It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sea Level new analysis and graphing tools

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I remember watching 'An Inconvenient Truth' and thinking, 'Wow, we are in trouble!'.
Now, I'm not so sure. With regards to sea level changes, in many cases we are being tricked, it's not the sea that is rising so fast, it's the land that is sinking.



. The worst effect of anthropogenic climate change is supposed to be accelerated sea-level rise. But that fear is the product of superstition, not science. The measurements show that anthropogenic GHG emissions have had no detectable effect on the rate of sea-level rise.

At some coastal locations, sea-level is rising, and at other locations it is falling, because of vertical land motion. The global average is slightly rising, but only about 1.5 mm/year (six inches per century), and the globally averaged rate of sea-level rise is no greater now, with CO2 over 400 ppmv, than it was 85 years ago, with CO2 under 310 ppmv.

This is a 111 year record of sea-level measurements at one particular location in the Pacific, but it is perfectly typical. The blue trace is sea-level, the green trace is CO2. If you know how to read graphs, then it will be obvious that CO2 is not affecting sea-level:

Lin k to article


New analysis and graphing tools for sea-level data
Sea Level information, data and graphs
edit on 21-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee




With regards to sea level changes, in many cases we are being tricked, it's not the sea that is rising so fast, it's the land that is sinking.

How are you being tricked? Subsidence (and uplift) are explicitly explained.

The variations in sea level trends seen here primarily reflect differences in rates and sources of vertical land motion. Areas experiencing little-to-no change in mean sea level are illustrated in green, including stations consistent with average global sea level rise rate of 1.7-1.8 mm/yr. These are stations not experiencing significant vertical land motion. Stations illustrated with positive sea level trends (yellow-to-red) are experiencing both global sea level rise, and lowering or sinking of the local land, causing an apparently exaggerated rate of relative sea level rise.

tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov...

Sea level is rising. Corrections for subsidence and uplift, as well as satellite measurements demonstrate this.

www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov...
 


The blue trace is sea-level, the green trace is CO2. If you know how to read graphs, then it will be obvious that CO2 is not affecting sea-level:

Strawman argument. No one claims that CO2 affects sea levels. But warming does. It causes thermal expansion of seawater and melting of glacial ice.
edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Thanks for an anti political thread!

I believe part of spirituality is being and leaving a positive connection to Earth as we live our lives... we as humans have a free will to act as a rebirth to life, or as a cancer to life. There will always live a varying levels of ying/yang... mother nature experiences things not much differently then we do as humans, but are portrayed in weather and magnetic events.

Overall, I do feel as if individual efforts can have an impact on small areas of mother nature, but enough of an infection will call for mother nature to scab her wounds, or even perform surgery to heal the wounds.

In regards to what is rising and dropping. It's the Ebb and Flow of life... Mother Nature's heart beat. The lands may be in fact dropping, but the seas will still be rising when looking down upon them...



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
A lot of people have been tricked into believing we will have catastrophic sea level changes that will wipe out our coastal cities, and this is just not the case.



Various methods have been employed over the years to account for vertical land motion in order
to determine a global absolute sea level rate (e.g. Douglas (1991)). The lastest IPCC report gives
a global sea level rise of 1.7 +/- 0.5 mm/yr for the 20th century (Solomon 2007). This value is in
good agreement with most previous studies (Douglas 1997)


tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov...



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee




A lot of people have been tricked into believing we will have catastrophic sea level changes that will wipe out our coastal cities, and this is just not the case.

Tell me, what is the timeline provided in that trickery?

Yes sea level is rising. The 20th century is behind us and we how how much sea level rose then. As the planet warms the rate of rise will increase due to increased thermal expansion, increased glacial melting and increased loss of Antarctic ice shelves.

Add that rise to the subsidence of some locations and yes, coastal cities will be heavily impacted. Areas without subsidence will be impacted. And areas with uplift will be ok.

edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Interesting. Subsidence due to gravity?

I recall reading something a year or so ago about the stretching-out of the Eurasian Plate contributing to the 1 cm rise per year of the Himalayas.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


The blue trace is sea-level, the green trace is CO2. If you know how to read graphs, then it will be obvious that CO2 is not affecting sea-level:



No one claims that CO2 affects sea levels. But warming does. It causes thermal expansion of seawater and melting of glacial ice.

A bit of circular logic, yes. It seems the author would like us to believe that an increase in C02 levels would have led to a increase in sea level rise, which it appears not to have done according to the data. I think the author was going off the theory that C02 will increase temperatures.
edit on 21-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Not circular logic. A straw man argument. Another logical fallacy quite common among warming skeptics.

edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I'm not, nor is the author a global warming skeptic. The data shows the earth is experiencing some warming.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
No, the graph shows no correlation between C02 and sea level rise. The argument has been advanced that increasing levels of C02 will lead to warming which leads to rising sea levels. This is not a case of a strawman arguement.



A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee
I didn't say you are. Unless you are Dave Burton.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Then perhaps a comparison to warming would have been more appropriate? It is, indeed a straw man argument.


edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: EightAhoy


Interesting. Subsidence due to gravity?


Subsidence due to human activity would include pumping from aquifers and oil producing zones. In most cases, oil bearing zones can be repressurized by pumping the produced water back into the zone, alleviating the problem. With water aquifers, it's not quite so simple, as you'd have to pump fresh water back into the zone to avoid contaminating the water.

Most subsidence and uplift are just natural forces like plate tectonics or land springing back after the glaciers have weighted it down during the ice ages.

Next time you see some coastal zone being inundated with 'rising ocean levels' you can investigate, you most assuredly will find that it's a result of land subsidence and not rising sea levels.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


Next time you see some coastal zone being inundated with 'rising ocean levels' you can investigate, you most assuredly will find that it's a result of land subsidence and not rising sea levels.
A combination of the two, actually.

Are you aware that an area does not have to be inundated to be affected by rising sea levels? Seawater intrusion into the water table is a very serious concern.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Correct, a combination of the two. Sea level rise is not the monster it has been made out to be. It's been rising, yes. 1.7 mm/yr. Been doing that for a while, since before C02 levels became an issue.



Satellite altimetry indicates a global sea level trend of over 3 mm/yr since 1993 (Nerem, Leuliette and Cazenave 2006). The latest satellite altimetry trends can be found at ibis.grdl.noaa.gov... The recent global trend raises the question of whether there has been a recent acceleration over the 20th century rate or if the recent trend is part of a multidecadal global fluctuation in the longer-period rate of 1.7 mm/yr. Some studies have found that the present-day global rate may have been equaled or exceeded for short periods of time earlier in the 20th century (Jevrejeva et al. 2006, Holgate 2007).



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee
You need to get the habit of posting links to your sources. I find this part of your quote interesting.

Satellite altimetry indicates a global sea level trend of over 3 mm/yr since 1993




Been doing that for a while, since before C02 levels became an issue.
Let me see if I have this right. You don't think increasing CO2 levels are causing warming which is, in turn, causing sea level rise?

edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Sorry for not including the link. It was from an article I had quoted from previously in the thread.

Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 053
SEA LEVEL VARIATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES
1854-2006



Let me see if I have this right. You don't think increasing CO2 levels are causing warming which is, in turn, causing sea level rise?

The observation is that the rate of sea level rise was not much larger during the last 50 years than during the twentieth century as a whole, despite the increasing anthropogenic forcing



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


The observation is that the rate of sea level rise was not much larger during the last 50 years than during the twentieth century as a whole, despite the increasing anthropogenic forcing

Is it inconsistent with the warming (which you acknowledge)? But, interestingly, one of the authors cited by your source says this:
Anthropogenic forcing dominates sea level rise since 1850


And, there is more recent work on GMSL.

Attempts to measure acceleration in global mean sea level (GMSL) have often used comparatively crude analysis techniques providing little temporal instruction on these key questions. This work proposes improved techniques to measure real-time velocity and acceleration based on five GMSL reconstructions spanning the time frame from 1807 to 2014 with substantially improved temporal resolution. While this analysis highlights key differences between the respective reconstructions, there is now more robust, convincing evidence of recent acceleration in the trend of GMSL.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...
Paywall, unfortunately.


edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
Sea level rise has not greatly accelerated, and it is not predicted to greatly accelerate. The data does not support that an increase in C02 is leading to a greatly accelerating sea level rise. We could continue to bandy papers back and forth in an attempt to prove something or another that is becoming increasingly off topic. The paper I quoted was from The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a good source, you would agree? There are countless papers on both sides of the issue.

This graph tells the story, and it's not the same story Al Gore and the mainstream media are telling the people. What was Al Gores claim? Twenty feet of sea level rise? yeah right.... The mean sea level (MSL) trend at Honolulu, HI, USA is +1.43 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of ±0.21 mm/year, based on monthly mean sea level data from 1905/1 to 2016/9. That is equivalent to a change of 0.47 feet in 100 years.
www.sealevel.info...
edit on 21-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee




What was Al Gores claim? Twenty feet of sea level rise?

Citation?


The combustion of fossil fuels increases atmospheric CO2 levels and forcing. Increased forcing increase global average temperatures. Increased global average temperatures causes changes in climate, sea level and temperature. Increasing atmospheric CO2 levels also affect ocean chemistry.

But all those changes are good, or we don't know what they are, so...never mind. No real problem.


edit on 1/21/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join