The more scientifically illiterate you are, the more convincing the Climate Alarmists’ arguments become. Climate Alarmists know that and that is why they usually only provide half the story at best, and as we all know, “half the truth is often twice the lie.” No matter if it is Coral Reefs, Sea Ice, Global Temperatures or other claims, the Alarmists’ arguments simply don’t hold up under even the most simple of analysis.
Evidence of an accelerating sea level rate of increase is crucial to the man-made CO2 climate change theory. It is a smoking gun piece of evidence and would be extremely important in bolstering the case of the Alarmists. The theory goes man-made CO2 is increasing at an increasing rate, Atmospheric CO2 has reached levels not seen over the entire ice core record spanning 800k years, the rapidly increasing CO2 had been absorbing outgoing IR radiation at an increasing rate, this increasing rate of absorbing outgoing IR Radiation has CAUSED global temperatures to increase at an increasing rate, global temperatures increasing at an increasing rate would CAUSE glaciers to melt at an increasing rate, the increasing glacier melt rate would CAUSE the sea levels to increase at an increasing rate. The “increasing rate” is critical to proving the man-made CO2 driven warming theory. Warming isn’t enough, what is needed is an “increasing rate,” for calculus fans, this is a second derivative model.
The problem for the Climate Alarmists is that the rate of change in the sea-level hasn’t been increasing. In fact, just the opposite has happened. The rate of change in the sea-level has been DECREASING.
The models are predicated on the assumption that anthropogenic CO2 emissions, which have risen explosively since about 1950, are the drivers of modern sea level rise…Tide gauges indicate there has been a substantial overall reduction in the rate of sea level rise since about 1950 rather than the expected substantial acceleration.
If a rapidly increasing sea-level is something to be feared, then increasing CO2 may be the way to prevent it. Data shows that CO2 and the rate of change in sea-level are INVERSELY correlated, the exact opposite of what the climate alarmists claim. Having the data prove just the opposite of what the hypothesis predicts is usually game over in most real sciences, but climate “science” isn’t a real science.
How does climate “science” deal with such a devastating blow? Do they admit defeat? Do they reformulate the hypothesis? Do they look for other explanations like maybe solar irradiance? Nope, they go looking for that needle in a haystack data set, the outlier that will prove their point. Climate alarmists have found the perfect data set to make their case down in Perth Australia. They have found a tidal gauge showing a rate of increase of 20cm over the past 100 years.
Global sea-level increase is around 2mm/yr, so 20 cm over 100 years is the expected increase. How do the Climate Alarmists present this data? Just what do the climate computer models predict? A full 2 m increase in sea level by 2100, or 22 mm/yr. That is 11x the current actual rate.
I’m not sure how a real science would predict an 11x increase in sea-level given the data showing the CO2 and sea-level are inversely correlated, but I can guess how Climate “Science” does it. Freemantle/Perth’s sea-level is increasing at 2mm/yr, but Sidney on the other side of Australia has a sea-level that is only increasing at 6.5 cm per 100 years, or only 0.65mm/year, less than 1/3 that of Perth’s. Most importantly, Perth is sinking, not due to CO2, but due to water usage. Much, if not all of the sea-level increase in Perth is in fact due to man, but not man-made CO2. So much like the Climate Alarmists exploiting the Urban Heat Island Effect to unjustly and unscientifically incriminate man-made CO2, they do the same with water usage. Simply put, man-made CO2 doesn’t cause the Urban Heat Island Effect, nor does it deplete water tables, nor does it melt glaciers from below, nor does it expose coral reefs to the bleaching sun, ect etc etc. What people need to ask is “do we really want to spend astronomical fortunes on computer models based on junk science and made up/corrupted data when there are infinitely better uses for that money?
the tide gauge is sinking 2 – 4mm each year (20 -40cm a century).
PARTS of Perth are sinking because too much water is being extracted from the Perth Basin, making those areas more vulnerable to sea level rises.
Professor Will Featherstone said the gauge was sinking at about 2-4mm a year due to groundwater being extracted at a faster rate than it can be replenished, causing the land to subside.
h/t to JoNova and No Trick Zone for the inspiration and graphics
Please like, share, subscribe and comment.