(Featured Image Borrowed from The Guardian)
Guest post by David Middleton,
Eric Worrall’s recent essay on the Prime Minister of Tuvalu and his reticence to providing some evidence that his island nation is being inundated by rising sea level inspired me to devise a simple test to see if an island is sinking, vanishing or being washed away:
Planimeter a recent map of the island and compare it to an older map of the island.
Since the USGS has a large historical inventory of topographic maps, this should be relatively easy for any islands in these United States.
For my test case, I chose Key Biscayne, Florida. It’s just south of the perennially sinking Miami Beach, has a maximum elevation of about 5′, is relatively small and the USGS had several vintages of 7.5 minute quadrangles available.
Then…
And Now…
I planimetered the coast lines of each map and found no significant changes over the 51 years from 1962-2012…
I guess I’m going to have to deny climate change or at least doubt the climate, because I can’t see any effect of sea level rise on this puny, flat, little island. (/sarc).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is just weather, not climate. /sarc
So did the bonefish flats areas increase or decrease; that’s what is important to the survival of Key Biscayne.
g
However non-hurricane Sandy hitting at high tide – and the 10mm/year subsidence of New Orleans + dyke failure leading to flooding, etc etc – that was climate change and not just a series of unfortunate events.
Katrina?
Rising sea levels: climate change. No rising sea level: climate change. More tornados :climate change. Less tornadoes : climate change. Severe hurricanes : climate change. No hurricanes : climate change. Hot weather :climate change. Cold weathet: climate change.
Aint that the truth… good one
People who live at sea level like me, know that this sea level rising is total B.S.
I am living next to the Mediterranean Sea and my sail boat is moored in the same place since 1975, 40 years until today continuously. I couldn’t notice any level rise though that region is said to be subject to a very weak tectonic sinking.
Check Portsmouth, Gosport, Exeter, Emsworth, Poole etc etc all coastal towns and have been for hundreds of years seemingly unaffected by sea level rise.
Wow, the same boat? I can imagine the ceaseless maintenance necessary to keep a boat seaworthy for 40 years.
I live just down the road from Brighton, the Green capital of the UK.
There are people there who walk their dogs on the beach every morning. And *still* believe the sea level has risen about twenty feet!
In Finland we have Opposite, Land is rising 3-9mm/y (Sea level decreasing) and in some places shore line is moving 1-10meters/y https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound First writter notes are from 14th Century in Nordic when citisens of a town argument that Sea shore has moved too far away and the port and town needs to be rebuild.
I agree; I live in Queensland Australia and I live on the edge of the water….no rise in 15 years! And it hasen’t got any warmer……
That method is no good, Mikey can’t “adjust” the data !! LOL
Bulletin: The USGS has just announced a project to adjust it’s historical coastline maps to reflect the fact that early surveying methods systematically underestimated the land area at mean sea level. Modern GPS methods show that the the baselines use in optical surveying methods tend to systematically overestimate sea area relative to land since the baselines avoid terminating in the sea. This tends to hide any recent increases in sea area relative to land. The adjusted maps will be used to assess the threat of sea-level rise due to climate change.
Sounds reasonable to me.
(/sarc)
Actually, the USGS established a project long ago for “determining the physical response of the coastline to sea-level rise.” There’s bound to be promotion and pay in this raise for the scientist who shows evidence of a sea-level rise — they could already see that in 2001.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds68/htmldocs/project.htm
Obviously they haven’t found anything that passes the smell test over the past fifteen years or you would have read about it by now.
Topographic engineering variables a side, point well taken.
British Admiralty Nautical Charts from the Age of Discovery are drawn to the nearest 1 foot of depth, and show no significant change over 200-300 years. While modern versions of these charts do have datum corrections for GPS (WGS-84), if sea level rise is real, why do the charts not have a datum correction for global sea level rise?
Ferd, here is also one from 1775.
Looking at the effect sea levels have had over the past 230 years, what has been the result.
See – An Accurate Map of North and South Carolina With Their Indian Frontiers, Shewing in a distinct manner all the Mountains, Rivers, Swamps, Marshes, Bays, Creeks, Harbours, Sandbanks and Soundings on the Coasts, ’1775′
– http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/ncmaps&CISOPTR=125&CISOBOX=1&REC=15
from NC Map
Compare with a side by side google map and most of the features are still there. A side note that 1775 was at the end of the Little Ice Age and a whole lot of ice was on shore and not in the ocean. – See Glacier Bay NP.
Glacier Bay was first surveyed in detail in 1794 by a team from the H.M.S. Discovery, captained by George Vancouver. At the time the survey produced showed a mere indentation in the shoreline. That massive glacier was more than 4,000 feet thick in places, up to 20 miles wide, and extended more than 100 miles to the St. Elias mountain range
That’s 1 watershed valley.
Now we know where the sea level rise in tuvalu comes from: The water flows from Florida to tuvalu.
LOL!
David, I also live out of a rock in the ocean…..our sea level has not changed in over 50 years that I’ve lived here.
Well, David, if you’re going to ‘cherry pick’ data like that you’ll be able to prove anything! But, this method is obviously invalid as it hasn’t applied any of the required adjustments or smoothings and flies in the face of consensus, so therefore it’s wrong. My model shows that the island in fact disappeared beneath the sea in 2012. Now, stop bothering me with these ‘facts’ as you call them and let’s get on with proper science. You’ll never get a grant if you persist in this attempt to confuse the issue!
But were the actual maps peer reviewed?
Yes, piers were viewed and viewed again and again
“In 1841, a mark was cut into the rocks of the Isle of the Dead at Port Arthur, in an attempt to record the height of the sea in the area, and to provide a benchmark for future studies of the movements of the Earth’s crust, relative to sea-level. It was made at the instigation of Captain Sir James Clark Ross, with the support of Thomas Lempriere (Deputy Assistant Commissary General at the Port Arthur penal settlement). Records indicate Lempriere had studied the tidal levels in the area for several years before the mark was made.
“The mark at Port Arthur is among the earliest benchmarks in the world against which to scientifically measure changes in sea-level. Until recently, a lack of actual data from the time prevented a proper understanding of the site. However, some of the original data has been found, and together with some recent detailed monitoring at Port Arthur, a clearer understanding of sea-level changes in the area are now possible. It also aids in the understanding of global sea-level changes, as there are very few good long-term benchmarks in the southern hemisphere.”
http://soer.justice.tas.gov.au/2003/casestudy/4/
It is a good read.
How many islands are being eroded away ? http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/content/dam/images/g/i/5/e/6/c/image.related.articleLeadwide.620×349.gi5cz2.png/1441608379050.jpg
A more energized atmosphere = more intensity and not necessarily more frequent storms.
Erosion of sand banks has entirely different effects than erosion on coral reefs. Sand banks are continuously formed and reformed by ocean action. New ones are formed, old ones are washed away or built up. The Outer Banks off the North Carolina coast are a good example. Much of Florida is mostly sand banks barely 10m above sea level formed by wind, waves, and currents.
Coral reefs on the other hand are a fairly complete biome produced by coral growing in the ocean. They regularly grow if the sea level rises, as long as it doesn’t suddenly flood them with meters of water. Faster growing corals do best in water less than ~18m.
The picture of the Gold Coast in southeast Australia is simply storm erosion. Stupid place the build hundreds of hotels and houses, especially right on the ocean’s edge.
Google “Hog Island”.
It was located on the south shore of Long Island, NY, and washed away during a hurricane around the late 1800’s-early 1900’s.
As for sea level rise. think about how much land has been filled in. why do you think engineers had to build a “bathtub” when constructing the twin towers of the original World Trade Center; Battery Park City was “created” using the material excavated for the WTC; thinkabout the artificial islands created in Dubai, and those the Chinese are building or expanding in the Pacific.
Hey, the water’s going to go somewhere!
Oh wow….now that you have pointed out this, expect the USGS to start re-arranging the map data to fit the IPCC scenarios…..
David: Your timing on this is excellent. Grist has something on the 3rd world lining up for reparations for damage that have not happened. I quote you here: https://ukuleledave.wordpress.com/2015/12/08/the-third-world-wants-money-to-offset-the-cost-of-going-green-and/
??? So global warming is causing the waters around Key Biscayne to evaporate faster uncovering more island? OMG, its so much worse than we thought! 🙂
O, the humidity!
That’s pretty funny!
clever
My god, you’re right! Look at Battery Park! And San Francisco! We must stop this urgent threat from runaway evaporation!
The size of the projected seal level rise is very small compared to lateral movement along tectonic plates. Los Angeles has moved north by about 25 centimeters since I have been living here.
If LA becomes more like northern California, would that be bad? 😎
anything that makes L.A. closer to NorCal is bad… ; sarc>
There has been no change in the number or mass of seals there.
Feel any cooler, now that you’ve moved up North?
Perhaps they meant sea level weirding – not change as such… 🙂
Obviously the 24 acres gained must have come from Tuvalu.
(Maybe all the genuine “Climate Refugees” should be settled there? Plenty of room left for the next 100 years worth.)
Maybe the island tipped over and we are now seeing the underside.
See also work by Paul Kench et al discussed here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/tuvalu/7799503/Pacific-islands-growing-not-shrinking-due-to-climate-change.html
Area of Pacific islands not changing much, if anything increasing.
Today, I received my copy of the National Geographic “Rising Seas” edition from Sept 2013.
Anyone interested in the promulgated of alarmist propaganda should buy themselves a copy.
So far, all I can see is – Hurricane Sandy = 14ft storm surge, 19billion damages, 43 dead + alrming photos.
Then some text containing “A profoundly altered planet is what our fossil-fuel-driven civilization is creating, a planet where Sandy-scale flooding will become more common”.
Then, a nice big hockey stick showing no sea level rise historically followed by the current glacial isostatic adjusted ramp – AND THEN – 6.6 feet by 2100 according to NOAA scary as hell scenario.
THEN – “How the uiltimate sea-vele catastrophe would reshape our world”.
A nice big fold-out feature showing the shape of the world’s coastline IF ALL THE ICE MELTED.
And to think that I used to read this shit – with no access to genuine scientific information.
Apologies; “alarming” not “alrming” and “sea level” not “sea vele” – I really should remember to proof read.
And it should be “Bu11$hit” not just “shit”.
Yeah, sorry for all the typos.
I was typing in the dark in order to simulate the effects of living without fossil-fuel-driven civilization.
Of course, I also turned the screen off!!
Like Scientific American, Nat Geo used to be a pretty good read with little or no propagada. What a waste .
yes indeed–last three issues–cover story on the new pope, an entire issue dedicated to the CAGW cult, and cover story on Virgin Mary. Could the recent sell out to Rupert Murdock have anything to do with it’s seemingly terminal demise???
Here, here! I’m waiting for the Scientific American article on Justin Beiber. Any month now.
For this reason I cancelled my Nat Geo subscription years ago and no longer buy SciAm.
Both are just part of the “Ministry of Information” that Orwell warned us about.
The American Association for the Advancement of Socialism is rapidly degrading. Ever more space given over to climate stories and now protesting the Congressional Inquiry. http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-leads-coalition-protest-climate-science-inquiry
Tropical Storm Sandy, plus two other storms.
They of course conveniently forgot about the Long Island Hurricane in 1938 which killed over 700 people, produced a 17ft storm surge and wreaked havoc across the NE from New Jersey to Maine devastating the area. Experts estimate that a similar Hurricane would cause damage in excess of $39 billion today.
Yeah, well thank crap that our leaders are finally about to strike an agreement to spend all our money on stopping climate change and extreme weather.
We’ve all quite frankly put up with dangerous weather extremes for far too long. It’s about time that somebody did something. 🙂
(sarc)
I hate to disappoint – but this “Novel Way to Test the Impact of Rising Sea Levels” is not very novel.
Here is basically the same exercise being conducted in relation to coral atolls.
“We analyzed six time slices of shoreline position over the past 118 yr at 29 islands of Funafuti Atoll to determine their physical response to recent sea-level rise. Despite the magnitude of this rise, no islands have been lost, the majority have enlarged, and there has been a 7.3% increase in net island area over the past century”
From this blog: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/12/told-ya-so-new-paper-proves-that-coral-atolls-keep-up-with-sea-level-rise/
In fact, it seems to be the simplest and most obvious way to test the effect of sea level rise. I was under the impression that the “Novel” description was thoroughly tongue in cheek.
Well, I count 24 additional acres (2012-1962 acreage), perhaps the fish swimming in the streets are responsible ???
Cheers, KevinK
I just tried to find a current satellite photo of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in Caliornia.Can’t find anything more recent than 2004. WTF??
“Onshore winds will pile up water onto a coastline, and offshore winds will do the opposite. Changes in atmospheric pressure also produce changes in sea level (lower atmospheric pressure leading to higher sea levels), so the effect of a severe storm (very low atmospheric pressure) with strong onshore winds can lead to very high coastal sea levels (Storm Surges) with, at times, severe coastal damage, especially when the large waves produced by the strong winds are added!”
http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_drives_short.html
A electrified atmosphere is in constant contact with ground state.
Understanding Man Made Climate Change — A simple demonstration of the scientific principle which you can do at home and use to educate your children.
If you take pot of water and put it on the stove it will boil. If you take the same pot of water and put it in the freezer it will turn to ice. That is a demonstration of man made climate change.
It really is that simple.
Eugene WR Gallun
Key Biscayne seems to have grown over 50 years from 2179 to 2203 acres, probably due to building activity of some sort. In Sydney the Tide Gauge carved into the sandstone rock at Lady MacQuarie’s Chair is still showing the same level of water as in 1810. That’s 205 years. At Lempriere at Port Arthur, Tasmania, there is a tide gauge from 1841, telling the same story. The sea rise is all in the computer models..
I think the “growth” is more likely a function of my manual dexterity.