German Media On The Prophets Of NASA: “Prophesizing Gigantic Floods” – 200 Years In The Future!

Pre-Paris hype

The German media have been buzzing some with the recent NASA publication warning of rising sea levels for the future, and that we need to be very worried.

Maybe I’m reading more into the lines than I should, but I get the feeling that the increasingly dubious NASA climate science organization is no longer being taken 100% seriously by some major German outlets, who have started to label NASA scenarios and projections as “prophecies”.

For example Germany’s normally politically correct, devout green NTV here has the article bearing the title: “NASA prophesizes gigantic floods“.

Prophecies are more the sort of things one typically expects to hear from prophets. The trouble today is that anyone who claims to be a prophet or to possess prophet-like powers almost always gets equated to being a kook, quack, or charlatan. Moreover being labeled a prophet doesn’t get you much respect either. So you have to wonder about the NTV’s choice of words for the title of its story.

Could NTV journalists really be so dim and naïve as to actually believe in climate prophets?

NTV writes of an organization that seems to fancy itself as having visionary power to see the end of the world. NTV tells us:

An unavoidable sea level rise of at least one meter in the coming 100 to 200 years is the result of the latest research data.”

The NTV report then cites NASA prophet Tom Wagner:

NASA scientist Tom Wagner says that when the ice sheets break down on each other, even the risk of a sea level rise of three meters over the coming 100 to 200 years is thinkable.”

Okay, these visions may be still a bit fuzzy, but the NASA scientists prophets know almost for sure they are out there. And again the prophecy of doom gets repeated at the end of the article by prophet Steve Nerem:

‘Things will probably get worse in the future,’ prophesizes Nerem as a result of global warming.”

Again this is the NTV using the word “prophesizes”.

Of course there are only a few teensy-weensy problems with NASA’s prophecies of doom. 1) The hundreds of coastal tide gauges show no acceleration in sea level rise and they show a rise that is much less than what has been measured by the seemingly poorly calibrated satellites, 2) polar sea ice has recovered over the past years, 3) polar temperatures have flattened, or are even declining, 4) global temperatures have flattened, and 5) there’s a growing number of scientists who are now telling us that we should be expecting global cooling over the coming decades.

Moreover, new Greenland data show growing ice (more on this tomorrow).

I’ll let the readers judge for themselves on whether NASA scientists are true prophets, or if they are behaving more like snake oil peddling charlatans.

Myself I’ve lost all respect for the space organization. It’s become a grossly distorted caricature of what scientific research is about.

200 years in the future… yeah, right!

22 responses to “German Media On The Prophets Of NASA: “Prophesizing Gigantic Floods” – 200 Years In The Future!”

  1. Ed Caryl

    “Things will probably get worse in the future.” Self fulfilling prophecy. No points!

  2. Curious George

    Satellite measurements of the sea level change .. it strikes me as an extremely difficult undertaking; the sea surface is far from smooth, waves can be many meters high, how do you measure an average rise of 3 mm per year? How thick can a surface foam in a storm get? The NASA website explains how it is done (I don’t trust the methodology much), but it all looks like – we are measuring this, and it must be an average sea level, because we say so. I applaud them for trying but I would highly appreciate an analysis of underlying uncertainties.

  3. TedL
  4. DD More

    But using NASA’s calculations what would be the effect?

    “(4) Calculate the sea-level-rise answers by dividing the water volumes determined in #3 by the global surface-water area determined in #1, thereby spreading the effect of the ice sheet’s water throughout the expanse of the Earth’s surface-water area. The answers are:
    (a) (2,343,728 cubic kilometers)/(361,132,000 square kilometers) = 0.0065 kilometers = 6.5 meters for the
    Greenland ice sheet;
    (b) (26,384,368 cubic kilometers)/(361,132,000 square kilometers) = 0.0731 kilometers = 73.1 meters for the Antarctic ice sheet;
    (c) 6.5 meters + 73.1 meters = 79.6 meters for Greenland and Antarctica together.”
    http://pumas.jpl.nasa.gov/files/02_10_97_1.pdf

    So by NASA reasoning we will get meters of sea level rise, but still have the same sized ocean (361,132 Km^2). No place gets drowned by the new rise, so why worry.

  5. DirkH

    “Maybe I’m reading more into the lines than I should, but I get the feeling that the increasingly dubious NASA climate science organization is no longer being taken 100% seriously by some major German outlets, who have started to label NASA scenarios and projections as “prophecies”.”

    You do. NTV workers are selected to be dumb as a box of bricks in my experience, and 100% system-aligned. They wouldn’t know a linguistic subtlety if it settled down in their behind.

  6. Herve

    200 years ahead ! Very practical and riskless indeed ! No possibility at all to be blamed for wrong prevision.

  7. AndyG55

    A bit OF but the equalitarian far-left won’t like this (from Paul)

    “The study has found the bottom 60 per cent US households by income received about 10 per cent of the value of the four main ‘green energy’ tax credits available, while the top 20 per cent extracted 60 per cent of the benefit.”

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/us-green-energy-subsidies-unfair-and-ineffective-study-finds-the-global-warming-policy-forum-gwpf/

    1. DirkH

      It’s too bad sod is on an Internet-less trolliday; because he would explain to us how a subsidized energy production scheme with get-rich-quick benefits for the wealthy helps the poor in Africa.

    2. sod

      Hawaii is moving to 100% renewables, because it is cheaper.

      http://www.thenation.com/article/hawaiis-governor-dumps-oil-and-gas-in-favor-of-100-percent-renewables/

      Canberra will get 100% renewables, because it will help its industry.

      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-22/canberra-to-run-on-100pc-renewable-energy-by-2025/6716336

      We are changing the world (like we did with “acid rain”) and then you folks will cry “the prophecies did not come true”…

      1. DirkH

        Hawaii is an island. That islands generally have far higher energy costs than the mainland has been known to everyone since forever – except to you, as it turns out.

        Canberra is an artificial collection of brutalist blocks in which government bureaucrats are housed and has nothing to do with a real city.

        “We are changing the world (like we did with “acid rain”)”

        Rain is naturally acidic. THe Waldsterben did not happen as predicted. The desulphurization of lignite power plants happened in the mid 90ies, long after the Waldsterben SHOULD have happened.

        ” and then you folks will cry “the prophecies did not come true”…”

        So now you are claiming that a few wind turbines and solar panels CHANGED the outcome – when CO2 levels are still rising FASTER than assumed by the IPCC scenarios?

        sod, as usual you are blowing smoke and lie to everyone. You are a shameless character – quite characteristic of the warmunist I must say.

      2. John F. Hultquist

        I just read the article about Hawai’i you linked to in The Nation. I looked but did not find that the governor signed a prohibition of fossil fuel airplanes or ships visiting the islands. Maybe the writer forgot that important information.

        1. AndyG55

          And of course, the manufacturing base in Hawaii is just so VIBRANT !!! 🙂

          Then you can look at the REAL DATA

          http://www.hawaiianelectric.com/heco/Clean-Energy/Latest-Clean-Energy-News/About-Our-Fuel-Mix

          The table labelled
          Fuel Mix in Our Service Areas – 2014 Calendar Year*

          is particularly interesting !! roflmoa. !!

          1. AndyG55

            ps.. I strong recommend that if you want a good laugh.. look at that table I mention above. 🙂

          2. sod

            “Then you can look at the REAL DATA”

            you do understand that that table is for a power company and that those have not been the main driver of solar power?

            The real numbers for Hawaii are higher. you do not look at “REAL” data, but at the false data.

  8. John F. Hultquist

    I guess this is the same NASA work discussed by David Middleton (on WUWT, Friday A.M.). On that post there is a very small “gif – loop” of end-Pleistocene deglaciation followed by a chart of sea level rise over the same period.
    If I were talented with such things I would enlarge the gif-loop and slow it down, and along side I would animate a rising line showing the Holocene Transgression.
    Anyway, it is claimed young folks are better with visuals and less capable readers. Don’t know about that.

    I’ll prophesize ol’Mr. Sun will rise in the East on Saturday, and Sunday too. Should either of these events not happen – I’ll buy you a beer.

  9. cementafriend

    SOD who seems to have no technical understanding has again added a puerile comment. Canberra has been receiving all its electricity needs from the Snowy Mountains Hydro scheme since about 1962 when the Tumut 2 station was completed. The Commonwealth financed the scheme and takes 13% of all the output for the ACT. The total capacity of 3950MW is small beside the Chinese 3 Gorges dam of 22,000MW. Unfortunately Australia does not have high mountains like the Himalayas and stupid “Greens” have prevented dam building since the mid 1970’s.
    Hawaii could possibly get most its electricity need from geothermal (such as supplies electricity in New Zealand and Iceland) with its active volcanoes but then if there is a big eruption there may then be no electricity. It pays to diversify and generation with gas in remote areas makes sense.

  10. Mauri Ses. - Italy

    It really seems that NASA has been turning into a joke of an organization in this century; it is not just making laughable prophecies about the planet but it has also just been caught making terrible, terrible predictions regarding the current solar cycle 24!

    http://www.iceagenow.info: “Scientists Predict Big Solar Cycle,” blared the headline on NASA’s Science News website on Dec 2006. Dec. 21, 2006: Evidence is mounting: the next solar cycle is going to be a big one.
    Solar cycle 24, due to peak in 2010 or 2011 “looks like its going to be one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began almost 400 years ago,” says solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center. He and colleague Robert Wilson presented this conclusion last week at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco.

    So what actually happened?

    Instead of being “one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began,” it turns out that solar cycle 24 is the weakest solar cycle in more than 200 years.” – !!!!

    1. AndyG55

      They are of course, also predicting this years “hottest heffer” temperature to two decimal places (with 4 months still to go. lol ).

      In GISS, they will probably land exactly on the figure they prescribe… Reality.. NOT !!

      For GISS, its an AIM or DIRECTIVE, rather than a prediction.

  11. Oliver K. Manuel
  12. Mervyn

    It is sad but true that under Obama’s appointee – NASA Administrator, Charles Bolden – the reputation of NASA has been steadily eroding, much to the chagrin of numerous concerned former and current employees.

    Bolden has been warned by former NASA scientists about this problem. Bolden has failed to enforce scientific discipline as a matter of policy. Hence, the engagement of NASA in pseudo-science has become evident.

    Of course, we all know why. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

  13. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #194 | Watts Up With That?
  14. Divergence: climate predictions and “warmest year on record” versus observable reality | Atlas Monitor