Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
The L A Times seems to be addicted to publishing scientifically unsupported climate alarmist articles regarding supposed sea level rise acceleration in Florida.
Just last September the Times published an article on this same topic which was exposed as nothing but climate alarmist propaganda (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/19/l-a-times-climate-science-denial-article-instead-shows-the-times-clearly-denying-well-established-climate-science/).
This most recent Times article repeats scientifically unsupported claims of accelerating sea level rise as well as claims of increasing rainfall in Florida caused by increasing man made CO2 emissions (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-helvarg-florida-climate-change-denial-and-action-20161202-story.html).
As discussed in the prior What’s Up With That article regarding Florida coastline sea level rise rates long time period NOAA tide gauge data updated through 2015 measurements from numerous locations around Florida clearly establishes that coastal sea level rise is not accelerating along Florida coastlines but instead remains steady and consistent with long term NOAA tide gauge measurements.
Claims in the most recent L A Times article speculate that the rate of Florida coastal sea level rise is accelerating to a “conservatively projected 3 feet” per century are likely based on (http://cpo.noaa.gov/sites/cpo/Reports/2012/NOAA_SLR_r3.pdf) a government report created by Obama’s National Climate Assessment initiative.
The range of coastal sea rise projections from this report vary between 8 inches to 6 feet over the next century with an average value of 3 feet.
Most significantly however the range of estimates of coastal sea level rise projected in this report are devoid of any degree of certainty as clearly noted in the report as follows:
Thus the assertion that a projection of Florida future sea level rise of 3 feet per century is clearly not “conservative” is in fact pure climate alarmist speculation.
Additionally the claims in this latest piece of climate alarmism journalism from the Times asserting that Florida is seeing increased rainfall levels are also completely unsupported by Florida rainfall climate data (http://climatecenter.fsu.edu/products-services/data/statewide-averages/precipitation).
This data going back as far as 1895 clearly shows that the highest levels of annual rainfall in Florida occurred in the years 1947 and 1959 at 72.57 and 71.26 inches of rainfall respectively.
Annual Florida rainfall for the period from year 2000 through the latest recorded month in 2016 show no increasing trend in annual rainfall whatsoever nor any annual rainfall amount even close to the peak years of 1947 and 1959.
This latest L A Times article is just another example the papers scientifically unsupported climate alarmist propaganda agenda which is completely devoid of any credible science and demonstrates why the Times had to institute it’s dictatorial censorship policy in its discussion of climate issues which are purely driven by political ideology not science.
What’s worse is Florida has little sewer system that can move water away. I remember being at my sister’s in Fort Walton Beach and it flooded during just short rains in many places because the rain just diverts to water ways, and they people take pictures and claim it’s rising ocean……….no, more like living in a 3rd world country.
Oh dear, LA Times gets added to PropOrNot list ;)
“Just last September the Times published an article on this same topic which was exposed as nothing but climate alarmist propaganda …”
Yes, duly noted and greatly appreciated. But until you see that sort of expose in mainstream print newspapers…excluding the WSJ which in any case the target audience of credulous lefties certainly wouldn’t call mainstream, we’re in for much more of the same.
Bottom line is they can print what they want, and for the most part get away with it. Scary, but true.
At least it is only “Coastal Sea Level Rise” they are talking about. It would be terrible if they were talking about “Inland Sea Level Rise” as this would be truely disasterous
So PropOrNot is moderation trigger now? Hard to discuss anything if comments are censored to that level.
There is nowhere for the water to go, really, when there are heavy rains. The water pools in surface depressions until it can soak into the ground. Living just slightly above mean sea level/water table level has its drawbacks. That walk to and from the beach is sure easy, though!
The picture they used….
The road was raised about 2 feet around that park…effectively making it a lake
Localized subsidence is a problem anywhere land has been reclaimed near sea shores, lakes and river flood plain regions. Doesn’t stop the leftists, they use whatever comes to hand in constructing their lies and agitprop.
The sinkhole phenomena is another problem in many parts of FLA, some from poorly built runoff drainage systems and some from over use of groundwater.
Localized subsidence is a problem…especially on a sand bar
Miami beach is a sand bar….that millions of truck loads of fill were brought in
Yep, two of my grandfather’s brothers worked down there in the ’20s and ’30s. The Texas coastal regions had 100s of thousands of acres “reclaimed” and built on. New Orleans,,,,,well, we will just not step off into that quagmire, thank you very much. The Pearl and Pascagula River estuaries along Mississippi coast are good examples of land created out of swamp and tidal marsh. Some places it works better than others. And them we have the attendant inland flooding problem created by “reclaiming” land in these regions. Yea, there is always problems, sea level rising just ain’t one of them.
It’s only two feet above sea level — since average high tide is also two feet above sea level, this is a problem. King Tides can be several feet higher.
Just like Lake N’orlins.
g
since average high tide is also two feet above sea level, this is a problem..
No, difference between high and low tide in Miami can barely be 2 ft…
…sea level is measured in the middle
The contribu on of land subsidence to the increasing coastal flooding hazard in Miami Beach
• Preliminary InSAR results detected localized subsidence, up to -‐3 mm/yr,
mainly in reclaimed land located along the western side of Miami Beach.
• Although the detected subsidence veloci,es are quite low, their effect on
the flooding hazard is significant, because houses originally built on higher
ground have subsided since the city was built, about 80 years ago, by 16-‐24
cm down to flooding hazard zones.
• The combined effect of subsidence and SLR further expose the subsiding
areas to higher flooding hazard than the rest of the city
http://www.ces.fau.edu/arctic-florida/pdfs/fiaschi-wdowinski.pdf
It is difficult, if not impossible to get those who are convinced it’s sea level rise, to look at any other cause – many thanks for that report. I was having a difficult time finding one about subsidence in Miami.
How much of the tide gauge sea level rise in Florida is due to land subsidence? Florida has problem with overpumping aquifers, and has a land subsidence problem in some areas.
Beat me to it. Tidal erosion is another factor in the “sea level rising” hype.
I agree that land subsidence may be a issue. Additionally, the moon is now closer to earth than it has been in the last 40 or so years. I believe that such closeness would increase the gravitational pull on the ocean and hence result in locally higher tides. I emphasize “local” as the local geology would have an influence on ocean currents and tides and may not affect the locations of the tide gage measuring stations.
No, currently, the Moon gets 3.8 cm further away from Earth every year.
So the moon is NOT in an elliptical orbit; it’s a spiral orbit.
G
Isn’t it time to quit these ‘point-by-point’ refutations? It’s time to shout, ‘..you’re WRONG L.A. Times, show us your science!!’
“Isn’t it time to quit these ‘point-by-point’ refutations?”
What’s missing in this fight is any offensive strategy on the ‘skeptic’ side.
You’re right about that, Tater.
And last time around for this September 19, 2016 at 12:40 amI posted this little graphic:
of the same three tide gauges and some time later people pointed me to Tamino’s Open Mind blog:
Misleading Trends: Sea Level Version
Where Tamino or whatever his name his complained that I plotted the end points of 30 year trends instead of the 15 year mark. It’s a matter of convention, the curve is the same. I would have posted this response over at Tamino’s blog except that it seems that I’m blocked from posting there. Fancy that!
Anyway, yes there doesn’t seem to be any acceleration or certainly not enough to get to the wild claims usually made. Three feet per century, in this case comes to 9 mm/yr and it’s not happening.
Tamino’s mind is open all right, but it does not mean his blog is open. His blog is only open for his cheercrowd. Or not exactly, he might allow a post if he and the cheercrowd can make fun out of it.
* * *
Have you noticed that it is Los Angeles Times which is concerned on sea level in Florida? If I were in LA, I would be concerned about earthquakes, not sea level rise.
“I were in LA, I would be concerned about earthquakes, not sea level rise.”
Can’t tax earthquakes.
That’s just classic misdirection. Point out other people’s problems so you won’t have to talk about or worry about your own.
Regarding Florida precipitation, here’s the NOAA’s Climate At A Glance plot for the Sunshine State’s rain fall since 1895 :
Note that the trend is flat (-:
Izzat a completely unexpurgated NOAA graph ??
Just what is the probability that a data set of samples of precipitation amounts, could result in EVERY point of maxima or minima actually falling EXACTLY on one of the data sampled points, and NOWHERE ELSE !
I say baloney.
It would be nice to have the exact x-y co-ordinates of every one of those sampled data points. Then one could enter them into an Excel spread sheet, and actually plot a continuous band limited function through those points.
That straight flat blue line was most certainly not computed from that green curve function; which is NOT a band limited continuous function, hence it is under-sampled, so nothing can be computed from the green graph as plotted here.
Why do they not teach sampled data theory in course on climate science ??
G
george e. smith – at 6:21 pm said:
That straight flat blue line was most certainly not computed from that green curve function;
Here’s their DATA drop it into Excel and see for yourself.
So I succeeded in collecting the data you cited, and even copying it to Excel.
I’ll get around to it, when I don’t have some work for pay to do.
But note: the file I got, contains ONLY the blue/black points on your graph. It doesn’t say anything about the green curve.
It’s the green curve I disagree with, not the blue/black dots. I’ll report back when I plot it.
My copy of Excel knows how to plot real sampled data graphs.
G
Apparently ” they ” haven’t ever used Microsoft Excel to plot graphs.
Most people seem to understand the concept of putting numbers for different variqables into different columns in a spread sheet, so you can plot whatever you want against whatever else you want.
I noticed that their real Temperatures are just 12 deg. C higher than their anomalies.
So what is the purpose in the anomalies; why not plot real Temperature ??
And I see they use ” Star Date ” for the time variable. Well I assume that’s what that is.
I’ll look up ” Sky & Telescope ” to figure out how to convert star date into real time.
Seems like obfuscation is the middle name in climate science.
G
George,
Huh? Please feel free to locate the “band limited continuous data” and show us how the fitted curve will change in any more than a minuscule fashion. Tip: 3rd decimal point precision indicating a difference won’t be considered vindication.
“…Just what is the probability that a data set of samples of precipitation amounts, could result in EVERY point of maxima or minima actually falling EXACTLY on one of the data sampled points, and NOWHERE ELSE !…”
Well, if you make a scatter plot in Excel of annual rainfall values and choose to have it presented as straight lines and markers, then you get exactly that 100% of the time. Not sure what you find so objectionable.
Send the Information to Trump, let Him call them the lying media to the whole world.
https://apply.ptt.gov/yourstory/
President Elect Donald Trump’s web page: “Tell Us Your Story”
And to FOX NEWS. A month ago Fox did a special on the candidates views on climate change, and they gave Miami as an example of climate change caused sea level rise. It is well down that that has nothing to do with sea level rise, so Fox knowingly presented leftist propaganda on climate change.
And, a few days after the election, there was Bill O’Reilly urging Trump to stay in the Paris Accord. I think it’s the new leadership at Fox — leftist leadership. We need to call Fox out for their leftist turn on climate change!
The money trail.
The union controlled superannuation for our hard yakka workers in OZ is invested in the green scam.
The advocates for the scam like Bruce Hawker have become unhinged on national television.
.
In case any readers here haven’t figured it out already:
LATimes ~ #FakeNews.
CNN ~ #FakeNews.
NYTimes ~ #FakeNews.
MSNBC ~ #ReallyFake News.
Scientific America ~ #FakeScience.
Politico ~ #FakePolitics.
BuzzFeed ~ #Propaganda.
….karma
Indeed, ‘a man of peace’ being carted around in a military vehicle …. and then it breaks down.
So perfect.
Karma is just the law of cause and effect, nothing more. So karma was at work here as it is everywhere and always. In this case I would say that schadenfreude is also at work.
BTW, for those who don’t recognize the picture, the vehicle carrying Castro on his final journey broke down. link
Symbolic of the economic engine that is Socialism which Fidel brought to Cube. — Eugene WR Gallun
+1 but what about the WaPo? #FakeNewsForLosers?
Fake News: Any website that gave heavy odds in favor of Hillary winning the election. If I had inclination I’d make a list but I think much of that has been ‘Net-scrubbed by now.
You forgot National Geographic
But what about the Gray Lady of Fake News–The New York Times?
To that growing list add nearly all the MSM (print, radio, TV).
Ian M
It is typical of cults that they encourage their members to view contrary opinions with extreme suspicion. I hope you are not promoting cult-like thinking.
I am encouraing critical thinking when reading or watching any MSM including FoxNews.
All Aussie media (fake news).
No. “The Australian” is as near to real news as you can probably get. And as for its opinion pages, well it has a fair range from left to right – probably more right than left, or just possibly it is the better right that makes it look more.
I don’t think we’ve had any significant rainfall in the two months since Hurricane Matthew came through. Everything is really dry in Florida right now. We are in desperate need of some serious rainfall.
The ants have been coming in through my kitchen window so they can get water out of the sink.
I have finally found a cure for ants. As near as I can tell the active ingredient is nothing but Borax.
I put about three of these soup kitchens around near my sliding door and kitchen window.
The ants come in, the goop goes out, and the last ant in the nest turns the lights out before going bye bye.
Seems like it lasts about three months, before some other ants need a feast.
It’s much better than roundup is on weeds.
G
lorcanbonda
We certainly have not in Merritt Island. Local meteorologists have begun to speculate about the North Florida drought creeping southward.
L.A. Times, Guardian, N.Y. Times, Washington Post … their staffs have studied Mann’s papers so they know how to use MS Excel to make-up what ever they need to feed the AGW Pandemonium.
Next, they will be writing the “Science Books” for K-12. Whoops! They already are!
Quote: Claims in the most recent L A Times article speculate that the rate of Florida coastal sea level rise is accelerating to a “conservatively projected 3 feet” per century are likely based on ,,,
Sorry, but I don’t like the speculative phrase “likely based on” any more than weasel words like might and could which pepper alarmist articles.
It would be far better to email the author to ask for the basis of the report and then publish what if anything comes back.
Yes, I know that runs against the groupthink. Those prone to groupthink are welcome to abuse me as usual.
Like any fraud investigator, we are reduced to trying to reconstruct the details of the crime – the criminals certainly aren’t going to tell us.
So you report that you asked and the journalist denies or ignores. And you have an undeniable fact. It beats speculation every time unless you can substantiate your speculation.
Being too quick to make an accusation is a classic flaw in finding the truth.
“The range of coastal sea rise projections from this report vary between 8 inches to 6 feet over the next century with an average value of 3 feet.”
In my mind, when discussing projections of acceleration of sea level rise, the most conservative projection would be the one that deviated the least from the previously observed rate of sea level rise.
Apparently, The LA Times thinks the lowest and the highest projections are outliers, and think opting for the middle of the range of projections is the most conservative course of action. In other words, they think taking an average of projections is a good idea.
SR
Steven,
A Suggested edit:
:In other words, they think taking an average of projections
is a good ideasupports the climate catastrophe narrative that Jon Podesta’s Think Progress wants them to say.Where is Nils-Axel Mörner when you need him? I’ll go with him – around 7 inches per century at most…globally average…
As a Californian I marvel at the insanity that has overtaken the lemmings here.
There is not the slightest hesitation in outright lying. And it’s only getting worse.
It would be funny if it wasn’t so dangerous.
Stalin would be proud.
“There is not the slightest hesitation in outright lying. And it’s only getting worse.”
The Internet never forgets. When the tide turns, the nakedness of their lies will be exposed. Quite a spectacle they will be, and the our side can harp on for decades.
Wally, that is good with so much to marvel over. So you were not worried about needed a boat to get to LAX?
An aide to Jerry Brown confirmed Wednesday that the governor was wrong when he said global warming would eventually cause rising seawater to inundate Los Angeles International Airport.
Citing new studies, Brown called attention to the global warming issue on Tuesday, saying a predicted 4-foot rise in sea level within the next 200 years could force the relocation of LAX at a cost of billions of dollars.
But various sources say that the nation’s third-busiest airport — bordered by the Pacific Ocean — has elevations ranging from 108 feet to 126 feet and is protected by higher coastal bluffs on the west side.
Another LAT & Moonbeam laugher.
It’s a psychological condition that Freud mentioned often: “NYT-envy.”
Look guys, liberals just wish they have a 3 mm rise.
Glad they don’t…. less liberals that way.
I now live on the Atlantic coast in north Fort Lauderdale in a three br, 3 bath, 2 garage condo. Have for 16 years. Can assure all having just dove it again that the just off shore three tier coral reef is still thriving, and so are we. And that sea level has not detrimentally risen since I moved in early 2000. My ground floor parking garage slot has never flooded despite our Wilma pool deck disaster in 2005; just checked again with the dog and our hybrid AWD Escape SUV was still high and dry. Should anyone want to join us here in our hurricane/climate change ‘disaster’ the 1/2 mile south neighboring oceanfront 8 acre site under construction as “Auberge Resort” (also on Atlantic beach sand) has 1 br 1 bath 1 garage units starting at only $1 million. Obviously a big CAGW discount bargain. A 4 br penthouse just sold preconstruction for $8 million. Cheap when you consider 350.org future climate change?
It’s probably all that snow in Hawaii. Is Al Gore visiting?
It is entertaining to see all the envirowackos freaking out because 14,000 foot high mountains are getting snow in December. Hell, a friend worked on Mauna Kea a few years ago and sent us pics of snow in April.
It is usually more common to get snow there on that 13,000 ft mountain in April and May as I recall…
correct me if I am wrong.
No idea, only time I was in Hawaii was a refueling stop. All my knowledge of the event is anecdotal. Ya know. Photographs. Motion pictures. Eyewitness accounts. All that sort of unreliable sh*t.
Oh! And you are right!!!!!!! Observatory on that mountain says thirteen thousand six hundred and seventy nine feet above sea level. Never snowed at that altitude! I am such a liar!!!!!!!
What’s the popular vote about.
The dems got 8 million votes to 4 million in California .
They won the popular vote by 2 million.
The Republicans won the other 49 states in the popular vote by 2 million.
Does anyone believe that California should be the president of the U.S.A
.
There are 62 counties in N.Y.
Trump won 46
Clinton won 16 and the State by 1.5 mil.
N.Y. city has 6 boroughs. Clinton won 5 by over 2mil. votes.
I would guess winning the 9 most populated counties in just 8-10 states would be a permanent Dem. majority.
The LA Times is to be thanked for demonstrating that climate change consensus stories and “fake news’ are synonymous.
Yam makes an essential point about a lack of an aggressive strategy to challenge the warming propaganda narrative in a much bigger way. It is difficult for scientists who fear being hounded out of their careers to make a stand on their own and any funding from sympathetic millionaires or big corporations to redress the balance will be misrepresented as a hidden agenda. Crowd funding requires a sustained electronic campaign with considerable expertise not all of us possess.
On a personal level I make a point of sending friends updates on some of the counters to climate extremism in the media, culled from the excellent contributions to WUWT and the GWPF, but it is a drop in the ocean. I had thought if a regular newsletter could be produced on two sides of A4 paper, we could all print off say 10 copies and pass them to friends, send them to MPs,leave them on public transport etc. Meanwhile we have some excellent contributors to papers like the British Daily Telegraph, but the rest of the media here is a disgrace to the reputation of journalism and broadcasting. This weekend’ s Observer – a major Sunday newspaper – featured an absurd bleat about Musk being given a hard time by evil skeptics.
Nailing the appalling misconduct of the Green movement in general seems a very lonely cause.
So, underwater real estate has higher value.
Who would’ve thunk it?
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/news/2016/12/02/these-are-the-south-florida-zip-codes-where-home.html#g6
How come all of the people getting their panties in a wad over the Delingpole piece are missing?
Shouldn’t basic integrity require them to be over here condemning the LA Times as well?
Is it me or just a coincidence that Anthony posts this article by Larry Hamlin and then https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8729840 , https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8724580 and https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8720030 are all now 503?
Wadda yuck! Florida SLR, with subsidence (!), less than a foot a century. Grab your waders, Martha!
The biggest joke is here out West. Unlike the East Coast we are overall not subsiding. The only areas subsiding are certain basins with graben-like characteristics or at least a degree of downwarping, and, places affected by subsidence caused by oil and water extraction. All other areas are either doing nothing or are in uplift. Classic case of the latter is San Francisco. There is no perceptible rise along the SF waterfront. There is minor subsidence due to ongoing fill compaction. Nonetheless, local media hype “the coming inundation.” We’ll see how seriously people who actually own infrastructure, sea defenses and flood control take it. I’ll believe it when real money goes into levee construction along the SF waterfront. Anything less tells me it’s a bunch of BS.
On the same day, the LAT’s also published this in their lackless paper: http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-mexico-garcetti-20161130-story.html
Begins on this note:
Bangkok is subsiding at such a rate, that it could be under water in 75 years even if there was no global SLR.
The Clinton’s and our State Dept have obviously been VERY concerned with sea level rise…not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eko_Atlantic
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/17/politics/clinton-foundation-chagoury-state-department/
Well, in all honesty, each time Billie Jeff and KIllery flop their bloated, walrus like forms into any body of water the “sea level” does rise.
The biggest joke is here out West. Unlike the East Coast we are overall not subsiding. The only areas subsiding are certain basins with graben-like characteristics or at least a degree of downwarping, and, places affected by subsidence caused by oil and water extraction. All other areas are either doing nothing or are in uplift chữa thoát vị đĩa đệm ở đâu tốt. Classic case of the latter is San Francisco. There is no perceptible rise along the SF waterfront. There is minor subsidence due to ongoing fill compaction. Nonetheless, local media hype “the coming inundation.” We’ll see how seriously people who actually own infrastructure, sea defenses and flood control take it. I’ll believe it when real money goes into levee construction along the SF waterfront. Anything less tells me it’s a bunch of BS.