The University of Colorado at Boulder releases satellite based altimetry of sea level change several times a year. This graph below is dated December 15th according to the image timestamp.
If the previous schedule is any indication, they are now almost two months overdue. I’m not implying any nefarious motives whatsoever, but I’m wondering why it is overdue. Below is the update list. Sometimes a nudge helps. So let’s call this article a friendly nudge. I sent a query from their web page asking why, and hope to hear back soon.
Changes to each release since 2006 Release 3
2007 Release 1 (10/23/2007)
Uses the new TMR replacement product version 1.0 for T/P.
Uses GDR-B for all Jason-1 cycles.
Uses Don Chambers SSB model for T/P and the default SSB model for Jason-1 GDR-B.
Correctly applies the off-nadir pointing editing criteria of Jason-1 GDR handbook.
2007 Release 2 (12/03/2007)
T/P cycles 8 through 16 are computed by correctly applying the new TMR correction.
The one-cycle-off time tag shift error is fixed.
2008 Release 1 (01/16/2008)
Corrects an error in the non-IB GMSL that mainly affected the annual variation.
Resulted from using an IB-corrected MSS reference. The error is corrected by estimating
a local mean sea level from the non-IB data.
2008 Release 2 (05/29/2008)
Applies an ad hoc JMR correction for Jason-1 GDR-B cycles 1 through 227.
Applies 1.6 mm correction for the IB error for Jason-1 GDR-B cycles 94 through 142.
2008 Release 3 (09/08/2008)
For Jason-1, a bug is fixed to correctly interpolate the mean sea surface.
Jason-1 GDR Version B cycles 1 through 232 are used.
2008 Release 4 (12/11/2008)
Uses GDR-C for cycles 180, 184, 186-190, 193-194, 196-240, 244-246, and 248.
Updates GDR-B with GDR-C standards, e.g., GDR-C JMR, range correction, SSB model,
etc.
2009 Release 1 (02/13/2009)
Uses GDR-C for cycles 11, 14-16, 151, 153-157, 159, 161-164, 166-167, 171-173, 177,
180, 182, 184-190, 193-242, and 244-256.
2009 Release 2 (03/12/2009)
Fixes a bug in the implementation of 1.6 mm correction for the IB error for Jason-1
GDR-B cycles 94 through 142.
Updates with GDR-C cycles are 3-6, 9-10, 12, 21, 133-135, 138, 143-145, 158, 165,
169-170, 174, 176, and 257.
2009 Release 3 (07/17/2009)
Updates with more GDR-C cycles. Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 1-28.
2009 Release 4 (09/18/2009)
Newly added GDR-C cycles are 13, 17, 19, 25, 47, 53, 56, 65, 118, 123, 142, 148-150, 168,
and 183. Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 29-34.
2009 Release 5 (12/04/2009)
Includes all GDR-C cycles except 69, 82, 137, 139, 178-179, and 243.
Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 35-43.
2010 Release 1 (02/10/2010)
Now includes all GDR-C cycles. Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 44-50.
2010 Release 2 (05/06/2010)
Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 51-61.
2010 Release 3 (07/26/2010)
Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 62-66.
2010 Release 4 (10/06/2010)
Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 67-77.
2010 Release 5 (12/15/2010)
Added Jason-2/OSTM GDR cycles 78-82.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I can hear them hoping for a miracle from here.
A miracle isn’t going to cut it.
They are likely working feverishly to have a press release which provides a theory as to how global warming causes the sea level to drop.
There is no doubt that 2010 will be at least 2mm lower, but it could be more. That is going to be a hard sell.
These things take time… Especially when they don’t fit the plan.
thanks! i follow this graph and i was wondering the same thing. Unfortunately i have the feeling that since the data is becoming more politically incorrect that delayed sea height data may be delayed so that every effort may made to try to show increase not decrease.
Anthony, didn’t you hear? They are not late on purpose. They’re just busy plugging the holes where all of the seawater is leaking out. (must be the earthquakes they hypothesize).
☺
“I’m wondering why it is overdue. ”
I could speculate that they’ve been desperately dumping Viagra into the sea in hopes of getting a rise, but I won’t go there.
Anthony:
Can you do a quick curve fit with a polynomial? 2nd or 3rd order?
I think the least squares of that could yield a “leveling curve”. Which might be interesting to note!
Max
What are they going to do when a straight line no longer fits the data?
Surely nature wouldn’t dare show off some curves!
Yes, I can hardly wait. Now that GATA has been down sea-level rise deceleration is further evidence it is cooling, not warming. Last March, we had the “hottest March evah” and now it is cooling. Hmmmm. Not looking too good for the man-made CO2 is overheating the planet theory.
Are there any detectable changes in ocean levels after massive earthquakes centered out in the ocean like the recent one in Japan?
Global Warming has forced the extra Sea Water into the air….
warming air causes wetter air…
Jeeezzzz… can’t you all follow the AGW program..?
Inconvenient truth , maybe?
It’s a travesty that we can’t find the missing water. 🙂
I found the missing water with quick google…
The melting poles are now allowing the seawater to drip to the “inner earth”.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0PJR9xmE9zE/TDOVGtIY66I/AAAAAAAAAFY/pll-8kJ7rCM/s1600/inner-earth-map.gif
Just believe.
You have it all wrong. The rise in beaver numbers has increased the rate of water retention and so the sea level would have risen if it wasn’t for those dam beavers……
MarcH says:
April 6, 2011 at 9:02 pm
What are they going to do when a straight line no longer fits the data?
Surely nature wouldn’t dare show off some curves!
If you download the data from http://sealevel.colorado.edu/results.php and plot the Jason and Topex data separately, you get two very different trendlines. Jason from 2002 until late 2010 shows much less than 3.1mm p.a. – it’s more like 2.5mm p.a.
Maybe they skipped a climate control pill?
Kelvin says:
It’s a travesty that we can’t find the missing water. 🙂
Don’t tell me… they’re trying to hide the decline!
It’s worse than they thought.
You are wondering why the delay, these figures just don’t change themselves you know.
C’mon Y’All!
They’ve had tons of snow in Colorado this winter. They’re probably just trying to get the last avalanche shoveled out of the path that leads to the computer shed, eh?
What’s needed is a new “trick”, a new hockey stick!
Do any other institutions monitor sea levels, or perhaps we can get the raw data and plot ourselves. If the answer is no to both questions there would be reason to suggest doubt.
The AMSU satellite temperature site also quit posting its daily updates for all altitudes in mid-December, 2010. Although it resumed posting the daily, 14,000 foot altitude temperature plot in early 2011. All other channels continue to report a data problem and “…processing suspended until resolved.” They’ve never answered my queries about the nature of the problem. Could this satellite problem be related to the UC level data shutdown?
Max Hugoson says:
April 6, 2011 at 8:59 pm
> Can you do a quick curve fit with a polynomial? 2nd or 3rd order?
I hope not! Polynomial fits can fit the range the cover quite well, but get questionable near the start and end points, and zoom off with extreme speed beyond the useful range.