 PP., 2011 - doi:10.1029/2010JC006601

Deep ocean warming assessed from altimeters, Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, in situ measurements, and a non-Boussinesq ocean general circulation model

Abstract

Deep ocean warming assessed from altimeters, Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, in situ measurements, and a non-Boussinesq ocean general circulation model – Song & Colberg (2011) “Observational surveys have shown significant oceanic bottom water warming, but they are too spatially and temporally sporadic to quantify the deep ocean contribution to the present-day sea level rise (SLR). In this study, altimetry sea surface height (SSH), Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) ocean mass, and in situ upper ocean (0–700 m) steric height have been assessed for their seasonal variability and trend maps. It is shown that neither the global mean nor the regional trends of altimetry SLR can be explained by the upper ocean steric height plus the GRACE ocean mass. A non-Boussinesq ocean general circulation model (OGCM), allowing the sea level to rise as a direct response to the heat added into the ocean, is then used to diagnose the deep ocean steric height. Constrained by sea surface temperature data and the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiation measurements, the model reproduces the observed upper ocean heat content well. Combining the modeled deep ocean steric height with observational upper ocean data gives the full depth steric height. Adding a GRACE-estimated mass trend, the data-model combination explains not only the altimetry global mean SLR but also its regional trends fairly well. The deep ocean warming is mostly prevalent in the Atlantic and Indian oceans, and along the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, suggesting a strong relation to the oceanic circulation and dynamics. Its comparison with available bottom water measurements shows reasonably good agreement, indicating that deep ocean warming below 700 m might have contributed 1.1 mm/yr to the global mean SLR or one-third of the altimeter-observed rate of 3.11 ± 0.6 mm/yr over 1993–2008.”

And

Warming of Global Abyssal and Deep Southern Ocean Waters between the 1990s and 2000s: Contributions to Global Heat and Sea Level Rise Budgets*, Purkey, Sarah G., Gregory C. Johnson, J. Climate, 23, 6336–6351. - doi: 10.1175/2010JCLI3682.1

Also

A 20th century acceleration in global sea‐level rise , Church, J. A. and N. J. White (2006), Geophys. Res. Lett. , 33 , L01602, doi:10.1029/2005GL024826.

 

[wirebender]

Here's something more recent that was published this year in the JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 116, C02020, 16 PP., 2011 - doi:10.1029/2010JC006601

Deep ocean warming assessed from altimeters, Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, in situ measurements, and a non-Boussinesq ocean general circulation model

In reference to that paper, Pielke Sr. observes:

"There is a significant analysis quality issue with the authors using “the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiation measurements” as one of the constraints on their analysis. These radiation measurements are of fluxes and have a signficant uncertainty."

Expect a rash of "debunking" papers to be published regarding that study.

Warming of Global Abyssal and Deep Southern Ocean Waters between the 1990s and 2000s: Contributions to Global Heat and Sea Level Rise Budgets*, Purkey, Sarah G., Gregory C. Johnson, J. Climate, 23, 6336–6351. - doi: 10.1175/2010JCLI3682.1

This paper claims 0.059 and 0.093 mm per year. Are those statistically signifigant numbers? I would also be interested in seeing a discussion regarding the physics of warm water accumulating under cold water. The physical fact is that cold water is more dense than warm water. Exactly how do you suppose it is staying below the cold water?

Then they claim that the rise in temperature is due to CO2. Upon what hard evidence do they base that statement, or is it, like so much of climate science, based on computer models as opposed to hard observation? The paper brings up far more questions than it answers.

 

[IanC]

good points wirebender. I hate the way so many of the scientists proclaim conclusions that are unsupported by the evidence or are tangential to the studies