http://www.skepticalscience.com//pics/SLRMarch2013.png

for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year

It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises.

What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc.

Don't live near a coastline and expect your children to inherit a beach side property with low insurance premiums, or even a beach side property at all - perhaps a Venice style appartment

Oh, I dunno. I think this global warming stuff is just a myth.

Do you know what the fudge factor is to the graph MOTR. How much have they had to make the past lower, make the present higher in this graph.

In other words, what are the adjustments from the raw data in order to get the picture they wanted, just like they do with the temp data?

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man-made-sea-level-rises-are-due-to-global-adjustments/

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg


http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 7^th, 2013 at 4:40am:

Oh, I dunno. I think this global warming stuff is just a myth.

Fascinating. I enjoy these intellectual conversations. You have such a talent there. What's your view on Symplectic Groups and Quaternion Representations in current research on the Grand Unifying Theory?

I'd be interested to know where you think the flaw is with global warming. Is it the uncertainty of feedbacks, or do you have an issue with the Greenhouse Effect itself.

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7^th, 2013 at 7:53am:

Do you know what the fudge factor is to the graph MOTR. How much have they had to make the past lower, make the present higher in this graph. In other words, what are the adjustments from the raw data in order to get the picture they wanted, just like they do with the temp data? http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man-made-sea-level-rises-are-due-to-global-adjustments/ http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf

You have had plenty of time MOTR. How much is the data fudged from the raw data. What is the anomoly raw data compared to adjusted data?


http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg

muso wrote on Apr 7^th, 2013 at 8:48am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 4:40am: Oh, I dunno. I think this global warming stuff is just a myth. Fascinating. I enjoy these intellectual conversations. You have such a talent there. What's your view on Symplectic Groups and Quaternion Representations in current research on the Grand Unifying Theory? I'd be interested to know where you think the flaw is with global warming. Is it the uncertainty of feedbacks, or do you have an issue with the Greenhouse Effect itself.

You're a temperamental type person. I shall call you "Nancy".

I live 300M above sea level

It would be lovely to have the sea just down the valley a bit

(goes to burn more coal)

Oh BTW are there any scenarios where the sea level will rise 300M

I don't mind drowning the bottom dwelling scum suckers, but we Hill People must not be inconvenienced

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 7^th, 2013 at 9:21pm:

muso wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 8:48am: UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 4:40am: Oh, I dunno. I think this global warming stuff is just a myth. Fascinating. I enjoy these intellectual conversations. You have such a talent there. What's your view on Symplectic Groups and Quaternion Representations in current research on the Grand Unifying Theory? I'd be interested to know where you think the flaw is with global warming. Is it the uncertainty of feedbacks, or do you have an issue with the Greenhouse Effect itself. You're a temperamental type person. I shall call you "Nancy".

So, you don't have a reason? It's just a feeling in your bones?

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7^th, 2013 at 3:23pm:

You have had plenty of time MOTR. How much is the data fudged from the raw data. What is the anomoly raw data compared to adjusted data?

Do you think he might have better things to do than try to figure out exactly how proven liars like Joanne Nova perpetrate their lies?

It's quite easy to invent nonsensical data without providing sources.

muso wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 6:38am:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 3:23pm: You have had plenty of time MOTR. How much is the data fudged from the raw data. What is the anomoly raw data compared to adjusted data? Do you think he might have better things to do than try to figure out exactly how proven liars like Joanne Nova perpetrate their lies? It's quite easy to invent nonsensical data without providing sources.

I see MOTR is in election campaign mode for labor. I wouldnt call that important.

muso wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 6:38am:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 3:23pm: You have had plenty of time MOTR. How much is the data fudged from the raw data. What is the anomoly raw data compared to adjusted data? Do you think he might have better things to do than try to figure out exactly how proven liars like Joanne Nova perpetrate their lies? It's quite easy to invent nonsensical data without providing sources.

So after 30 years of freakin dire warnings of doom and gloom and countless $$Billions blown, just how many people have fu5ken well drowned????

Answer...NONE

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2013 at 10:44am:

for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc.

If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ?

Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming.

Oh well.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 8:57am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well.

Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models.

Care to share.

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 9:08am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share.

Look at the OP you numskull.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 12:46pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Look at the OP you numskull.

I didnt see model anything.


progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7^th, 2013 at 7:53am:

Do you know what the fudge factor is to the graph MOTR. How much have they had to make the past lower, make the present higher in this graph. In other words, what are the adjustments from the raw data in order to get the picture they wanted, just like they do with the temp data? http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man-made-sea-level-rises-are-due-to-global-adjustments/ http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 1:12pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 12:46pm: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Look at the OP you numskull. I didnt see model anything. progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 7:53am: Do you know what the fudge factor is to the graph MOTR. How much have they had to make the past lower, make the present higher in this graph. In other words, what are the adjustments from the raw data in order to get the picture they wanted, just like they do with the temp data? http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man-made-sea-level-rises-are-due-to-global-adjustments/ http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg

Exactly. No catestrophic warming to be found...despite every alarmist claim being prodded and poked and splashed with as much GRANT CASH that could be thrown at them..now the abstract of sea level rise (or continent sinking haha) and glacier retreat are thrown in....all of which are debunked with the simple notion that no warming equals no co2 feedback of consequence equals the warmist numpties have exagerated the life out this and it is now a mirthless joke.

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 1:12pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 12:46pm: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Look at the OP you numskull. I didnt see model anything. progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 7:53am: Do you know what the fudge factor is to the graph MOTR. How much have they had to make the past lower, make the present higher in this graph. In other words, what are the adjustments from the raw data in order to get the picture they wanted, just like they do with the temp data? http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man-made-sea-level-rises-are-due-to-global-adjustments/ http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg

Thats not the OP, thats just a graph made by someone who cant even get auto-focus to work.

Jo Nova is an idiot, making money peddling bullsh1t to those more stupid than herself. 
Well, either she's an idiot, or a nasty manipulator.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 1:49pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 1:12pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 12:46pm: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Look at the OP you numskull. I didnt see model anything. progressiveslol wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 7:53am: Do you know what the fudge factor is to the graph MOTR. How much have they had to make the past lower, make the present higher in this graph. In other words, what are the adjustments from the raw data in order to get the picture they wanted, just like they do with the temp data? http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man-made-sea-level-rises-are-due-to-global-adjustments/ http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/lansner/adjustments/sea-level-fig-2.jpg Thats not the OP, thats just a graph made by someone who cant even get auto-focus to work. Jo Nova is an idiot, making money peddling bullsh1t to those more stupid than herself.  Well, either she's an idiot, or a nasty manipulator.

Some people, even the graph (using non-manipulated data), say that the manipulated data is the manipulator. Hey, that even has maniplulat in both. Wonder who the manipulators are lol

Probably the thing that is confusing you is that although there is data saying land temperatures have levelled, all recorded ocean temperature data is showing a continued warming trend.

Higher ocean temperature = higher sea levels.

Land temperature is irrelavent for this OP.

muso wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 6:35am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 7th, 2013 at 9:21pm: You're a temperamental type person. I shall call you "Nancy". So, you don't have a reason? It's just a feeling in your bones?

Flick that chip off your shoulder. I was just heckling you. Hop off your high horse and come down and live amongst the rest of us proletariat. I couldn't give a fuying flock about topics that only 1% of the rest of humanity might even consider being interesting.  :D
When you finish displaying your superiority complex to everyone, you might want to consider that this post wasn't directed at you for response. But if you want to be my next punching bag, figuratively speaking, then I can make room on my schedule for you.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 2:20pm:

Probably the thing that is confusing you is that although there is data saying land temperatures have levelled, all recorded ocean temperature data is showing a continued warming trend. Higher ocean temperature = higher sea levels. Land temperature is irrelavent for this OP.

Yes, as a responce to strong el Nino events. Plain and simple, nothing to do with co2, emmissions or farts (brain or other). Everything else is irrelevant white noise designed to buffer the cash coffers of the CAUSE.

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 4:29pm:

[quote author=muso link=1364927377/9#9 date=1365366914][quote author=WorldSacred link=1364927377/6#6 date=1365333674] Flick that chip off your shoulder. I was just heckling you. Hop off your high horse and come down and live amongst the rest of us proletariat. I couldn't give a fuying flock about topics that only 1% of the rest of humanity might even consider being interesting.  :D When you finish displaying your superiority complex to everyone, you might want to consider that this post wasn't directed at you for response. But if you want to be my next punching bag, figuratively speaking, then I can make room on my schedule for you.

Well your original proclamation must have had some basis, you would think.  The subject of Climatology is a tad more complex than the latest price of Santa Getrudis heifers at Gracemere, so if you have such a strong opinion on it, it stands to reason that you wouldn't have just snatched that particular pearl of wisdom from where the sun doesn't shine.

So what's your opinion on brain surgery?  There has got to be more where the last one came from.

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 9:08am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share.

Are you trying to pretend that sea levels are not rising?!?!?

http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/alt_gmsl_seas_rem.jpg
http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_last_15.html

DOn't you realise now how silly you are for falling hook,line and sinker for that silly opinion piece from the Daily Mail you keep referring to?  You know - the one that claimed that there had been no global warming for 15 years or whatever.

If there has been no global warming   - why do sea levels continue to rise?  Why does glacial mass balance and the arctic ice cap continue to decrease?  Why do ocean temperatures continue to rise?

Why do you always run away when asked that question?


Why is it that the only people you can find to support your denialism are a Daily Mail columnist, a children's TV presenter and a journal published by a bloke that was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for fraud?

rabbitoh07 wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 6:01pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Are you trying to pretend that sea levels are not rising?!?!? http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/alt_gmsl_seas_rem.jpg http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_last_15.html DOn't you realise now how silly you are for falling hook,line and sinker for that silly opinion piece from the Daily Mail you keep referring to?  You know - the one that claimed that there had been no global warming for 15 years or whatever. If there has been no global warming   - why do sea levels continue to rise?  Why does glacial mass balance and the arctic ice cap continue to decrease?  Why do ocean temperatures continue to rise? Why do you always run away when asked that question? Why is it that the only people you can find to support your denialism are a Daily Mail columnist, a children's TV presenter and a journal published by a bloke that was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for fraud?

Are you pretending you cant read

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6223/161/1600/jumper11.jpg

PEOPLE LOVE PRETEDNING EVERYTHING IS FINE UNTIL THE SHITE HITS THE FAN

if you rank the DECADES for how hot they are you get

warmest decade on record  2000-2009
2nd warmest decade on record  1990-1999
3rd warmest decade on record  1980-1989
4th warmest decade on record  1970-1979
5th warmest decade on record  1960-1969


Gee. I wonder what could be causing this???

(don't worry, Andrew Bolt and Lord Monckton has assured everyone on the planet that the world has stopped warming for 15 years - phew - that was a close one - THANK GOD FOR THE HONEST INTELLECTUAL NAMED MR BOLT hey folks?)

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 6:35pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 6:01pm: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Are you trying to pretend that sea levels are not rising?!?!? http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/alt_gmsl_seas_rem.jpg http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_last_15.html DOn't you realise now how silly you are for falling hook,line and sinker for that silly opinion piece from the Daily Mail you keep referring to?  You know - the one that claimed that there had been no global warming for 15 years or whatever. If there has been no global warming   - why do sea levels continue to rise?  Why does glacial mass balance and the arctic ice cap continue to decrease?  Why do ocean temperatures continue to rise? Why do you always run away when asked that question? Why is it that the only people you can find to support your denialism are a Daily Mail columnist, a children's TV presenter and a journal published by a bloke that was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for fraud? Are you pretending you cant read

Still no answers?

Still running away?

Please tell us

If there has been no global warming for 15 years   - why do sea levels continue to rise?  Why does glacial mass balance and the arctic ice cap continue to decrease?  Why do ocean temperatures continue to rise?

Stop running away.

See how stupid you look when you believe crap written in a Daily Mail opinion piece?
When you get you information from the website of a children's TV presenter?
When you link to journals published by a bloke that was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for fraud?

No wonder you run away every time you are asked a question.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 8:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 6:35pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 6:01pm: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 9:08am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 8:57am: Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 3rd, 2013 at 10:44am: for this time scale the data shows a strong linear correlation where the slope is a little over 3 mm per year It is unlikely that this linearity will continue because there are tipping points and various positive drivers that come into play as the earths temperature rises. What is expected is a departure from linear sea level rise behaviour to a bursts or exponential increases as these tipping points and positive rivers begin to act in unison etc. If you look at the OP's graph, are we hitting the first exponential growth over the last 2 year period ? Too early to say, but what can be said is that the cooling the deniers are claiming as the end of global warming was a short term anonmoly which is now undergoing a rapid correction back to modelled warming. Oh well. Model warming. Wow, which model you looking at? I cant seem to pick 1 that models our temps and thats from atleast 100 models. Care to share. Are you trying to pretend that sea levels are not rising?!?!? http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/alt_gmsl_seas_rem.jpg http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_last_15.html DOn't you realise now how silly you are for falling hook,line and sinker for that silly opinion piece from the Daily Mail you keep referring to?  You know - the one that claimed that there had been no global warming for 15 years or whatever. If there has been no global warming   - why do sea levels continue to rise?  Why does glacial mass balance and the arctic ice cap continue to decrease?  Why do ocean temperatures continue to rise? Why do you always run away when asked that question? Why is it that the only people you can find to support your denialism are a Daily Mail columnist, a children's TV presenter and a journal published by a bloke that was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for fraud? Are you pretending you cant read Still no answers? Still running away? Please tell us If there has been no global warming for 15 years   - why do sea levels continue to rise?  Why does glacial mass balance and the arctic ice cap continue to decrease?  Why do ocean temperatures continue to rise? Stop running away. See how stupid you look when you believe crap written in a Daily Mail opinion piece? When you get you information from the website of a children's TV presenter? When you link to journals published by a bloke that was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for fraud? No wonder you run away every time you are asked a question.

Guess you arent. You are for real.

muso wrote on Apr 8^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 8th, 2013 at 4:29pm: [quote author=muso link=1364927377/9#9 date=1365366914][quote author=WorldSacred link=1364927377/6#6 date=1365333674] Flick that chip off your shoulder. I was just heckling you. Hop off your high horse and come down and live amongst the rest of us proletariat. I couldn't give a fuying flock about topics that only 1% of the rest of humanity might even consider being interesting.  :D When you finish displaying your superiority complex to everyone, you might want to consider that this post wasn't directed at you for response. But if you want to be my next punching bag, figuratively speaking, then I can make room on my schedule for you. Well your original proclamation must have had some basis, you would think.  The subject of Climatology is a tad more complex than the latest price of Santa Getrudis heifers at Gracemere, so if you have such a strong opinion on it, it stands to reason that you wouldn't have just snatched that particular pearl of wisdom from where the sun doesn't shine. So what's your opinion on brain surgery?  There has got to be more where the last one came from.

My initial post was a fishing post to try and provoke revelation for someone specific to respond. Didn't work. But atleast it brought out you from your ivory tower.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/30/finally-jpl-intends-to-get-a-grasp-on-accurate-sea-level-and-ice-measurements/


Finally: JPL intends to get a GRASP on accurate sea level and ice measurements

Posted on October 30, 2012by Anthony Watts


A climate science bombshell: New proposal from NASA JPL admits to “spurious” errors in current satellite based sea level and ice altimetry, calls for new space platform to fix the problem.

People send me stuff. Today it is a PowerPoint presentation from NASA JPL that touts the new GRASP (Geodetic Reference Antenna in Space) satellite project. I’d say it is more than a bit of a bombshell because the whole purpose of this new mission is to “fix” other mission data that apparently never had a stable enough reference for the measurements being made. This promises to rewrite what we know about sea level rise and acceleration, ice extent and ice volume loss measured from space.


TRF errors readily manifest as spurious sea level rise accelerations

That’s a bucket of cold water reality into the face of the current view of sea level rise. It puts this well-known and often cited graph on Sea Level Rise from the University of Colorado (and the rate of 3.1 mm/yr) into question:


What’s  a TRF error? That stands for Terrestrial Reference Frame, which is basically saying that errors in determining the benchmark are messing up the survey.

Sea Level rises ...So many errors....so much bullstish

The beachhouse is SAFE....

Thursday, April 25, 2013


New paper finds global sea levels will rise only about 5 inches by 2100


A new peer-reviewed paper by sea level expert Dr. Nils-Axel Morner concludes that Australian government claims of a 1 meter sea level rise by 2100 are greatly exaggerated, finding instead that sea levels are rising around Australia and globally at a rate of only 1.5 mm/year. This would imply a sea level change of only 0.13 meters or 5 inches by 2100. Dr. Morner also finds no evidence of any acceleration in sea level rise around Australia or globally.

From the conclusion of the paper:


In view of the data presented, we believe that we are justified to draw the following conclusions:


(1) The official Australian claim [2,3] of a present sea level rise in the order of 5.4mm/year is significantly exaggerated (Figure 3).


(2) The mean sea level rise from Australian tide gauges as well as global tide gauge networks is to be found within the sector of rates ranging from 0.1 to 1.5 mm/year (yellow wedge in Figure 3).


(3) The claim of a recent acceleration in the rate of sea level rise [2,3,12] cannot be validated by tide gauge records, either in Australia or globally (Figure 3). Rather, it seems strongly contradicted [19,21,24,39-41]


The practical implication of our conclusions is that there, in fact, is no reason either to fear or to prepare for any disastrous sea level flooding in the near future.


http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/jaeger/Moerner_Parker_ESAIJ2013.pdf

or see for yourself at the Hockey Schtick  ;D

the assumption is that global sea level rise with respect to time has a simple linear relationship

The positive feedback loops and ice dumping events will most certainly drive the sea level rise beyond linearity

The planet is stuffed!

And nothing will be done because the WEST is under a corporate fascist dictatorship regime.

Short term profits rule

Banks rule

Criminal financial cartels rule

kneel and pray ladies and gentlemen

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 27^th, 2013 at 1:17pm:

The planet is stuffed!

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcj8herHXr1r0lvj5o1_500.gif

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 27^th, 2013 at 1:17pm:

the assumption is that global sea level rise with respect to time has a simple linear relationship The positive feedback loops and ice dumping events will most certainly drive the sea level rise beyond linearity The planet is stuffed! And nothing will be done because the WEST is under a corporate fascist dictatorship regime. Short term profits rule Banks rule Criminal financial cartels rule kneel and pray ladies and gentlemen

you make deathridesahorse look sane  ;D

Rider wrote on Apr 27^th, 2013 at 2:18pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 27th, 2013 at 1:17pm: the assumption is that global sea level rise with respect to time has a simple linear relationship The positive feedback loops and ice dumping events will most certainly drive the sea level rise beyond linearity The planet is stuffed! And nothing will be done because the WEST is under a corporate fascist dictatorship regime. Short term profits rule Banks rule Criminal financial cartels rule kneel and pray ladies and gentlemen you make deathridesahorse look sane  ;D

...thanks Rider, I appreciate your support
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/110912-smoking-monkey-5a.grid-4x2.jpg

Sea levels are not rising at the alarming rate Al Gore predicts.


Quote:

The uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story, writes Christopher Booker. Christopher Booker 6:25PM GMT 28 Mar 2009 If one thing more than any other is used to justify proposals that the world must spend tens of trillions of dollars on combating global warming, it is the belief that we face a disastrous rise in sea levels. The Antarctic and Greenland ice caps will melt, we are told, warming oceans will expand, and the result will be catastrophe. Although the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) only predicts a sea level rise of 59cm (17 inches) by 2100, Al Gore in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth went much further, talking of 20 feet, and showing computer graphics of cities such as Shanghai and San Francisco half under water. We all know the graphic showing central London in similar plight. As for tiny island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, as Prince Charles likes to tell us and the Archbishop of Canterbury was again parroting last week, they are due to vanish. But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story. Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.

Will post more on this when i can post web sites.

Rider wrote on Apr 27^th, 2013 at 7:25am:

New paper finds global sea levels will rise only about 5 inches by 2100 A new peer-reviewed paper by sea level expert Dr. Nils-Axel Morner concludes that Australian government claims of a 1 meter sea level rise by 2100 are greatly exaggerated,

Who did the peer reviews, and which journal was it published in?

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 27^th, 2013 at 1:17pm:

the assumption is that global sea level rise with respect to time has a simple linear relationship The positive feedback loops and ice dumping events will most certainly drive the sea level rise beyond linearity

It would be hard to predict how some of this feedbacks loops will affect rates of melting. I doubt this is a model sophisticated enough to predict with much accuracy.

There are too many variables like how much extra energy will be absorbed due to less white ice reflecting the radiation fro  the sun, and how much difference will more sean less land make in stabilising Arctic temperatures and providing warmer winters. How will extra humidity work in trapping heat in the atmosphere. How much radiation from the sun will be reflected due to extra cloud cover? All these things are unknown.

What we do know is that if the Greenland ice sheet alone melts it will raise sea levels by about 15 metres - most of Sydney gone!

I have a feeling that he's using tidal gauges instead of satellite altimeter data. The problem with tidal gauges is that the land itself is in motion. For example most of Scandinavia is still rising after the last Glacial period.

The Satellite altimeter data shows a steady rise, but as other posters point out, it's unlikely to continue on a linear trend. The main contributing factors are mean ocean temperature and the degree of melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

I understand that INQUA is distancing itself from Nils-Axel Morner's paper.

http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/alt_gmsl_seas_rem.jpg

The worst case will be that sea levels will rise 100mm(4") by the year 2100.

And it wont be from AGW but rather the natural cycle of the Earth.