Skip to comments.Sea-level rises are slowing, tidal gauge records show
Posted on 07/22/2011 6:14:36 AM PDT by GregNH
ONE of Australia's foremost experts on the relationship between climate change and sea levels has written a peer-reviewed paper concluding that rises in sea levels are "decelerating".
The analysis, by NSW principal coastal specialist Phil Watson, calls into question one of the key criteria for large-scale inundation around the Australian coast by 2100 -- the assumption of an accelerating rise in sea levels because of climate change.
Based on century-long tide gauge records at Fremantle, Western Australia (from 1897 to present), Auckland Harbour in New Zealand (1903 to present), Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour (1914 to present) and Pilot Station at Newcastle (1925 to present), the analysis finds there was a "consistent trend of weak deceleration" from 1940 to 2000.
Mr Watson's findings, published in the Journal of Coastal Research this year and now attracting broader attention, supports a similar analysis of long-term tide gauges in the US earlier this year. Both raise questions about the CSIRO's sea-level predictions.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
I never knew they had started.
Obama did slow the rise of the oceans!
Use more carbon.
For the chil’ren.
(que celestial host...)
my God, you know it’s coming
Yup, and we discovered 657 new islands when he receded the seas.
Can’t quite figure out how the globalwarmingidiots can keep crying about the rising oceans when NEW islands are being discovered.
Discovered with the help of the Huffingpost Post
Thank you Obama - as if we really needed another reason to anoint him Emperor!!
"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere [historically] is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well-known but under-appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2-rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation.
Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause [historically -etl]. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase.
If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere."
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds [clouds of course aren't gas, but high level ones do act to trap heat from escaping, while low-lying cumulus clouds tend to reflect sunlight and thereby help cool the planet -etl]. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, 'Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,' Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other 'minor greenhouse gases.' As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.
Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).
Human activities contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate.
Water Vapor Confirmed As Major Player In Climate Change
ScienceDaily (Nov. 18, 2008) Water vapor is known to be Earth's most abundant greenhouse gas, but the extent of its contribution to global warming has been debated. Using recent NASA satellite data, researchers have estimated more precisely than ever the heat-trapping effect of water in the air, validating the role of the gas as a critical component of climate change.
Sea levels have been rising since the end of the last ice-age 11000 years ago.
The rate of change has been reducing - with perturbations caused by the solar barycenter oscillation - for 11000 years.
The Huff posters are getting nervous.
Sea level has been rising only about 3mm per year which is about one foot per 100 years.
Sea level about seven to 8 thousand years ago was about 20 to 30 feet higher than now. When the next ice age hits, which could be anytime, sea level will drop about 500 feet and sea level will be at the edge of the continental shelf like last time and the time before, and before.
You can’t make this stuff up, and if it weren’t so dangerous, it would be hilarious.
Hottest summer in a long time... and the greenies say the sea-levels aren’t rising as fast!
That’s too bad. I was hoping NY City, Seattle, and San Francisco would inundate.
It is the weapon the red/green coalition has chosen to deploy in order to batter capitalism into submission.
For real? Have you gone over there and taken a gander? That would be interesting, so please elaborate!
It’s actually quite simple. All brainwashed cult members are taught to ignore facts when it disagrees with their religion.
Global warming is just magical.
It’s a miracle! Praise be to Obamassiah!......./projectile sarc.......
Yes, every twelve hours
Knowing this, one would think that building homes in New Orleans is not a good idea?? The sea is rising and the land is sinking there. I wonder what's going to happen??
New Orleans is a 'Chocolate' city in more ways than one.
Tidal charts look exactly the same as they did 100 years ago.
One blogger writes:
“Wellll, mass earthquakes, volcanic activity, and general siesmic activity tendsto make islands... though I have to admit this is interesting for the global warming debate.”
In places you can throw a seashell from the Atlantic to the Gulf and the sea level on either side of Hwy 1 is only a foot below the road.
Thanx for the ping Fractal Trader & SunkenCiv !
Don’t know if you’re aware of this . . .
Dr Michio Kaku
Seems like we would be ablbe ot easily effect the path or even destroy this object.
BTW: the Rose Bowl isn’t *1000s* of feet in length, Shep.
Certainly doable . . . if there’s a will to do it.
Satan’s deceptions are likely such that there’s a delusion that it would be better to not do it and reduce the population dramatically . . . that some of the deeply buried bunkers are survivable for the elite.