UN Chief Poses For TIME Cover Off ‘Sinking’ Pacific Island Nation That’s Actually Growing In Size

from The Daily Caller

Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor

  • TIME magazine’s cover shows U.N. chief António Guterres standing in waters off a Pacific island that’s allegedly “sinking” into the sea — except scientific studies indicate it’s not.
  • Studies have found most low-lying Pacific islands either remained stable or increased in size over the decades, including Tuvalu.
  • One researcher noted that the “loss of land is unlikely to be a factor in forcing depopulation of Tuvalu.”

The newest TIME magazine cover features United Nations chief António Guterres standing in water off the island nation of Tuvalu, which the outlet called “one of the world’s most vulnerable countries” to global warming.

The photo, taken during Guterres’ four-country tour of Pacific nations in May, is meant to illustrate one point — that island nations are sinking in the face of global warming-induced sea-level rise.

TIME titled it’s Thursday cover story, “Our Sinking Planet.” There’s just one problem: Scientific studies show Tavalu’s islands, indeed most Pacific islands, have actually grown in the face of sea level rise.

A 2018 study found that Tuvalu’s total land area grew nearly 3 percent from 1971 to 2014, despite rising sea levels. Satellite and aerial photos showed eight of Tuvalu’s nine atolls and three-quarters of its reef islands increased in size over the last four decades.

Study lead author Paul Kench told AFP, “the dominant mode of change over that time on Tuvalu has been expansion, not erosion.” Kench made similar findings in a 2010 study. (RELATED: ‘Climate Change’ Isn’t Alarming Enough For The Liberal Media. Here’s What They Now Call It)

“On the basis of this research we project a markedly different trajectory for Tuvalu’s islands over the next century than is commonly envisaged,” Kench said. “While we recognise that habitability rests on a number of factors, loss of land is unlikely to be a factor in forcing depopulation of Tuvalu.”

Another 2018 study found that nearly 90 percent of low-lying islands in the Pacific and Indian oceans either remained stable or increased in size over the decades.

Virginie K. E. Duvat of the University of La Rochelle compiled past work by Kench and other researchers studying islands and sea level rise. Based on that data, Duvat found measurements showed the overall land area of Tuvalu’s islands was stable.

This “indicates that they may not be affected yet by the presumably negative, that is, erosive, impact of sea-level rise,” Duvat wrote.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres attends a session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres attends a session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), Russia June 7, 2019. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov.

Tuvalu Prime Minister Sopoaga addresses the 73rd session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York

Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sosene Sopoaga addresses the 73rd session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York, U.S., September 27, 2018. REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz.

Much of TIME’s cover story focuses on the now abandoned village of Vunidogoloa, which was abandoned five years ago. Fijian officials say the village and its inhabitants were relocated to a higher elevation in the face of climate change.

Fiji plans to relocate another 40 villages because of sea level rise, TIME reported. The outlet went on to claim other island nations were also in danger, adding that sea-level rise was “threatening to wipe them off the map entirely.”

Pacific island nations met with Guterres in May to “push to make developed countries commit to aggressive new targets for reducing their emissions at a global climate summit” scheduled to take place this fall.

UN officials used Pacific islanders to make the moral case for fighting global warming during climate talks in 2015. When those talks concluded, nearly 200 countries agreed to the Paris climate accord.

“Climate change offers an opportunity for multi­lateralism to prove its value,” Guterres told TIME.

Activists hold a demonstration in support of Tuvalu at the UN Climate Change Conference 2009 in Copenhagen

Activists hold a demonstration in support of the South Sea island of Tuvalu as delegates arrive for a meeting at the UN Climate Change Conference 2009 in Copenhagen December 9, 2009. REUTERS/Bob Strong.

UN officials, including Guterres, have warned that many Pacific islanders could become “climate refugees” if no action is taken to curb global warming, though past UN predictions of waves of climate refugees have not come true.

But so far, studies on island nations shows they are more resilient to sea-level rise than previously believed.

“We tend to think of Pacific atolls as static landforms that will simply be inundated as sea levels rise, but there is growing evidence these islands are geologically dynamic and are constantly changing,” researcher Kench said in 2018.

Follow Michael on Twitter

Advertisements

104 thoughts on “UN Chief Poses For TIME Cover Off ‘Sinking’ Pacific Island Nation That’s Actually Growing In Size

  1. I guess we can’t really blame the good folk of Tuvalu for thinking that they are going to be submerged beneath the waves someday because the entire world keeps telling them that. All that free money promised for island fortification from the storm surge or moving their entire village to higher ground, and I am sure they are only too happy to say whatever the alarmists want them to. Some of those locations are barely above sea level, and have been that way since they arrived. Some erosion is most definitely happening, but that has been happening forever and can go both ways too, with waves and currents bringing in new sand along with corals growing up to stay in synch with any real SLR.

    We keep hearing this same story year over year, including that the Maldives would actually be under water by now which was predicted almost 35 years ago. And they are no closer to sinking under the waves now than they were then. These cases should be detailed in high resolution, and proven to be either gross exaggerations or outright bogus claims. While maybe it is hard to prove now what will happen by 2050 or 2100, we can most certainly point out that there has been little truth to this meme so far that they are sinking beneath the waves because of SLR caused by global heating and climate change.

    • “I guess we can’t really blame the good folk of Tuvalu for thinking that they are going to be submerged beneath the waves someday because the entire world keeps telling them that. ”

      I think we can blame them. It’s called willful ignorance. If what you’re hearing doesn’t match reality, and you choose to believe the imaginary alarm, then you deserve what you get.

      • No, I can’t blame the local islanders. They barely have a grade/high school education if that, and don’t have the scientific skillset to even be able to comprehend the subject matter at hand. Sort of like why we can’t blame the school kids today being terrorized by academia, media and politicians that CAGW is a fact. They don’t know any better, and why they defer to the authority of the establishment. It’s not their fault that most of all this is premeditated racketeering by special interests for some other nefarious reasons.

        And in the case of Tuvalu, the majority of the CAGW they have been told about is still in the future, that this will happen by 2030 or 2050, so it isn’t so much about matching reality yet. They are deferring to the ‘experts’, which is really what the rest of the world has done as well. And if all these powers that be are offering you free money to move or vacate your island, then the fraud is even that much worse. All the more reason why I can’t blame these islanders, or the school kids who think this might all be true. You and I maybe know better, but we can’t expect everyone else to think like us. Tuvalu is a microcosm for the entire world, being led astray by delinquent science and other forces intent on causing harm.

    • The fact that people who claimed to be scientists were not aware that coral atolls will not be submerged by slowly rising seas, had no idea this was impossible, is a travesty
      They should have their degrees revoked and me pilloried in the town squares, have over ripe tomatoes pitched at them, and laughed out of town and out of science.
      Dis they think it is some cosmic coincidence that thousands of small islands are all a few feet above sea level at the current time, when it is known that the sea has been hundreds of feet lower and over ten meters higher in the recent past?
      This is basic knowledge, first semester physical geography.

    • A lot of people need to dig ditches and fill them in again. It would keep them busy and they could concentrate on the job at hand, instead of dreaming.

      • Yah, but… those people who need to be digging ditches are too busy playing with climate models for really great pay, so I don’t think it’s gonna happen.

  2. First, let us differentiate between coral islands and islands created through volcanic action. The Fiji villages abandoned because of rising seas must have been situated on mainland Fiji which is of volcanic origin.
    Coral islands always grow with rising seas, as has been known since Darwin wrote his little seminal book on the issue over 150 years ago.
    But yes, airports, concrete buildings and asphalt roads, built on coral islands will certainly be ruined by rising sea levels. That just goes to show it was a silly place to build airports, etc. But residents should not be described “climate change refugees” because of that, should they??.

    • Another possible reason why the Fiji villages were abandoned could be that the government forced the people to abandon their homes so that the government could make a bid for more donations. As for the new airports, it could be a cargo cult manifestation.
      Climate change refugees do exist. I’m one of them. It was getting too cold in Melbourne, VIC, Oz. Global cooling? We sold up 4 years ago and moved 1,000km north to be closer to the equator. It’s warmer here.

      • We sold up 4 years ago and moved 1,000km (621 mi) north to be closer to the equator. It’s warmer here.

        Here in the US, … New Yorkers move 1,153 mi (1,855 km) south to Florida to be closer to the equator.

        When they just move south for the winter they are referred to as “snowbirds” by the permanent Floridians.

      • Count me a climate refugee, although I do not want to live like one.
        h/t T. Petty.
        Made the decision one day while walking down the street in Philly in the 1970s, slipped on ice that was two months old and felt like shards of glass on my hands as I broke my fall.
        Decided right then that I need the sunshine and palm trees of Florida, just like the FL board of tourism commercial I had seen that morning told me.
        Here I iln, all these years later.

        • BTW, it case it slipped by unnoticed: A period in any Winter that is so cold that even in downtown of a large city, ice on the sidewalk can persist for several months.
          Most years being below freezing for a couple of weeks straight would be notable.
          But in the 1970s, there were some Winters it did not get anywhere close to melting point of ice for months on end.
          I was in my teens the first time I ever saw a foot of snow fall at once.
          And in that decade, we had several that were around two feet, at once.
          Cold.
          Nothing like it for decades, until this past decade.
          BTW…it also used to get over 100 degrees when I was a kid.
          It has been a long time since that happened, and if it did, it was like once.
          I recall the streets melting so bad the traffic pushed the asphalt into bumps that were feet high.
          There was one in front of our house, and my dad was so pissed…busses would slam into it at full speed (those drivers did not care) and shake our whole house.
          We had masonry damage from it. And that house is a fortress.

    • Good comment, AndyE. The problem is that most persons at the United Nations appear to have read Saul Alinskys book “Rules For Radicals” than Charles Darwins “Voyage of the Beagle”.

  3. I just spent two weeks in Hawaii … on Kauai and Maui. The beaches, reefs, and Hotels are right where they’ve always been, since I began visiting the islands in the 1970’s. Nothing’s changed, other than some forest roads having been washed-out last winter on Kauai. Every one of the most exclusive Hotel chains in the world are investing $B’s in beachfront hotel sites. The notion that “sea level rise” is at “crisis” levels is just STUPID. Capitalist corporations are INVESTING in oceanfront property … while the Socialist Warmists are INVESTING in “rising” doom, gloom, and wealth-transfer indulgences.

    • There are towns up and down the East coast of the US, right on the beach, which have been in the same place for centuries.
      And some houses and roads are as old.
      In none of them is there any noticeable difference in the position of the ocean in relation to homes, with the exception of places were erosion has washed away the sand, or deposited new sand.
      And this in spite of the ill advised removal of dunes just about everywhere with a lot of people.

    • “I just spent two weeks in Hawaii “

      It must have been hellish there Kenji….what with 418 ppm of CO2 being measured at Kilauea. Glad you survived.

      • I did … Nothing … for two weeks. Except watch the native grasses grow 6 inches per day. The Horror. The Horror. The pineapples were RIPE, and Coconuts plentiful. Thank you Co2 !!

    • Kenji, I just spent a week on the Big Island, and it is getting bigger! Madame Pele has donated all of this lava and the island is now a square mile bigger. Oh, also, all of the rest of it appears the same

  4. Never ever let inconvenient facts get in the way of a heart rending story, especially if that story props up an agenda.

  5. Some inconvenient facts that weren’t mentioned by Mr Bastasch.

    This is all based on Kench et al (2018)
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-02954-1

    Kench’s paper begins: “Sea-level rise and climatic change threaten the existence of atoll nations. Inundation and erosion are expected to render islands uninhabitable over the next century, forcing human migration. ”

    and goes on to say:

    “Using remotely sensed data, change is analysed over the past four decades, a period when local sea level has risen at twice the global average (~3.90 ± 0.4 mm.yr−1).”

    and

    “Climate change remains one of the single greatest environmental threats to the livelihood and well-being of the peoples of the Pacific”.

    There is no dispute about the sea-level rise and as AndyE points out the shifting sands will shift but rock and concrete won’t.

        • 97% of scientists agree that Sea level has risen at least 300 feet in the last 15,000 years. If Atolls were static, there should be zero Atolls in the Pacific. Most currently “endangered reefs” were dry land when America was first settled.

          Both Atolls and reefs are the most climate resilient, but dynamic, structures on earth.

          If someone builds a house on river bank, the people who live on the hill above him think he’s a lazy idiot and he deserves what he gets.

          • Here in low lying South Florida where I live, we have the distinction of having very few artifacts of human habitation dating more than about 5,000 years old, as contrasted to most of the rest of North America where evidence of human habitation extends back to at least 13,000 to 15,000 years.

            Why?

            The reason we have such a paucity of human artifacts is because in low lying Florida, most of the human habitation – both ancient, and even today’s – is and always has been clustered along our Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico shores. The inland areas, particularly in South Florida, were virtually uninhabitable prior to the creation of modern drainage infrastructure. Prior to 5,000 years ago, therefore, most human habitation was in areas that have been inundated by sea level rise for that entire timeframe.

            Sea level rise has been a fact of human life and habitation for the entire existence of Homo Sapiens. And in those fringe coastal areas of low elevation landforms, those areas have been inundated for many thousands of years.

            Adaptation – it’s what we humans do, and have always done.

          • More likely that 5000 years is the amount of time that passes before every inch of the coastline has been scoured by direct passage of a cat 5 storm surge.
            The center of Florida has a feature called the Highland Ridge, which is a very high sand ridge that is so permeable it is basically impossible to flood.
            Large parts of inland Florida are not swampy at all, but dry scrub. These are ancient ecologies, not some recent development.
            I am not sure how much of what you said is just lazy writing, but Florida is not a big swamp away from the coast.
            Except for the Everglades, the lowest parts of Florida ARE the coasts!
            There are large swamps besides the ‘glades, such the Green Swamp, and the St Johns and Kissimmee river flood plains, and the Okefenokee swamp in the north, but most of this exists because the ridge is so high and gets so much rain that karst topography and hydrostatic pressure on the groundwater keeps them wet even in the dry season and dry years.
            I live 25 miles inland from Ft Myers, and am at 35′, on yellow sand over ten feet deep.
            A short drive from here are the groves and towns along route 27, w/ some well over 150′ above sea level. You can take that route to Georgia and it for the most part only gets higher.

            And 5000 years ago, when sea level was only 1’ lower, Florida was nearly twice as big as now. Was it swampier then?
            Not sure but I tend to doubt it.
            And there are dry hammocks even in the middle of the ‘glades.
            This is where Seminole Indians and runaway slaves hid successfully for many decades.
            Sorry to be so critical Duane, but I cannot help it when people say stuff that is just wrong as if they are reciting facts.
            Links are
            – Florida coastline when sea level was lower
            -topographic map of the southern part
            -topo map of the whole state

            http://johnglennmbci.blogspot.com/2013/04/nothing-new-under-sun.html
            https://archive.usgs.gov/archive/sites/sofia.usgs.gov/publications/circular/1134/images/fig5x.jpg
            https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&id=B0A13D13A0D060753863D257A895326E2FE97268&thid=OIP.iB1Yqkfkl5Jl_tg3xh8LSQHaH0&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Flh6.googleusercontent.com%2Fproxy%2FtC_eBkMwPneD254RCQMAD7Jfjhl7ByrmQikoxRajgf32m6PWSgeVx7klhFxquF7CtcwTBCRlMkH6yizK0OhZAr70LoS5i0M59891%3Ds0-d&exph=1024&expw=970&q=Florida+topography&selectedindex=6&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&eim=1,2,6

          • Nicholas McGinty – Dude, you’re an idiot. I have lived and practiced engineering and environmental restoration here in South Florida for 30 years, so don’t lecture me an instant about what Florida is “really like”.

            There is no “central Florida ridge” in South Florida, which is what I described. South Florida is a gigantic waterway, flat as hell, leading from the Kissimmee River watershed just south of Orlando through Lake Okeechobee through the Everglades to Florida Bay. It was, prior to the massive Everglades drainage projects that began around the turn of the 20th century and accelerated through the 1940s virtually all uninhabitable wetland.

            What I wrote is precisely what South Florida archaeologists have written about extensively.

            Stop commenting ignorantly, especially if you are going to challenge someone like me.

          • Rather, he is referring to the very definite – but low! – central FL ridge. Starts west of the swamps at the GA-FL border, heads south and broadens out, and ends a bit north of Orlando. I-$ (er, I4) itself is very flat all the way across, but a low isolated “hump” resumes and then trails off into the very flat slope towards Okeechobee swamps and the Everglades. You are correct for the southern FL tip.

            https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwismMO81-viAhUOmeAKHSviBBwQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Froom.mailbox-limit.info%2Fflorida-topographic-map&psig=AOvVaw0PztErh124p2RdvXHPFMuq&ust=1560694759379079

          • RA,
            I am not sure if you live in Florida, or if you looked at the topographic maps I posted.
            They show there is much more than an isolated low hump.
            The interior of South Florida (I attended USF: Uni of SOUTH Florida, in Tampa. Tampa…South Florida.)
            There are broad stretches over 50 miles wide between 50 and 100′ in elevation.
            Duane is full of crap when he say the whole of South Florida from Orlando down is a “a gigantic waterway, flat as hell, leading from the Kissimmee River watershed just south of Orlando through Lake Okeechobee through the Everglades to Florida Bay.”
            He obviously suffers from “expert syndrome”, thinking because he considers himself knowledgeable, he has no need to look at maps or to speak precisely or even to limit himself to things that are true.
            Prior to the 1970s, hardly anyone lived along the coast of Florida, because hurricanes.
            That is true for most of the US in those years.
            Of course ports are on the coast, and plenty of towns, but the interior is mostly high and dry, and plenty inhabited.
            I think he has never driven away from some small zone in SE Florida.
            Your link does not work, so I do not see what map you are making reference too.
            I posted three, two of which are topo maps.
            I have lived here, been a member of various organizations and clubs, lived and worked all over the state in the lake and wetlands management biz, built, owned and ran a plant nursery during which time I drove all over the state all the time, studied subjects such as physical geography, botany, and many other classes which involved field work and trips, and had years of instruction from native Floridians.
            I know this state.
            If 150 feet is low, then yes, it is low.
            But for people wanting to stay out of swamps, 30-50 feet is real dang high.
            I live at 35′, and during the Irma floods, my house was high and dry.
            I live well south of Lake Okeechobee latitude.
            Yellow on this map is 150′
            Green is 160-200′
            Blue is over 220′
            There are blue areas south of Tampa.
            Yellow with spots of blue and green down to a point south of the northern shore of Lake Okechobee. Dark red to brown in this region is very wide, 40-50 miles or more in spots.
            The width of the area that is over 50 feet and as much as 220′ plus ranges from 40 to almost 100 miles wide.
            A large area of rolling hills north of Tamps, where my nursery was, covers several counties and thousands of square miles (yes!) and is as much as 240 feet high.
            I have friends in this area that have farmed hay on farms owned by their families for well over 100 years.
            The area around Sanford (north of Orlando) was settled by a guy named General Sanford
            after the civil war.
            Seminole and Miccosukee Indians have inhabited hammocks in the middle of the Everglades for hundreds of years.
            The interior of Florida has been extensively inhabited by Europeans and Natives alike for hundreds of years, and during much of this time the coast were largely abandoned.
            Interior portions have seen influxes of people who then mostly left after such events as killing freezes, since long before the civil war.
            Low isolated hump hardly describes it well, although better than the way Wayne pictures the interior of his state.
            Have a look at the legend.

            http://rooms.spsteroid.com/florida-topographic-map/topographic-maps-of-the-united-states

        • “Kench’s paper begins: “Sea-level rise and climatic change threaten the existence of atoll nations. Inundation and erosion are expected to render islands uninhabitable over the next century, forcing human migration. ”

          Sounds like a prediction to me.

          • That’s just it, Kench made the prediction, Loydo didn’t. Loydo just endorsed the prediction.
            In Loydo’s shallow mind, that’s enough of a distinction.

          • ‘Loydo just endorsed the prediction.’

            Exactly – and was careful not to do so in so many words.

    • Twice the global average. That would seem like a local condition and not global climate change. The rest sounds like verbal padding for fit and funding.

    • “local sea level has risen at twice the global average”

      How does that work? Sounds like the claim that everywhere is warming twice as fast as everywhere else.

    • Who are we going to believe, a reporter or actual science.

      Coral is not rock. I thought even you were smart enough to know that.

    • Some inconvenient questions for your study: what is different LOCALLY for the sea-level rise to be twice the global average? What data ties the local sea-level change to a global climate change? What evidence do they have to link the sea-level rise to climate change rather than other natural causes? Is the difference in the rate of sea-level rise between this locale and globally different from past rates (i.e., has the area always shown a 2 delta correlation?).

      If they have always had a rate twice that of the global average, then that rate has been essentially the same since the LIA, and their response to the rising sea-levels, unchanged. If they haven’t, why the change now?

      • There have been articles, I believe, about subsidence due to aquifer depletion on a variety of islands and seashores. Since water seeks it level and the seven seas are everywhere in open communication, it seems unlikely that a local rise in the sea can occur over time. But an island could subside and the water level seem to rise

        • kwinterkorn

          There have been articles, I believe, about subsidence due to aquifer depletion on a variety of islands and seashores. Since water seeks it level and the seven seas are everywhere in open communication, it seems unlikely that a local rise in the sea can occur over time. But an island could subside and the water level seem to rise

          Baytown TX lost several FEET (over a meter) of “local sea level rise” due to massive pumping from the water-filled aquifer underneath it in the 60-70’s. Flooded several subdivisions, and threatened the massive Exxon-Mobil oil refinery nearby.
          They stopped pumping water out and forced water back in the rocks. Raised the region enough to prevent further damage and to regain the flooded areas. Didn’t rebuild those subdivisions and roads though. “Wetlands” ya know became popular as mosquito-breeding spots for the enviro’s.

          Several cities in Taiwan as well.
          Venice Italy? Not sure if their subsidence is “too heavy and too many” buildings in “too small an area” on the mud, or if the land under the mud is continuing to go down.

    • Loydo

      In the same article there is a major inconvenient fact not mentioned by you:

      “Results challenge existing narratives of island loss showing that island expansion has been the most common physical alteration throughout Tuvalu over the past four decades.”

    • “Using remotely sensed data, change is analysed over the past four decades, a period when local sea level has risen at twice the global average (~3.90 ± 0.4 mm.yr−1).”

      … AND still the land area is greater than it was forty forty years ago.

      hey! Spike (loydo), tell me about life…

    • Some inconvenient facts that are ignored by an awful lot of people:

      If you use relatively conservative figures for sea level rise since the last interglacial – 300 feet over a period of 15,000 years – you get an average rate of about 6 mm per year, assuming I’m doing the math correctly. So a rate of about 4 mm per year (“twice the global average”) is only about 2/3 of the historical average, meaning the the global average itself is only 1/3. If you use less conservative numbers – maybe 400 feet over 10,000 years, or something in-between – then that 4 mm looks even less impressive.

      Now, since the end of the interglacial sea level has pretty much risen constantly but not at a uniform rate. Instead it has risen in fits and starts, sometimes at a terrifying rate (and it might very well do so again at some point in the future). Lately, of course, that rate has flattened out – but it has never actually gone to zero! In other words, sea level rise related to the interglacial is still going on and may yet go on indefinitely, at a rate (at least for now) that’s well below the historical average. But a lot of folks would seem to prefer instead that we believe that it’s all or mostly of anthropogenic origin.

      • Even meltwater pulse 1A (the period of fastest rise documented) was not some terrifying rate. Unless you were in a wheelchair chained to the rocks next to the ocean for 1000 years.
        “Meltwater pulse 1A (MWP1a) is the name used by Quaternary geologists, paleoclimatologists, and oceanographers for a period of rapid post-glacial sea level rise during which global sea level rose between 16 meters (52 ft) and 25 meters (82 ft) in about 400–500 years, giving mean rates of roughly 30–60 mm (0.098–0.197 ft)/yr.”

        The upper end of the estimate is 60 mm/yr.
        6 cm/yr.
        2.54 cm/1 inch
        So, the fastest the water ever rose when entire continental ice sheets two miles high were rapidly melting, water was being trapped and released in giant deluges periodically, etc…even then the vertical rise was a couple of inches a year.
        And it may have been half that.
        Granted, that is a considerable rise over a lifetime, maybe as much as 13′ from birth to death of a person who lived to be 80.
        But, at that same time, entire continents were being freed up and weather conditions were transitioning from disastrous to yummy.

        So, if we all keep in mind not to live right next to the ocean, chained to a radiator for life, at the end of the next interglacial, we will be fine.

        • Some of the charts I’ve look pretty scary, but maybe not so much when you properly account for the timeframes involved. In any case, if those much higher rates were occurring today, at least some people might rightfully be freaking out about it, wouldn’t they? Instead they’re trying to get all of us to freak out over a relatively small and mostly natural rise.

          • I should also point out that the tide graphs as they look now are nothing like what was reported before the era of global warming alarmism, when all records were modified, even the tide gauge ones.
            They now show a smoothly continuous uptrend, or whatever the trend is.
            But prior the late 1980s, they showed several decades long periods with no rise overall, and decades in which SL fell by quite a lot.
            And prior to the tide gauge era, from a few hundred to a few thousand years ago, reconstructions do not show continuous rise at all.
            Sometimes up, sometimes down.
            What else would happen during hundreds to thousands year cooling periods when glaciers were expanding and ocean cooling?
            I can post links if you have never seen these.

      • “Now, since the end of the interglacial sea level has pretty much risen constantly but not at a uniform rate.”

        Not true: it has risen since the end of the last GLACIAL, due to melting land ice. The present interglacial has not ended; we are in it now.

      • Scross said;
        “Now, since the end of the interglacial sea level has pretty much risen constantly but not at a uniform rate. Instead it has risen in fits and starts, sometimes at a terrifying rate”

        When land goes up, water goes down. When water freezes (ice Age), water levels again go down.
        It is simple bathtub logic, but does not appear to be the cause of sea level rise. My conclusion would be that water is going up because we “live in a gravity well” pulling in material from outside the planet.
        My evidence for this is from studying the ice build up on the south pole which defies conventional explanations. In short, the original base erected at the south pole in the 50s is now, 60 years later, under 60 feet of ice. 12 inches per year with no obvious source. (I haven’t seen the latest measurements) And yet at 10,000 feet, the south pole is one of the driest climates on the planet with all most no measurable rainfall/snowfall. The new ice shows up every September just after the return of spring when the polar stratospheric clouds evaporate at the same time the O-Zone hole appears in its yearly routine. The magnetically collected solar gases from the sun in the solar wind freeze in the upper atmosphere until the first UV ray’s of spring sets up a chemical reaction converting methane and ammonia, of the polar stratospheric clouds, in to water and carbon dioxide. The water subelement to the cold surface and the carbon dioxide is added fresh to our atmosphere. How many “billions of tons” is dependent on how active our Sun is, or in the case of an Ice Age, if we pass through an intergalactic cloud in the local fluff.
        Passing through a super nova remanent would not only block sunlight/stars, at the same time incoming gases, like the aurora borealis on steroids, converting our oxygen atmosphere into water raising ocean levels , dropping air pressure drastically reducing our heat retention capabilities. Hotter days, colder nights. Mountains covered in glaciers slow to melt.
        It would also add mass to all the planets in the solar system covering the colder ones with ice. My hypothesis…

    • ‘Two more quotes from Kench et al (2018).

      “Results challenge existing narratives of island loss showing that island expansion has been the most common physical alteration throughout Tuvalu over the past four decades. Of significance, documented increases in island area over this period have occurred as the sea level has been rising. ”

      “Changes expected include the ongoing erosion of smaller sand islands in the archipelago (10 ha), stability of reef platform islands and increased mobility of atoll reef rim islands. Such changes suggest that the existing footprint of islands on reef surfaces will continue to change, although the physical foundation of islands will persist as potential pedestals for habitation over the coming century. ”

      Quote-mining is best done from less easily accessible papers Loydo.

    • Lloydo,
      No dispute about sea level rise twice the global average?
      Tide gauge data shows these islands have had very low to nonexistent sea level rise for many decades.
      So, I for one dispute that contention. It is false.
      Patently so.
      It is not even just kind of false…it is a complete fabrication that in order to make it one has to ignore the fact that sea level has long been monitored at these places and records kept by the government.

      Some specifics:
      Midway: 1.38 mm/yr

      Kwajalein: Marshall Islands 1.88 mm/yr, although this appears dubious, as for most of 50+ years there is little if any trend

      Wake Island: 2.1 mm/yr, again iffy interpretation of the graph.

      Johnston Atoll: 0.75 mm/yr, very iffy. This graph look flat to me with some el nino outlier years

      Guam, Mariana Islands: The listed number is crap at 3.68 mm/yr, even though prior to the earthquake denoted on the chart, sea level there was falling, and even now there is no sign of any trend, just fluctuations.

      Pago Pago: 2.21 mm/yr. Very iffy yet again. There appears to be no trend until shortly before the recent Earthquake. look at the peaks and troughs and this becomes clear.
      It may be that all sea level changes in these areas are due to tectonic movements of the underlying plate.

      https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=1619910
      https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=1820000
      https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=1890000
      https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=1619000
      https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=1630000
      https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=1770000

      • Never us actual data .. Loydo is a climate faithful, a true believer and he doesn’t need or what to see facts.

  6. I am sure that all of their problems would disappear, if only us “”Naughty””
    Western nations would send them lots and lots of money.

    MJE VK5ELL

    • Many do have major problems looming. A bunch of money might help somewhat. The problems are population growing much faster than land area and fresh water, accumulated from rainfall, under the island, over top of saltier water, over geological time periods, is now being used much more rapidly than it can replenish.

  7. Will the UN boss be known to posterity as “Mr. Wet Pants Guterres” after this picture? No wonder he looks so glum.

    And I wonder why nobody seems to be worried about Diego Garcia? Those islands are even more low-lying than the Maldives, and right there in the Pacific, and yet the Americans are still using it as an air base. Doesn’t seem to be any large new seawalls either. Has UK found a magical way of halting the rise of sea levels? Because the Chagos islands are British, at least for the time being. However, if they get transferred to Mauritius, no doubt Diego Garcia will be in imminent danger of drowning, and eligible for massive rescue funding.

      • Indeed. Transferring it to Mauritius would not make much sense otherwise. Sea level rise, however, is supposed to be global (but actually varies a lot).

    • there was something recently about the usa mil wanting more money to upgrade all their coastal bases and diego garcia was named and shown typical agw will risk the effectiveness of the mil ability to protect folk
      theres also a stink starting up about the dispossession of many Chagan peoples by force , back whenever and wanting to come back and compensation etc. it may have been either Zero Hedge or SOTTnews i saw it on

      • No such thing as a Chagan people. The Chagos islands were uninhabited when discovered. The so-called “Chagans” are just ex-plantation workers.

    • yup more tourism dollars more water used from aquifers if theres any left? and more trash to hide/dump as well
      using their billions in profits to clean up their own mess and function otherwise? nah
      and if they allowed OS corps to build and didnt get a tax take and management contract in their favour?
      too bad too sad cope with it!
      Id like to see an inquiry into their spending and whos on the take.

  8. Its a pity that the real science will never make the front cover of Time.

    Any wonder that depression is becoming a major threat to the well-being of the current generation of kids. They are bombarded almost daily with fake stories about doom and gloom, with the end of the world as we know it nigh.

    Paul.

    • I’m 24 years old, and reading about the “The end is coming in 12 years” tosh would make me sick in the stomach, which made worse by autism (Yes I admit I am autistic). The other day I read a climate doom and gloom article that made me so sick I nearly passed out at the dining room table. I then came here after being recommended WUWT to get closure and to help put my mind at peace about all the hogwash I’ve been reading. Tuvalu’s nothing; they “predict” that the Pacific island of Tarawa would be the first to go, and that they were evacuating residents to Fiji. I don’t believe it for a second. And this was back in 2014!

      • Stay positive, Matt.
        As Bill Murphy says below, a few years ago a senior US Congress Rep was concerned that the island of Guam was about to reach a tipping point, and turn turtle.
        As has been noted elsewhere, humans can content with most situations, but there is still no cure for stupid 🙁

  9. Its not rocket science:
    1. the sea slowly rises
    2. corals grow upwards
    3. eroded coralline sand around the corals increases.
    4. new corals grow on the newly eroded coralline sand.
    5. more sand gets deposited on adjacent beaches, which grow in size, further increasing the area available for new coral to grow around, etc etc.
    6. ocean currents can change around the island, furthering the process of sand deposition in some cases.

    As long as the sea level doesn’t rise too quickly, coral-based islands can actually grow with a slow sea level rise.

  10. I’ve not read the Time magazine article, but I, with others, did unsuccessfully appeal to the New Zealand Broadcasting Standards Authority about a Television New Zealand news story that talked about the village of Vunidogoloa having to relocate because of rising sea levels and increasing storm surges.

    The facts are that this low lying village in a large bay has been subject to flooding from storm surges for at least the last 65 years according to published reports in the Fijiian Sun newspaper. Nothing to do with sea level rise or increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. There are no measurements of sea levels in the area. The tide gauge at Lautoka is about 300kms way by sea. The Suva tide gauge was relocated. They show a sea level rise of about 3mm pa.

    TVNZ provided a report that helpfully showed that the number cyclones passing within 400kms of Suva had gone down in the last 70 years. So the number of storm surges that are generated by cyclones were decreasing, not increasing, contrary to the TVNZ report. Ludicrously TVNZ claimed, based on John Cook’s study, that 97% of climate scientists agreed with the man made climate change story. The BSA was unconvinced by the very sound evidence to the contrary.

    The BSA in their wisdom ruled on the 2 areas of complaint – that the story was not balanced or accurate. On the question of balance, they ruled that in order for them to make a ruling that the issue needed to be a controversial issue of importance to the New Zealand public. They ruled that it was not, therefore they could not rule on the issue of balance. On the question of accuracy, their ruling was hard to understand. I think that they said that because it was an item of human interest that it didn’t need to be accurate, even thought it appeared on the main TV One 6pm news slot.

    This was just before COP 23 at Bonn where Fiji was a lead country. A wonderful coincidence?

  11. ‘Green’ scheme refugees and plant/animal extinctions (villages flooded by ecologically damaging hydro schemes etc.) far outnumber any actual climate impacts.

  12. I’m only astonished UN President Peron isn’t walking on the water… where’s Evita while this nonsense gets peddled?

  13. Have faith, just because it’s growing in size and not actually sinking, doesn’t mean that 97% of the usual pal review alarmists can’t continue to make stuff up, say it’s sinking and be repeatedly promoted by the media.

  14. I still worry the most about the Pacific island of Guam. I heard from Democratic congressman Hank Johnson of Georgia in a hearing a few years ago that it could capsize if the U S military constructs too many buildings on one end of the island.

    • I’ll never forget that, and particularly enjoyed the face of the Admiral he was questioning…best poker face ever! I still look at the vid occasionally, just to watch his masterful laugh control. I think Johnson may have some Tlingit blood, and thus thinks that humanity exists on the back of a turtle.

  15. Bastasch thinks he can fight political propaganda with science. He mistakenly thinks this is about science. He’s fighting the wrong war.

  16. hhmmmm….
    Now why would billionaires and multi-millionaires want to move off the natives and de-populate lush tropical island paradises????……….

  17. While not exactly the same as coral reefs, oysters reefs have been degraded by humans, in some cases to increase production. Many have been killed by changes in climate, geology, disease, etc., and the restorers too often don’t realize how dynamic they are. Some think they know better than those who have been making a living on them for centuries and others view it as a way to make money. Rodriguez, A. B., et al. 2014. Oyster reefs can outpace sea-level rise. Nature Climate Change. 4:493- 497. https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2216

    “The intertidal reefs we studied should be able to keep up with any future accelerated rate of SLR (ref. 7) and may even benefit from the additional subaqueous space allowing extended vertical accretion.”

    Yesterday I was looking at a partially Harvey destroyed ship channel bulkhead at Port Aransas. It had little fetch until the water rose as it was protected by a couple of miles of marsh and some land. Living reefs and marshes for protection are the not so new fad.

  18. Considering the nature of atolls, as coral grounded around a submerged extinct volcano, only if the sea level rise exceeded the growth rate of the coral could the atoll “sink”.
    What atoll are has been known since Darwin in the 1840’s, and well confirmed by drilling down to base rock in the 1940’s. The green blob is, as usual, relying on ignorance.

  19. So congressman Hank Johnson’s concerns about Pacific islands tipping over and capsizing really were unfounded? Who could have foreseen this?

    • Well, good ol’ Hank is a ranking member of the CIC (Congressional Idiot Caucus) an informal group that has been around since the first Congress in 1789. Their unofficial motto is “Those who can, do… those who can’t teach… and those too stupid to teach run for Congress.” Membership in this venerable group has waxed and waned over the 230 years since it was founded but has very recently gained many new members. Of particular note, in the last election they acquired their very own bartender, an acquisition that many believe will keep the members of the CIC drunk during committee meetings, thereby raising the overall intelligence of the Congress by a small amount.

  20. They live in their reality, I live in mine.

    Mine requires observation, data, and facts. In their reality – observation, data, and facts are outlawed.

  21. The last photo of this post: Tuvalu delegates in Copenhagen
    . . . appears to be paid shills of 350 . org. Thus, “Tuvalu is the Real Deal” is one of Bill McKibben’s staged climate porn activities.

    Bill, like Hansen and Schmidt, have been sidetracked by kids now leading the cult.

  22. “Now, since the end of the interglacial sea level has pretty much risen constantly but not at a uniform rate.”

    Not true: it has risen since the end of the last GLACIAL, due to melting land ice. The present interglacial has not ended; we are in it now.

  23. Small island nations have long ago found the Climate Hystery to be a great source of blackmail money. It’s your fault that we are sinking – big industrialized nations so pay us. Quite a compelling line – don’t you think. Also, if there is free money to be had, you are very likely to go along with any statement that gives you better odds of actually laying hands on it. Now we see those islands are not getting smaller – they actually grow in surface area. Has this happened while they were not looking? Or did they just chime into a big, fat lie for the greenbucks? Looks like its the second one. What are we supposed to do about this now? The least we can do is stop the cash and make it abundantly clear that there won’t be any more. As fir Gutteres – there should be criminal prosecutions.

  24. One wonders if, “Guterres’ four-country tour of Pacific nations in May,” included those little drinks featuring parasols and self-exposure tests of tropical irradiance alone or augmented by sand reflectance, and/or moderated by nearby small bodies of marble-and-tile-enclosed chlorinated water.

    Possibility of his attention to other sorts of nearby bodies recognized but unelaborated.

  25. Its funny how both Gutterres and Time could be so clueless and uninformed to specifically pick Tuvalu of all places to try and make the climate emergency! rising oceans! panic now! point.

    Its a pretty well known fact that Tuvalus land area has increased https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/south-pacific/101319846/pacific-nation-tuvalu-has-grown-by-73-hectares-over-40-years

    An Australian parliament member dared mentioned in recently and was greeted with shrieks of ourage and fact checking for going off narrative https://jennifermarohasy.com/2018/12/seasons-greetings-tuvalu-and-thank-you-mr-kelly/

    Sadly for the narrative fans , it was found to be true . Tuvalu is getting larger rather than sinking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *