According the University of Colorado, sea level is rising much faster than 85% of tide gauges show, and forming a massive mound near the Philippines. Apparently they believe that water likes to pile up in mounds, and to help visualize their BS I created a 3D animation.
And one more minor detail. They used to have the map below on their site, but have removed it. It showed that their error was almost as large as their trend – meaning their data is basically worthless
This complete garbage forms the basis of the IPCC claim that sea level rise suddenly doubled in 1992, when they switched measurement systems.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
The effluent from a Viagra factory?
The area here: how much CO2 would be liberated each year with the amount of warming this volume of water represents?
Meanwhile, El Niño index is 0.0 and fell between 0.1.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
It’s quite obvious. This is the IPCC’s Battle of the Bulge, a last ditch attempt to reach the Port of An Twerp thereby to stop supplies reaching Allied Scientific Armies as they race to the capital of the Climate Axis heartland!
AlecM says: September 15, 2014 at 10:48 am
“It’s quite obvious. This is the IPCC’s Battle of the Bulge, a last ditch attempt to reach the Port of An Twerp thereby to stop supplies reaching Allied Scientific Armies as they race to the capital of the Climate Axis heartland!”
Giggle!
Joe Public – I have found a likely suspect in Nick Clegg who probably flushed the Climate Viagra down the toilet, just like he did our rights.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/09/458670.html
😊
The climate obsessed are invalidating their own belief system by pushing silly stuff like this. One of the signs of bad science is when huge conclusions are drawn from marginal, barely susceptible results. The climate obsessed are entirely dependant on assertions and claims that are as weak as this so-called bulge. We should encourage these people to speak more and at length regarding this sort fo faux crisis.
I have a crazy thought that the University of Colorado data may be less wrong than it’s being given credit for :
A change in the shape of the Geoid is my theory. I’ve just had a play on this :
http://geographiclib.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/GeoidEval?
and plugging in co-ordinates of 10N, 145E which appears to be right in the middle of your “bulge” shows that the height of the Geoid at that location rose by a massive 1.4m between 1984 and 2008 – that’s a rate of 57mm per year!.
If that sounds a lot, consider that the undulation of the Geoid varies from -106m near the Maldives (the only reason they poke their noses above the ocean surface) to +85m just north of Papua New-Guinea.
Changes in the shape of the Geoid are driven by variations in rock density in the crust and lithosphere caused by processes about which we know the square root of bugger all. However, the area highlighted is very tectonically active so, in theory at least, it may be possible. It also cannot be emphasized enough that if my theory has any merit it would have absolutely nothing to do with climate.
It’s what we don’t know that make science so interesting……
(Re-posted from Steve G’s site)
Last strong earthquake in Sweden may be related with the activity of the volcano in Iceland. It is a sign of greater activity of tectonic plates? Asthenosphere is a mystery. I think this is a message for Vukcevic.
