Guest post by John Kehr
Based on the most current data it appears that 2010 is going to show the largest drop in global sea level ever recorded in the modern era. Since many followers of global warming believe that the rate of sea level rise is increasing, a significant drop in the global sea level highlights serious flaws in the IPCC projections. The oceans are truly the best indicator of climate. The oceans drive the world’s weather patterns. A drop in the ocean levels in a year that is being cited as proof that the global warming has arrived shows that there is still much to learned. If the ocean levels dropped in 2010, then there is something very wrong with the IPCC projections.
The best source of sea level data is The University of Colorado. Only government bureaucracy could put the sea level data in one of the places farthest from the ocean, but that is where it is. I use both data sets that includes the seasonal signal. So with and without the inverted barometer applied. This is the source of the data that is used to show that the oceans are rising. Of course the rate of rise is greatly exaggerated and if the rate from 1993-2010 is used there will be a 1m rise in the year 2361.
Of course the rate is not constant. The rate of rise over the past 5 years has been half the overall rate. At the rate of the past 5 years it will be the year 2774 before the oceans rise a single meter. Of course a decrease in the rate is technically an negative acceleration in the rate of rise, so technically the rate of rise is accelerating, but in a negative direction. That statement is misleading though as most people consider acceleration to be a positive effect.
Sea Level Change
Even more interesting is the fact that from 1992-2005 there was an increase each year. 2006 was the first year to show a drop in the global sea level. 2010 will be the 2nd year to show a decrease in sea level. That is correct, 2 of the past 5 years are going to show a decrease in sea level. 2010 could likely show a significant drop global sea level. By significant I mean it is possible that it will likely drop between 2-3 mm from 2009. Since the data has not been updated since August it is difficult to guess more precisely, but the data ends at the time of year that the seasonal drop begins to show up. If the drop does show up as expected it is possible that 2010 will show the largest drop in sea level ever recorded.
2010 could show a significant drop in sea level from 2009.
Of course what will happen won’t be known until the data for the past 5 months is made available. I have been patiently waiting for the data to be updated for several months now, but I got tired of waiting and decided to put the information I have out there.
One fact is certain. A drop in sea level for 2 of the past 5 years is a strong indicator that a changing sea level is not a great concern. In order for the IPCC prediction to be correct of a 1m increase in sea level by 2100, the rate must be almost 11 mm/yr every year for the next 89 years. Since the rate is dropping, it makes the prediction increasingly unlikely. Not even once in the past 20 years has that rate ever been achieved. The average rate of 2.7 mm/yr is only 25% of the rate needed for the IPCC prediction to be correct.
This is yet another serious blow the accuracy of the official IPCC predictions for the coming century. The fact that CO2 levels have been higher in the last 5 years that have the lowest rate of rise than the years with lower CO2 levels is a strong indicator that the claims of CO2 are grossly exaggerated.
=========================================================
John Kehr runs the website The Inconvenient Skeptic – I recommend a visit. – Anthony
Cedar hill, those squiggly lightbulbs diminish in output over time. I also replaced mine after one year, and stocked up on incandescence before they become illegal (seriously)
Expect to hear the word LAG when questioned by the media. The storyline will be “their is a lag between ocean response and temperature increase”
In reality, one can say there is a lag between fact and fiction.
Some of that water is stored in the form of white soot in my backyard. Obviously there is more of it than there was last year.
This article is trying to produce a very definite conclusion from the visual inspection of a small short term change at the end of a slow long term trend. That can’t be done.
It shows a lack of skill plus an excess of hope.
It looks to me like a repeat of the Steve Goddard Incident where a tiny blip on the arctic ice curve became, in some people’s fevered imagination, an approaching ice age. We all know how embarassing that turned out to be.
Tonyb says
———-
There is no evidence to show it was higher today than in the 18th century from which it declined then rose.
Similarly we know levels to have been higher than today in the Roman Optimum and MWP.
———-
This looks like a self contradiction. Seems to be expressed badly.
Patrick Davis says
——–
I simply do not believe a satelite can measure sea levels with levels of accuracy in milimeters, yes, they are good, but not THAT good IMO.
——–
They can measure the distance to the moon using the Apollo retro reflecting array with an accuracy of 1 foot.
An individual with a hand held gadget can measure their own position to an accuracy of about 30 feet.
Many other astonishing examples are available. Just because it is outside your personal experience does not mean it’s impossible.
SL is the most important issue, because the decline can not be as easily hidden as “global average temperature”!
It will bring the AGW down!
SL dropping -> Check -> a lot to explain by warmists
SL and CO2-concentration dropping -> Checkmate -> game over
John Marshall says
——–
According to the Argo date set ocean surface temperatures are falling. It follows that there will be a thermal shrinking of this water thus lowering sea levels.
——–
I may follow that up, but does this relate to the change over from ship temperatures to more and more Argo bouys being deployed? Apparently the ship temps are slightly warm due to the sampling process. This in turn gave a spurious cooling trend.
I’d say all the missing water is in Rio and Brisbane.
The overall rise rate was 3.2 a few years ago, now it’s 3.1, and I’m betting 3.0. Nice to see it turn.
“Only government bureaucracy could put the sea level data in one of the places farthest from the ocean”
And award the space shuttle booster rockets contract to a manufacturer located in a land locked state causing the booster to be designed for train transportation instead of barge (hense the need for sections and O rings), causing the first space shuttle disaster.
Yes, but it’s a rotten drop.
The quiet sun has resulted in more meridional/equatorward jets with more clouds overall and a higher global albedo.
That is most likely due to a shift in the balance of chemical reactions inviolving ozone in the upper atmosphere which changes the vertical temperature profile of the atmosphere and redistributes the pressure patterns at the surface.
That results in less solar energy into the oceans and over time a decline in both ocean heat content and sea leels.
The first consequence is and has been a tendency to skew the balance of ENSO towards more powerful and longer La Nina events as compared to El Nino events.
So Obama was right. In his campaign speech Jun 2 2008 in all humility he ended with:
The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; !!!->this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal;<–!!! this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment—this was the time—when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.
“Of course a decrease in the rate is technically an negative acceleration in the rate of rise, so technically the rate of rise is accelerating, but in a negative direction.”
It is all due to global warming the sea is evaporating?
All this in the “hottest decade on the record” in one of the “hottest years on the record”. ;O)
If sea level rise doesn’t accelerate fast the IPCC will have some serious explaining to do. They have painted themselves in a corner.
I would not be in the least bit surprised is someone writes a paper to show how global warming can disrupt the climate causing sea level to fall.
@Lazy Teenager
Would you lieke to draw our attention to the specific ‘very definite conclusion’ that you assert cannot be done.
I didn’t see one, so find it difficult to understand your point.
Lest we forget: “Rising Waters Threaten NC Coast”
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/01/16/1983784/rising-waters-threaten-nc-coast.html
LazyTeenager
It is what it is, and we can all see that. How is your nonsensical dismissal supposed to change that?
MikeEE
I do wish you guys would stop confusing a good yarn with facts…
Patrick Davis, your question about accuracy of satellite altimetry is a good one. I have some experience in that area and can confirm it is very good since the process is very simple mathematics. You send out a radar pulse and with a very accurate clock you can time the return to yield the distance travelled round trip. Voila.
Of course there are some fiddly bits since the satellite and the earth are both moving and you have to have good data on the ephemeris of the spacecraft but those problems are well solved. Years ago we reported we had enough accuracy to be able to detect shallow whales by their wake perturbing the surface. We could determine wave height within 5-8 mm in those days. Turned out that submarines are both bigger and faster than whales and have a really nifty three-dimensional wake. Needless to say, after that discovery much more money became available to improve the entire system. I have no idea what the detection level accuracy is these days but you can be sure it is significantly better than it was in 1998.
Jimbo says:
“I would not be in the least bit surprised is someone writes a paper to show how global warming can disrupt the climate causing sea level to fall.”
It’s only a matter of time.
LazyTeenager says: January 17, 2011 at 4:00 am
Tonyb says
———-
There is no evidence to show it was higher today than in the 18th century from which it declined then rose.
Similarly we know levels to have been higher than today in the Roman Optimum and MWP.
———-
This looks like a self contradiction. Seems to be expressed badly.
Simply the historical truth, stop using your navel as a source.
I’m just amazed that the global sea level can be measured accurately enough that a tenth of an inch difference from year-to-year can be detected.
thingadonta:
Your question shows that you are unfortunately badly misinformed and believe things that are absolutely not true. The positive feedbacks in the climate models apply to all forcings, including solar forcing. The only ones who I know of who are proposing that some mechanisms get selectively amplified are those who are arguing that this somehow happens for solar forcing.
Patrick Davis says:
January 17, 2011 at 2:53 am
I simply do not believe a satelite can measure sea levels with levels of accuracy in milimeters, yes, they are good, but not THAT good IMO.
I was thinking the same thing. And Lazyteenager, a foot is hardly comparable to a millimeter. We’re just supposed to take their word for it that the satellites are accurate despite observations on the ground (at places like decades-old docks, sea walls etc.) showing that sea level has not risen much/at all?