Climate change propaganda is simply a ruse for a socialist agenda

[BlasterBates]

You see no trend in the red line?

no

[pjclarke]

Its counterintuitive, but even after you average out the effects of tides, currents and air pressure, the sea level is not uniform, it is 'lumpy'. The
main reasons are expansion due to warming and gravitational, undersea mountains can pull water downwards and huge ice masses can exert an influence ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0219102449.htm

[BlasterBates]

Lets let Dr Nils-Axel Mörner explain it.

He was formerly the Chairman of INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and led the Maldives Sea Level Project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner

from the horses mouth

As he says:

why do people listen to this nonsense

The maximum that the sea level can rise is 10 mm a year which is the fastest it rose after the end of the last ice age. Hansen's prediction of several metres in a century is completely proposterous.

[pjclarke]

That damn cartoonist again

http://www.skepticalscience.com/What...Sea-Level.html

"Of the many things about global warming misunderstood by the public at large, the irregular or lumpy distribution of sea level rise must surely be near the top of the list. When sea level rise is mentioned, this typically refers to the global average or mean, but this obscures the fact that not all areas of the ocean are rising. In a few regions sea level is actually falling, while at others it is rising at a rate much larger than the global average. So even though the total volume of seawater from melting land ice, and thermal expansion from ocean warming are increasing, this isn't being evenly spread around the oceans."

"It just so happens that the western Pacific and Tuvalu in particular, are one such region where there is a large rise in sea level, much greater than the global average."

[pjclarke]

Morner!? You're kidding, right?

His Maldives work was discredited in the literature, less than a year after it appeared, as you'd know if you read the wiki entry.

You cite his INQUA affiliation to give him authority, but he parted company with them well over a decade ago, and they have since regarded him as an embarrassment.

"Dr Morner was, quite some time ago, president of one of INQUA’s commissions, indeed, the commission on sea-level changes. That commission no longer exists, as such, but is now part of our Commission on Coastal and Marine Processes. Dr Morner’s views concerning sea-level change are his own and are not endorsed by the current Executive Committee of INQUA, nor have previous INQUA Executive Committees endorsed Dr Morner’s views. On several occasions INQUA has requested of Dr Morner that he not inadvertently represent his views on sea-level change as if they have some connection with INQUA."

This is the man who, in testimony to the House of Lords, simply rotated the graph on the page until the trend was flat.

This is a man who believes he has paranormal powers to detect water and metal, and who spends his spare time desecrating ancient monuments.

Where do you find them?

[BlasterBates]

Morner!? You're kidding, right?

His Maldives work was discredited in the literature, less than a year after it appeared, as you'd know if you read the wiki entry.

You cite his INQUA affiliation to give him authority, but he parted company with them well over a decade ago, and they have since regarded him as an embarrassment.

"Dr Morner was, quite some time ago, president of one of INQUA’s commissions, indeed, the commission on sea-level changes. That commission no longer exists, as such, but is now part of our Commission on Coastal and Marine Processes. Dr Morner’s views concerning sea-level change are his own and are not endorsed by the current Executive Committee of INQUA, nor have previous INQUA Executive Committees endorsed Dr Morner’s views. On several occasions INQUA has requested of Dr Morner that he not inadvertently represent his views on sea-level change as if they have some connection with INQUA."

This is the man who, in testimony to the House of Lords, simply rotated the graph on the page until the trend was flat.

This is a man who believes he has paranormal powers to detect water and metal, and who spends his spare time desecrating ancient monuments.

Where do you find them?

Back to personal smears

The flat graph from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology bears him out.

That's why you've now decided to stop the scientific argument and personally attack the man.

If you had a strong argument you wouldn't need to smear anyone. The trouble is the graphs like the one from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology completely destroy your argument, so you deflect by attacking the messenger.

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/man...l-adjustments/

[pjclarke]

Back to personal smears

The flat graph from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology bears him out.

That's why you've now decided to stop the scientific argument and personally attack the man.

If you had a strong argument you wouldn't need to smear anyone. The trouble is the graphs like the one from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology completely destroy your argument, so you deflect by attacking the messenger.

Man-made sea-level rises are due to global adjustments « JoNova

Morner is wrong, wrong, wrong. All his conclusions are contradicted by the data.

The fact that he's an aging dowsing nutter is just a bonus.

Mörner maintains that places such as the Maldives, Bangladesh and Tuvalu “need not fear rising sea levels.” There is, he says, “no ongoing sea-level rise” and no link between sea levels and climate change. He makes the false claim that the rate of sea-level rise accepted by most climate scientists “has been based on just one tide gauge in Hong Kong” (does he have a thing about Hong Kong?).

These claims have already been comprehensively debunked. To sustain them, Mörner relies on misinterpretations of scientific data so grave that even an arts graduate such as Fraser Nelson should have been able to spot them.

In his Spectator article, Mörner makes much of his research trips to the Maldives. These culminated in a 2004 paper published in the journal Global and Planetary Change. In it, Mörner uses an apparently random series of observations – including the discovery of a skeletal “reef woman” buried in a 800-year-old coral reef – to postulate that sea level rise in the Maldives is a figment of scientists’ imagination. How this paper got published is a mystery that only the journal’s editors can explain.

It was comprehensively debunked within a year in the same journal by Philip Woodworth, an oceanographer based in the UK, who wrote acidly that ‘reef woman’ “is hardly definitive as a sea level marker” and that Mörner’s convoluted arguments – which also relied on anecdotal accounts by fishermen sailing over shallow rocks – were “hard to understand” and ultimately “implausible”. A follow-up critical comment by the Australian oceanographer Paul Kench and colleagues notes that Mörner’s paper “contains a number of unqualified and unreferenced assertions” which fail to stand up to scrutiny, does not follow carbon-dating conventions, and that “standard information is missing”.

The Spectator’s Spectacular Blunder | George Monbiot

The Maldive Islands are often used as case studies within research into the impacts of potential future sea level change. Therefore, if such studies are to be realistic, it is important that the past and future variations of sea level in the islands are understood as well as possible. That objective led a fieldwork team to the Maldives, and resulted in a conclusion that sea level in the islands fell by approximately 30 cm during the past few decades. In the present paper, the suggestion of such a fall has been examined from meteorological and oceanographic perspectives and found to be implausible. A number of met-ocean data sets and regional climate indices have been examined, at least one of which would have been expected to reflect a large sea level fall, without any supporting evidence being found. In particular, a suggestion that an increase in evaporation could have caused the fall has been demonstrated to be incorrect.

Have there been large recent sea level changes in the Maldive Islands?

[BlasterBates]

Morner is wrong, wrong, wrong. All his conclusions are contradicted by the data.

The fact that he's an aging dowsing nutter is just a bonus.




The Spectator’s Spectacular Blunder | George Monbiot



Have there been large recent sea level changes in the Maldive Islands?

What's that quaint scientific term you often use?

ah yes

Bullsh*t

Here is photographic evidence showing how the shoreline has extended out:

[pjclarke]

I see your holiday snaps and raise you a peer-reviewed journal article

We feel compelled to respond to the recent article by Mörner (2004) because he makes several major errors in his analysis, and as a result completely misinterprets the record of sea level change from the TOPEX/Poseidon (T/P) satellite altimeter mission. One major criticism we have with the paper is that Mörner does not include a single reference to any altimeter study, all of which refute his claim that there is no apparent change in global mean sea level (GMSL) [see Cazenave and Nerem, (2004) for a summary]. The consensus of all other researchers looking at the T/P and Jason data is that GMSL has been rising at a rate of 3.0 mm/year (Fig. 1) over the last 13 years (3.3 mm/year when corrected for the effects of glacial isostatic adjustment (Tamisiea et al., 2005)).

Mörner gives no details for the source of the data or processing strategy he used to produce Fig. 2, other than to say it is based on “raw data”. Because the details of the analysis are not presented in his paper, we are left to speculate on how this result could have been obtained, based on our years of experience as members of the T/P and Jason-1 Science Working Team. Mörner was apparently oblivious to the corrections that must be made to the “raw” altimeter data in order to make correct use of the data.

As with any satellite data set, calibration and validation of the data must be performed after launch to determine if there are any instrumental errors, find the source of those errors, and evaluate their behavior over time. Satellite altimetry is somewhat unique in that many adjustments must be made to the raw range measurements to account for atmospheric delays (ionosphere, troposphere), ocean tides, variations in wave height (which can bias how the altimeter measures sea level), and a variety of other effects. In addition, the sea level measurements can be affected by the method used to process the altimeter waveforms, and by the techniques and data used to compute the orbit of the satellite. Early releases of the satellite Geophysical Data Records (GDRs) often contain errors in the raw measurements, the measurement corrections, and the orbit estimates that are later corrected through an on-going calibration/validation process defined by the T/P and Jason Science Working Team.

The original release of the T/P GDRs (as well as some subsequent re-releases) contained several errors that directly affect GMSL change. Based on our experience with these issues, and the shape of Fig. 2 in Mörner3s paper, we believe that he used the original release of the T/P GDRs with no attempt to correct for two significant errors. One of the errors is caused by a drift in the TOPEX Microwave Radiometer (TMR). It was first observed in sea level via a comparison to tide gauges (Chambers et al., 1998; Mitchum, 1998), and was verified to be caused by the TMR via comparisons to other orbiting microwave radiometers and radiosondes (Keihm et al., 2000). It caused a drift of nearly −1.2 mm/year in measured GMSL until early 1998, and then a bias of −5 mm. A second major error was introduced when the redundant TOPEX altimeter was turned on in early 1999 due to degradation in the original instrument (Chambers et al., 2003). Since the electronics of the redundant altimeter were different, it caused an apparent bias in the GMSL measurement related to the Sea State Bias (SSB). The sense of the bias was such to cause an incorrect sudden drop in GMSL from the end of 1998 to the beginning of 1999 of nearly 10 mm. This drop is apparent in Fig. 2 of Mörner’s paper (and in comparison to tide gauge data (Mitchum, 2000)). This error is removed when an updated SSB model is applied (Chambers et al., 2003). Data with these corrections applied are available from both the U.S. and French processing centers, as well as products to correct the original GDRs.

When care is taken to make these corrections, the rate of sea level change over the entire T/P mission is 3.0± 0.4 mm/year (CU Sea Level Research Group | University of Colorado), 3.3 mm/year when corrected for the change in ocean volume due to glacial isostatic adjustment (Tamisiea et al., 2005). In light of this, the statement by Mörner that “This means that this data set does not record any general trend (rising or falling) in sea level, just variability around zero plus the temporary ENSO perturbations” is completely false and is based on his erroneous data processing. Mörner’s paper completely misrepresents the results from the T/P mission, and does discredit to the tremendous amount of work that has been expended by the Science Working Team to create a precise, validated, and calibrated sea level data set suitable for studies of climate variations. Finally, Mörner ignores substantial other oceanographic (e.g. Levitus et al., 2001; Antonov et al., 2002; Munk, 2003; Willis et al., 2004) and cryospheric (e.g. Dyurgerov and Meier, 2000; Rignot et al., 2003; Krabill et al., 2004; Thomas et al., 2004) evidence of sea level rise which corroborate the altimeter observations.

In scientific language: Game (and career) Over.

Global and Planetary Change
Volume 55, Issue 4, February 2007, Pages 358-360

See also Damning evidence of fraud by Nils Axel-Morner | Dale Husband's Intellectual Rants

[BlasterBates]

I see your holiday snaps and raise you a peer-reviewed journal article



In scientific language: Game (and career) Over.

Global and Planetary Change
Volume 55, Issue 4, February 2007, Pages 358-360

See also Damning evidence of fraud by Nils Axel-Morner | Dale Husband's Intellectual Rants

I'll post it again.

Monthly sea level measurements for Tuvalu in the Maldives from the Australian Bureau of Meterology: