Latest AMS paper shows sea level rise to be less than 1.5mm/year

cancel2 2022

Canceled
It is easy to fool someone, but it is almost impossible to convince them that they have been fooled. That is the fraudsters staple psychological tool used by the likes of Al Gore and many others. Case in point, this paper was just published by the American Meteorological Society.

In another newly published paper by Frederiske et al. 2018 just this year, oceanographers estimate that global sea levels rose at a rate of only 1.42 mm per year between 1958 and 2014. That figure closely coincides with the results of Dr. Simon Holgate from 2007. According to the Holgate study: “The rate of sea level change was found to be larger in the early part of last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904–1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954–2003).”


A Consistent Sea-Level Reconstruction and Its Budget on Basin and Global Scales over 1958–2014

Thomas Frederikse
Department of Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands

Svetlana Jevrejeva
National Oceanography Centre, Liverpool, United Kingdom

Riccardo E. M. Riva
Department of Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands

Sönke Dangendorf
Research Institute for Water and Environment, University of Siegen, Siegen, Germany

Supplemental information related to this paper is available at the Journals Online website: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0502.s1.
[emoji767] 2018 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).
Corresponding author: Thomas Frederikse, t.frederikse@tudelft.nl

Journal of Climate

Vol. 31: , Issue. 3, : Pages. 1267-1280
(Issue publication date: February 2018)

Received Date: July 27, 2017
Final Form: October 31, 2017

https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0502.1

Abstract
Different sea level reconstructions show a spread in sea level rise over the last six decades and it is not yet certain whether the sum of contributors explains the reconstructed rise. Possible causes for this spread are, among others, vertical land motion at tide-gauge locations and the sparse sampling of the spatially variable ocean. To assess these open questions, reconstructed sea level and the role of the contributors are investigated on a local, basin, and global scale. High-latitude seas are excluded. Tide-gauge records are combined with observations of vertical land motion, independent estimates of ice-mass loss, terrestrial water storage, and barotropic atmospheric forcing in a self-consistent framework to reconstruct sea level changes on basin and global scales, which are compared to the estimated sum of contributing processes. For the first time, it is shown that for most basins the reconstructed sea level trend and acceleration can be explained by the sum of contributors, as well as a large part of the decadal variability. The sparsely sampled South Atlantic Ocean forms an exception. The global-mean sea level reconstruction shows a trend of 1.5 ± 0.2 mm yr−1 over 1958–2014 (1σ), compared to 1.3 ± 0.1 mm yr−1 for the sum of contributors. Over the same period, the reconstruction shows a positive acceleration of 0.07 ± 0.02 mm yr−2, which is also in agreement with the sum of contributors, which shows an acceleration of 0.07 ± 0.01 mm yr−2. Since 1993, both reconstructed sea level and the sum of contributors show good agreement with altimetry estimates.

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0502.1

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
It is easy to fool someone, but it is almost impossible to convince them that they have been fooled. That is the fraudsters staple psychological tool used by the likes of Al Gore and many others. Case in point, this paper was just published by the American Meteorological Society.



https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0502.1

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
In

For those not on the metric system, that 1.42 mm translates to 1/16".
 
Havoned Moron chattering like a retarded woodchuck about Global warming? What else is new?:blah:

Scab maggot is trying to sell the lie that a sea-level rise of 1.5mm means a nice even spread of calm water around the entire globe .
He's getting more and more desperate to shore up his position of denial.
First islander that loses a family to drowning should seek him out and lynch him.
 
Scab maggot is trying to sell the lie that a sea-level rise of 1.5mm means a nice even spread of calm water around the entire globe .
He's getting more and more desperate to shore up his position of denial.
First islander that loses a family to drowning should seek him out and lynch him.

Care to explain how ocean rise occurs globally? This ought to be good.
 
Care to explain how ocean rise occurs globally? This ought to be good.

Why should anyone bother? Those in denial won't listen to scientists that spent their lives studying the stuff, and have well regarded status. So what's a poster on a chat forum supposed to do?
 
Why should anyone bother? Those in denial won't listen to scientists that spent their lives studying the stuff, and have well regarded status. So what's a poster on a chat forum supposed to do?

Back up his/her bullshit. Show that he/she has a working knowledge at least of what they say. Not much to ask really. Everyone has opinions, I want facts included in discussions.
 
Why should anyone bother? Those in denial won't listen to scientists that spent their lives studying the stuff, and have well regarded status. So what's a poster on a chat forum supposed to do?

Can you understand this chart ... or is it tooo sciencey for you??? :palm:

Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
 
Scab maggot is trying to sell the lie that a sea-level rise of 1.5mm means a nice even spread of calm water around the entire globe .
He's getting more and more desperate to shore up his position of denial.
First islander that loses a family to drowning should seek him out and lynch him.

I agree with you only problem by that time we will be nothing but dust and man will be on other planets.
 
Back up his/her bullshit. Show that he/she has a working knowledge at least of what they say. Not much to ask really. Everyone has opinions, I want facts included in discussions.

Um, all I could do is give the usual facts from the scientists, that deniers ignore. I've explained stuff from personal understanding, and observation, but that doesn't help either. The climate like most things that fluctuate is like a scale, and when a scale gets off kilter you get aggressive fluctuations. We keep warming up to where snow starts melting, and we get rain. Then in no time it's dipping down into the teens, and it was even close to 0 a few times. Eventually we may see suffering in fruit production, because of this. In early spring it has often warmed up so much already, that blooms pop out, but than it shifts and gets cold. The blossoms are stifled, if not killed off sometimes in these conditions. I'm no scientist, but I'm a person with one of the most observant natures you may know. Intricacies, and variations tend to ingrain in my mind. What bugs me most is all the deniers that don't have the first understanding of climate.
 
Why should anyone bother? Those in denial won't listen to scientists that spent their lives studying the stuff, and have well regarded status. So what's a poster on a chat forum supposed to do?

I post a peer reviewed paper published by the AMS and you dismiss it summarily out of hand. So what are your scientific qualifications, oh obese one?

Looks like I need to reiterate what was said in the OP.


"It is easy to fool someone, but it is almost impossible to convince them that they have been fooled. That is the fraudsters staple psychological tool used by the likes of Al Gore and many others."

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Um, all I could do is give the usual facts from the scientists, that deniers ignore. I've explained stuff from personal understanding, and observation, but that doesn't help either. The climate like most things that fluctuate is like a scale, and when a scale gets off kilter you get aggressive fluctuations. We keep warming up to where snow starts melting, and we get rain. Then in no time it's dipping down into the teens, and it was even close to 0 a few times. Eventually we may see suffering in fruit production, because of this. In early spring it has often warmed up so much already, that blooms pop out, but than it shifts and gets cold. The blossoms are stifled, if not killed off sometimes in these conditions. I'm no scientist, but I'm a person with one of the most observant natures you may know. Intricacies, and variations tend to ingrain in my mind. What bugs me most is all the deniers that don't have the first understanding of climate.
Bullshit on steroids, stick to posting heart attack inducing recipes.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
The only state that would go under water would be Florida. Not a big loss since people down there can't even read a ballot right.
 
Back
Top