Not so fast again. Do read the second item also. Whatever they areall claiming, it is clear that the sea level did rise slowly inresponse to the global increase in temperature that peaked in 1998. As could be reasonably expected that impact is now slowly dropping asthe driver is flat to now declining.
We can presume that this possibly reflects additional fresh waterbeen released from Greenland and other Glaciers. It may also reflectwarmer waters. How much of either is likely open.
The more interesting question is just how much of this rise is aresult of a rebound from the Little Ice Age? I have no doubt that aperiod of cold will again expand all glaciers and take it all back.
What makes this all so problematic anyway is that the global seasurface area is 361 million square kilometers. That means that arise of one meter requires 361 000 cubic kilometers of ice. That isan awful lot of ice to melt. The glaciers reacting with the sea justdo not cut it. In fact we are talking about one cubic kilometer ofice per square kilometer of area in Greenland and we have had nothingof the kind anytime during the past centuries.
So the only reasonable explanation for the modest rise we have seenis the modest general global temperature increase driven by therebound from the Little Ice Age causing an expansion of the surfacewater.
Seas rising 60percent faster than UN forecast: study
by Staff Writers
Paris (AFP) Nov28, 2012
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Seas_rising_60_percent_faster_than_UN_forecast_study_999.html
Sea levels are rising60-percent faster than the UN's climate panel forecast in its mostrecent assessment, scientists reported on Wednesday.
At present, sea levelsare increasing at an average 3.2 millimetres (0.125 inches) per year,a trio of specialists reported in the journal Environmental ResearchLetters.
This compares with a"best estimate" by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change (IPCC) in 2007, which projected that by today, therise would be 2 mm (0.078 inches) per year.
The new figureconverges with a widely-shared opinion that the world is heading forsea-level rise of around a metre (3.25 feet) by century's end,co-author Grant Foster of US firm Tempo Analytics told AFP.
"I would say thata metre of sea level rise by the end of the century is probably closeto what you would find if you polled the people who know best,"Foster said.
"In low-lyingareas where you have massive numbers of people living within a metreof sea level, like Bangladesh, it means that the land that sustainstheir lives disappears, and you have hundreds of millions of climaterefugees, and that can lead to resource wars and all kinds ofconflicts," he added.
"For majorcoastal cities like New York, probably the principal effect would bewhat we saw in Hurricane Sandy.
"Every time youget a major storm, you get a storm surge, and that causes a majorrisk of flooding. For New York and New Jersey, three more feet ofwater would be even more devastating, as you can imagine."
The investigation, ledby Stefan Rahmstorf of Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate ImpactResearch (PIK), gauged the accuracy of computer simulations that theIPCC used in its landmark Fourth Assessment Report in 2007.
That report joltedgovernments into nailing climate change to the top of their agenda,culminating in the ill-fated Copenhagen Summit of 2009, and helpedearn the Nobel Prize for the IPCC.
The new study gavehigh marks for the document's forecast on global temperature, sayingthere was a "very good agreement" with what was beingobserved today, an overall warming trend of 0.16 degrees Celsius(0.28 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade.
But it said the IPCC'sprojection for sea levels was much lower than what has turned out.
The panel's predictionfor the future -- of a rise of up to 59 cms by 2100 -- "may alsobe biased low," it warned, a caution shared by other studiespublished in recent years.
Foster said thebigger-than-projected rise could be attributed to meltwater runofffrom land ice, something that was a big unknown when the IPCCreported in 2007 and remains unclear today.
Other factors weretechnical uncertainty, he said.
The IPCC's projectionhad been based on information from 1993 to 2003, and there has beenmore data since then, helping to prove the accuracy of satelliteradars that measure ocean levels by bouncing radar waves off the seasurface.
The IPCC's FifthAssessment Report will be published in three volumes, in September2013, March 2014 and April 2014.
Stefan Rahmstorf’sSea Level Amnesia – Using His Own Numbers, Sea Level Rise ActuallySlowed Down 3%!
By PGosselin on 29. November 2012
http://notrickszone.com/2012/11/29/stefan-rahmstorfs-sea-level-amnesia-using-his-own-numbers-sea-level-rise-actually-dropped-3/
Ulli Kulke, veteranjournalist at the German flagship daily DIE WELT, posts acomment at his blog on über-alarmist Stefan Rahmstorf’s claimthat “sea levels are rising 60% faster” than previously thoughtin 2007.
Sea levelshave decelerated over the last years. Chartsource:http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
Being a devoutalarmist, Rahmstorf is obsessed with finding ways to producespectacular headlines. In Germany scary climate headlines have becomea tradition every November, just before every major climateconference. Doha this year is no different.
In his latest claim,Rahmstorf claims that just a few years ago, sea levels were thoughtto be rising 2 mm/year. Suddenly the sea level, the satellites say,is actually now rising at 3.2 mm/ year – that’s 60% faster thenthey thought!
But as Kulke pointsout in his piece titled False climate alarm surrounds an oldhat,Rahmstorf is suffering from (selective) amnesia, and forgot whathe said in the UN-IPCC report of (2007): Rahmstorf back then:
Satellite measurements show a rise of 3.1 mm/year for the period1993-2003 – and if you consider the measurements through 2006, it’seven 3.3 mm/year.”
Kulke writes, with abit of sarcasm:
It was, after all,quite some time ago, and there was so much data in that thick report.Also with sea levels – some numbers were lower and some werehigher. But Rahmstorf, the ocean scientist, had been lead author inevery climate report. For this reason the data shouldn’t beanything new for him. Back then the report projected an increase of18 – 59 cm for the coming century.
Alarm, Alarm. Let’sincrease the growth of data. Or, to speak like Honecker (leader offormer communist regime East Germany): Always higher, never lower!And if it’s not possible to increase the current data, then let’sjust reduce the data of the past. Just like some climatescientists also want to reduce the temperature of the hottest yearsince instrumental measurements began, namely 1998, just so that thisdecade can once again appear to be on the rise. Or just likeMichael Mann tried with his infamous hockey stick – but failed.”
If we take Rahmstorf’s1993 – 2006 period value of 3.3 mm/year, then we see that sealevel rise has actually slowed down by 3%, and not risen 60%.The tricks being used by alarmist climate scientists are becomingever more obvious and desperate.
You don’t need to bean investigative journalist to uncover that.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder