New data is available, and Envisat continues to show sea level declining at a rate of more than 5mm/year since the beginning of 2010. This is due to the record melting in Greenland over the last two years that we keep hearing about – which is filling up the oceans with anti-water.
Steve,
Shame on you!
Don’t you know it does not count to climate science as it is not temperature based.
So, it must be ignored as insignificant.
Interesting how now Climate Science has eliminated ocean temperatures to show warming with just land temperatures.
Wonder how many Climate Scientist have vested interests such as businesses that depend on keeping the AGW alive.
Certainly pushing the uncertainty with absolute no intention of looking into science to generate certainty.
“Wonder how many Climate Scientist have vested interests such as businesses that depend on keeping the AGW alive.”
That is their business. If it were to leak out that climate change is not man made and only dangerous in ice ages, there goes the industry.
This “anti-water” how can we bottle it? I remember a popular cola brand trying to sell tap water, they just ran a hose from the main domestic supply and slapped a price on it, I think they are now scamming with polar bear extinctions these days.
If my logic is sound we could be selling empty plastic bottles to for 100% mark up in no time and if we use a (dangerous) cuddly animal on the label we can charge extra or even get a huge tax break. Every one who buys our bottles of “anti-water” will want to recycle the plastic bottles, it’s a winner.
>>>”anti-water” LMAO
Many years ago a co-worker had a can of “dehydrated water.”
To reconstitute the product, you simply poked two holes in the top of the can and added liquid water until the can was full of the mixture of dehydrated and liquid water.
Love it!
I need to buy some for my survival supplies!
I wonder what the usable shelf life would be on a product such as that!
Water? as in H2o? ha ha ha! why not, if that sells.
Steven,
Is that not double of the rises that used to happen?
Over at Skeptical Science they have a graphic
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/1_msl.gif
that makes fools out of folks who go on about the recent downturn in sea level.
But what’s important is that sea level is not accelerating as folks over there often claim. If you go to Colorado University Sea Level Research Group’s page
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
and down load their data:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/files/2011_rel4/sl_ns_global.txt
and plot it out on Excel as I have done
http://i54.tinypic.com/2qtl828.jpg
With a 2nd Order Polynomial Trend line you will see that indeed there hasn’t been any acceleration of sea level rise over the almost twenty years of satellite data.
Get serious. The earlier data Cook is using is complete crap. Envisat is lower now than when it started measuring in 2003.
Steve, the problem with the graphic CU presents is that it mixes data sets. They just as well put tree ring data in the graph as well, it would be just as legitimate.
For a more thoughtful discussion of what is going on here, see:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/hiding-the-incline-in-sea-level.html
Terry
Brilliant. Sea level is actually rising 5 metres this century as Hansen predicted. Alarmist use the word “thoughtful”l to replace “idiotic.”
lol, Cook uses data from 18 years ago, gathered from archaic satellites to tell us that sea levels aren’t decreasing. And even with all of that, he still shows a sharper downturn than anytime in his graphic. lol, “thoughtful” isn’t what I’d call it. Worse, he misrepresents the period of time Envisat shows…… for a more accurate representation, go here to see 7 years of declining sea levels….. http://suyts.wordpress.com/2011/11/12/a-look-back/
Seasonal signals need to be removed:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/files/2011_rel4/sl_ns_global.pdf
Complete nonsense. Over a period of several years any real seasonal signals would average out to zero.
Sorry Steve: You have no plotted a period of “several years,” but about 1.75 of them. There are many small, short-term fluctuations in that time, especially ENSOs.
Choosing to focus on such a short time period only shows how weak your case is.
Yes, I completely understand.
Greenland is melting at a record rate in 2010-2011 leading to multi-metre sea level rise this century, but the water is magically disappearing down Alice’s rabbit hole over the last 1.75 years.
David, maybe this one will satisfy your sensibilities…… http://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/image_thumb19.png?w=561&h=266
@David: Even from the graph you provide, it is very easy to see that the rate of sea level increase from 2002 is decelerating rapidly. The last two years show at least flat, if not a decline.
What makes you think a 2-yr trend is relevant to the larger issue of climate?
What makes you think that water from melting ice can magically disappear?
According to the supposedly “Sensible” explanation linked above , that freezing water, which mind you is very cold,
evaporates and falls as rain, causing floods, in various regions.
According to the graphic, this very cold water
melts off of Greenland and then falls as rain in Africa and Australia.
That is what it
says.
Oh wait, sorry, I just put on glasses.
The ice melts into the ocean around Greenland
and then magically falls as floodrains in Australia and South America, not Africa.
Because, you know, that is how it works when you are trying to save the planet from itself.
I guess.
Australia is in a permanent drought. How can it be raining there against the will of the climate models?
Apparently , according to the “thoughtful” discussion and explanation,
there is “Extra Water” there in Australia.
This is what happens when people lie.
They cannot keep their stories straight.
They might have to move that”Extra Water” to Antarctica in the interest of not being questioned further.
Steven Goddard says:
Australia is in a permanent drought. How can it be raining there against the will of the climate models?
Climate models predict short-term precipitation in Australia?
Which ones do that?
What makes you think the water has just disappeared? Measurements from GRACE show an increased amount of water on land:
http://grace.jpl.nasa.gov/news/index.cfm?FuseAction=ShowNews&NewsID=53
Greenland is melting at a record rate and sea level is going down. I’m terrified.
Well that’s a relief….obviously sea level rise had nothing to do with ice melting in the first place
….It was all because there was no water on land
Greenland is, of course, just one part of the system — its melt rate is expected to raise sea level only about 0.5 mm/yr. We just had a very strong La Nina and, as GRACE shows, there is a lot of water on land. It will drain to the oceans.
It’s fun to make plots every time a new data point is released, but climate change is about the long-term — decades. I know you know that, but if these short-term fluctuations are all you guys have left, I guess you have to go with them, right?
Latitude says:
Well that’s a relief….obviously sea level rise had nothing to do with ice melting in the first place
….It was all because there was no water on land
Or maybe science is more nuanced than your black-and-white view and both are happening at the same time, and by varying rates.
Would that really be too much for you to handle?
17 years is over 1/2 of the data period……30 years.
The first 1/4 of that period was flat, and the last 3/4 cooling……..
Santer et al (2011) Separating Signal and Noise in Atmospheric Temperature Change: The Importance of Timescale, state at the conclusion of their abstract that,
“Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature.”
..I think the nuances are moving to fast for the morons
@David: “What makes you think a 2-yr trend is relevant to the larger issue of climate?”
When activists like James Hansen (who have the ear of the media) keep talking about a multi-metre rise in sea level, a two-year decline in sea-level is significant. It’s hard to sell fear in the media when sea level is doing the opposite of what is being reported. BTW, I didn’t just mention the 2-year trend. I also mentioned that for the last 9-10 years (since 2002), the rise in sea-level was decelerating rapdily. Again, this is contrary to the shrill voices (like Hansen) who keep talking about sea-level rise accelerating when it is doing the opposite. Being a journalist yourself, surely you should appreciate that what is being reported in the media should be accurate, and not fear-mongering nonsense designed to make headlines, and sell newspapers and magazines.
LLAP: Of course James Hansen has the ear of the media — he’s much more accomplished that you.
Can you show me where Hansen said that sea-level has to rise over every two-year period?
Thanks.
LLAP says:
I also mentioned that for the last 9-10 years (since 2002), the rise in sea-level was decelerating rapdily.
Proof?
@David: “Of course James Hansen has the ear of the media — he’s much more accomplished that you.”
1) Should be “than” not “that”.
2) What a stupid statement. If it comes to that, he is much more accomplished than you too. Hansen has the ear of the media becuase he is an activist who sows the seeds of fear and, as I mentioned before, fear sells. I don’t think the general public is going to pay much attention to headlines that say, “Sea Level Declining – Manhattan is Safe”.
“Can you show me where Hansen said that sea-level has to rise over every two-year period?”
You are deflecting the issue when you make a statement like that. I never said that Hansen said that. What Hansen does is make outrageous claims about sea-level rise, and the media swallows it wholesale.
“I also mentioned that for the last 9-10 years (since 2002), the rise in sea-level was decelerating rapdily.
Proof?”
Look at the graph that YOU posted. Surely someone with a PhD in physics can look at the graph in sections and tell that the slope of a certain section (ex: 2002 onward) would be much LOWER than the straight line that is on the graph. Sheeesh!
good grief David…..You’re using Jason 1 and 2??
Don’t you know about all the problems they had?
How they were “tuned”?
Do you even know how Envisat was tuned….and what happened when they did that?
Suggestion, take a few hours and read this:
Envisat RA2/MWR ocean data validation and cross-calibration activities. Yearly report 2008
http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/…report/EN/annual_report_en_2008.pdf
If that link doesn’t work —-google it
Basically if you’re using Jason 1-2 you’re using garbage…..pure garbage
I have said it before and despite the fact that it is
not necessary to inform you fellows, I will say it again.
Sea Level has been rising for thousands, THOUSANDS of years.
That the alarmists have hitched their wagon to that star and found that even this apparently consistent activity of the planet
refuses to cooperate should evoke some humility.
But I guess it doesn’t.
Jimash: Yours is a particularly thoughtless comment.
Please show for us a time series of sea level for the past X years — X is your choice.
It’d be nice if you included a chart of the rate of change, too.
Thanks.
David , do you mean like this one ?
http://www.geologywales.co.uk/storms/searise2.jpg
’cause dude, we’ve all seen it.
Only the alarmists pretend to be unaware of this .
Latitude: Your link didn’t work.
Why am I not surprised?
David, I believe this is what he wanted you to inspect……http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/fileadmin/documents/calval/validation_report/EN/annual_report_en_2008.pdf
because you are a moron and can’t even google it!
…why am I not surprised
Don’t be a smart asswipe David
woops…..
now it’s the missing heat …..and water!
Dang….the planet is warming at a unprecedented rate….and we can’t find it
…and now the glaciers and all the ice is melting at a unprecedented rate….and we can’t find that either
@ Steve Goddard,
Australia is in a permanent drought. How can it be raining there against the will of the climate models?
Dang it, so what’s falling from the sky right now in Sydney? Trenbreth’s missing heat that underwent a phase transition into a liquid state?
That’s just hydrated dryness…..
David Appell says:
November 17, 2011 at 3:06 am
LLAP says:
“I also mentioned that for the last 9-10 years (since 2002), the rise in sea-level was decelerating rapdily.”
Proof?
========================================
David, if I may…….. go here…. http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/en/news/ocean-indicators/mean-sea-level/products-images/
Click on the radio button “time series”……. then click on the various satellites……
even with their silly “adjustments”, T/P has a linear slope of 3.42mm/yr covering the time period 93-06 Jason1 has a slope of 2.61mm/yr for the period of 02-present. Envisat has a slope of 0.803mm/yr for the period of 04-present and Jason II has a slope of 1.24mm/yr 08-present………
So, even if you use inane stuff like the GIA and seasonal (lol) adjustments, there is a rapid deceleration of over 2mm/yr……..
Can someone explain how the globe has a season? Isn’t there some silly hemispheric dynamic that would negate a “season” for water? Or, does our H2O have its own timetable?
Great song!
I have been putting water in my dehydrator so I can have some dehydrated water in case of an emergency. All my dehydrated food says to add water so I am dehydrating water also! That is probably where the missing water went. All the survivalists in the world are hording it in a dehydrated form!
Sea level, like global temperature, tends to vary over the years and thirty years is not enough time to determine any significant trend when we know there are long term variations that show longer cycles than thirty years. To find a trend we would need to capture RELIABLE information from a sufficient number of cycles. Of course we already know about the 120K cycles we are in the process of experiencing a minor portion of. I guess that means the sea level will do something over the next 120 thousand years and we can sit back and observe while adapting to the long term changes.
BTW! We do not have a reliable method of currently determining what the short term sea level is doing! We have a whole bunch of people making wild A$$ guesses about sea level and telling fairy tales that some people actually believe!
I am specifically referring to SS and Colorado.edu!
Sorry to say David Appell, but all one has to do is look at the peer-reviewed, published study by S., J. C. Moore, A. Grinsted, and P. L. Woodworth (2008), Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L08715 weblink=> http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=Z2xhY2lvbG9neS5uZXR8Z3JpbnN0ZWR8Z3g6NzgyNmQ2MjdkMzQ1MmU1NA
Recent sea level rise started just after 1850, well before CO2 levels started to rise. The rise has not has not accelerated at all during the 1900′s, and now that sea level rise since 2005 (according to satellite data) has slowed and possibly has even has gone negative, AGW proponents have absolutely no scientific leg to stand on (other than their gigo alarmist models) that sea level rise was anything other than natural in cause.
“Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [IPCC’s]
publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it
changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per
year, the same as from the tide gauge. And that didn’t look so
nice. It looked as though they had recorded something; but
they hadn’t recorded anything. It was the original one which
they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a “correction
factor,” which they took from the tide gauge. So it was
not a measured thing, but a figure introduced from outside. I
accused them of this at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow—
I said you have introduced factors from outside; it’s not
a measurement. It looks like it is measured from the satellite,
but you don’t say what really happened. And they answered,
that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten
any trend!”
Dr Nils-Axel Morner
http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf
Does not this decreasing solar radiation impel a cooler Earth?
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/Ap.gif
ALSO-
This bizarre graph seems at odds with some other ice measurements-
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic
I’ve thoroughly enjoyed watching you guys systematically take Dave apart with logic and fact. Good show
Oh my Steven, I think you have made some serious “scientific” errors here. Using the “scientific method” we must first dismiss all data showing a decline in sea levels. Then we multiply the actual decline by four to obtain a “projected average increase” (thus turning the decline into an increase). Next we substitute our hypothetical, projected increase and label it as factual proof of the catastrophic rise in ocean levels. Do you see now how the “scientific method” works?
I’m still giggling over the term “anti-water”! When I can stop giggling I’ll start googling and rejoin this glorious debate!
Here’s a way to control sea level rise, and I’m not joking… in simple language, dig a very very very large hole (or a number of holes) in the ocean floor. Not only will the water fill the holes resulting in sea level decline (or control), but the dredge material can be used to build up land mass. Tell me if my idea holds water (sorry for the pun). Plus, think of the jobs that will be created! I think human engineering is up to the task, yes?
Are shifting sands calculated by anyone? I mean it is a huge mass why should it be left out?
There’s nowt so queer as folk, ‘cept thee, David Appell, Steven Goddard, Old Uncle Tom Cobbley and me, but I’m not too sure about t’others.
Dammit, my seaside apartment is one road up from the shore. I was hoping that in due time the apartment block in front of mine would be submerged, and my apartment would become seafront, thus doubling the value on my investment.
Good post and comments. Bookmarked for the record when SL debates come up and to document how David Appel left when he was forced to actually look at real graphs and studies, and asked to respond to those, poof he vanished, or melted, gone, just like the missing water and missing heat.