From NOAA Headquarters, laughable claims gift wrapped for the fall AGU conference.
They claim 8 inches to 6.6 feet (o.2 to 2 meters) over the next century….such wide variance doesn’t inspire much confidence, even though they claim “high confidence” in that spread. That’s a lot like saying that you have “high confidence that the winner of the latest NBA basketball game will score between 20 and 200 points”. I don’t think the bookies would be impressed with the skill. – Anthony
Experts available to discuss new paper detailing global sea level rise scenario
On December 6, NOAA will release a technical report that estimates global mean sea level rise over the next century based on a comprehensive synthesis of existing scientific literature. The report finds that there is very high confidence (greater than 90% chance) that global mean sea level will rise at least 8 inches (0.2 meters) and no more than 6.6 feet (2 meters) by 2100, depending upon uncertainties associated with ice sheet loss and ocean warming.
The actual amount of sea level change at any one region and location greatly varies in response to regional and local vertical land movement and ocean dynamics. The ranges of global mean sea level rise estimates detailed in this study will help decision makers prepare for and respond to a wide range of future sea level rise and coastal inundation.
Higher mean sea levels increase the frequency, magnitude, and duration of flooding associated with a given storm. Flooding has disproportionately high impacts in most coastal regions, particularly in flat, low-lying areas. In the U.S., over eight million people live in areas at risk to coastal flooding, and many of the nation’s assets related to military readiness, energy, commerce, and ecosystems are already located at or near the ocean.
The report provides a synthesis of the scientific literature on global sea level rise, and presents a set of four global mean scenarios to describe future conditions for the purpose of assessing potential vulnerabilities and impacts.It was authored by a panel of scientists from multiple federal agencies and academic institutions, and will be used to support the National Climate Assessment – a U.S. interagency report produced once every four years to summarize the science and impacts of climate change on the United States.
WHAT: Availability of scientists to discuss the findings of global sea level rise paper
WHO: Adam Parris, report lead author, NOAA; Virginia Burkett, Ph.D., report co-author, U.S. Geological Survey; and Radley Horton, Ph.D., report co-author, Columbia University and NASA
CONTACT: Brady Phillips, NOAA Office of Communications and External Affairs, 202-407-1298 or brady.phillips@noaa.gov
The technical report will be available online on Dec. 6 at http://www.cpo.noaa.gov/reports/sealevel
NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Join us on Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels.
I have a scientific background but am not a scientist. When I read 8″ to no more than 6.5 ft, with a probability of 90%, I think of it as follows: The minimum in the range has a very high probability. As one moves up the range, the probability declines. The take away is, 1) the sea will rise over the next 100 years. 2) At the end of 100 years the sea will be at least 8 inches higher. 3) At the end of 100 years, the sea may be higher than 8″. If I lived near the ocean, I would find this useful information.
Steven Mosher says:
December 5, 2012 at 5:10 pm
This is a parody, right?
Wait for the next big announcement,
The Great Barrier Reef may or may not be dead by Christmas.
John says:
December 5, 2012 at 11:20 pm
The lowest sea level change scenario (8 inch rise) is based on historic rates of observed sea level change…
The intermediate-low scenario (1.6 feet) is based on projected ocean warming
The intermediate-high scenario (3.9 feet) is based on projected ocean warming and recent ice sheet loss
The highest sea level change scenario (6.6 foot rise) reflects ocean warming and the maximum plausible contribution of ice sheet loss and glacial melting…
—————————————————————————–
The reader would most likely be directed to the intermediate-high scenario, because including projected future warming and most recent ice sheet loss data appears to be a good idea.
However, the issue is not about uncertainty, but about bias and about missing and misleading information.
1. Climate models do now fail almost everywhere.and projected temperatures have been too high almost everywhere.
http://landshape.org/enm/q-where-do-climate-model-fail-a-almost-everywhere/
2. Recent ice sheet loss is mostly if not all natural and cyclical. Using short term data while excluding the last cyclical temperature highs in the 1930s, 1940s is misleading:
Berkely Earth shows Greenland temperature just rising a little bit above 1940s temperatures, and BE does not even correct for UHI.
http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/regions/greenland
Greenland ice sheet melt from Chylek 2007 as reported by Akasofu: “present changes of the Greenland ice sheet are smaller than changes observed during the 1920–1940
http://www.appinsys.com/globalwarming/RS_Greenland_files/image016.jpg
3. Solar activity is not included, despite Bond and Bond (2001) showing Greenland ice melt and solar activity with spectacular correlation about the best correlation of any variables in climate science:
http://kaltesonne.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/bond-et-al-2001.gif
December 6, 2012 at 5:27 am | Bill says:
“Also Mosher is correct that this has some minor utitilty [sic] in that it may scare people from building as close to the sea … ”
—————————
Rubbish, so long as there is a block next to the water there will be somebody there to develop it … Location, Location, Location ! Remember that !! Commercial, Retail, Industrial, Residential … it is all the same.
Answer me why the greatest proponents of CAGW have residences on water ? … why, even our Australian climate clown Tim Flannery (FlimFlammery) recently purchased a home at the waters edge after flapping his gums wildly about sea-level rises.
@Skeptik,
The Great Barrier Reef shal hence forth be known as Schrodinger’s Reef.
What was NOAA’s prediction in 1900 regarding the Catastrophic Horse Poo Accumulation problem in NYC for the 21st century?
December 6, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Manfred says:
____________________________________
New science upsets calculations on sea level rise, climate change: Ice sheet melt massively overestimated, satellites show.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/28/sea_levels_new_science_climate_change/
When the experts give such a range, but fail to say “All things considered, THIS is my best estimate,” one wonders what he has paid for.
If we allow experts to change their minds with new data (which they do, anyway), then we should be able to get a direct answer. We are looking for information sufficient to make plans on, not FYI discussions. But since the science is “settled” and the outcome “certain”, I guess they can’t do that. Politically, that is.
“….That’s a lot like saying that you have “high confidence that the winner of the latest NBA basketball game will score between 20 and 200 points…..”
No, it’s a lot like saying that you have “high confidence that the winner of the NBA championship 100 years from now will score between 20 and 200 points.” When you are in the prediction racket you never, ever, allow yourself to be found out.
I wish my CIO would let me get away with predictions like that:
“Yeah boss that new piece of software will be ready sometime between 6 months and 5 years from ago. You’re welcome.”
Mike.
“I don’t think the bookies would be impressed with the skill. – Anthony”
They would, however, happily take those bets, after a quick odds adjustment (bookies know real-world math). And don’t forget the vig (in this case, all the tax money funding these mutual masturbation offences against science).
Hah. Confident the sea level will increase rather than decrease!? But only to one sigma. Hedge your bets, ladies and gentlebongs.