Claim: Hidden in Caves: Mineral Overgrowths Reveal Unprecedented Modern Sea-Level Rise


University of South Florida geology professor discovers the industrial boom’s impact on global warming.Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA

large-cave-deposit-in-dets-ases-cave.jpeg
IMAGE: UNIVERSITY OF THE BALEARIC ISLANDS CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR STANDS NEXT TO A LARGE MINERAL DEPOSIT IN THE DETS ASES CAVE IN MALLORCA, SPAIN. view more CREDIT: UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA

The early 1900s were an exciting time across the world, with rapid advances in the steel, electric and automobile industries. The industrial changes also mark an inflection point in our climate. According to an international team of researchers led by the University of South Florida (USF), the sea level has risen 18 centimeters since the start of the 20th century.

The study, featured on the cover of the July 1 issue of Science Advances, works to identify preindustrial sea levels and examines the impact of modern greenhouse warming on sea-level rise.

The team, which includes USF graduate students, traveled to Mallorca, Spain – home to more than 1,000 cave systems, some of which have deposits that formed millions of years ago. For this study, they focused on analyzing deposits from 4,000 years ago to present day.

The team found evidence of a previously unknown 20 centimeter sea-level rise that occurred nearly 3,200 years ago when ice caps melted naturally over the course of 400 years at a rate of 0.5 millimeters per year. Otherwise, despite major climatic events like Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, the sea level remained exceptionally stable until 1900.

“The results reported in our study are alarming,” said lead author Bogdan P. Onac, geology professor at USF. “The sea-level rise since the 1900s is unprecedented when compared to the natural change in ice volumes over the last 4,000 years. This implies that if global temperatures continue to rise, sea levels could eventually reach higher levels than scientists previously estimated.”

To create the timeline, the team gathered 13 samples from eight caves along the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea. The deposits are rare – only forming near the coastline in cave passages that were repeatedly flooded by sea water, making them accurate markers of sea-level changes overtime. Each deposit holds valuable insight into both the past and future, helping researchers determine how quickly the sea level will rise in the coming decades and centuries.

The samples were taken to the University of New Mexico and University of Bern in Switzerland, where special instruments were used to determine their age by uranium-series method. Over time, uranium decays into other elements such as thorium and lead, allowing researchers to create a timeline of the sea level documented in each deposit.

A complex software at Harvard University helped generate predictions using various ice models and Earth’s parameters to showcase an accurate history of the sea level. These predictions are essential because they allow researchers to estimate past global mean sea level, which is key in addressing future sea-level rise.

“If humans continue to be the main driver and the temperature increases 1.5 degrees in the near future, there will be irreversible damage,” Onac said. “There will be no turning back from that point on.”

Based on ice mass loss from the Antarctic and Greenland, the average sea-level rise since 2008 is 1.43 millimeters per year.

Permanent flooding from the rising sea level won’t happen overnight, but Onac says it will be seen more and more during storm surges and hurricanes. With nearly 40 percent of the world’s population living within 62 miles of a coast, the rising sea level could be catastrophic with substantial societal and economic impacts.

“Even if we stop right now, sea level will continue to rise for at least a couple of decades, if not centuries, simply because the system is warmed up.”

In June, Onac received a new research grant from the National Science Foundation to continue his research to predict future sea-level rise due to global warming. The grant will allow Onac to expand the research further into history by 130,000 years and create a better understanding of sea level globally. Starting in September, Onac and his team will begin analyzing cave deposits from around the globe, including Italy, Greece, Mexico and Cuba.

This study was conducted in collaboration with the scientists from Harvard University, University of New Mexico, University of the Balearic Islands, University Rome Tre, Rutgers University, Australian National University, Los Alamos National Laboratory and University of Bern.


JOURNAL

Science Advances

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Data/statistical analysis

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

Not applicable

ARTICLE TITLE

Exceptionally stable preindustrial sea level inferred from the western Mediterranean Sea

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

29-Jun-2022

1.6 22 votes
Article Rating
151 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Editor
July 5, 2022 2:05 am

“University of South Florida geology professor discovers the industrial boom’s impact on global warming.”

Yawn!

Regards,
Bob

commieBob
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
July 5, 2022 4:26 am

Otherwise, despite major climatic events like Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, the sea level remained exceptionally stable until 1900.

Can you say ‘hockey stick’?

A quick web search will show that the alarmists are cherry picking every shred of evidence to prove that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) and Little Ice Age (LIA) were not global.

It’s time again to re-acquaint people with CO2 Science. In particular, they have amassed a bibliography of thousands of papers providing evidence that the MWP and LIA were indeed global. Here’s a link to their summary page for global MWP.

The paper described in the story above may be a yawner but it is part of a concerted campaign.

Where a scientist’s findings are of interest to nobody, they may be valid. On the other hand, where they bolster some ideological stance, or where profits are involved, science is corrupt to the point of being mostly fraudulent.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  commieBob
July 5, 2022 5:37 am

Here’s a link to a Google Maps page that has links to papers which cover the period of the MWP showing warming,cooling or nothing tangible.

Global papers covering MWP

commieBob
Reply to  commieBob
July 5, 2022 6:54 am

re. fraudulent

Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?

BMJ

The above is the title of an opinion piece by a former editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), one of the most prestigious journals in the world.)

Supporting the above contention is the fact that the vast majority of biomedical research can not be reproduced and/or replicated. link In a disturbing number of cases, the authors can’t even reproduce their own experiments.

When drug companies find published research that might result in a profitable product, the first thing they do is to attempt to reproduce it. Bayer and Amgen, as reported in the above link, have found that as much as 90% of published research findings can’t be reproduced. It’s called the replication crisis.

Then there’s Why Most Published Research Findings are False by John P. A. Ioannidis. The study is widely cited and could be classified as common knowledge. As far as I can tell, it hasn’t been solidly refuted and is accepted as valid. It is also mostly ignored.

So, the problems are well known. When a researcher publishes something which is a result of p-hacking, and is, or should be, aware that that’s a problem, I would call that fraudulent. Mind you, if they (singular ‘they’) doesn’t publish something, they won’t have a career, so there’s a perverse incentive.

The corruption of science is mostly because of perverse incentives.

Loren C. Wilson
Reply to  commieBob
July 5, 2022 6:07 pm

I remember an experiment that showed promise. I repeated it and did not see the same effect. I attribute the first result to too many variables that were hard to control. Sadly, another nice idea foundered on the rocks of real data.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  commieBob
July 6, 2022 6:22 am

Much of the replication problem is a result of inadequate training of the experimenters. They simply do not document their experiments well enough. They ignore environmental conditions that can affect the experiment and never cover them in their study write-ups. They ignore that when using test subjects that even small differences in DNA (e.g. different strains of mice) can have a big influence on experiment outcomes. They don’t document food intake and output and on and on and on.

Even in non-bio studies environment can play a huge part, e.g. in the calibration of things as simple as voltmeters or accelerometers, in the actual measurements used to calculate results. None of this gets documented well enough to replicate experiments with results that aren’t overwhelmed by the uncertainties associated with the measurements.

Felix
Reply to  commieBob
July 5, 2022 7:31 am

Apparently the cooling up until the 1970s also contributed to sea level rise. Who new global warming used absolute values?!?

MGC
Reply to  commieBob
July 5, 2022 7:25 pm

re: “It’s time again to re-acquaint people with CO2 Science. In particular, they have amassed a bibliography of thousands of papers providing evidence that the MWP and LIA were indeed global.”

Sorry, but this “work” by CO2 “Science” is well known to be an egregiously dishonest disgrace. They make all kinds of claims about various climate history studies that are completely false and entirely at odds with what the actual authors of the studies say about their own data. The so-called “conclusions” by CO2 “Science” are entirely bogus.

Here are just four of many examples of false CO2 “Science” claims that could be cited:

One:

Cronin, T.M., Dwyer, G.S., Kamiya, T., Schwede, S. and Willard, D.A. 2003. Medieval Warm Period, Little Ice Age and 20th century temperature variability from Chesapeake Bay. Global and Planetary Change 36: 17-29.

What co2science claims this study says:

“Statistical analyses revealed mean 20th-century temperatures were 0.15°C cooler than mean temperatures during the first stage of the Medieval Warm Period”

What the study itself actually says:

“late 19th and 20th century temperature extremes in Chesapeake Bay … exceeded those of the prior 2000 years, including the interval 450-1000 AD, by 2-3C”

Two:

Annual temperatures during the last 2485 years in the mid-eastern Tibetan Plateau inferred from tree rings Yu et al 2009

What co2science claims this study says:

“the Medieval Warm Period at this location was warmer than the Current Warm Period by about 0.2°C.”

What the study itself actually says:

“Our data suggests that the late twentieth century (1970-2000 AD) was the warmest during the last 1000 years.”

Three:

Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data Moberg et al 2005

What co2science claims this study says:

“the Medieval Warm Period peaks just prior to AD 900 and is strongly expressed between about AD 650 and 1250. Peak temperatures during this time period are about 0.22°C higher than those at the end of the Moberg et al. record.”

What the study itself actually says:

“We find no evidence for any earlier periods in the last two millennia with warmer conditions than the post-1990 period”

Four:

Ljungqvist, F.C. 2010. A new reconstruction of temperature variability in the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere during the last two millennia. Geografiska Annaler Series A 92: 339-351.

What co2science claims this study says:

“it was just as warm as, or even warmer than, it has been recently during both the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods.”

What the study itself actually says:

“The temperature of the last two decades (1990s 2000s), however, is possibly higher than during any previous time in the past two millennia”.

And its gotten even warmer since then.

“corrupt to the point of being mostly fraudulent” describes this CO2 “Science” work to a tee.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  MGC
July 5, 2022 9:50 pm

So, all those tree stumps in the far northern tundra here in canada, hundreds of km further north than the current tree line, they were put there by the Inuit just to fool us dumb skeptics?

Tree roots grown through Viking graves in Greenland where it’s now permafrost, how did the Inuit do that?

Sea levels far higher than now over the past 10,000 years, how did that happen when it was so much colder before now?

jon2009
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
July 6, 2022 4:10 am

Tree roots grown through Viking graves in Greenland where it’s now permafrost, how did the Inuit do that?”

Isn’t that proof that aliens with advanced technologies are among us?

patrick healy
Reply to  commieBob
July 6, 2022 7:26 am

Not ‘mostly’ but mainly fraudulent.

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  commieBob
July 6, 2022 5:49 pm

“Otherwise, despite major climatic events like Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, the sea level remained exceptionally stable until 1900.”

I call BullShit!!

Scissor
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
July 5, 2022 4:29 am

There are numerous underwater caves in Florida in need of study that were dry previously when they were occupied by prehistoric peoples. There are also numerous dry caves that were further above sea level in the past. The good professor had to go to Spain, however.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Scissor
July 5, 2022 7:30 am

Was this “alarming” and “unprecedented” sea level rise caused by CO2?

Inquiring minds want to know…

Rich Davis
Reply to  Scissor
July 5, 2022 10:40 am

Aw c’mon Scissor. He’s forced to publish or perish, he should at least be able to have a jolly holiday in Spain.

Climate believer
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
July 6, 2022 12:56 am

… and let’s not forget the obligatory sacred psalm that MUST be sung when you’re in the cult of holy alarmism… all together now!

“sea levels could eventually reach higher levels than scientists previously estimated.”

Amen…

Rod Evans
July 5, 2022 2:16 am

Now come on, the clue to the story’s veracity centres on the location of the caves. The students decided Mallorca, one of Spain’s main tourist islands was a great place to study.
I would read it again, but there is only so much time allocated to us in life. Did they really say the oceans had increased by 1.8 metres in the past century? That is about six feet, I think we may have noticed that change.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  Rod Evans
July 5, 2022 2:52 am

Did they really say the oceans had increased by 1.8 metres in the past century?

No, they said 18 centimeters, which is 0.18 metres. Maybe you should read it again?

Rod Evans
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 3:06 am

OK thanks.

paul courtney
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 7:31 am

Mr. Nail: Thanks for the spot of the floating decimal. Now, maybe you SHOULD read it again and consider this- 9 inches in 120 years, what are you and your friends worried about?

Paul C
Reply to  paul courtney
July 6, 2022 5:09 am

Closer to seven inches – you might exaggerate to the girlfriend, but research done on a Spanish holiday island came up with a different measurement 🙂

Joao Martins
Reply to  Rod Evans
July 5, 2022 3:51 am

I agree with you. I wonder if they accounted for the demographic changes in the region durin the 20th century…

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Joao Martins
July 5, 2022 4:20 am

“With nearly 40 percent of the world’s population living within 62 miles of a coast”
Since places like Mount Rainer, Mount Fuji, etc. etc. are within 62 miles of the coast, the more relevant metric would be “With nearly ____ percent of the world’s population living within 18 centimeters above minimum elevations prescribed by coastal building codes . . .). “40 percent of the worlds population” is irrelevant, not scientific, and very misleading IMO.

MarkW
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
July 5, 2022 8:42 am

Of that 40 percent, current rates of sea level rise means that a few hundred people every year will have to relocate a few feet further inland.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 11:24 am

Or, alternatively, when the current buildings near the shore reach the end of their design life, they are rebuilt farther away from the shore.

Drake
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
July 5, 2022 2:05 pm

But, But, I HAVE BEACH FRONT PROPERTY!!

If I have to surrender my house, then the SECOND row of houses will be beachfront, and I will be screwed.

I THINK THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE WORLD should spend whatever amounts of other peoples money necessary to maintain MY front row seating.

MarkW
Reply to  Drake
July 5, 2022 3:37 pm

You can keep your house. Whenever it’s time to rebuild, just make the stilts 7 inches taller.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 9:53 pm

Just have a couple children, give them toy dump trucks and tractors and tell them to imagine they are saving the beach house.
Those toddlers will more than keep up with imaginary sea rise.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  MarkW
July 7, 2022 8:31 am

The higher water will just wash 7 inches more sand up on the beach.

Paul C
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
July 6, 2022 5:14 am

The choice of “within 100km of the coast” is meaningless, and is an indication of the depth of thought going into the “study”.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Joao Martins
July 5, 2022 11:22 am

Not only demographic changes, but what is the tectonic stability of the area? Did they do any differential GPS studies to gain insight on whether the area is currently sinking? The unstated assumption is that Mallorca is tectonically stable, and they are only measuring changes in absolute sea level. Where is the evidence for the assumption?

Joao Martins
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
July 5, 2022 1:31 pm

You are right: the African plate is trusting itself under Spain around that place.

MarkW
Reply to  Joao Martins
July 5, 2022 3:39 pm

I don’t care if the African plate trusts itself, do you trust it?

Joao Martins
Reply to  MarkW
July 6, 2022 2:48 am

Sorry, missed “h”…
And yes, I also don’t mind what the African plate trusts!…

Last edited 1 month ago by Joao Martins
DrTorch
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
July 6, 2022 2:44 pm

I think there are several unstated assumptions regarding geology of the region.

Moreover, since their findings are inconsistent with other research (including their “previously unknown” work from 3200 years ago) why is this accepted as the canonical sea level?

EdH
July 5, 2022 2:20 am

Guess there is no acceleration then. 18cm divided by 122 years since the start of the 20th century is 1.475 mm/yr. They indicate since 2008 it is 1.43 mm/yr. Nope, no acceleration, just the easily expected natural rebound from the little ice age. And a similar rise of 20 cm a few thousand years ago? So not unprecedented either, just something known to have happened due to natural cycles in the past before they could try to blame it on humans.

I do enjoy using their own data to demonstrate that their false concern.

Ed Hanley
Reply to  EdH
July 5, 2022 3:09 am

TLDR: The disaster we are facing is that sea level will continue to rise about 7 inches every 100 years. That’s pretty horrible, but at least it’s slow enough that I should be able to finish eating my sandwich.

Reply to  Ed Hanley
July 5, 2022 8:01 am

At some point we will go into the next glaciation and sea level will plummet. Then, they will blame cooling/ice on human activities, especially CO2 emissions which they will suddenly discover actually cools the planet.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  EdH
July 5, 2022 3:17 am

Guess there is no acceleration then. 18cm divided by 122 years since the start of the 20th century is 1.475 mm/yr. They indicate since 2008 it is 1.43 mm/yr. Nope, no acceleration…

The figure 1.43 mm/yr since 2008 refers only to that component of sea level rise stemming from Antarctic and Greenland ice mass loss, as the article states. It does not include thermal expansion caused by ocean heating. The linked source (IPCC AR6_WG1_SPM) states that thermal expansion explains 50% of the sea level rise observed during 1971–2018, with ice loss from glaciers and ice sheets contributing 42%. The final 8% is explained by land-water storage changes. (see paragraph A.4.3.)

From the same source (paragraph A.1.7), the estimated rate of sea level rise between 2006 and 2018 was between 3.2 and 4.2 mm/yr. Much faster than the 0.5 mm/yr that caused the 20cm rise over a 400 year period, ending ~3,200 years ago.

Last edited 1 month ago by TheFinalNail
Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 3:26 am

TFN,
So what is the number for thermosteric change, how many mm does ocean level change for each 1degree C change in ocean temperature?
With uncertainty limits, please.
Geoff S

TheFinalNail
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
July 5, 2022 3:29 am

I don’t know. Probably best to follow the source linked to in the article. This is just the SPM, but paragraph A.4.3 cross reference AR6 chapter 9 (9.4, 9.5, 9.6, Cross-Chapter Box 9.1). Have a check yourself and let us know, please.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 5:43 am

The linked source (IPCC AR6_WG1_SPM) states that thermal expansion explains 50% of the sea level rise observed during 1971–2018″

You don’t know how much the ocean rose due to thermal expansion? Does the IPCC?

Sounds like a lot of buffalo chips to me.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 5, 2022 6:50 am

I’m guessing you haven’t tried following the links either.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 5, 2022 11:27 am

Accompanied by “original recipe” re-fried bean dip.

MarkW
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 8:45 am

Once again, an appeal to authority. But only those authorities that agree with the narrative.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 3:55 pm

And it is the SPM.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 3:44 am

Right. So the geological record selectively records *only* sea level rise caused by melting ice, and “hides” any amount due to thermal expansion.

LMFAO.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
July 5, 2022 5:04 am

Who’s suggesting that?

Duane
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 5:28 am

It is practically impossible to measure the thermal expansion of the world’s oceans on a mass basis, since we do not have world wide temperature monitoring networks staged throughout the full water column in all the world’s seas. We only have good data for the surface layer of the oceans, which constitutes practically no mass at all compared to the mass of the oceans. It is extremely doubtful that waters in the oceans thousands of meters down have changed temperature at all, let alone enough to explain sea level rise.

What we DO know for a fact is that all land surfaces erode and much of that sediment arrives in the oceans, which of course, absent any other effect such as post glacial rebound and tectonic actions with subduction zones and underwater vulcanism, would tend to cause the oceans to rise gradually, regardless of any effects whatsoever from atmospheric temperature or sea temperature..

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Duane
July 5, 2022 5:46 am

Let me add that I can’t see where any impact of storms and the accompanying storm surges were accounted for in any of the historical intervals. Was it more stormy since 1900 than before? Would storm surge show up in mineral deposits?

There is a lot here that is just ignored in this study. Hardly comprehensive.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 5, 2022 11:35 am

But the beaches on Mallorca were bitchin’, Tim. And they got published! Where are your priorities?

No matter how TFN wants to slice and dice it, sea level is on a decidedly un-alarming trend line that is neither unprecedented nor threatening in any way. A typical storm surge ranges 1-5 meters. 18cm is noise. Very little coastal land is low-enough lying that it’s going to make a difference. And to the extent that it might, they have decades to build sea walls.

I wonder if TFN has heard of the Netherlands? Note to the students—you could check it out. They have hash bars.

Drake
Reply to  Rich Davis
July 5, 2022 2:10 pm

“They have hash bars”, LOL, yep I did LOL.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  Duane
July 5, 2022 6:54 am

It is practically impossible to measure the thermal expansion of the world’s oceans on a mass basis, since we do not have world wide temperature monitoring networks staged throughout the full water column in all the world’s seas.

See Argo floats.

Regarding subduction, rebound, etc, these are all taken into account by the various sea level data producers.

paul courtney
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 7:47 am

Mr. Nail: Do you ever notice that your reassuring “oh, they take it all into account” is reassuring to nobody? Argo floats help you understand thermal sea level since 1900?
I do appreciate you letting us see what uninformed people think.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  paul courtney
July 5, 2022 8:27 am

Mr. Nail: Do you ever notice that your reassuring “oh, they take it all into account” is reassuring to nobody?

I could provide links to the various sites but no one would follow them.

MarkW
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 8:51 am

Translation: The fact that nobody agrees with me proves that they aren’t following the links I provide.

BTW, are you related to Obama?

Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 1:02 pm

I don’t believe you.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  paul courtney
July 6, 2022 6:10 am

Not only that but the Argo floats don’t measure the deep ocean! And the deep ocean is where most of the mass is!

MarkW
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 8:50 am

We can’t measure any of it accurately, but be assured the models take all of it into account.

MGC
Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 7:31 pm

re: “We can’t measure any of it accurately”

Merely because MarkW has decreed it to be so. Never mind that the best measurement professionals in the world state otherwise.

Duane
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 9:50 am

So the floats have cables running thousands of meters throughout the water column in the deep oceans that contain most of the mass of water on the planet? And we have tens of thousands of them at sea?

Nope they only have 4,000 and they “park” at 1,000 meters and occasionally “dive” to 2,000 meters. The average depth of the oceans is 3,700 meters and the maximum is 11,000 meters. Most of the mass of the oceans is not being measured.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 11:34 am

… these are all taken into account by the various sea level data producers.

Like this one?
comment image

MarkW
Reply to  Duane
July 5, 2022 8:49 am

1) We don’t have good measurements even for the surface waters.
2) As continents get lighter due to erosion, they rise.
3) Plate tectonics play a big role. India is pushing into Asia at a few millimeters a year, creating the Himalayas and a little more room for the oceans.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 11:38 am

Something that is overlooked is that the tectonic movement is typically an order of magnitude faster than the claimed rise in sea level. The oceans are rising at a rate of millimeters per year, while tectonic plates are moving at centimeters per year.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 8:04 am

Be careful with the thermal expansion factor. Most uninformed “scientists” assume that the oceans, top to bottom are warming (if at all, in reality),are warming when it is only the top few 100 meters, which greatly diminishes the thermal expansion effect. Also, as this layer of the oceans are cooling and warming all over the world at any given time, it is nearly impossible to have a valid overall measure of warming or cooling, just like a global climate temperature is a joke.

TheFinalNail
Reply to  Charles Higley
July 5, 2022 8:29 am

Argo floats measure to 2,000m.

DonM
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 11:16 am

argo floats are not located where they can project an an overall average.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 11:41 am

One data point out of a range of 0-11,000 meters.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 9:59 pm

You certain arm wave and flail with the best.
Well done, should be choreographed

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
July 6, 2022 8:07 pm

Maybe to some of the music from the movie Jesus Christ Superstar.

MarkW
Reply to  TheFinalNail
July 5, 2022 8:44 am

Just how much is the ocean expected to expand from a temperature increase of 0.003C?

Rich Davis
Reply to  EdH
July 5, 2022 10:50 am

But it was the best all-expenses-paid vacation they ever had. Unprecedented!

lee
July 5, 2022 2:25 am

“toward offshore zones at the periphery of former ice cover that are undergoing subsidence, yielding a sea-level fall at such sites” Say what? I would think sites undergoing subsidence would give an indication of Sea-level rise.

H B
July 5, 2022 2:55 am

Time DeSantos had a another de-funding session

Right-Handed Shark
July 5, 2022 2:58 am

Maybe the USF students could’ve reduced their carbon footprints and stayed at home where they would discover that practically the entire state of Florida was once a coral reef, and all that limestone was once in the air as CO2 before the corals sequestered it. Much more interesting.

MAK
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
July 5, 2022 2:46 pm

And the limestone was deposited under water.

fretslider
July 5, 2022 3:04 am

“The results reported in our study are alarming,” 

If only they were right, but they aren’t.

“If humans continue to be the main driver and the temperature increases 1.5 degrees in the near future, there will be irreversible damage,”

If only that were true, but it isn’t.

As the bona fide alarmists are wont to remind us:  

“It’s most important not to fall into the trap of thinking that any single study will overturn a vast body of scientific evidence, derived from many different sources of data (or as Andrew Revkin calls this, single-study syndrome). “

Climate Sensitivity Single Study Syndrome, Nic Lewis Edition (skepticalscience.com)

Nuff said on this propaganda effort.

MGC
Reply to  fretslider
July 5, 2022 7:34 pm

re: “If only they were right, but they aren’t”

Merely because I, the almighty fretslider, have pompously decreed it to be so. Not because there is any actual evidence to support my claim (and there isn’t).

Typical “Nuh Uh because I say so” handwaving “skeptical” excuse to pretend away reality.

Last edited 1 month ago by MGC
Pat from kerbob
Reply to  MGC
July 5, 2022 10:01 pm

I note that there are none on here more pompous than you.

Eric Stevens
July 5, 2022 3:13 am

“Otherwise, despite major climatic events like Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, the sea level remained exceptionally stable until 1900.”

That will be news to the English towns and villages of a thousand years ago which are now a mile or more out to sea.

Philip Mulholland
Reply to  Eric Stevens
July 5, 2022 3:39 am

Eric,
The coastal erosion of the glacial sediments in the east of England that caused the loss of medieval villages is due to seabed erosion as well as cliff line retreat. Seabed erosion allows for the increase of wave power delivered at the beach line as the water depth immediately offshore increases due to seabed soft sediment removal.

Editor
Reply to  Eric Stevens
July 5, 2022 3:57 am

Dunster Castle in Somerset UK was on the coast in the 16th century. Now it’s 2-3 miles inland. Plenty more similar. (No they didn’t move the castle).

Graemethecat
Reply to  Mike Jonas
July 5, 2022 5:51 am

Ditto Arundel Castle in Sussex, which was built on the coast, but is now many kilometers inland.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Mike Jonas
July 5, 2022 4:02 pm

And Harlach Castle near the coast of Wales.

Disputin
Reply to  Eric Stevens
July 5, 2022 3:59 am

“That will be news to the English towns and villages of a thousand years ago which are now a mile or more out to sea.”

Different cause, Eric. Those towns are on the East and South coasts which are undergoing isostatic movement because the weight of the ice cap on the pennines and Southern Scotland/Ireland was removed so the land rose.

Peta of Newark
July 5, 2022 3:28 am

No chance that Mallorca sank then…….

Matt Kiro
Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 5, 2022 7:15 am

Well there are more people on the island now, but better be careful if too many live on just one side of the island, it might tip over, just ask Congressman Johnson from Georgia

2hotel9
July 5, 2022 3:40 am

18 centimeters? Really? Wow, where did it happen? Was not on Earth.

Ron Long
July 5, 2022 3:50 am

There exist very useful reconstructions of Mediterranean sea level histories, like “New Relative sea-level (RSL) indications from the Eastern Mediterranean…” 2021, Yasur-Landau et al. These reconstructions utilize age-dating of human artifacts that show sea-level, like docking structures, cut channels, etc, and show this history: sea level from 3,800 years before present (Bronze Age) to 2,200 years before present the level was stable to slight decline, then underwent abrupt rise to about Middle Roman Period (1,700 years before present), then slowed down and continues at slow rise to Present. Who do we trust, careful archaeological dating or funded doom and gloom and send me more funds?

fretslider
July 5, 2022 4:03 am

Nevermind the Bolleaux, have you considered the lunar influence on Earth climate? No?

“It arises from the so-called lunar nodal cycle of 18.6 years caused by variations in the angle of the Moon’s orbital plane. During this period the Moon’s orbit “wobbles” between plus or minus 5 degrees relative to the Earth’s equator. When the lunar plane tilts away from the equatorial plane, the tides on Earth are reduced. When the Moon’s orbit is aligned with the Earth’s equator, the tides are exaggerated.

It is suggested that the lunar connection to climate is through the modulation of ocean tides the dissipation of which are a major influence in mixing in the world’s oceans. Some studies have been carried out suggesting a lunar link with the circulation of the Pacific Ocean. Now the researchers detect this cyclic signal in global and regional surface air temperature having amplitudes of 0.1 degree C and also in ocean heat uptake and ocean heat content.

The possible lunar signal in global surface air temperature and heat uptake are coincident with the so-called hiatus – the slowdown in global warming in the first decade of the 21st century.

Extrapolating this influence into the future the researchers say,

Our results suggest that the contribution of the lunar nodal cycle to global temperature should be negative in the mid-2020s before becoming positive again in the early-2030s.”



The signal is also present and possibly influencing warmer than average Arctic surface temperatures at the same time as the global warming hiatus. Enhanced energy input in the Arctic is found during the period 2007-2011. The all-time low in Arctic ice extend was in 2012 and has not yet been surpassed.

The researchers say that the lunar effect should be implemented in future climate models “in order that they better represent the effect of this repeatable and predictable source of climate variability on the impacts of climate change.”

The Moon’s climate influence detected – Net Zero Watch

Another addition to, er, settled science.

Last edited 1 month ago by fretslider
Gregory Woods
July 5, 2022 4:05 am

This study was conducted in collaboration with the scientists from Harvard University, University of New Mexico, University of the Balearic Islands, University Rome Tre, Rutgers University, Australian National University, Los Alamos National Laboratory and University of Bern.

and don’t forget The University of Blarney….

a happy little debunker
July 5, 2022 4:05 am

If as they say, sea levels remained exceptionally stable through the MWP and the LIA temperature fluctuations – why have they assumed current sea level rise is as a result of current ‘warming’ influences?

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  a happy little debunker
July 5, 2022 4:34 am

Easy. This is because CO2 produces an entirely different type of temperature that can overwhelm ANY other influence. Please try to keep up.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  a happy little debunker
July 5, 2022 11:48 am

I’m perplexed by the difference in the title here — “Hidden in Caves: Mineral Overgrowths Reveal Unprecedented Modern Sea-Level Rise — and the author’s title of the article — “Exceptionally stable preindustrial sea level inferred from the western Mediterranean Sea.”

Last edited 1 month ago by Clyde Spencer
Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  a happy little debunker
July 5, 2022 4:05 pm

At least they are admitting to the MWP and the LIA.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
July 5, 2022 10:04 pm

But that they had no effect

Massive changes in the world temp, zero change

1.1c in 200 years and it’s time to build an Ark.

Garboard
July 5, 2022 4:22 am

100 year old tide gauge in key west Florida records approx 2mm year rise with no acceleration for the last 100 years . But a nice trip to Spain on gov money is always welcome

Duane
July 5, 2022 5:18 am

The astounding discovery that in one single location it’s indicating 1.47 mm of sea level rise per year since 1900. Pretty much everywhere else based upon subsidence-corrected sea level rise at the moment is around 1.8-2.3 mm per year.

Giordano Milton
July 5, 2022 5:20 am

Unprecedented? There are salt domes in Europe in the mountains—from a higher sea level, here in Colorado, there are petrified redwood trees at over 7000 ft. elevation, and the Great Salt Lake in Utah didn’t form under dry conditions.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Giordano Milton
July 5, 2022 7:38 am

And the huge ancient coral reefs in Eastern Utah, many meters thick.

Editor
July 5, 2022 6:10 am

This is unmitigated horst schist…

The team found evidence of a previously unknown 20 centimeter sea-level rise that occurred nearly 3,200 years ago when ice caps melted naturally over the course of 400 years at a rate of 0.5 millimeters per year. Otherwise, despite major climatic events like Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, the sea level remained exceptionally stable until 1900.

The Holocene highstand was not “previously unknown”…

comment image

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/06/the-holocene-sea-level-highstand/

Last edited 1 month ago by David Middleton
Dave Andrews
Reply to  David Middleton
July 5, 2022 7:09 am

It was apparently unknown to Bogdan. Perhaps he hasn’t studied geology for very long!

Reply to  Dave Andrews
July 5, 2022 7:46 am

Apparently a lot of geology that was well-known before 1980 has become previously unknown since 1988.

Derg
Reply to  David Middleton
July 5, 2022 8:47 am

Lol

mkelly
July 5, 2022 6:35 am

Having been to Mallorca a number of times I highly recommend it as a place to study anything. I would suggest a study of the paella and topless sun bathers.

I studied both when there but failed to write up any papers on them. I did small sample studies of the wines and beers but prefer the first two.

Jack
July 5, 2022 6:47 am

Did this research team heed of the vertical tectonic moves of the rocky coastal substratum in that place?
In other places of the mediterranean coast there are obvious signs that the sea level could be about 6 meters higher than the current one 5 or 6 millenaries ago.

Solomon Green
Reply to  Jack
July 5, 2022 7:11 am

I seem to remember reading that when the Suez Canal was completed, it was discovered that the level of the sea in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea were significantly different. It is still, I believe, about 9 inches lower in the Med.

So, also, was the composition of the water; not to mention aquatic inhabitants.

And, of course, the Mediterranean is notorious for earthquakes.

Jack
Reply to  Solomon Green
July 5, 2022 7:29 am

There is a permanent stream of oceanic water getting in the Mediterranean through the Gibraltar straits due to the strong water deficit caused by water evaporation not being balanced by the freshwater inflows of coastal rivers. The 9 inches of sea levels difference is an obvious explanation of this stream.

MarkW
Reply to  Jack
July 5, 2022 8:57 am

Cores taken of the Mediterranean sea floor show that the Mediterranean has all but dried up several times in the past. It is theorized that plate movements sealed the Straits of Gibraltar causing the Mediterranean to dry up.

Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 10:35 am

There is an ancient Egyptian port city under water today.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Anti-griff
July 5, 2022 11:55 am

And, I believe that is associated with an earthquake that took place.

Jack
July 5, 2022 6:52 am

Knowing the huge amounts of water freezed during the Little Ice Age, about 3 centuries long, has anyone attempted to find proofs of a sea level fall somewhere in theworld ?

Walter Horsting
July 5, 2022 6:54 am

Funny, sea levels were 2- meters higher during the Holocene Optimum…

DXq8DB3WkAAfUsg.jpg
MarkW
Reply to  Walter Horsting
July 5, 2022 8:59 am

I’ve been assured by several alarmists that there is no evidence that the Holocene Optimum was a world wide even, so this data must be false. Please double check your funding and re-submit your evidence.

Walter Horsting
July 5, 2022 6:56 am

And in warmer previous interglacials sea levels were 6-40+ meters higher than our relatively mild Holocene.

Average of 7  Interglacials.jpg
DMacKenzie
July 5, 2022 7:06 am

Water levels in caves in any now populated locations are suspect. At various times in in the last several thousand years, the forests have been removed and the land converted to agriculture, various waterways modified at surface to enhance agriculture and water supply to growing towns, all well before records were kept….there is just no reason to suspect consistent calcium deposition in these caves since the influx of humanity since the last ice age…

MarkW
Reply to  DMacKenzie
July 5, 2022 9:06 am

Extraction of groundwater is also going to impact land levels.

Editor
July 5, 2022 7:12 am

I am confused by this report. They find that since 1900(ish) sea level has risen 18 centimeters — which is, in some places, 7 inches in 120 years. This is less than the generally accepted 8-10 inches per century.

Yet the authors claim that is “alarming”?

ThinkingScientist
Reply to  Kip Hansen
July 5, 2022 8:08 am

Looks they failed on the literature search part of the research.

Editor
Reply to  ThinkingScientist
July 5, 2022 8:15 am

TS ==> Yes, reporting less than the already accepted trivial amount of SLR as alarming is, well, alarming.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Kip Hansen
July 5, 2022 4:10 pm

It may well be alarming to the entire CCC / CAGW narrative, and their funding.

Carlo, Monte
July 5, 2022 7:24 am

“Unprecedented”—what a pack of liars.

M Courtney
July 5, 2022 7:29 am

To create the timeline, the team gathered 13 samples…


n = 13.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  M Courtney
July 5, 2022 11:57 am

An auspicious number for those prone to being superstitious.

July 5, 2022 7:41 am

Always prefer proxies to tide gauge readings.

Peter Wells
Reply to  Curious George
July 5, 2022 8:09 am

The weight of the tide guages is known to cause significant subsidence.

DHR
Reply to  Peter Wells
July 5, 2022 9:18 am

I believe The Battery tide gauge is on bedrock as are many others. What is the source of your claim?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  DHR
July 5, 2022 11:58 am

Are you sarcasm impaired?

Drake
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
July 5, 2022 6:26 pm

2nd LOL on this thread, thanks Clyde, sarcasm impaired indeed!

David Anderson
July 5, 2022 8:27 am

We need to fund a Federal Ark project

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  David Anderson
July 5, 2022 4:11 pm

Give ti the aerospace industry – it’ll be decades late and trillions over budget.

MarkW
July 5, 2022 8:38 am

If it started in 1900, it couldn’t have been due to CO2, since that didn’t start to rise significantly till around 1950. Even the IPCC admits that.

MarkW
July 5, 2022 8:39 am

If it takes a “complex computer program” to find a trend in your data, then the odds are there is no trend in your data.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
July 5, 2022 12:01 pm

Actually, what they said was “a complex software,” leads me to suspect that it was written by someone for whom English is a second language.

DHR
July 5, 2022 9:02 am

Corrected for istocacy? Without that, no conclusions can be made regarding global sea level change. Larson and Clark, of the USGS found sea level on the east coast of the US has risen at an average rate of about 1.5 mm/yr over the past 6,000 years. See Journal of Coastal Research, July 2006.

DHR
July 5, 2022 9:15 am

The Battery sea level gauge in New York City has been operating since 1856 and shows a sea level rise corrected for isostasy of about 1.5 mm/yr. Why did Onac choose to ignore this data and that of Larsen and Clark and his other peers when claiming such a “profound” discovery?

ATheoK
July 5, 2022 9:17 am

“The results reported in our study are alarming,” said lead author Bogdan P. Onac, geology professor at USF. “The sea-level rise since the 1900s is unprecedented when compared to the natural change in ice volumes over the last 4,000 years. This implies that if global temperatures continue to rise, sea levels could eventually reach higher levels than scientists previously estimated.”

To create the timeline, the team gathered 13 samples from eight caves along the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea…

…A complex software at Harvard University helped generate predictions using various ice models and Earth’s parameters to showcase an accurate history of the sea level. These predictions are essential because they allow researchers to estimate past global mean sea level,”

Confirmation bias junk.

  • 13 samples…
  • Models for ice and sea levels…
  • Radioactive decay estimated timeline from a pitifully small sample set. With zero mention of error ranges…
  • Use of the intentionally alarming word “unprecedented”. It appears they do not know the real meaning of the word.
  • Apparently these quacks couldn’t be bothered to include historical tidal measurements as a verification for their alarming tide conclusions from 13 samples.
Gonzo
July 5, 2022 9:37 am

“at least a couple of decades if not centuries”

Way to pin it down! That’s some serious “science” there.

Kit P
July 5, 2022 10:05 am

There are caves in Mallorca?

Joined the navy to see the world and get skills to earn a decent living. After 9 years I had acheived the later but never deployed. Spent a lot of time in the shipyard. Told my detailer to get me on a ship where I could finsish quals like driving the ship.

So I got orders to the med. I signed myself up for ‘overseas diplomacy coordinator school’ know that my new ship had a chaplin who had those SLJ duties. So I spent a week goofing off and Mallorca was my class project.

I do not like flyhing and have been know to put Kalua in my coffee before getting on a commercial flight. First stop Rota Spain. When I returned to the base at 2 am I had failed to spend $20 practicing overseas diplocy. Rule one, do not drink at the first bar outside the gate.

Found out I was on the next COD in 2 hours to NAS Sigonella. I was able to navigate onto the plane without help but I was seriously impaired. The crew chief did not sugar coat the fact that no one had survived ditching at sea. My first time sitting in a cargo net with wax in my ears.

Then one of two engines stopped over water. I learned being drunk does not help with terror. We made an emergcy landing Mallorca. I am thinking party. Local authorties had other ideas. The crew got the engine running and we headed the shortest distance over water which was Rota.

Had many great shores leaves but never got back to Mallorca in the navy.

A few years later I was working in Spain. Decided Mallorca was the perfect place for a second honeymoon. Looked out into the bay fromn the hotel room to see CVN Nimitz and my CGN. Checked out and went to otherside of the island. Did not go cave hopping!

jeffery P
July 5, 2022 10:10 am

How is it every claim of “unprecedented” sea level rise uses everything except actual measurements of the sea level?

Last edited 1 month ago by jeffery P
Clyde Spencer
July 5, 2022 11:07 am

If humans continue to be the main driver …

The facts supporting the unstated assumption — humans are the main driver — are not in evidence.

Dusty
July 5, 2022 11:08 am

“The team found evidence of a previously unknown 20 centimeter sea-level rise that occurred nearly 3,200 years ago when ice caps melted naturally over the course of 400 years at a rate of 0.5 millimeters per year. Otherwise, despite major climatic events like Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, the sea level remained exceptionally stable until 1900.”

So, it was ‘exceptionally stable’ except for 1200 of those 3200 years, and since the MWP and LIA were close to being back to back at the end of the time period, the exceptionally stable period appears to be from 2800 to 1000 years ago.

I’m at a loss to see how this ‘new’ info tells us anything helpful in relation to the climate change hypothesis. It does suggest that coastal areas are naturally subject periodic inundation, slowly and over long periods but we didn’t need to spend money to know that.

By the way, that exceptionally stable 1800 years is just one cave away from not being so exceptionally stable.

Stephen Skinner
July 5, 2022 12:06 pm

In June, Onac received a new research grant from the National Science Foundation to continue his research to predict future sea-level rise due to global warming. The grant will allow Onac to expand the research further into history by 130,000 years and create a better understanding of sea level globally.”
Hmmm….
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it” – Upton Sinclair

Terry
July 5, 2022 1:35 pm

Wow my first thought – shock, my second, has anybody told Gore, Obama, and Kerry, that they are about to lose their oceanside luxury homes?

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Terry
July 6, 2022 1:15 pm

I offered them 10cents on the dollar for their clearly worthless properties and for some reason they didn’t jump at it.

It’s as though they don’t believe their own words.

Loren C. Wilson
July 5, 2022 6:00 pm

“With nearly 40 percent of the world’s population living within 62 miles of a coast, the rising sea level could be catastrophic with substantial societal and economic impacts.” It’s not how close you live to the coast, it’s how much higher you are than current sea level.

Pat from kerbob
July 5, 2022 10:14 pm

I pointed this out before

https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/carbon-dioxide-now-more-than-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-levels

From the link:
“CO2 levels are now comparable to the Pliocene Climatic Optimum, between 4.1 and 4.5 million years ago, when they were close to, or above 400 ppm. During that time, sea levels were between 5 and 25 meters higher than today offsite link, high enough to drown many of the world’s largest modern cities. Temperatures then averaged 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times, and studies indicate offsite link that large ”.

So, if co2 controls temp, and if co2 is now the same as 4 million years ago when temps were 7F hotter and the ocean 25M higher, then why is it 7F colder and the oceans 25M lower today?

If co2 controls temps.

I’m just asking.

July 6, 2022 7:32 am

It’s not unexpected, unreported or unprecedented.

Here is a useful interactive summary of peer reviewed evidence of warmer times and higher sea levels, and less glaciation around the World during the Holocene optimum the IPPC deny, and the still warmer times as these temperatures fell, cyclically, from Minoan times. AS the geological record shows and the “Climate scientists” deny. Because they are paid to prefer prophesy to science.

http://pages.science-skeptical.de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod.htmx

In articular there is one on sea level from the Persian Gulf which saw recorded rises up the Euphrates and Tigris resulting from the rises in sea levels during the Holocene optimum, after the Straits of Hormuz were overtopped during the last interglacial warming event. In particular see page 55.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/s94gh2g2lhv6i0e/Persian%20Gulf%20Sea%20Levels.pdf?dl=0

There are more in my own acquired collection from my own research collection available here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xffozx2nfpy3sia/Interglacial%20climate%20papers.zip?dl=0

Why doesn’t everyone know the well demonstrated reality is that now is 2 deg colder than the Holocene optimum, and most probably warming is now reversing and soon set to cool. From the 1 deg above the coldest this interglacial we now live in.

Spread this truth to destroy the deceit of self appointed “climate scientists”, a quasi religious organisation who have never done real science thabt stested by the observation of nature, just invented models to prove what their masters paid for, in a VR computer World they created, not the real one we observe.

No science involved, mostly real science must be denied to presume otherwise in the models. Geologists and climatologists know the truth, but are not allowed to tell it, or risk personal attacks by activists and their grants and publications being stopped if they try.

But I can. Please do access, note and record the data above. Don’t believe, or be surprised.

The only REAL science, that proven by observation, already knows most of what we need to know to refute the claims of accelerating warming and a supposedly unusually warm climate. It’s simply lies, that were created to support political agenda of the UN, as part of Agenda 21. Falsely, per the observations of nature, hundreds and hundreds of papers by thousands of authors.

There is only one truth, and it’s not the UN’s.

Eur Ing, CEng, CPhys

Andy H
July 6, 2022 8:44 am

All over Britain there are reliable signs that the sea has gone down in the last thousand years. There are castles with land locked “water gates” or tidal moats that are well above tidal levels. There are ports that have “silted up” (which are really above tidal levels). If you can find an old jetty with steps going down it is pretty easy to work out where the tidal levels used to be. There is usually a platform whose height is related to sea level when the boats are unloaded. People are not stupid and no one is going to build a jetty at the wrong height.

It is a lot easier to survey old ports than cave systems (and you are more likely to find ice cream shops in the process).

MM from Canada
July 6, 2022 1:53 pm

According to an international team of researchers led by the University of South Florida (USF), the sea level has risen 18 centimeters since the start of the 20th century.

The team found evidence of a previously unknown 20 centimeter sea-level rise that occurred nearly 3,200 years ago when ice caps melted naturally over the course of 400 years at a rate of 0.5 millimeters per year.

“The sea-level rise since the 1900s is unprecedented when compared to the natural change in ice volumes over the last 4,000 years.”

I am SO tired of people abusing the term “unprecedented.” If something is “unprecedented” then by definition it has NEVER happened before.
But it obviously HAS happened before, because the researchers found evidence to that effect.

Ulric Lyons
July 12, 2022 11:36 am

“The team found evidence of a previously unknown 20 centimeter sea-level rise that occurred nearly 3,200 years ago”

A grand solar minimum driving a warmer AMO and Greenland warming.

%d bloggers like this: