How the GW myth is perpetuated

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
15,796
1,205
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Do you happen to know the elevation of his house?

Just curious.

Nearest I can find, some sources say 9 feet above sea level and others say 10’.

Sea level?

The Obama's is 3 to 4 meters above sea level.

3 meters is between 9' & 10' (9'10" & a whisker) & jives with the elevation map above that says 10'. I'm assuming it's in the yellow zone (flood danger) due to storm surges. I'm not saying that storm surges are getting worse or better, but simply that they are a thing that exists that would potentially explain why this property is in yellow on the flood risk map above.
 

Avro52

Time Out
Mar 19, 2020
3,635
2
36
3 meters is between 9' & 10' (9'10" & a whisker) & jives with the elevation map above that says 10'. I'm assuming it's in the yellow zone (flood danger) due to storm surges. I'm not saying that storm surges are getting worse or better, but simply that they are a thing that exists that would potentially explain why this property is in yellow on the flood risk map above.

So what?
 

Avro52

Time Out
Mar 19, 2020
3,635
2
36
Linear and for a long long time.

Then you agree it's rising.

That's all I've stated here.

Currently rising about an inch per decade but has accelerated slightly since 1930.

The more the oceans absorb heat and as land ice melts it could rise faster.
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
18,429
4,173
113
Twin Moose Creek
Then you agree it's rising.
That's all I've stated here.
Currently rising about an inch per decade but has accelerated slightly since 1930.
The more the oceans absorb heat and as land ice melts it could rise faster.

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html

Sea level continues to rise at a rate of about one-eighth of an inch per year. Higher sea levels mean that deadly and destructive storm surges push farther inland than they once did, which also means more frequent nuisance flooding.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
98,811
4,912
113
Moccasin Flats
Then you agree it's rising.
That's all I've stated here.
Currently rising about an inch per decade but has accelerated slightly since 1930.
The more the oceans absorb heat and as land ice melts it could rise faster.
It hasn't accelerated.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
98,811
4,912
113
Moccasin Flats
What did they use before satellites? When does the "satellite era" begin?

Are the thousands of tide gauges around the globe broken?

Try using Ft Denison's tide guage Oldest in the S Hemisphere
 
Last edited:

Avro52

Time Out
Mar 19, 2020
3,635
2
36
Okay.

The amount of sea level rise has been determined globally from long term tide gauge records. Globally, sea level rise has been reported at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past century and 1.9 mm/year from 1961 up to 2009.

The global sea level trend from the beginning of satellite measurements in 1993 up to 2014 is 3.2 mm/year. The sea level trend for the period 1993 to 2009 calculated from tide gauge records is 2.8 mm/year very close to the satellite altimeter global sea level trend.

Both well above the 1961-2009 average.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
98,811
4,912
113
Moccasin Flats
You have less than 100 years out of 3.8 Billion. Narrow it down a little, what is the Holocene mean.

Whittle it down further to the 1000 year mean.

If you want to talk geological processes use geological time.

Why would you limit it to post coldest point in the Holocene?
 

Avro52

Time Out
Mar 19, 2020
3,635
2
36
What did they use before satellites? When does the "satellite era" begin?
Are the thousands of tide gauges around the globe broken?
Try using Ft Denison's tide guage Oldest in the S Hemisphere

Me...

Okay.

The amount of sea level rise has been determined globally from long term tide gauge records. Globally, sea level rise has been reported at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past century and 1.9 mm/year from 1961 up to 2009.

The global sea level trend from the beginning of satellite measurements in 1993 up to 2014 is 3.2 mm/year. The sea level trend for the period 1993 to 2009 calculated from tide gauge records is 2.8 mm/year very close to the satellite altimeter global sea level trend.

Both well above the 1961-2009 average.
You have less than 100 years out of 3.8 Billion. Narrow it down a little, what is the Holocene mean.
Whittle it down further to the 1000 year mean.
If you want to talk geological processes use geological time.
Why would you limit it to post coldest point in the Holocene?

Have you moved on or are will still talking about accelerated sea level rise?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
98,811
4,912
113
Moccasin Flats
Yeah yeah yeah I have that NOAA site too.

Have you moved on from Science to ideology?

Sea level rise and fall is a geological process.

Geology demands pragmatism and long term scale.

Can you strip away ideology to take a pragmatic approach or is this a game?
 

Avro52

Time Out
Mar 19, 2020
3,635
2
36
It's not a NOAA site.

You stated sea level rise is not accelerating.

I pointed to some Satellite data that says it is.

You say look over here.

I do and the look over here confirms it's accelerating.

Then you deflect.
 

Avro52

Time Out
Mar 19, 2020
3,635
2
36
You need to compare it to thousands of years to average it out to declare acceleration.
27 years is bupkis.


Why did you direct me to the Fort Denison tide gauge?

It doesn't provide thousands of years of sea level rise.

It does say sea level is rising and has accelerated over the last quarter century. Expected, given thermal expansion and land ice melt.