NASA tells us this May was second hottest on record

a reply to: D8Tee

I'll read it. 👍 But... a quick glance suggests they're using very limited datasets (i.e. not the full sets we were talking about), plus it's 6 years old and hasn't been cited all that much. It's also swimming in a sea* of papers that contradict it.

Also, no offence, but I suspect you probably haven't read it yourself. Google's brilliant though. 😉

I say again... go read the methodology of the project your originally posted. All your questions are answered (in excruciating detail) there, including how they drew their conclusions.

As I said, the only agenda I'm seeing being pushed here is an anti-NOAA, anti-science agenda. I really struggle with the idea that huge teams of scientists are somehow faking climate change, as the mechanics of that kind of cover up would, I think, preclude it happening.

*awwww yes, I saw the pun, and I took it. You're welcome. 😉🙄🙂

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Sooooo what is everyone's point here...hehe

I don't like seeing the non scientific population being manipulated into believing the lies that NOAA and NASA are propagating with regards to climate change. I'd love to see these clickbait pages defunded and leave it to the Guardian to provide this style of story. NOAA could just as well take that peer reviewed paper by Dean and Houston and make it into a one page article proving there is no acceleration in the rate of sea level rise. Instead they publish totally misleading and false articles designed to trick people into believing the rate of sea level rise is accelerating. Utter nonsense, and not supported by empirical evidence. Instead they use some outlandish semi empirical model to deceive the people that expect NOAA to report facts not fallacies.

I understand the difference between a dataset and a semi empirical model based upon data, yes.
Here, if you want to play around with graphing the data, go to woodfortrees.org. Has most all the datasets.

Link

Your earlier posts suggest otherwise, but I'll take your word for it. 😉

As for the datasets...

I'm a software developer in real life, and at the moment I'm CTO of a company that's building machine learning algorithms to analyse.....

wait for it........

wait for it....

'cause you're going to love this).....

... sea, ocean and river levels, with a view to better predicting flood patterns in the U.K, and later, the rest of the world.

My (tbh, slightly frightening) ever improving AI pulls in data from pretty much all the public datasets (and a pile that we pay to access - mostly sat based data from private companies), and the idea that sea levels aren't rising is borderline insane from where I'm sitting.

a reply to: eightfold

I'll read it. 👍 But... a quick glance suggests they're using very limited datasets (i.e. not the full sets we were talking about), plus it's 6 years old and hasn't been cited all that much. It's also swimming in a sea* of papers that contradict it.

Show me those papers.

Also, no offence, but I suspect you probably haven't read it yourself.

Not only have I studied the Houston and Dean paper, I'm aware of the challenge to it, and how they answered to that challenge. Its rock solid, based on empirical evidence, not some semi empirical model, but nice try at telling ME that I didn't read it lmao.

The issue is not whether data show a small acceleration (as found by Church and White, 2011) or deceleration (as we and others found) of sea level in the 20th century. In either case, the values are so close to zero that the trend is essentially linear.

a reply to: eightfold

the idea that sea levels aren't rising is borderline insane from where I'm sitting.

And where did I say that sea levels were not rising? The question is, are the sea levels rising at an accelerated rate, if you don't know that much, i predict utter failure for your company.

a reply to: D8Tee

May 2017's temperature was 0.05 degrees Celsius cooler than May 2016.

Second hottest. Well..one could say that..or you could say...it was cooler then last year...but that doesnt sound right. Right ?

a reply to: eightfold

Can you tell me what the difference between Global Mean Sea Level and Relative Sea Level is?
Can you explain to me the difficulties associated with the satellite altimetry measurements being made since 1993?
Can you explain to me some pitfalls of the semi-empirical method used to project sea level?

Aha, yes, granted.... forgive me my one misreading of one of your posts.

But, that doesn't (or shouldn't) distract from the fact that *all* your questions are answered on the project site, thus (surely?) sort of nullifying the apparent point of the thread.

I think the reality is that you're pushing an anti-NOAA, anti-NASA agenda, that doesn't really stand up to any scrutiny. From glancing at your other threads, it seems to be a running theme. The wind-on-mars one is a corker.

And, for what it's worth, I'll let our AI, Steve (and our ever growing team of some the best data analysts in the world) know that you predict our failure. He's getting pretty (terrifyingly) good at making predictions himself, so I won't let yours cost me any sleep. 👍

a reply to: eightfold
at the moment I'm CTO of a company that's building algorithms to predict flood levels of oceans and rivers

sounds like you have a financial stake in continuing the global warming hysteria...

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: eightfold

Can you tell me what the difference between Global Mean Sea Level and Relative Sea Level is?
Can you explain to me the difficulties associated with the satellite altimetry measurements being made since 1993?
Can you explain to me some pitfalls of the semi-empirical method used to project sea level?

Yep, totally. You did read the post where I explained what I do for a living, right? Last I checked this was ATS and not a pop quiz.

If it makes you feel better, I'll happily verify who I am in real life with a mod.

If you're stuggling, Google can answer those questions for you too. 🙄😉

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Be interesting to see the fine print when NOAA releases their clickbait article for May in the next several days.

For April, it said that we were the second highest on record but then the fine print....

Africa had its 4th warmest April on record; Asia, its 8th; North America tied for its 10th; South America, its 12th; Europe, its 36th; and Oceania tied for its 40th.

NOAA LINK

Usual deceptive practices from them.

originally posted by: eightfold

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: eightfold

Can you tell me what the difference between Global Mean Sea Level and Relative Sea Level is?
Can you explain to me the difficulties associated with the satellite altimetry measurements being made since 1993?
Can you explain to me some pitfalls of the semi-empirical method used to project sea level?

Yep, totally. You did read the post where I explained what I do for a living, right? Last I checked this was ATS and not a pop quiz.

If it makes you feel better, I'll happily verify who I am in real life with a mod.

If you're stuggling, Google can answer those questions for you too. 🙄😉

I have no problems answering those questions without google, makes me wonder why you didn't take one minute and do the same?

a reply to: D8Tee

Again, here's the questions, why not just answer them, will only take but a minute if you have the knowledge.

Can you tell me what the difference between Global Mean Sea Level and Relative Sea Level is?
Can you explain to me the difficulties associated with the satellite altimetry measurements being made since 1993?
Can you explain to me some pitfalls of the semi-empirical method used to project sea level?

especially with a 4 billion year history.
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: AttitudeProblem

sounds like you have a financial stake in continuing the global warming hysteria...

Nope. We do flood analysis and prediction - I have a financial stake in our models and algo's being demonstrably correct based on historical data, and we seem to be doing pretty well so far.

Hysteria (and global warming) has nothing to do with it, we deal in numbers and hard facts. The reality is, flooding the UK is becoming more severe (and more likely) because of changes in rainfall patterns.

That's just a fact. If you want to dispute that, talk to *any* insurance company. Similar things are happening everywhere, including the US. Look at California for a brazen example, or Dubai in the UAE. *Why* it's happening isn't massively relevant to us, it's about the "how."

In all honesty, we're way more interested in rainfall levels, patterns, basin geography and river systems than we are with changes in sea levels, but it does play a role.

originally posted by: AttitudeProblem

a reply to: eightfold
at the moment I'm CTO of a company that's building algorithms to predict flood levels of oceans and rivers

sounds like you have a financial stake in continuing the global warming hysteria...

Yep, thats ones got a definite vested interest in the alarmism.
Notice how he asked for a peer reviewed paper, and then tried to dismiss it immediately, made false claims that I was not familiar with the material, stated it was outdated, not enough data (very untrue), anything to defect and defend his narrative, his livelihood depends upon it. He's into building model, just like the IPCC. That paper is rock solid, published in the Journal of Coastal Research and it's survived easily the challenges put too it by the alarmists. I'll take empirical evidence over a semi empirical model put together by some programmer any day.

The most important thing that everyone should know about climate change and sea-level is that there's been no detectable sustained acceleration (increase) in the rate of sea-level rise in over 85 years. All around the world, the best sea-level measurements all show the same thing: an almost perfectly linear trend. Sea-level is rising no faster now, with CO2 at 0.040% of the atmosphere, than it was when CO2 was less than 0.031%  of the atmosphere, in the early 1930s, during the Great Depression. 
There are about sixty good-quality, century-long records of sea-level around the world. A couple of them extend back more than 200 years. 
Due to differences in local factors (primarily vertical land motion), the rates of sea-level change vary greatly between those locations. Some are recording falling sea-level, and more are recording rising sea-level; the average is slightly rising. 
But they all show the  same thing w/r/t accel­er­a­tion: none of them have meas­ured a statistically significant increase in the rate of sea-level rise in over 85 years. At most locations it's been more than a century since the rate of sea-level rise meas­ur­ably increased. 

edit on 19-6-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)

a reply to: eightfold

wait for it........

wait for it....

'cause you're going to love this).....

... sea, ocean and river levels, with a view to better predicting flood patterns in the U.K, and later, the rest of the world.

Couldn't answer the sea level questions so now you are backing off to rainfall prediction? Cool.

In all honesty, we're way more interested in rainfall levels

Glad you are showing some honesty now. Care to address the sea level questions I gave you yet?

a reply to: eightfold

If it makes you feel better, I'll happily verify who I am in real life with a mod.

Do whatever you think you need to do, I'm not your keeper.

a reply to: eightfold

I have a financial stake in our models and algo's being demonstrably correct based on historical data, and we seem to be doing pretty well so far.

ex...squeeze me....whatta ????

You have a financial stake in your models being correct ???

Wow...I commend you for being open about it...the cancer of science laid bare.

originally posted by: D8Tee
Can you tell me what the difference between Global Mean Sea Level and Relative Sea Level is?

I'm not even going to dignify that with an answer.

Can you explain to me the difficulties associated with the satellite altimetry measurements being made since 1993?

Short version: bias drift, which is (effectively) dealt with nowadays. The real issues lie with tide gauge measurements.

Can you explain to me some pitfalls of the semi-empirical method used to project sea level?

The main issue is that different models make different assumptions, and their outputs massively diverge the further away your try to make predictions. I/we don't need to worry about that in our work, because our prediction timescales are relatively short and "local."

have no problems answering those questions without google, makes me wonder why you didn't take one minute and do the same?

If you know the answers, why are you asking me, and why are you asking the questions in the OP and thread? And why do your comments (and other threads) demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of basic science and methods. Seriously, your "wind on mars" thread is pricless

I didn't answer because I think you're a google warrior, and your "quiz" isn't relevant to the thread. You're questioning me rather than dealing with the issues you've raised. You're bordering on the standard ATS ad hominem reply, and it's not helpful.