From his June 4, 2008 speech on winning the Democratic primaries:
“This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal.”
Here’s the proof: Ten year running mean sea level rise from satellite altimetry.
Figure 1. Decadal (overlapping) rates for sea level rise as determined from the satellite sea level rise observations, 1993-2011 (data available from http://sealevel.colorado.edu/).
h/t to Dr. Pat Michaels
UPDATE: for the whiners about “cherry picking” here’s a graph with data through 2012, not much difference in the rate.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well they gave him a Nobel before he became the Messiah – now he can walk on water anyway!
Since the sea level rise peaked in 2005 and the decrease started in 2006, the POTUS was not being clairvoyant, he was just looking at a data trend 3 years running.
Kurt in Switzerland
The POTUS was not being clairvoyant, he was just being himself: a megalomaniac.
And he did that without even doing anything about CO2! How’s that for progressivism!
Why would you use that graphic instead of the one at the link? Seems like less information. And why not include 2003-2012? If you’re just making a joke that’s fine, but people take this website seriously, and a lot of them are bad enough at graphs without giving them the fancy version 😛
There’s no need to update my Sea Level infographic made in 2010, for Pinocchio’s song remains the same as new tide gauge data remains omitted on NASA’s climate page about sea level:
http://i.imgbox.com/acjDjgBA.jpg
oh my Lord…..the bottom of the ocean is sinking faster than we thought
He had no knowledge of any of it.. Its just over zealous little snow flakes at the north and south poles.. really..
Ha! His perfect record is now ruined. He actually got something right. LOL!
Only a 44% decline in sea level rise rate over 6 years (3.9 to 2.2)
i.e. 7%/year decline in rise rate from 2001 to 2006.
Obviously a “negative acceleration”!
If I am reading that graph right the “rise of the oceans began to slow” in 2000.
Bush’s fault.
Does not the geological record tell us that sea level peaks out just before the start of next glaciation period?
You mean the sea isn’t going to rise 5 feet by 2100, like the Scientific American article claimed just today?
Ooh, the irony! It burns! 🙂
Using the average rate for the past 20 years (even though the average rate is declining), we get a sea level rise of 14 inches per century. This is about double the rate of a broad sample of tide gauges, but still is far below apocalyptic predictions of Gore, Hanson, and a raft – stranded high and dry – of others. In the San Francisco Bay Area an increase of five feet is predicted, yet the oldest tide gauge record in the Western Hemisphere, San Francisco, has been plugging along at an eight inches per century rate since 1854. I feel like the guy at his computer whose wife asked him to check and see what the weather was like, and he said “Look out the window.” It’s time the Bay Area prognosticators looked at the Bay. Are they in for a surprise.
Like a lot of the stuff on this website, but agree with Ryan the 10 year overlapping data of rate of change of sea levels, lacking the last couple of years is cherry picking and obfuscation. The data at the link this comes from is much more informative and shows a pretty linear rise that had a brief hiatus for a year in 2011.
You know what this means;
it’s worse than we thought, the ocean expansion sink is filled up and they can’t expand anymore.
Trenberth’s missing heat doesn’t seem to be doing much in the way of thermal expansion.
“now he can walk on water anyway!”
I’ll lend him some concrete gym shoes. 🙂
Latitude says: May 28, 2013 at 2:47 pm
oh my Lord…..the bottom of the ocean is sinking faster than we thought
Meant in jest, I’m sure, but the good folks at C.U. actually believe that and have included it in their chart. It’s that Glacial Isostatic Adjustment “GIA corrected” term under the chart legend. It amounts to 0.3 mm/yr added to the rate of rise, and accounts for their belief that the the balance between rising land and deepening ocean after the melting of the ice age glaciers amounts to that much per year. It affects sea volume, however, not sea level, and thus muddies up the usefulness of the data.
The “inverse barometer applied” adjustment also affects the chart in some unspecified manner. Once upon a time, before the GIA was invented, C.U. had charts available with and without the inverse baro and seasonal signal adjustments.
The GIA explanation was available on the front page, and now it is no longer referenced. It’s in their FAQ page, however.
This is kinda worrying. I thought that sea-level fell just before a Tsunami came!
Is it really worse than we thought and all the bad things said about CO2 (Source: numberwatch.co.uk) are actually true?
Shouldn’t someone give Laureate Gore (call me Al) a ring so he can head for the hills and safety?
Increased Carbon Dioxide has made the Sponges in the ocean grow at an accelerated rate, and they are soaking up all of the extra water!
(runs away)
Latitude: The bottoms of the oceans are sinking and the land is rising. All at the same time. Imagine that ! People who think there will ever be a significant rise in oceans levels are seriously deluded.
@James Baldwin Padgett says:
May 28, 2013 at 3:34 pm
“Trenberth’s missing heat doesn’t seem to be doing much in the way of thermal expansion”
James, Thermal expansion is yesterday’s Physics.
You’re, clearly, not a climate-scientist with a background in Post-Normal Fizzicks or you’d be fully aware that dihydrogen-monoxide at depths beyond 700m or so is teleconnected , in such a way to the atmosphere, so that it contracts as it absorbs energy and therefore sinks via convection!
Maybe you’re not totally convinced by my reasoning but the evidence is clear.
We must be warming because the models tell us that this is happening.
That we don’t observe this warming is a travesty.
We can’t think of why ths is happening.
Ergo, it must be Mann-made and the blame clearly lies with CO2!
I rest my case!
Any rise in sea level rise over the last few centuries has been caused by Dutch Dykes. Naturally, the Netherlands should be flooded now, spreading the oceans over a larger area and lowering sea level. Dutch Dykes I tell ya.