Historical UK Sea Levels

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

There’s a new study out that uses previously overlooked or obscure sea-level records to extend the UK sea-level record back to 1832. It provides an interesting look at the question of possible acceleration in sea level records. The study is called “Changes in mean sea level around Great Britain over the past 200 years“. The data is available in Appendix A of the study.

Here are their results:

Now, is there acceleration in this record? The problem with that question is that it is well-established that there are long-term cycles in the tides with periods of up to 50 years. Given that, what can we say about this record?

Well, it’s clear that there was a rapid acceleration in about 1890. It’s a good thing that people weren’t hyperventilating about the so-called “CLIMATE EMERGENCY!!!” back then, they’d have claimed that their case was totally proven …

But that 1890s acceleration only lasted a couple of decades. After that, the rise was approximately linear until 1950.

Then there was a slight deceleration until about 1980, and a slight acceleration since then.

The problem is that the alarmists will look at the record, cut it off so it begins in 1950, and then loudly proclaim that the UK record shows a dangerous acceleration of 0.045 mm/year per year. Which is mathematically 100% true, and as the graph above shows, in the larger world it is 100% false

At the the current rate of UK sea level rise, the total rise by 2100 will be 160 mm (6.3 inches). But with the false “sea level acceleration” added in, the rise would be more than twice that, 340 mm (13.4 inches).

So that’s the latest in the world of sea level … still no sign of any claimed long-term acceleration.

Now, I was going to leave it there. But for the math inclined, mathematically acceleration is what is called the “second derivative” of a dataset. So I thought I’d take a look at the year-by-year acceleration in the dataset above. Here’s that result:

Depending on the period that you choose, you can say that there is positive acceleration, negative acceleration (deceleration), or no acceleration in the historical UK sea level record.

In other words … the endless claims of long-term acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise are absolutely not visible in the UK historical record.

Me, I’m off to see the sea, to Bodega Bay, which is where my polling place is for today’s special election. The ocean is my long-time friend, it’s always good for my spirit. As Karen Blixen (whose pen name was Isak Dinesen) wrote, “The cure for anything is salt water: sweat, tears or the sea”.

Works for me.

Best regards to all,

w.

PS—I can defend my own words. I can’t defend your interpretation of my words. So please, when you comment, quote the exact words you are discussing. Thanks.

4.8 42 votes
Article Rating
140 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scissor
March 2, 2021 2:06 pm

I liked it better when math wasn’t racist.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Scissor
March 2, 2021 3:14 pm

Or genderist/sexist, whatever is currently in vogue.

Bryan A
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 2, 2021 7:40 pm

That is only pending the next great Maths Extinction
OR
Perhaps just a Weapon of Maths Destruction

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Bryan A
March 2, 2021 7:46 pm

Weapon of Maths Destruction: Built by the terrorist group Al Gebra.

Tombstone Gabby
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 3, 2021 9:47 am

How ’bout Nationalist? Willis could have used “furlongs per fortnight per fortnight” for his graph units – UK style.

Itdoesn't add up...
Reply to  Tombstone Gabby
March 4, 2021 1:54 pm

Divide by 220x3x304.8x(365.25/14)^2

Not that difficult…

Tombstone Gabby
Reply to  Itdoesn't add up...
March 5, 2021 6:29 pm

Right first try.

Asimov’s “On Numbers” – a collection of his essays from ‘way-back-when’ makes interesting reading. From memory, one of his comments is “We haven’t forgotten enough”.

(My copy is 465 miles away- his name might be part of the book title.)

Charles Higley
Reply to  Scissor
March 2, 2021 5:45 pm

You have to understand what white privilege, which has morphed into white supremacy, is that we teach our children how to think, learn, accumulate knowledge, and use their brains. Others seem to find this intimidating, but, oh my, they can do it, too. PoC that do this are also considered to have gone over to white supremacy.

So, leave out thinking, logic, and such and you have idiots who are not in control of their lives. This is exactly why math is “racist.” A good geometry proof is exactly how you argue a case in court, a good defense, or a meeting in which decisions are made. And, using your brain is free for all to do.

paul courtney
Reply to  Charles Higley
March 3, 2021 10:51 am

Mr. Higley: I am trying to understand these notions. Seems to me, all types of humans seek “supremacy” over others, by tribes or in their own little circle. Me, I chose not to be supreme in my own little circle- I got married.

RLu
Reply to  Scissor
March 2, 2021 9:14 pm

Math is Racist ?
So you won’t mind if I make a few miscalculations on your paycheck.

Vuk
March 2, 2021 2:06 pm

Scotland is still rising (might even split from England if the SNP gets away with it), south England is sinking (since Bojo moved into no 10). The last ice age ice sheet came as far south as M4 (pivoting point must be somewhere around Manchester, it always rains there).

Last edited 1 month ago by Vuk
John Tillman
Reply to  Vuk
March 2, 2021 2:32 pm

Remarkably, despite the sinking of southern England and Wales, sea level was so much higher during the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods that Roman seaside forts on the Saxon Shore, and Medieval castles on the Welsh shore are high and dry.

John Tillman
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:07 pm

Not a claim, but a fact, ie an observation of reality..

Pictures of Roman forts and Harlech Castle, with its high and dry water gate, a mile from the present Irish Sea shore, with accompanying music, have often been posted here. Sorry you missed all of them. Here goes again, among other WUWT posts:

https://www.discoveringbritain.org/activities/wales/viewpoints/harlech.html

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/17/sea-levels-are-never-still/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/07/the-unbroken-record-of-broken-icons/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/04/israel-study-shows-variable-sea-level-in-past-2500-years/

While not the most famous Roman Fort on the Saxon Shore, Burgh Castle, near Yarmouth, shows well the retreat of the sea since its construction in the 3rd century. Three walls stand nearly intact, but the fourth collapsed into the then estuary, which is now a marsh, Breydon Water, with the estuary far away..

Last edited 1 month ago by John Tillman
Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 3:22 pm

The change around Harlech Castle is attributed to siltation of the coast rather than sea level.

From your link, click on the highlighted question:

But why is Harlech’s water gate stranded on dry land and nearly a mile from the sea?

John Tillman
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
March 2, 2021 3:44 pm

Ancient and Medieval former port cities now stranded inland are always said to be because of channels silting up, but that is often not the case. The car park link is wrong. It’s because of sea level fall.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/sea-levels-were-higher-in-the-middle-ages/

A map of East Anglia in the Anglo-Saxon period, when sea level had already fallen from its Roman WP highstand:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fens#/media/File:Williamson_p16_3.svg

Some of the inundated land has been reclaimed by drainage, but mostly sea level has fallen, shrinking the Fens naturally.

Last edited 1 month ago by John Tillman
tonyb
Editor
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 11:54 pm

I did a big study of Roman sea levels in Britain carried here and at Climate etc around 10 years ago

Historic variations in sea levels. Part 1: From the Holocene to Romans | Climate Etc. (judithcurry.com)

Sea levels were higher in Roman times and in medieval times and also during the Bronze age which is when there was a rapid rise that eventually produced the Scilly Isles.

I went on a dig at Harlech Castle many years ago and the sea level gate changes was due to a sea level fall 500 years ago which has not been reversed, with some small amount due to deposition, but not round the castle.

tonyb

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
March 3, 2021 8:27 am

And why would siltaton only occur right there?

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 3:31 pm

PS: Hope you feel better. It could be worse. You could live in Oregon, where those over 65, with medical conditions, have to wait for 23 to 63 year-old public school staff to get both their shots.

TonyL
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 4:15 pm

To both Right-Handed Shark and John Tillman:
????????????
Sea level rise often promotes erosion and conversely, sea level fall can promote sedimentation. A word for observation. One can often look at something and say “see *that*, *that* is what is happening”. But we ask, why is *that* happening.

John Tillman
Reply to  TonyL
March 2, 2021 5:18 pm

Sure, cliffs erode. But in the Middle Ages people drowned above what is now dry land connecting hills that were then islands.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 5:57 pm

In fact the Roman fort in Suffolk was claimed by the sea due to erosion during the 18th century. In the LIA, the cliff was 100 feet high, but stormy seas ate away at it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walton_Castle,_Suffolk

lackawaxen123
Reply to  TonyL
March 3, 2021 5:13 am

a 1 inch rise or fall in sea level has nothing to do with coastal erosion or sedimentation … its wave action and storms that drive that …

John Tillman
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 6:34 pm

Harlech is not on a river delta. If you haven’t been to Wales, look at it on Google Earth. There is a small river mouth three miles to the north. Maybe some silt washes down from there, but not enough to have stranded the castle so high.

Your uncited 2004 study of Mediterranean Sea level, finding it -0.13 m lower than now is for 2000 years ago, ie about 300 years before the forts were built, near the end of the Roman WP.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222837315_Sea_level_in_Roman_time_in_the_Central_Mediterranean_and_implications_for_recent_change

As you may know, tides in the Med are much weaker than in the wild Lant, the MSL of which is 30 cm higher. Or was in 1974.

Please look at the map of the Fens of Anglo-Saxon East Anglia, even under the low sea levels of the Dark Ages Cool Period. The same applies to the Somerset Levels, on an island in which King Alfred hid out from the Norse Great Heathen Army.

This survey of MSL studies, including by Carbonari, concludes that it was higher than now in AD 1100 to 1200, but also higher then even than during the HCO, perhaps thanks to millennia of more rebound on so many coasts.

http://www.kwaad.net/SeaLevel-MiddleAges-LittleIceAge.html

Editor
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 3:14 am

Dunster Castle, in Somerset, too.
https://www.discovermiddleages.co.uk/dunster-castle/
“In the early medieval period, the sea reached the base of the hill”. The base of the hill is now well over a mile from the sea.

MarkW
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 8:35 am

I’ve never understood the argument that old ports are now high and dry because estuaries silted up.
We start with a port that is presumably just a few feet above sea level.
If the water in front of the port silts up, how does it become anything other than a salt marsh or mud flat?

saveenergy
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 9:15 am

Willis,
As John says “Harlech is not on a river delta”.
(see my reply to him March 2, 2021 6:30 pm).

The area around South Ferriby IS part of the River Ancholme delta (draining a section of the North Lincolnshire Wolds) it lies to the east of Alkborough escarpment & the Roman Ermine Street Humber crossing (Winteringham Haven to Brough). The whole southern area area of the Humber is built on silt, much of it is sinking ‘cos thats what it does, large amounts of land reclimation work has gone on since the 1600s a lot is well below HW mark.
I lived in the area for 12 yrs so know it quite well.

More geological info of the Humber –
https://citizan.org.uk/blog/2020/Jan/17/humbers-deep-past/
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/35b2/9e1246f04eb9b58be836a3d265205e1e5dc8.pdf

Areas of falling land and rising sea levels:
1. Somerset, Cornwall and Devon
2. Dorset, Hampshire and Sussex
3. Kent and Essex
4. Suffolk and Norfolk
5. The Wash
6. Humberside and North Lincolnshire
7. Shetland Islands.
8. South Wales
9. Southern Ireland
10. Western Ireland

Areas of rising land levels include:
1. Tyne and Wear
2. Northumbrian coast, Berwickshire, East Lothian,
3. The Firth of Forth and the Moray Forth
4. Fife, Aberdeenshire, Caithness
5. Minch and the Western Isles
6. Argyll, Ayrshire and the Solway Firth
7. Northern Irish coast
8. Isle of Man
9. Cumbria, Lancashire and Merseyside
10. North Wales
From – https://phys.org/news/2009-10-coastland-sea-defenses.html

saveenergy
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 6:30 pm

John, you are correct except Wales & Scotland are rising not sinking !

Harlech Castle built 1289, the west entrance was a Watergate, just where the road & rail cross in this picture –
http://www.harlech.com/visitwales/harlech.jpg
– the sea is now approx 1 mile away to the left.
(you can also see the old coastline curving away top right)
Some of that accretion of land is due to long-shore drift from Fairborne/Barmouth & some is silt from Afon Dwyryd.

Over the last ~700yrs the difference in apparent sea-level is ~3m
some is due to post-glacial rebound.
comment image
&
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-3121.1991.tb00166.x

We see the same on Anglesey, I live on a Drumlin (in a house ! ) there may have been 1/2 km of ice on top of where I sit !!!

Beaumaris Castle Anglesey, started in 1295 (still needs finishing) also has a water gate but today even king tides are not high enough to get a paddle board in.

See also – Pevensey Castle built in 290AD was a Roman Fort. The sea surrounded it on three sides, now it is 1.5km from the sea (silting & land reclamation are the main reasons)

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:16 pm

Isn’t it great to live in California?

Mike Lowe
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 2, 2021 3:28 pm

You CAN’T be serious!

Abolition Man
Reply to  Mike Lowe
March 2, 2021 4:41 pm

Commifornia is a state of amazing natural beauty; especially if you know the backroads and byways that take you back into the rural areas where most folks are pretty friendly and conservative by nature.
Sadly the state has been overrun by Progressives in the cities and halls of power who have brought millions of semiliterate, poor people up from Central America to displace the blue collar workers like me, who used to love living there! Now you have the highest rates of poverty and welfare, the largest degree of wealth inequality and a rapidly crumbling infrastructure made worse by an insane push for Unreliables that will only worsen the situation!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Mike Lowe
March 2, 2021 8:01 pm

I’ll give you a clue. I used to live in California. Actually, for most of my adult life. I do miss the climate and rural scenery. However, in my opinion, they don’t make up for the political and demographic changes that have occurred over the last 50 years.

Anecdotally, the inexpensive tract home my parents bought in ‘Silicon Valley’ in 1957 for $14,000, sits among about 100 similar homes, where one recently sold for $1.3 million!

Doonman
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 2, 2021 4:00 pm

The coastal weather is still great, but that’s about all. If you don’t mind paying triple for life’s necessities, it’s OK living until the next big earthquake.

bigoilbob
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 3, 2021 6:44 am

Isn’t it great to live in California?”

Sour grapes, repete.

Said it before. California living is so sought after that spots are competitive. It’s expensive and the work required to earn a living there is demanding. So, unless you have exceptional abilities and a strong work ethic, you will default to the B team areas sooner or later.

I’m sorry that you did not have what it took to succeed there. But thankful that there are refuges, like rural Ohio for those that couldn’t.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversation/sd-california-losing-low-income-people-gaining-wealthy-people-per-report-20180221-htmlstory.html

MarkW
Reply to  bigoilbob
March 3, 2021 8:37 am

If it weren’t for immigration from other countries, mostly illegal, California would be losing population.
Over the last couple of years, many major corporations have announced their intention to move factories and headquarters out of California.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
Clyde Spencer
Reply to  bigoilbob
March 3, 2021 10:56 am

Speaking of “sour grapes!”

I was made an offer I couldn’t refuse, from a major aerospace company, to move to SW Ohio as a senior remote sensing scientist, reporting to the chief scientist. When I retired, I could have easily returned to California, which was my original plan. However, I decided that the cost of living and personal freedoms here in Ohio were so much more advantageous that I would put up with reading in front of the fireplace when we get the occasional snow. The money I save makes it easier to travel to places that are great to visit, yet unlivable. I really question the intelligence of those who remain chained to high-paying jobs in California, which are necessary to just get by. What is really important is not how much one earns, but how much is left over after paying for all the necessities.

paul courtney
Reply to  bigoilbob
March 3, 2021 11:11 am

Mr. big: “So, unless you have exceptional abilities and a strong work ethic, you will default to the B team areas sooner or later.”
I’ll try to be kind, but progressives recognize that as “rac!st dog whistling.” Don’t let your lefty friends know that you think like a rac!st.

Philip
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:32 pm

As far as Harlech Castle goes, here is a photo I took myself:

https://pjpeake.smugmug.com/Wales/i-MNDn8t7/A

If you visit there and walk around, you will find an entrance at the lower level which is high and dry on the cliff face. You may wonder why someone would build an entrance that you would break your neck exiting by, and need siege ladders to get into?

Well, for many years there was a painting in the castle entrance showing that entrance, with waves breaking around it and a boat unloading supplies. The entrance was a sea entrance so that should the castle be besieged by land, it could still be supplied (or worst case, evacuated) by sea.

Of course, when Global warming became a thing, the painting vanished, and references to it on the Internet vanished too.

Last edited 1 month ago by Philip
John Tillman
Reply to  Philip
March 2, 2021 4:04 pm

There’s not even a good source of silt where Harlech Castle stands on Tremadog Bay. It lies three miles SSE of the mouth of the little River Dwyryd, which can’t carry much silt.

Even those former major ports on bigger river estuaries, like Pisa, Ostia Antica and Ephesus, were stranded not by silt but by sea level fall.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/02/history-falsifies-climate-alarmist-sea-level-claims/

Last edited 1 month ago by John Tillman
saveenergy
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 10:32 am

Willis, I went to your post March 8, 2020 12:49 pm
You said
“Regarding Harlech, a couple of points.
The port is still there. From Google Earth, you can see the boats”

For your info, there is NO port at Harlech.

The picture you show is of the harbor at Porthmadog 8km north & inland on the River Glaslyn. The vertical line on the left of picture is ‘The Cob’ on which runs the 2ft gauge Ffestiniog Railway.

The reconstruction of the “sea-gate” was from an archeological dig some years ago when they found the remains of piles in the silt/sand in line with the steps in the lower photo, (HW mark was approx ground level in that photo ).
The railway station (50m to the left) was built on a flat slab of rock, everything else in the area is built on sand. That photo is taken from the road/rail crossing.

Mr.
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:57 pm

2nd shot?
LOOOXURY!!
In Canada, the Trudeau government is still working on polio vaccinations.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Mr.
March 2, 2021 4:09 pm

We’re gearing up for Spanish Flu in Tasmania.

Duker
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
March 2, 2021 4:41 pm

Werent any flu vaccinations at all until 1940s in US , developed by Jonas Salk and others

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Duker
March 2, 2021 4:46 pm

What’s a vaccination?

John Tillman
Reply to  Duker
March 2, 2021 5:15 pm

Salk did contribute to first flu vaccine in 1938. His polio vax was introduced in 1955.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  John Tillman
March 3, 2021 11:07 am

I distinctly remember being given sugar cubes with the polio vaccine while I was in elementary school. I’m reasonably confident it was before my parents moved from Illinois to Arizona in 1953. But then, memories are notoriously unreliable. Which is why people keep voting for democrats.

BobM
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 6:25 pm

Got my first shot today. Moderna. Shot #2 in 28 days.

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  BobM
March 2, 2021 6:47 pm

Be prepared for a couple of crappy days after the second shot .
Senor medical staff told me that about 80% of us have a moderate to serious reaction : a moderate reaction being desired , indicating best protection against Covid .

Our reactions lasted about a day and a half , fully back to normal by day three.

DHR
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
March 2, 2021 7:15 pm

Got my second Moderna shot three weeks ago. Very minor reactions – sore arm like any vaccination, slight headache that quickly passed. Same with my wife – both in our 70’s.

philincalifornia
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
March 2, 2021 7:28 pm

Yeah, I got my second Pfizer shot yesterday (Monday) at 5:30pm and just started feeling a bit crappy this afternoon with mild chills, and a mild ache in the arm it was injected into. I guess that means it’s working.

Charles Higley
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 5:49 pm

Yes, it is not a simple effect. Sea level overall was higher in Roman times, but the UK was still undergoing isostatic changes, rising in the north and sinking in the south from the last glacial period. Then, the Little Ice Age lowered sea level a bit and Roman sites remain still high and dry despite the isostatic changes.

Loydo
Reply to  John Tillman
March 2, 2021 8:47 pm

 “the sinking of southern England and Wales”

I don’t know if any place that is subject to rebound like the UK, Scandinavia etc, are going to be good places to show subtle trends in sea level.
comment image

…from here (paywalled) https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2006.1747

griff
Reply to  John Tillman
March 3, 2021 3:22 am

Though quite a lot of that is due to estuaries etc silting up…

Tom Halla
March 2, 2021 2:23 pm

I wonder if it is the same set of tide gauges throughout. Over 188 years, piers and such get replaced or moved.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:14 pm

I didn’t. An interesting effort to tie together short bits of tide level evidence, with a few longer periods used.

Steve Case
March 2, 2021 2:26 pm

The tide gauge record does show some acceleration over the last 200 years but it is about one tenth of the 0.097 mm/year² that Colorado University’s Sea Level Research Group says.

Steve Case
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:38 pm

There’s Dave Burtan’s page with acceleration values:
http://www.sealevel.info/
I could send you my Excel file of 65 long term PSMSL

Steve Case
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 2, 2021 3:59 pm

There’s Dave Burtan’s page with acceleration values here’s Fernandina:
http://www.sealevel.info/MSL_graph.php?id=fernandina
The acceleration is in the bottom right under regressions. I could send you my Excel file of 65 long term PSMSL data with acceleration figured about three different ways including values from Dave’s sea level page.
 
I’ve been critical of CU’s Sea Level Research Group for a long time.
 
Am I guilty of using your post to post my views on sea level rise. I suppose that’s true. Sea level rise is a big issue with the alarmists, the spectre of coastal cities inundated by the ocean is a scary hobgoblin.
 
My opinion is that “Watts Up With That” doesn’t cover the sea level scare as thoroughly as it should. The Methane bullshit is another one that needs more attention.

And thanks for the reply

I hit the post instead of insert link button and it all timed out Sorry about that.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 9:59 am

Why don’t you take the content of your “384” posts on this web site, and write a paper, then submit it to a journal for peer review? That way you can make an actual contribution to science.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 12:37 pm

First, good science takes time. If you lack the patience to do good science, I get it.
.
Second, good science isn’t a popularity contest.
.
Third, good science doesn’t care about politics, and this site has very few good scientists publishing here. There is only one side in science so your reference to two sides of the climate aisle is meaningless. You seem to be confusing politics with actual science. This is a “News and Commentary” site not a science journal.
.
Fourth, a lot of your articles contain uncorrected errors.
.
Fifth, there are many pre-print sites such as arxiv.org
.
Sixth, Roy Spencer caught you plagiarizing a previously published idea which you did due to a lack of knowledge of prior work.
.
Seventh, yeah, you have to use that style on this site because otherwise, you’d be going over the heads of most of the readers.
.
Eighth, Soon, Monckton, et al, didn’t seem to have a problem with the Chinese journal.
.
Lastly, you should really try doing some real science as opposed to blogging, the science deserves to advance with the work of a man with your talent.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 3, 2021 12:51 pm

PS, if someone does plagiarize you, you have no recourse since you don’t hold the copyright on the contents of this site.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 5:48 pm

1) “I’ve written over 800 posts for WUWT” Your blog posts are not “science.” This is a “news” and “commentary” site. Very few PhDs publish here.
.
2) Science is not about “belief.” That is religion. Science is about fact.
.
3) “I reach them all.” No, you don’t, you think you do, but this site has a reputation for errr…….rejection-ism, (didn’t use the “d” word)
.
4) Thermostat hypothesis
.
5) LOL…..better than a blog.
.
6) Had you done proper research, you would not have made the mistake of touting prior research as your idea. This happens to uneducated novices. Spencer caught you.
.
7) Yup, you a”re not writing for a scientific “peer,” you aren’t doing science.
.
8) Sour grapes much?
.
9) “First, science is science no matter where it is published.” Can’t find any “science” published here. What is the impact factor for this site?
.
10)  “I’ve published in the journals”….. I’m sure you have, anyone can have anything “published in a journal.” Some charge more than others.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 3, 2021 5:52 pm

PS, when can I expect Fox, NewsMax, Breitbart, OANN, or the Daily Caller to run an article about Willis Eschenbach publishing a earth shattering discovery?

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 3, 2021 5:55 pm

OH, and I forgot to laugh at your “Energy & Environment” citations. (D-word) friendly editor there.
..
Nature Communications is a comment publication.

Keep trying Willis, maybe someday you will get recognition by real scientists.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 3, 2021 6:03 pm

FYI Willis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor
..
For “Energy & Environment” ….
.
Impact factor0.319 (2012)

Not very good

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_&_Environment

Last edited 1 month ago by Brian Jackson
Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 3, 2021 6:19 pm

I can’t find impact factor for WUWT, can you provide it for me?

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 4, 2021 6:39 pm

Your “publication” in Nature is a f-ing COMMENT
.
https://www.nature.com/articles/
.
It is not original research, its a comment on someone elses work.
.
Get real Mr. Ego, you are miss characterizing your “work,” You have offered NOTHING creative, not a stitch of real science.
..
And you get pissy when someone calls you out on your “fake science.”

paul courtney
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 4, 2021 8:46 am

Mr. Jackson: Playing the “mole” in whack-a-mole is entertaining, so thanks for that. Your opinions about “science” are not science. In trying to show us how much you know, you demonstrate ignorance. Were the Wright bros. “scientists”? Your definition is a moving target. Anyway, Mr. E. was too generous in responding to your ill manners. You should flatter him some more.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  paul courtney
March 4, 2021 6:47 pm

The Wright Brothers were engineers.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 4, 2021 6:40 pm

You got caught by Spencer, and the Internet will never forget.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 4, 2021 6:43 pm
Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 4, 2021 6:45 pm

Typical error by a “novice” (amateur).

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 4, 2021 6:58 pm

LOL, can I call you “Wannabe-Willis?”

,
Because you ain’t no scientist.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 4, 2021 7:07 pm

Real scientists are the guys that go out to Greenland or Antarctica to drill ice cores. They are not keyboard warriors like you who think their excrement is odorless.

AndyHce
Reply to  Steve Case
March 2, 2021 5:09 pm

Rest you hand on top of the tidal guage as you lean over to read it and you just adjusted out 500 years of seal level change at 0.097 mm/year

peter green
March 2, 2021 2:45 pm

I have fished for salmon in the pacific out of Bodega bay…… marvelous experience. I now live on the Moray coast in Scotland and have looked at the historic records going back over 1000 years and there have been many changes over that time period. The most difficult to take account of is the slow rebound of the earths crust after the retreat of the ice after the last ice age. on a more recent topic we see no significant modern changes to sea levels as i have visited most of the very oldest harbours in Northern scotland and they are all stillin the sea where they were erected in the past few hundred years

Editor
Reply to  peter green
March 2, 2021 4:48 pm

Thank you for your interesting comment, can you provide any links in this are?

Gums
March 2, 2021 3:07 pm

Salute!

So we are talking about a potential foot of sea level rise in the next hundred years?

Wait, wait!! Where’s the 8 or 10 feet that California folks went to court with last year when trying to get $$$$ from “big oil”?

Can”t wait for next IPCC or ICpp or whatever report and models sell us.

Gums sends…

March 2, 2021 3:08 pm

WE, neat stuff. I got to wondering about the lack rise pre 1900. Unique to UK?
So popped over to PSMSL and dug into their very long record tide gauge stuff, most of which isn’t in their regular data tables because of inconsistencies. There are a few reports,; mostly europe, very user unfriendly. For example, the Stockholm report is in Swedish, and they do not provide annual data prior to 1916 even tho they say it exists back to about 1700. For example, Bergen Norway is in Norwegian, and the data table does not go back to 1900. Because of data quality issues, they have just archived the reports but done nothing with them.

I finally found one 24 page report in English, produced in Russia, about Finland’s Kronstadt gauge. Goes back to about 1820 with ‘best efforts’ geodetic corrections for the several gauge location moves.. Guess what. Table 5 shows basically the same as the UK, with the SLR starting around 1900 with no subsequent acceleration but some periodicy.

So, the new UK data seems not to be a fluke but rather what is really happening in that part of the world.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 2, 2021 3:38 pm

Myself, I tend to reach for the salt shaker when a plotted curve changes drastically <i>exactly</i> where a different set of data starts (or ends).

Duker
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 2, 2021 4:48 pm

Kronstadt, a main Russian naval base, tide gauge began observations in 1707. Due to building of the St Petersburg sea barrier defences probably not independent of human changes any more

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 3, 2021 11:13 am

Rud
Is Google Translate any help with the Scandinavian reports?

dk_
March 2, 2021 3:30 pm

Wondering if the scale for on the left of the second chart, for acceleration, is correctly marked? If those numbers are truly ranging over 0.4 millimeters (less than 16 thousandth of an inch) per multiple decades, it seems to me to be more in the nature of noise than a useful signal.

Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 4:08 pm

“long-term acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise are absolutely not visible in the UK historical record.”

  1. Good start Willis, now, got a 2nd geographical location that proves your point? Oh, and how many geographical locations do you need to make a valid logical conclusion about GLOBAL sea levels?
TonyL
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 4:35 pm

The last SLR post, I put up the chart for Boston. A good clean record going back to Jan. 1921. Acceleration is exactly 0.000, with the same sort of oscillation Willis sees in this data. I have looked at Portland, ME and The Battery, NYC, and it is the same. 0.000

Also I will add here that it does not matter if the land is rising or falling due to glacial rebound. That motion is constant in any human terms and SLR acceleration will still be clearly visible. Acceleration will simply be superimposed on any *relative* SLR.

This is a couple more points for you, we can keep looking.

Brian Jackson
Reply to  TonyL
March 2, 2021 4:59 pm

Also I will add here that it does not matter if the land is rising or falling due to glacial rebound”……FALSE

TonyL
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 5:36 pm

We would like to see your reasoning for that quite assertive statement.

Here is the way I see it.
Distance traveled (SLR) with acceleration can be described as:
d = (V0 * t) + 0.5 a * t^2

where V0 = is initial velocity (SLR)
a = acceleration
t = time

Here we note that V0 is the base SLR with glacial rebound already included, as measured. All that is required is that the rebound component is constant, a condition which is held to be true barring a major earthquake.

It does not matter what the value for V0 is. As long as a, the acceleration is not zero, it will show up. Further, the acceleration will have the same value no matter what the value for V0 is.

Derg
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 5:38 pm

Clown show indeed

Derg
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 4:40 pm

Please sell me your seaside home. I will be happy to pay $1 a foot. A dollar is cheap seeing that global warming… climate change…climate extinction will put your place underwater 🤓

fred250
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 5:17 pm

Sydney

comment image

Oh and coastal rock shelves along the East coast show a higher sea level by some 1m-1.5m existed about 2000 years ago.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240738335_Holocene_sea-level_change_on_the_southeast_coast_of_Australia_A_review

Sea level continued to rise to between +1 and +1.5 m between 7700 and 7400 cal. yr BP, followed by a sea-level highstand that lasted until about 2000 cal. yr BP followed by a gradual fall to present.

Last edited 1 month ago by fred250
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 6:38 pm

Brian, I suggest you read essay PseudoPrecision in my ebook Blowing Smoke. It answers all your geographical issues, and much more, in just a few pages. Boy, what you do NOT know.

MarkW
Reply to  Brian Jackson
March 2, 2021 8:25 pm

1) I’ve seen dozens of sites from all over the world.
2) Water doesn’t tend to pile up in one place for long. If the ocean is rising, it should show up everywhere.

fred250
Reply to  MarkW
March 2, 2021 9:24 pm

According to satellites vs tide gauges,

….. it won’t be long until water levels the middle of the oceans are tens of metres higher than water levels at the coastlines 😉

Last edited 1 month ago by fred250
Chris Hanley
March 2, 2021 4:08 pm

Sea levels have fluctuated over the Holocene.
comment image
The figure at the top could give the impression to the uninformed that sea levels have been more or less constant in the past and suddenly increased due to anthropogenic forcing, a sea level ‘hockey stick’.
The absence of measured data before the industrial revolution has been exploited by the climate cultists to great effect.

John Tillman
Reply to  Chris Hanley
March 2, 2021 5:27 pm

The long Holocene Optimum shows up in the Qatar curve, plus the Minoan and Roman Warm Periods, but not the Medieval WP and the Modern WP barely.

Thanks.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Chris Hanley
March 2, 2021 6:08 pm

We have many proxies of reefs and cliffs, several on this classic graphic. We can be glad that present day sea level has been relatively CONSTANT for the last 7000 years. It will likely completely level off as mid-latititude high elevation glaciers melt away as a result of our being in a mid-Milankovich warming cycle….

post-glacial_sea_level.png
Mr.
March 2, 2021 4:09 pm

I accord great credibility to mankind’s ability to take precise, accurate microscopic measurements of material objects under well controlled, stable conditions using calibrated specialist instruments.

But 0.045 mm per year global sea level change?

I reckon this is playing with numbers that have no basis of connection or authentication with the real world.

Abolition Man
March 2, 2021 4:30 pm

Willis,
Thanks for the post! The chart of the changing acceleration looks like it could have a cyclical nature. Did you perchance compare it to any of the Atlantic oceanic cycles to see if there are any correlations?
Love the quote from Isak Dinesen; the book was even better than the movie which was, I think, the last thing from Redford I have watched! Hope all goes well and you get your second jab without delay!

Meab
March 2, 2021 4:59 pm

“Then there was a slight deceleration until about 1980, and a slight acceleration since then.”

As usual, Willis, it’s nice to see the data and analysis results from that data. However, your second plot shows that the above statement is not correct. Acceleration and deceleration is shown by the curvature, not the position of the data w.r.t. the linear trend. According to the 2nd derivative, acceleration started about 1975 and ended about 1998. As this is data from only one place on Earth, this could be nothing more than a slight shift in the prevailing winds.

John Tillman
Reply to  Meab
March 2, 2021 5:30 pm

The PDO and AMO did flip to their warm phases in the late ‘70s, and 1998 was a Super El Niño year.

Charles Higley
March 2, 2021 5:38 pm

The effect that many seem to miss is that, as long as the global temperature is above a certain temperature, the ice of the planet will continue to melt overall and, thus, sea level will continue to rise. As the global temperature fluctuates over time, the rate of melting continues at various rates. Nothing alarming here. We recently came out of the Little Ice Age and thus melting is normal.

It does seem that, looking at the major ice masses, that things are relatively balanced and might even be tending toward more ice. More decline in the overall temperature is needed before we really see things truly icing up.

Lasse
March 2, 2021 11:29 pm

Where to find this form of variations?
You can see it i many sea level graphs as this one:
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?plot=50yr&id=140-012

AMO is my guess.
http://la.climatologie.free.fr/amo/amo-english.htm

Lasse
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 5:26 am

Thanks
You did my job!
But where do I find this 45 Year cycle?
Is it present in all the sea level graphs?
Like this from Your nabor hood? San Fancisco
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=9414290

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 11:23 am

Also, the shape and size of local basins — as in the Bay of Fundy — can amplify the daily tides, so it isn’t too much of a stretch to imagine amplification of longer period oscillations.

Lasse
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 4, 2021 12:56 am

A 45 year slosh in Cuxhaven.
Sincere thanks for the effort and science in progress.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
March 3, 2021 11:20 am

Surely you aren’t saying that I was mistaken when I have seen what looked like creatures in the clouds, hiding to pounce on me?

Climate believer
March 3, 2021 1:48 am

The cure for anything is salt water: sweat, tears or the sea.”

Oh that’s good.

Vuk
March 3, 2021 3:48 am

“Sorry to be grumpy about this, but hey, I’m grumpy today. They just told me they ran out of vaccine so I can’t get my second shot tomorrow … grrr.”

Willis, I wouldn’t be too much concerned. I presume it is Pfizer vaccine, in the UK two jabs are separated by up two three months, research was published showing good protection for over 70’s
Vaccine effectiveness in the data for Public Health England is calculated using a mathematical ratio, click here for the full data and methodology.

Robert of Ottawa
March 3, 2021 4:19 am

From the abstract We adjust this data for known sources of variability and estimate overall uncertainties over the entire period.

lackawaxen123
March 3, 2021 5:10 am

oh good lord … talking about .1 vs .2 mm anything when you are measuring the ocean that CAN’T be measured with ANY accuracy is just mathematical masturbation …

Pat Smith
March 3, 2021 5:44 am

The photo at the top may not be from the UK.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Pat Smith
March 3, 2021 6:37 am

I’m guessing Willis took it in his bath!

Steve Z
March 3, 2021 7:54 am

According to CAGW theory, there must have been lots of SUVs and planes in 1890 spewing so much CO2 into the air that it started melting the ice caps and raising sea level. Oh wait a minute, the first airplane was flown in 1903…

But before people had cars and planes, they got around on horses, or horse-drawn carriages. There must of been a lot of horse manure in 1890 emitting methane into the air, but horses didn’t poop until 1890…(sarc)

I was taught in calculus class that acceleration of a variable is the second time derivative of the variable being measured. If you do a parabolic regression, the average acceleration is the coefficient of t^2 in the regression, and if the R^2 value of a parabolic regression isn’t much better than that of a linear regression of the same data, the real trend is linear and has no acceleration.

So the global warmers cut off the starting date and ending date to maximize the coefficient of t^2, then extrapolate that beyond their chosen ending date. By the way, the yellow curve in the top graph is concave-down beyond the year 2000, so someone who wanted to maximize acceleration would only regress the data from 1970 through 2000.

If the sea-level rise started in 1890, before the increase in man-made CO2 emissions, it had a natural cause, and the recent increase in CO2 concentrations did not add much to it, since the trend is linear. This would mean that, despite what the great prophet Barack Hussein Obama promised in 2008, reducing CO2 emissions would NOT stop the seas from rising. He didn’t prevent Hurricane Sandy from flooding New York City in 2012 either.

But for low-lying coastal cities, could someone build a sea wall 6.3 inches high over the next 80 years? That is definitely within the realm of possibility…

M Courtney
March 3, 2021 8:02 am

That’s the science.
Here’s some engineering.
The sea defences need update and maintenance every thirty years or so anyway. So we can easily upgrade them then as required.
Extra cost is negligible.
Seal level rise is an interesting scientific problem but not an actual practical problem.

beng135
Reply to  M Courtney
March 9, 2021 10:11 am

Exactly. Nothing has changed regarding dealing w/sea-level except the fear brought on by the incessant scare-mongering campaign. It has got to be the lamest of “scares”, but obviously works on the credulous/feeble-minded.

Last edited 1 month ago by beng135
CD in Wisconsin
March 3, 2021 8:45 am

“Me, I’m off to see the sea, to Bodega Bay, which is where my polling place is for today’s special election.”

Bodega Bay Wills? Keep on the lookup for bird attacks. BTW, the schoolhouse from Hitchcock”s “The Birds” is still there the last time I checked. It is a private residence now.

RoHa
March 3, 2021 6:00 pm

Headline is “Historical UK Sea Levels”
Illustration shows drowned New York.

Joe
March 4, 2021 11:11 pm

If sea levels are rising…what then should be the ideal sea level?
Thats what I want to know from the climate change kooks..

%d bloggers like this: