UPDATE: Thanks to a tip from Willis Eschenbach, there’s some developing news in that story from Dr. James Hansen. The Salon interviewee and book author, Rob Reiss that I quoted, now admits he somehow conflated 40 years with 20 years, and concedes that Dr. Hansen actually said 40 years for his prediction. However, as the newest analysis shows, it doesn’t make any difference, and we still aren’t seeing the magnitude of sea level rise predicted, now 23 years into it.
See the relevant excerpt below:
Michaels also has the facts wrong about a 1988 interview of me by Bob Reiss, in which Reiss asked me to speculate on changes that might happen in New York City in 40 years assuming CO2 doubled in amount. Michaels has it as 20 years, not 40 years, with no mention of doubled CO2. Reiss verified this fact to me, but he later sent the message:
“I went back to my book and re-read the interview I had with you. I am embarrassed to say that although the book text is correct, in remembering our original conversation, during a casual phone interview with a Salon magazine reporter in 2001 I was off in years. What I asked you originally at your office window was for a prediction of what Broadway would look like in 40 years, not 20. But when I spoke to the Salon reporter 10 years later probably because I’d been watching the predictions come true, I remembered it as a 20 year question.“
Source: this update on Dr. Hansen’s personal web page at Columbia University.
In my story, below, I quoted from Reiss here in the Salon interview.
So I’m happy to make the correction for Dr. Hansen in my original article, since Mr. Reiss reports on his original error in conflating 40 years with 20 years. But let’s look at how this changes the situation with forty years versus twenty.
Per Dr. Hansen’s prediction in 1988, now in 2011, 23 years later, we’re a bit over halfway there … so the sea level rise should be about halfway up the side of Manhattan Island by now.
How’s that going? Are the predictions coming true? Let’s find out. Let’s look at the tide gauge in New York and see what it says.
Here’s the PSMSL page http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/12.php
You can see the terrifying surge of acceleration in the sea level due to increasing GHGs in the 20th century. Willis downloaded and plotted the data to see what the slope looked like, and then plotted a linear average line.
Here it is overlaid with the Colorado satellite data. Note the rate of rise is unchanged:
And add to that, the recent peer reviewed paper from the Journal of Coastal Research that said: “worldwide-temperature increase has not produced acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years”
As of this update in March 2011, we’re 23 years into his prediction of the West Side Highway being underwater. From what I can measure in Google Earth, Dr. Hansen would need at least a ten foot rise in forty years to make his prediction work. See this image below from Google Earth where I placed the pointe over the West Side Highway, near the famous landmark and museum, the USS Intrepid:

The lat/lon should you wish to check yourself is: 40.764572° -73.998498°
Here’s a ground level view (via a tourist photo) so you can see the vertical distance from the roadway to the sea level on that day and tide condition. Sure looks like at least 10 feet to me.

According to the actual data, after 23 years, we’ve seen about a 2.5 inch rise. There’ s still a very long way to go to ten feet to cover the West Side Highway there.
To reach the goal he predicted in 1988, Dr. Hansen needs to motivate the sea to do his bidding, he’s gonna have to kick it in gear and use a higher octane driver if he’s going to get there. – Anthony
The original story is below:
===========================================================
The news today from the Pew Institute tells us that many Americans are backing away from the predictions of catastrophic climate change. This may be because many predictions simply haven’t come true.
Most, if not all, WUWT readers know Dr. James Hansen of GISS. He’s credited with jump starting the debate in 1988 with his now famous “sweaty” testimony before Congress in June 1988. See more about the stagecraft of that event here.

Readers might be tempted to think that I’m going to point out the discrepancies between the three different model scenarios that Dr. Hansen presented to Congress in 1988, as shown below. But these model projections are very well known. I’m talking about something else entirely.

In Dr. Hansen’s case, he’s been living the life of a scientist in the media spotlight since, giving thousands of interviews. He’s also taken on the role of activist during that time, getting himself arrested this year for obstructing a public highway.
He likely doesn’t remember this one interview he gave to a book author approximately 20 years ago, but fortunately that author recounted the interview on Salon.com. What is most interesting about this particular Hansen interview is that he dispenses with the usual models and graphs, and makes predictions about what will happen in 20 years to New York City, right in his own neighborhood. Sea level figures prominently.
Here’s the interview.
In a 2001 interview with author Rob Reiss about his upcoming book “Stormy Weather” Salon.com contributor Suzy Hansen (no apparent relation to Jim Hansen) asks some questions about his long path of research for the book. One of the questions centered around an interview of Dr. James Hansen by Reiss around 1988-1989. Red emphasis mine.
Extreme weather means more terrifying hurricanes and tornadoes and fires than we usually see. But what can we expect such conditions to do to our daily life?
While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress. I went over to the window with him and looked out on Broadway in New York City and said, “If what you’re saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?” He looked for a while and was quiet and didn’t say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, “Well, there will be more traffic.” I, of course, didn’t think he heard the question right. Then he explained, “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.” Then he said, “There will be more police cars.” Why? “Well, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.”
And so far, over the last 10 years, we’ve had 10 of the hottest years on record.
Didn’t he also say that restaurants would have signs in their windows that read, “Water by request only.”
Under the greenhouse effect, extreme weather increases. Depending on where you are in terms of the hydrological cycle, you get more of whatever you’re prone to get. New York can get droughts, the droughts can get more severe and you’ll have signs in restaurants saying “Water by request only.”
When did he say this will happen?
Within 20 or 30 years. And remember we had this conversation in 1988 or 1989.
Does he still believe these things?
Yes, he still believes everything. I talked to him a few months ago and he said he wouldn’t change anything that he said then.
I’ve saved the Salon.com web page as a PDF also, here, just in case it should be deleted. So not only did Dr. Hansen make the claims in the late 1980’s, he reaffirmed his predictions again in 2001.
The scenario of the interview with Dr. Hansen looking out his window and describing the changes he envisions 20 years into the future is very plausible. As we established yesterday, Dr. Hansen’s NASA GISS office at 2880 Broadway in NYC, has a view of the Hudson River.
Here’s a Google Earth street level view of 2880 Broadway:

Using Google Earth, I can actually fly right up to (what I think is) Dr. Hansen’s window and recreate the view. (Note to anyone who worries, this info about the location is public domain information, published on the NASA GISS office website)
First let’s establish the location in traditional downlooking map style view at put Dr. Hansen’s line of sight on the image:

Here is a close in view, from further east on 112th street, just behind the GISS building looking northwest to the Hudson river. Google’s 3D buildings feature is used to recreate the buildings:

Here’s what the view from Dr. Hansen’s window at GISS looks like:

And finally, here is the view from the Hudson, looking back to the GISS building:

In the recounting of the interview by Rob Reiss, Hansen makes several claims about trees, birds, police cars, and crime. I can’t comment on those as I have no data. What I can comment on is this prediction by Dr. Hansen:
“The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water.”
As you can clearly see in the Google Earth images, the West Side Highway remains dry and open. Sea level (at which the Hudson River at that point becomes) is not encroaching on the highway. Note the date on the Google Earth timeline toolbar in the upper left. The aerial imagery was taken approximately 20 years later, on May 12th, 2008.
So much for local climate change predictions by the leading global authority on climate change.
Even if we give Dr. Hansen the benefit of 30 years, I’ll point out that satellite measured rate of change of global sea level has slowed significantly in the last few years, and is not likely to rise enough to meet Dr. Hansen’s prediction even 30 years out. See this story.
In fact using the University of Colorado interactive sea level plotting tool, we can see virtually no trend in the last 20 years:

You can reproduce it here at sealevel.colorado.edu
I wonder what Dr. Hansen thinks when he looks out that window today?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Matt (23:19:51) :
Now that you’ve mentioned it, he does.
Like Denethor, his palantir has been giving false images, or perhaps he is misreading the visions.
I haven’t read through all of the posts, but has anyone asked…
If Dr. Hansen really believed his predictions, why is his office still located there? Or is he an avid swimmer?
WWF has move their goal posts: http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/10/23/wwf-extends-dire-consequences-deadline/
tokyoboy (22:23:03) :
To err is human, to forgive divine….. up to a point though.
‘But to really screw things up you need a computer.’
Said by a computer guy who has had to fix far too much of it…
You have assumed Mr. Hansen thinks.
Hansen is denying (sort of) that he ever said this. I asked him about it.
REPLY: In person, email, telephone? Please share. – A
The Weather Clown in full bloom.
Email. Send me a note and I’ll show you. I don’t want to put it here.
“No you’ve got it wrong, you didn’t read the whole article apparently. I’m talking about the fact that Hansen said in 1988/89 “The West Side Highway would be under water in 20 years”, and reaffirmed the prediction in 2001. It is clearly not. His prediction of sea level rise failed badly. – A”
No you missed the point as usually. The prediction of Hansen is here:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/1988/Hansen_etal.html
There is nothing about “The West Side Highway”. This is what matters, the peer reviewed literature. What someone said 20 years ago but did not publish has nothing to do with science. This is a science blog, right?
REPLY: Oh puhleezee. Hansen lives his professional life in the media and only the peer reviewed literature matters? If that’s the case then YOU tell Hansen to shut up and stop giving interviews. -A
Logan (01:48:43) :
New readers might find the list of philosophical quotations from various bigwigs at http://www.green-agenda.com/ helpful in understanding the source of climate propaganda. Add a large dose of pure cynicism to understand the cap-and-tax garbage.
This an interesting and scary link that matches the utterances of the residents of 2880 Broadway. I used to think that Paul Ehrlich’s arguments were worth considering in the 1970’s but have a look at the zealotry and cold-blooded, superior attitudes on display.
Hanson is in good company of other dubious celebs making failed predictions as Alan gruba points out in his latest article titled “Where are the hurricanes Mr. Gore?
http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2009/10/where-are-hurricanes-mr-gore_23.html
an example………………
“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells;
the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people.
We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to
the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many
apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”
– Prof Paul Ehrlich,
The Population Bomb
Very frightening to give people like this a microphone,or an editor.
Anyone notice that even the hindcasting back into the 1960s, for not only Hansen C but all his scenarios, also featured exaggerated warming?
RE: hunter (09:07:17) :
Where’s the soup Nazi? LOL!
No wonder Hansen’s predictions turn out funny. He works in the building used by Jerry Seinfeld for restaurant scenes in his TV show.
Re: Jimbo (10:04:11)
Wish we did maintain a database of “predictions” gone wrong. All we have is the link to all the postings related to failed predictions: http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/
We do have two other url’s that are related to model predictions:
http://www.c3headlines.com/are-scientists-able-to-predict-climate-accurately/
http://www.c3headlines.com/climate-models/
There is definite overlap among the three url’s but each has unique postings over the last 11 months.
C3H Editor
“Roger Knights (06:32:32) :
Patrick Davis (02:20:01) :
“An example is in WW1, politicians decided arm Allied soldiers with a French made weapon, when there was a far superior weapon available at the same time. At least 100,000 soldiers died because of that decision.”
I’m curious about that–could you provide more detail?”
I don’t recall the names of the weapons or politicians etc however, the French made weapon was a gun that had a circular magazine (Like a “Tommy” gun). It was notoriously unreliable, usually jammed, mis-fired or back-fired, exploding in the faces of the user, usually killing them or severly injuring them. It would not fire reliably when wet, too hot or covered in grime. There was, even in the same weapons store, and American made rifle, which didn’t do anything the French weapon did. It was a simple design. It would fire when fired, it would fire when wet or hot. It would even fire when covered in mud. It never mis-fired (Unless it was the bullet didni’t fire), it never back-fired, it never exploded in the users face. Roughly 100,000 allied soldiers, who were issued the French weapon over the American one, died because they could not fire back. Bad political decision making, resulted in bad equipment being issued, resulted in dead solders.
The French machine gun was called the “Chauchat”. It had a semicircular flat magazine ALONG and UNDER the gun and it is touted as the WORST gun EVER made in World’s history, worse than the Japanese Nambú pistol first model.
Most guns made by “commissions” appointed by governments (politicians) showed to be real bad designs. When technicians get together there seem to be a tendency to follow the politically correct way of not showing onself as a ignornat fool and approve other more important technician view. It was also the case of the German 1888 “Commission Gewher”, the rifle that was intended to replace the single shot, old black powder Mauser 1871 cal. 11.5 mm. Of course, finally Germany adopted the Mauser 1891 by he Mauser Bros. and later the famous 1898 model that was used until in WW2.
The Chauchat light machinegun was replaced, fortunately, by the BAR, Browning Automatic Rifle, in 30-06 caliber, that was one of the BEST gun ever designed -it was being used in Vietnam in the 60s, when it was replaced by the M-60.
I am sure that Hansen became sour and angry with mankind (or with the rest of normal haired men) because he was GETTING BALD. Some inferior people cannot stand going bald and feel that life has betrayed them. They must take revenge and make the rest of the people hunhappy.
See how bald he has gotten by now and for sure he would sell his soul to the devil, as Dr. Faustus, if he could get to have as much hair as Roy Spencer. 😉 and wouldn’t be inventing such things as the Coal Train of Death.
Psychiatry should start working in climatology as urgently needed scientific discipline.
(And sorry for the prior post on the Chauchat machine gun. I hadn’t read the comment made much earlier…)
Eduardo Ferreyra (19:21:52)
Thankyou for the detail 🙂
Well, all here seems to be part of the case. Many, if not most, elderly scientists (politicians and others) keep to their favourite idea, even if it has been falsified. Jim Hansen seems to have been wrong, but he built his career on it and it undeniably had a great impact. Few of us would be flexible enough to admit such an important failure.
So, I think it’s not some kind of madness. It’s just the way of it. It’s human.
Philip T. Downman (23:23:42
It may very well be human, but science is cold and hard.
Future catastrophe and impending calamity, agreed, is as old as the race.
Such prognostications used to be the arm of religion – which increased their power – religions used to be straitjackets but since its hold over men’s minds is less dominant, religions are now seductive dressing gowns. The emotion of future calamity seems to have been transferred to science instead.
Thanks for the feedback on the bad machine gun. There is a book on another bad “political” weapons-decision, in a book called The Great naval Battle of Ottawa. The Canadian PM insisted that the sonar for sub-detection be made locally, instead of importing it from Britain. Result: none of the hundreds of Canadian corvettes equipped with it sunk a single sub.
Here’s another case. In the June 1981 Atlantic magazine, James Fallows published “M-16: A Bureaucratic Horror Story.” It described how the Army’s ordnance department, feathers ruffled from criticism over having foisted the unworkable (too heavy a caliber) SKS assault rifle on NATO over the protests of the British and others, who wanted a light-caliber round similar to what the Germans and Russians had used effectively in WW II, sabotaged the AR-15 by inserting three requirements over the frenzied protests of its designer, a genius named Stoner at Armalite.
The barrel twist had to be increased to improve accuracy (but this halved lethality); the ammunition had to be changed to a dirty-burning compound from Olin (because it was similar to the powder used in other weapons); and an insertion-assist had to be added to force home recalcitrant rounds (this added zero to effectiveness, but increased cost and weight).
The original weapon, which can be bought from Armalite, is as good as the article says. But the Army still wouldn’t back down from its mistaken specs, even after Congressional hearings exposed the Ordnance dept.’s blunder. “The system” protects its own—and it recognized blood-brothers in the mediocrity and petty gamesmanship of the blunderers.
Fallows’ article isn’t available online yet, Fallows explains in his thread on the Atlantic’s site that articles from that date have to be scanned in and are still in a legal limbo. But you can obtain it by interlibrary loan—they may even make a free copy for you and mail it to you. Check with your library.
Is the current Highway the one that was present when Hansen made his prediction? According to this site http://www.nycroads.com/roads/west-side/
the current highway wasn’t completed until 2001.
“Construction of the new West Side Highway began in April 1996. The first section of the project, between Clarkson Street and Horatio Street, was finished in August 1998. The entire “NY 9A Reconstruction Project” was completed in August 2001.”
“Rivalling the Mauser both in terms of use and reputation was the British Lee-Enfield 0.303-inch rifle, which was issued to virtually all British soldiers on the Western Front (and many elsewhere). First produced in 1907 and officially titled the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield (SMLE) Mark III, the name was derived from its designer (James Lee, an American) and its manufacturer (the Royal Small Arms Factory based in Enfield, London).”
“The Springfield, manufactured in the U.S. (at Springfield, Massachusetts), was the standard wartime rifle of the U.S. army. It was reliable and produced in a short-barrelled version for issue to the American Expeditionary Force. In short supply however around half of U.S. soldiers in the field were issued with the M1917 ‘American Enfield’.
The performance of the U.S. rifle was comparable to the British Lee-Enfield, and was also produced in a Mk1 automatic version. The Springfield utilised a licensed Mauser action. Derivatives of the Springfield remained in use until the Korean War.”
http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/rifles.htm