UPDATE: The serial regurgitation has started. See the end of the article.
Somehow, I just can’t get past the picture of the guy in the beret who seems to be saying to the cameraman “Look the island! It is disappearing before our eyes!”. Red underline mine.
Now here’s the interesting part…we’ve apparently seen this sea level rising 3x faster “secret leaked report” before:
Yep, back in 2009, the same claims were made, right about the time of the Copenhagen Climate Conference. Of course it isn’t surprising to see Climate Progress leading the pack with such disinformation, it is what the blogger is paid to do. But. let’s look at the unpaid reality of the data.
From this post by Willis Eschenbach: Putting the Brakes on Acceleration he plots the satellite data up to September of 2010. If anything it looks like the trend is slightly decelerating:
And, as we’ve seen from the latest JASON-1 and JASON-2 data, plotted by RomanM, there does not seem to be any acceleration in sea level rise. In fact it seems quite linear. The data speaks for itself, with a general slight downturn in the JASON1-2 data since late 2009: 
Of course, the fact that this is old news and that when you examine the claims, they just don’t hold up. Nope that won’t stop the “secret leaked report” from being released tomorrow here at http://www.amap.no/ and a serial regurgitation by news media.
h/t to Duncan and CTM
=========================================================
UPDATE: Here we go…
http://www.independentmail.com/news/2011/may/03/new-report-confirms-arctic-melt-accelerating/
Here is the list of stories from Google so far. The best thing our readers can do is visiti these links and place comments if they are allowed, showing that so far, sea level rise has not accelerated at all. – Anthony
The weasel out, and you are correct! I think they call this the lie of omission. In other words, they do not say that the original rate is 0, so yes, 3 times 0 is technically correct!
@Entomologist: it’s the *acceleration* (the 2nd order MSL differential) that’s zero. The MSL *rise* is a constant 3mm (approx) per annum – about 1ft per century, ongoing, reflecting the continuing steady melt as from the last ice age.
I wonder how much longer it will be untill these propagandists realize that their scare reports are having the opposite effect on the populace. Thanks to the internet and blogs like this one people are fact checking and education theirselves on the scientific merits of the claims and how truly alarming they are. The result is a political backlash that started with the US midterm elections. Unfortunately they are starting to realize this and now are trying to change the debate from co2 to ‘dirty air’ and back door carbon controls through agencies like the EPA. But guess what:
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
Abraham Lincoln, (attributed)
“Nope that won’t stop the “secret leaked report” from being released tomorrow here at http://www.amap.no/ ”
Actually nothing along those lines up to now also nothing in the conference program schedule on their website, this must REALLY be recycled old news launched just in time by somebody to stir confusion.
Funny, they have an “Icebreaker event” on the 3rd before the conference starts…..
Another AP version, which contrasts the AMAP report with Rignot et al. 2011:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_on_sc/eu_arctic_climate_change
I measured a 400mm rise in sea level the other day. I was going to report it but then I realised my boat was sinking.
The Globe and Mail is regurgitating the story…
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/science/arctic-melt-accelerating-sea-level-climate-report-says/article2008382/comments/
The greens got less than 4% nationally!!! So the green agitprop in Globemedia, Thomson controlled newspaper continues…
Oh dear, not sea level rise again! Wherever it’s happening (and can anyone show anywhere it IS happening), it ain’t happening here! Info about a TIDAL mill here in Hampshire UK which has been using the tide to grind grain for 900 years IN THE SAME SPOT!!
http://s277147633.websitehome.co.uk/Elingmill.html
NO relative level change AT ALL!
This:http://www.washingtontimes.com/world probably identifies the source of the report referred to above. Rather than a leak, it appears to be a press release previous to an AMAP conference beginning 4 May in Denmark. Wonder where Walt Meier can be found? Check the attendees list here:http://www.amap.no/. I find 8 attendees with .gov or .org in their email addresses and a total of 18 attendees from “USA”, only one of which has a .com address. Interesting times.
OT I saw the name Mummery ( an Australian Gov’t official I believe) somewhere here. What an intriguing name for a CAGW advocate.
>>3×2
>>The problem with the Mediterranean, especially around Greece and
>>Turkey, is that the water may be fairly static but the land isn’t.
So they say. But if you go just 30 miles down the road from that picture, you come to Phaselis, where the Greek port is in just about exactly the same position, relative to sea level, as when the Greeks built it.
.
[“Keith Battye says:
May 3, 2011 at 1:10 am
My house is only 4860 ft AMSL so somebody please let me know when I need to start running away.”]
Don’t worry Keith, I live on a boat. You can come and stay with me in about 495000 years! 🙂
@TimC: you are absolutely correct, I should have written “rate of sea rise”. Mea maxima culpa!
@Eric Anderson
I have my doubts in regards to satellite altimetry. When ever someone wants to show a rise in sea levels, they pull out there handy dandy satellite graphs.
It has already been determined that satellite imagery data is consistently higher than tide gauges.
And I imagine that with the latest JASON-1 and JASON-2 data, that shows a deceleration in global sea level, the warmistas have to attack now to gain leverage.
Even if its an illusion.
jaymam and Tim Folkerts:
Good point about seawater vs. freshwater. Just curious: if we are talking about Arctic sea ice, where did it primarily come from in the first place: frozen seawater or precipitation? If the former, when the sea ice becomes more pure, does that make the underlying seawater more saline, and if so, what is the consequence of that? In other words, if you start with seawater, freeze it, then melt it, what kind of sea level rise will you observe?
———-
DCC, I think you’re replying to SteveE’s comment, not mine. I don’t think sea level rise is accelerating. SteveE made that assertion, and I believe he is mistaken, based, for example on Willis’ and Roman M’s plots in the head post above.
DCC says:
May 3, 2011 at 9:26 am
Perhaps you should learn how a graph works. The line notes the global mean sea change over the last 140 year. As you can see the rate that it is going up is increasing, this is called acceleration.
The graph in 3b is the rate per year of that change. If you’re able to read off the graph that in 1880 it was about 1mm/year and now it is higher than 3 mm/year.
Home at the farm we just call it spring flood. Apparently it happens every year and is no biggie.
SteveE: click
Like I said before, forget these guys. The true rise will be 24.6 cm.
So it’s rising 3x faster and it’s declining at the same time. Makes perfect climatology sense to me.
Feared to be rising, worse than we thought/previously imagined, catastrophic, imminent doom (rhymes with eminent domain).
It’s like watching kids being transfixed by video games.
G. Karst,
Do you mean Copromania? Macromania might also be in play here: delusion that objects are larger than natural size.
“sea level rise has not accelerated at all”
Maybe they are taking the fact that a deceleration is technically an acceleration and running with it in the hopes that no one notices.
Baghdad Bob?????????????/
I suspect the Conservative Majority just elected here, can thank team global warming to a small extent. No carbon tax for Canada, and vanishing funding for AWG/CC/whatever research. And the artists were protesting funding cuts to the arts, while supporting the eco-nuts I guess they do like competition after all.
An answer to the question about why UC’s sea level data has not been updated since mid 2010
Posted on April 15, 2011 by Anthony Watts
…
“This new website design won’t work with our current format, so if you can just be patient and wait a couple of weeks we’ll have it online.”
…
So in “couple of weeks” we’ll see if the wait for the new prettier web page was worth it.
—
Anthony;
A “couple of weeks” from April 15th would be about 3 days ago.
I do not see the new and improved communication presentation or sea level. Do you think that they meant a traditional 7 day weeks or some kind of new and improved variable length climate change week?
A variable length week would yield a variable length year, decade and century; this would vastly improve the predictive capacity of the computer models. Do you suppose that this is what they have not been communicating very well, the variable length climate change week?