"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
news:d83737e5-30f8-49b0-a2f5-39397df1af0d@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 26, 11:08 am, silky wrote:
> On Mar 26, 12:39 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
>
> > Glacier Melt Impact on Sea Level Rise Underestimated
>
> > The total rise in sea level over the past century is due mostly to
> > ocean water expanding in volume as it warms up, and ice melt from
> > mountain glaciers and Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
> > Subtracting
> > the effect of thermal expansion from the observed rate of sea level
> > rise should give a reasonable estimate of the rate of ice melting,
> > the
> > researchers say, but the equation leaves out the amount of water
> > locked up in reservoirs.
>
> > Please see:
>
> >http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2008/0314ice.shtml
>
> >http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1154580
>
> Roger you are such a kook,on the one hand "total rise in sea level" as
> if it has been
> signifigant then you turn around witht the fact tthat the rise has
> been less than a
> 10th of an inch.....
NOPE! YOU SHOULD GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
-- Rising sea level:
**************
Get your facts straight Coppcock ...
Scientists Denounce Alarmist Scaremongering On Sea levels
Scientists Counter AP Article Promoting Computer Model Climate Fears
Marc Morano - Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov 9:55 AM ET
September 24, 2007
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=37cd65f0-802a-23ad-4a69-5a1509a4a551
Nearly two dozen prominent scientists from around the world have
denounced a recent Associated Press article promoting sea level fears in
the year 2100 and beyond based on unproven computer models predictions.
The AP article also has been accused of mischaracterizing the views of a
leading skeptic of man-made global warming fears. The scientists are
dismissing the AP article, entitled "Rising Seas Likely to Flood U.S.
History" (LINK) as a "scare tactic," "sheer speculation," and "hype of
the worst order." (H/T: Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters.org - LINK)
Dr. Richard S. Courtney, a climate and atmospheric science consultant
and a UN IPCC expert reviewer ridiculed the AP article.
"Rarely have I read such a collection of unsubstantiated and
scare-mongering twaddle. Not only do real studies show no increase to
rate of sea level change, the [AP] article gives reasons for concern
that are nonsense," Courtney told Inhofe EPW Press Blog on September 23.
UN IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr Vincent Gray, of New Zealand
slammed the article as well:
"This [AP article] is a typical scare story based on no evidence or
facts, but only on the 'opinions' and 'beliefs' of 'experts', all of
whom have a financial interest in the promotion of their computer
models," Gray wrote to the Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
Swedish Professor Wibjorn Karlen of the Department of Social and
Economic Geography at Stockholm University:
"Another of these hysterical views of our climate," Karlen wrote to
Inhofe EPW Press Blog regarding the AP article. "Newspapers should think
about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young
kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate,"
Karlen explained.
The September 22, 2007 Associated Press article promoting future
computer generated climate fears, appears just days before a high
profile UN climate summit in New York City this week. The AP's Seth
Borenstein has a history of promoting unverifiable climate fears of the
future (See: "AP Incorrectly claims scientists praise Gore's movie" from
June 2006 - LINK )
This AP report comes at a time when the peer-reviewed science is
continuing to debunk the foundation of man-made climate change fears.
(See "New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears"
(LINK)
Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of
Alabama in Huntsville, stated that the AP mischaracterized his views on
sea level in the article promoting climate fears a hundred years from
now.
"[My] discussion [with the AP reporter Seth Borenstein] was primarily
about the storm surges which come from hurricanes - that's the real
vulnerability. The sea level is rising around 1 inch per decade, but sea
level is like any other climate parameter - its either rising or falling
all the time. To me, 16 inches per century is not a significant problem
to deal with. But since storm surges of 15 to 30 feet occur in 6 hours,
any preventive strategy, like an extra 3 feet of elevation, would be
helpful," Christy wrote to the Inhofe EPW Press blog.
"Thinking that legislation can change sea level is hubris. I did a
calculation on what 1000 new nuclear power plants operating by 2020
would do for the IPCC best guess in the year 2100. The answer is 1.4
cm - about half an inch (if you accept the IPCC projection A1B for the
base case.) Also, there doesn't seem to be any acceleration of the slow
trend," Christy explained.
Borenstein's AP article stated: "Ultimately, rising seas will likely
swamp the first American settlement in Jamestown, Va., as well as the
Florida launch pad that sent the first American into orbit, many climate
scientists are predicting. In about a century, some of the places that
make America what it is may be slowly erased."
Borenstein, who only quotes six scientists in the article, of which only
one can be labeled a climate skeptic, uses the generic phrase "several
leading scientists say." [EPW Blog Note: This blog report alone quotes
nearly two dozen climate experts countering the AP's "report" on sea
level]
Borenstein's article also claims alarming sea levels "will happen
regardless of any future actions to curb greenhouse gases, several
leading scientists say. And it will reshape the nation."
"Storm surges worsened by sea level rise will flood the waterfront
getaways of rich politicians-the Bushes' Kennebunkport and John Edwards'
place on the Outer Banks. And gone will be many of the beaches in Texas
and Florida favored by budget-conscious students on Spring Break,"
Borenstein's AP article continued.
But prominent scientists are speaking out and denouncing the article a
mere hours after its publication.
Here is a sampling of scientists' reaction to the AP story:
State of Florida Climatologist Dr. Jim O'Brien of Florida State
University countered the AP article.
"The best measurements of sea level rise are from satellite instrument
called altimeters. Currently they measure 14 inches in 100 years.
Everyone agrees that there is no acceleration. Even the UN IPCC quotes
this," O'Brien wrote to EPW on September 23. O'Brien is also the
director of the Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies.
"If you increase the rate of rise by four times, it will take 146 years
to rise to five feet. Sea level rise is the 'scare tactic' for these
guys," O'Brien added.
Climate researcher Dr Vincent Gray, of New Zealand, an expert reviewer
on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990:
The IPCC never makes 'predictions', only 'projections'; what might
happen, or be 'likely" if you believe the assumptions in the model. No
computer model has ever been shown to be capable of successful
prediction," Gray wrote to the Inhofe EPW Press Blog on September 23.
"Actual data on sea levels are unreliable. Long term figures are based
on tide-gauge measurements near port cities prone to subsidence and
damage of equipment from severe weather. Many recent and more reliable
measurements show little recent change. Satellite measurements have
shown a recent rise which may be temporary," Gray added.
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, a retired Senior Research Scientist and
Coordinator for national international marine geological research at the
Geological Survey of Finland:
"Even the worst case scenario is half of that quoted by Associated
Press. This is a hype of the worst order. This whole scare builds on
GCM's which we know mimic Earth processes very simplistically and are
thus most unreliable," Winterhalter told Inhofe EPW Press Blog on
September 23.
"I, as a marine geologist, am abhorred. I just looked at the USGS (US
Geological Survey) site and am astonished that none of the references or
fact sheets seem to refer to IPCC Fourth Assessment Report released this
spring," Winterhalter added.
Prominent scientist Professor Nils-Axel Morner, declared "the rapid rise
in sea levels predicted by computer models simply cannot happen."
Morner, a leading world authority on sea levels and coastal erosion who
headed the Department of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics at Stockholm
University, called the AP story "propaganda." "The AP article must be
regarded as an untenable horror scenario not based in observational
facts," Morner told Inhofe EPW Press Blog, "Sea level will not rise by 1
m in 100 years. This is not even possible. Storm surges are in no way
intensified at a sea level rise. Sea level was not at all rising 'a
third of a meter in the last century': only some 10 cm from 1850 to
1940," he wrote.
Morner previously noted on August 6, 2007: "When we were coming out of
the last ice age, huge ice sheets were melting rapidly and the sea level
rose at an average of one meter per century. If the Greenland ice sheet
stated to melt at the same rate - which is unlikely - sea level would
rise by less than 100 mm - 4 inches per century." Morner, who was
president of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal
Evolution from 1999 to 2003, has published a new booklet entitled "The
Greatest Lie Ever Told," to refute claims of catastrophic sea level
rise. (LINK)
Dr. Richard S. Courtney, a climate and atmospheric science consultant
and a UN IPCC expert reviewer:
"Global sea level has been rising for the 10,000 years since the last
ice age, and no significant change to the rate of sea level rise has
been observed recently," Courtney wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog on
September 23.
"A continuing rise of ~2 mm/year for the next 100 years would raise sea
level by ~0.2 m as it did during the twentieth century. And it is hard
to see any justification for Andrew Weaver's claim (as quoted by AP)
that 'We're going to get a meter and there's nothing we can do about it,
unless Weaver is talking about the next 500 years," Courtney wrote.
"Simply, there is no reason to suppose that sea level rise will be more
of a problem in this century than it was in the last century or each of
the previous ten centuries," he concluded.
Geophysicist Dr. David Deming of University of Oklahoma.
"Projections of sea-level rise are based on projections of future
warming, fifty or a hundred years hence. And these projections are
based on speculative computer models that have numerous uncertainties,"
Deming wrote in a September 23, e-mail to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"These models cannot even be tested; their validity is completely
unknown. In short, predictions of future sea-level rise are nothing but
sheer speculation," Deming added.
Swedish Professor Wibjorn Karlen of the Department of Social and
Economic Geography at Stockholm University:
"I have used the NASA temperature data for a study of several major
areas. As far as I can see the IPCC "Global Temperature" is wrong.
Temperature is fluctuating but it is still most places cooler than in
the 1930s and 1940s," Karlen wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog regarding
the AP article.
"The latest estimates of sea level rise are 1.31 mm/year. With this
water level increase it will take about 800 years before the water level
has increased by 1 m if not conditions change before that (very likely).
Society will looks very different at that time," he added.
Emmy Nominated Meteorologist Art Horn says AP loves 'a scary story'
"Fearless forecasts from people who likely have never made real time,
real world predictions. We who have worked in the real world of everyday
weather forecasting for decades understand what it's like to be burned,
even when you felt the forecast was a lock. I'm of the belief that most
if not all of these predictions come from people who don't know much
about the nature of prediction," Horn wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog the
day after the AP article was published.
"Working with computer models that don't even start with a climate
remotely similar to the real world can't give you results that are in
any way close to useful. But the AP and all news organizations love a
scary story. I know, I worked as a TV meteorologist for 25 years. If it
will generate a buzz they will run with it," Horn explained.
"Making predictions about how much sea level will rise helps to insure
the money train will continue. There will be people in seats of power
that will continue to feed money to universities, research facilities
and people like [NASA's] James Hansen.
Greenpeace co-founder ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore noted the AP article
was way off base from even the UN IPCC predictions.
"The IPCC predicts 18 - 59 cm, i.e. their high end is about half
predicted in the AP story, and the AP story warns of a possible three
meters," Moore told Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"The sea was 400 feet (130 meters) lower than today at the peak of the
last Ice Age 18,000 years ago. This is an average of 72 cm/100 years.
Most of this occurred between 18,000 and 6,000 years ago so there were
periods when the sea rose more that 1 meter per 100 years," Moore
concluded.
Former Harvard physicist Dr. Lubos Motl:
"There's no good reason to expect more than 3 millimeters per year in
average. It's been really 1.5 mm in the last 50 years, and 2 mm per year
in 1900-1950. The rate has actually slowed down according to some
papers," Motl wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"Any model that predicts significant acceleration [of sea level] with
growing CO2 is falsified or nearly falsified by the observed data. It's
crazy to think that this slow gradual rise is anything that would
justify any actions besides the houses that have to be either moved or
protected on the centennial scale," he added.
"Any calculation that wants to indicate that the effects of sea level
rise are a significant portion of the life or the economy is simply a
miscalculation," he concluded.
Chemist and agronomist Paavo Siitam:
"Despite some doom and gloom predictions, excluding waves washing onto
shores by relatively rarely occurring tsunamis and storm-surges,
low-lying areas on the face of our planet have NOT yet been submerged by
rising oceans... so probably low-lying areas along shorelines of Canada
and the USA will be SAFE into foreseeable and even distant futures,"
Siitam wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"By the way, I'd be happy to buy prized oceanfront properties at bargain
prices, anywhere in the world, when unwarranted, panic selling begins.
The dire predictions will not come true this century," he added.
IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Dr. Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist:
"I cannot help but conclude that this is one more example of
scare-mongering by some very reputed scientists in the atmosphere/ocean
science. I am disappointed to find that none of these scientists seem to
want to refer to the excellent work of Prof Morner of Stockholm
University who was the President of the INQUA commission for Maldive
Islands SLR and who has discounted & dismissed the Maldive Islands
'disappearing' in ONE hundred years or even earlier according to some
scare-mongerers!" Khandekar wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"Besides Prof Morner's excellent studies, the scientists named in the
news story seem to have ignored another well-documented study by Simon
Holgate , an oceanographer in UK, whose paper in GRL( Geophysical
Research Letters, 2007) has analyzed nine long sea-level records from
1903-2003 and the study finds that the SLR from 1953-2003 was about 1.5
mm/yr while the SLR from 1903-1953 was about 2 mm/yr, so there is NO
ESCALATING sea level rise at present," Khandekar explained.
"If the earth's climate enters into a mini ice age by 2035-2040 as
several solar scientists are suggesting now, we may NOT even see half
the sea level rise as quoted above," he added.
Atmospheric physicist Dr. Fred Singer:
"The key to Borenstein's story is the first very word: 'Ultimately.'
Yes -- with sea level continuing to rise at the rate of about seven
inches per century (as it has in past centuries), Florida will be
flooded in a few 1000 years," Singer, co-author of "Unstoppable Global
Warming Every 1500 Years," wrote.
Singer added sea levels will rise "unless a new ice age begins sooner --
lowering sea level -- as ocean water turns into continental ice sheets."
Dr. Art Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine:
"Long term temperature data suggest that the current - entirely natural
and not man made - temperature rise of about 0.5 degrees C per century
could continue for another 200 years. Therefore, the best data available
leads to an extrapolated value of about 1 foot of rise during the next
two centuries," Robinson explained to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"There is no scientific basis upon which to guess that the rise will be
less or will be more than this value. Such a long extrapolation over two
centuries is likely to be significantly in error - but it is the only
extrapolation that can be made with current data. There may be no sea
level rise at all. No one knows," he added.
Accuweather chief meteorologist Joe Bastardi, who specializes in
long-range forecasts, slammed the AP article for being offering up "a
series of anything can happen and probably will statements."
"As someone who competes in the private sector and gets fired if my
forecasts are not supply enough merit to be right enough for clients to
benefit, I would welcome the kind of padding one has in making such
outrageous long range forecasts that no one still alive will be able to
verify," Bastardi explained.
Internationally known forecasting pioneer Scott Armstrong of the Wharton
School at the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania and his colleague
Kesten Green Monash University in Australia:
"Dire consequences have been predicted to arise from warming of the
Earth in coming decades of the 21st Century. Enormous sea level rises is
one of the more dramatic forecasts. According to the AP's Borenstein,
such sea-level forecasts were experts' judgments on what will happen,"
Armstrong and Green wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"As shown in our analysis experts' forecasts have no validity in
situations characterized by high complexity, high uncertainty, and poor
feedback. To date we are unaware of any forecasts of sea levels that
adhere to proper (scientific) forecasting methodology and our quick
search on Google Scholar came up short," Armstrong and Green explained.
"Media outlets should be clear when they are reporting on scientific
work and when they are reporting on the opinions held by some
scientists. Without scientific support for their forecasting methods,
the concerns of scientists should not be used as a basis for public
policy," they concluded.
The Viscount Christopher Monckton of Brenchley in the UK, an advisor to
the Science and Pulblic Policy Institute, who has authored numerous
climate science analyses (LINK):
"Given the absence of credible evidence for extreme sea-level rise over
the coming century in the peer-reviewed literature, the IPCC has been
compelled to reduce its sea-level estimates. The mean centennial
sea-level rise over then 10,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age
has been 4 feet per century; in the 20th century sea level rose less
than 8 inches; and the IPCC's current central estimate is that in the
coming century sea level will rise by just 43 cm (1 ft 5 in)," Monckton
wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
Canadian Geologist Albert F. Jacobs, co-founder of the group Friends of
Science:
"Basic to the IPCC case for sea level rise and for the alarmists' hype
is the hypothesis that increasing levels of carbon dioxide will cause
increasing amounts of global warming. It should be stressed that this
assumption of truth is no more than a hypothesis, which is increasingly
being attacked and on which any meaningful discussion has been thwarted
by the IPCC's political masters," Jacobs wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"As far as CO2 is concerned, basic physics has always been clear about
the limitations of higher concentrations of gas to absorb equivalent
amounts of heat radiation. 'Doubling of CO2' does none of the things the
IPCC's computer says it does. And that's all separate from the fact that
water vapour is a much greater 'greenhouse' driver than carbon dioxide
in any case," Jacobs added.
Canadian economist Dr. Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph in
Ontario (who was key in debunking the infamous "Hockey Stick") pointed
out that real estate values would be plummeting on the coastlines if the
AP article was accurate.
"If what they're saying is true, we will see the effect on land values
long before we see the effect on sea levels. They are saying that it is
certain that all sea-level waterfront property around the US will be
worthless in 50-100 years. Since the market is very efficient at
discounting future certainties into present values, US beachfront
property ought to be losing at least 20 percent of its remaining value
every decade from now on," McKitrick wrote to Inhofe EPW Press Blog.
"It might be worth asking some real estate agents, especially in places
like Hollywood and the Hamptons, where there seems to be such a
consciousness of global warming, if beachfront owners are beginning to
dump their properties at a discount. Because, of course, if some people
have inside information that this land is really going to be worthless
soon, they'll be the first ones to cash out and move to higher ground,"
he concluded.
As EPW previously reported in a comprehensive report debunking fears of
Greenland melting and a scary sea level rise, many prominent scientists
dismiss computer model fears. (LINK)
Ivy League geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack of the University of
Pennsylvania, explains that sea level is only rising up 1.8 millimeters
per year (0.07 inches) -- less than the thickness of one nickel.
"Sea level is rising," Giegengack said, but it's been rising ever since
warming set in 18,000 years ago, he explained according to a February
2007 article in Philadelphia Magazine. "So if for some reason this
warming process that melts ice is cutting loose and accelerating, sea
level doesn't know it. And sea level, we think, is the best indicator of
global warming," he said. (LINK) Giegengack also noted that the history
of the last one billion years on the planet reveals "only about 5% of
that time has been characterized by conditions on Earth that were so
cold that the poles could support masses of permanent ice." (LINK)
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
"Attributing global climate change to human CO2 production is akin to
trying to diagnose an automotive problem by ignoring the engine
(analogous to the Sun in the climate system) and the transmission (water
vapour) and instead focusing entirely, not on one nut on a rear wheel,
which would be analogous to total CO2, but on one thread on that nut,
which represents the human contribution." Dr. Timothy Ball, Chairman of
the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP.com), Former Professor
Of Climatology, University of Winnipeg
|