New Study on sea level rise find ‘no compelling evidence that recent rates of sea level rise are abnormal’

Posted: November 28, 2018 by oldbrew in Analysis, Natural Variation, research, sea levels

H/T Climate Depot
Allowing for limitations of global sea level data, it seems the endless cries of alarm and scary scenarios are not justifiable at this time.

Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry: Mean global sea level has risen at a slow creep for more than 150 years; since 1900, global mean sea level has risen about 7-8 inches.

The implications of the highest values of projected sea-level rise under future climate change scenarios are profound, with far-reaching socioeconomic and environmental implications.

However, these projections are regarded as deeply uncertain and the highest of these projections strain credulity…

Recent research has concluded that there is no consistent or compelling evidence that recent rates of sea level rise are abnormal in the context of the historical records back to the 19th century that are available across Europe…

Tide gauges also show that rates of global mean sea level rise between 1920 and 1950 were comparable to recent rates.

Continued here.

  1. oldbrew says:

    Should we prefer excessive fear to reality?

    Subsequent to the 2013 IPCC AR5, there has been a focus on the possible worst-case scenario for global sea level rise. Estimates of the maximum possible global sea level rise by the end of the 21st century range from 1.6 to 3 meters [5-10 feet], and even higher. These extreme values of possible sea level rise are regarded as extremely unlikely or so unlikely that we cannot even assign a probability. Nevertheless, these extreme, barely possible values of sea level rise are now becoming anchored as outcomes that are driving local adaptation plans – JC

  2. Roger W Carradice says:

    Dear Roger
    Can you help me? When considering sea level from what absolute datum do we measure it? We know that continents are moving and there are changes to the ocean basins so are these net zero or if there are significant changes do we know them and are they taken into account?

  3. BoyfromTottenham says:

    I am very disappointed that Dr Curry did not make the obvious point that these ‘projections’, whether by the IPCC or anyone else, are pure computer-generated fiction. I was surprised that she gave them any credibility at all. Real science uses real data, everything else is BS and should be ridiculed.

  4. oldbrew says:

    I suspect JC doesn’t want too many bunfights with the alarmists.

  5. BoyfromTottenham says:

    Oldbrew, then we need others with more guts to call these ‘projections’ out for what they are. Where are our Churchills?

  6. Bitter@twisted says:

    You mean “fraud”.