New Paper On Atolls: “There Has Been A 7.3% Increase In Net Island Area Over The Past Century”!

What else can be said about all the doom and gloom nonsense from UN scientists surrounding the atolls and sea level? A new paper that is just out should make them red with embarrassment.

This new paper tells us that the atolls are doing just fine and are gaining in area! Read the paper’s abstract that now follows.

Coral islands defy sea-level rise over the past century: Records from a central Pacific atoll


The geological stability and existence of low-lying atoll nations is threatened by sea-level rise and climate change. Funafuti Atoll, in the tropical Pacific Ocean, has experienced some of the highest rates of sea-level rise (∼5.1 ± 0.7 mm/yr), totaling ∼0.30 ± 0.04 m over the past 60 yr. We analyzed six time slices of shoreline position over the past 118 yr at 29 islands of Funafuti Atoll to determine their physical response to recent sea-level rise. Despite the magnitude of this rise, no islands have been lost, the majority have enlarged, and there has been a 7.3% increase in net island area over the past century (A.D. 1897–2013). There is no evidence of heightened erosion over the past half-century as sea-level rise accelerated. Reef islands in Funafuti continually adjust their size, shape, and position in response to variations in boundary conditions, including storms, sediment supply, as well as sea level. Results suggest a more optimistic prognosis for the habitability of atoll nations and demonstrate the importance of resolving recent rates and styles of island change to inform adaptation strategies.”

Don’t you just love it when observational data clash with hysterical crystal ball model projections?

How About Protecting Today’s Real People, And Not An Impossible Climate Of The Future?

Reader Frederick Colbourne put Bangladesh and its woes in what I feel is a proper perspective. I’ve upgraded his comment to a post.

Once again it is a sad story that politicians are using computer-generated climate disasters of the far future as a cynical, lethal and obscenely expensive distraction of today’s real problems. The money flowing into the folly of “climate protection” would have been far better spent had it been invested where it was really needed. Worse it is distraction from the political failures of those calling for climate protection.

Comment by Frederick Colbourne:

Among journalists (and the public too) there is profound ignorance about the physical Earth. I recall from a beginning physical geography course that deltas subside and that also the great rivers gradually extend seaward by depositing silt and clay.

When I worked in Bangladesh last year on an urban development project last year, I found that other false claims are being made too: that offshore islands are being destroyed by climate change. However, the reality is that offshore islands drift with currents in the Gulf of Bengal.

So many myths about the Earth! There are even vestiges of the Garden of Eden myth: the belief that at some time in the past, the Earth was benign. Nature is neither benign nor malevolent.

Nature is indifferent to the affairs of Man. The geographical disadvantages of eastern Bengal are ancient but made worse by growth of population to over 100 million people in a land that has few resources apart from land and rivers. These rivers flood about 40% of the land each year.

Religious and political conflicts led to partition of British India 65 years ago. Since then Bangladeshis have suffered a war of independence and military rule, either overt or behind the scenes. Bangladesh is one of the worst-governed countries in the world.

Climate change is the least of Bangladesh’s worries.”


Truth Sinks Into The Mud: How German N24 Public Television Grossly Misled Viewers On Sea Level

German public television seems to have gotten extremely sloppy and misleading lately. Gone are the days of critical reporting and fact-checking, it seems.

Not long ago flagship ARD television, using tricky wording, sadly misled viewers into thinking that the more than 15,000 deaths caused by the Japan tsunami of 2011 were caused by the Fukushima nuclear reactor meltdown (Reality: not a single death has yet to be attributed to leaked radiation).


Image licensed under public domain via Wikimedia Commons

The latest gross deception, by what Germans are starting to call the “Lügenpresse” (the lying press), comes from German NDR public television site which got the entire science on Sundarbans sea level rise wrong.


River delta in India and Bangladesh sinking away: N24 forgets to mention sediment compaction as an important reason for rising waters

Climatic apocalyptic mood on 19 February 2015 at n24:

Extreme climate change: The Sundarbans have 15 years left
Climate change is threatening all of humanity, but some are especially impacted. In the Sundarbans already the livelihoods of 13 million people are threatened. […] Sea water has already swept over the spot of land on the Indian island of Bali where Mondol grew rice and operated fish ponds – just like earlier generations since about 200 years ago. Water has taken everything else away – and one day it will also take away the hut. ‘Every year we have to move a bit further inland,’ he says. Bali is considerably smaller than the Indonesian island with the same name. Mondol lives in the Sundarbans, a low lying delta region between India and Bangladesh that has 200 islands and round about 13 million inhabitants. Most of the homes are in an impoverished condition. The sea level in the region is rising about twice as fast as the global average. Tens of thousands already have become homeless. According to estimates by scientists, a large part of the Sundarbans could be submerged in 15 to 25 years.”

Delta regions are known for the gradual stabilization of their sediment – so-called compaction – sinking. This small detail was simply left out by n24. Here on April 30, 2013 Nature India explicitly pointed out that the flooding was not solely due to climate change:

Seven years after the first report on the ‘vanishing islands’ of Sundarbans, Subhra Priyadarshini revisits the fragile delta in the Bay of Bengal to find that it is not just climate change that threatens the existence of this world heritage mangrove tiger-land spread across the Indo-Bangladesh border. […]In the last 25 years, the rate of relative sea level rise comes close to 8 mm/year, significantly higher than the rate of 3.14 mm/year in the previous decade,’ he says. In a recent report he co-authored for the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)3, Hazra says besides global warming and the subsequent thermal expansion of water, the rather rapid subsidence of the Bengal delta (2-4 mm/year), compaction of silt and other local causes may be responsible for the exceptionally high rate of relative sea level rise in the Indian Sundarbans.

Science has already intensively studied the subsidence problem, and so it is peculiar that n24 did not mention this result. Geologist Till Hanebuth reported in 2013 on results from the delta region of Bangladesh. His team found natural subsidence of more than 4 millimeters per year. This rate is considerably higher than the climatic-related sea level rise. In the description of results of a project by the Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Association) it is stated:

Assessing the recent subsidence of the central coastal Delta of Bangladesh by dating submerged kilns The densely populated low lying Ganges‐Brahmaputra Delta is highly vulnerable to the global sea‐ level rise. In order to estimate the subsidence of the delta, we examined submerged salt‐producing kiln sites in the coastal Sundarbans. These kilns were built just above the previous winterly spring high‐tide level, but are currently located ~155 cm below the corresponding modern level. According to optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating, the kilns were ultimately fired ~300 years ago and salt production was terminated by a catastrophic event, which affected the kiln sites at different levels and locations. AMS‐14C ages of charcoal at the kiln’s base and associated mangrove stump horizons support the OSL dates. Based on the elevations and the ages, the 300‐year‐average rate of sinking of the outer delta is 5.2 ± 1.2 mm/a, which includes 0.8 mm/a of eustatic sea‐level rise. Reasonably postulating that the subsidence rate will not change during the next few decades and accepting the estimates of current sea‐ level rise of 1.8–3.0 mm/a or 2.7–7.1 mm/a, a RSL rise of 6.4 ± 1.7 mm/a or 8.9 ± 3.3 mm/a, respectively, must be assumed along the Sundarbans coasts.”

Similar subsidence was also found by Stanley & Hait (2000).


Teutonic Power Grab…Schellnhuber & Co. Tell World To Do As They Say, Or Globe Gets 230-Foot Sea Level Rise!

They’re back.

Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber and his WBGU have just released their latest Special Report: Climate Protection as a World Citizen Movement. The 126-page report is the 9th of its kind since the first one was published in 1995.


Professor Schellnhuber telling German Parliamentarians to act as he and his WBGU recommend, or else sea levels will rise 230 feet. Photo cropped from

Totalitarian designs

The latest Special Report is shrill and the underlying message is: Time is running out and unless policymakers do as us German scientists say, the world will end in catastrophe. The Special Report suggests that the normal democratic processes are failing and that governments must start heeding the instructions of the elite German group of Potsdam scientists. Schellnhuber, a person who openly admits having no background in sociology, insists that he and his fellow WBGU scientists be given the helm in all decision matters concerning climate policy.

Schellnhuber, the WBGU Chairman and Director of the alarmist Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), once recommended a watering down of democracy and more policy-making power being placed in the hands of far-sighted “experts”.

4 recommendations

The alarmist, climate doomsday obsessed site Klimaretter here writes that Hans Joachim Schellnhuber not long ago appeared before German Parliamentarians to present the “impending climate catastrophe” up close and “to explain the four recommendations of the Council”.

The climate alarmist Klimaretter gives their four recommendations:

First recommendation, Klimaretter writes:

First the expertise of climate science must be securely anchored in the political process of climate action. Also when, as Schellnhuber emphasizes, policy making and science are of two different realms, science is essential for keeping the world climate policy on course: ‘Without a compass, you cannot steer a ship.'”

Here we see Schellnhuber & Co. are not content with simply supplying governments with data, but they also insist on being the ones guiding future policy for global society. But how can we know that their science is not being tainted by their political convictions? We can’t. This is why it is so dangerous to put so much into the hands of such a tiny group…who happen to be the most alarmist at that.

The second recommendation, Klimaretter writes:

Secondly there should be the right for countries to file climate protection lawsuits in constitutional courts in order to increase the societal pressure on the governments. A strong involvement by the civil society is decisive in pushing climate protection forward. The ‘global societal contract for climate protection’ does not only manifest itself in demonstrations such as the recent one in New York, but also in the strengthening of the Divestment Movement.

Not only do the WBGU scientists want to be the ones running planetary policymaking, but they want it institutionalized.

Third recommendation:

Thirdly the two-degrees Celsius target has to be established as international law because only by limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius can the consequences for the societies in many countries be managed. A continued business-as-usual CO2 emission would not only lead to a melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, but also of the East Antarctic. That would bring about a sea level rise of 70 meters.”

Here the scientists, who to many readers, by now are surely beginning to appear as the quintessential mad scientists, are claiming that sea levels will rise and drown large parts of the planet if their requests do not become binding international law. Hard to be believe they’ve made it this far.

Fourth recommendation

Schellnhuber warns that time is running out and is calling for “flat zero” global carbon emissions already by the year 2070 in order to reach the 2°C target. “At the latest by 2030 Co2 emissions must reach their peak and start downward.”

That demand, and their seemingly complete unawareness of the 18-year pause and growing scientific literature showing only moderate CO2 sensitivity, suggests that the WBGU are very remote from reality.

Since the WBGU was established in the early 1990s, they’ve published 9 lengthy special reports and 14 even lengthier flagship reports…all pushing for radical societal transformation. Seems the Potsdam scientists are more preoccupied with being the architects of social adventurism than serious scientists objectively looking at the recent data and findings.


Senior Meteorologist Demolishes, Mocks Alfred Wegener Institute Claims Of “Unprecedented Antarctica Ice Loss”

UPDATE: Klaus-Eckart Puls’s rebuttal is also confirmed by MIT. When observations clash with runaway assumptions…

Puls, K.E.  EIKE

Veteran German meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls. Photo: EIKE

Antarctic Melt Alarm by the AWI …at -93°C!
By EIKE meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls
(Translated, edited by P Gosselin)

On August 10, 2010, a new record cold was measured in Antarctica [1]: -93.2°C. Thus the previous record of -89.2°C set at the Vostok Research Station on 21 July 1983 was smashed by 4°C. The annual mean temperature in Antarctica at ice sheet at elevations of 2000 to over 4000 metres range from -30 to -50°C, and the trend is downward [2]. Now the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) has announced in a press release [3]: “A record retreat in the ice sheets“. Can ice sheets melt at such record low temperatures? Has the AWI discovered some new physical law?

In the AWI release the following amazing thing can be read:

Researchers from the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, have for the first time extensively mapped Greenland’s and Antarctica’s ice sheets with the help of the ESA satellite CryoSat-2 and have thus been able to prove that the ice sheets of both regions are momentarily declining at an unprecedented rate.”

These ice sheets mainly located in Greenland and Antarctica and are mostly around 3000 meters thick. On the Greenland ice sheet the annual mean temperatures are about -20°C, and -40°C in Antarctica. Antarctica is a huge polar continent, and Greenland is an island (peninsula) with a latitude range of 10°- 30° from the Pole and borders on the Arctic ocean. This is one explanation for the considerable temperature and climate differences. While Greenland has marginally lost ice during the summer over the last 20 years, the change in ice volume in Antarctica is very much in dispute [4] and hardly measureable with the needed accuracy (Fig. 1).

Figure 1  Trends in ice ice mass [5].

Only a small part of Antarctica has lost mass

Contrary to the claims made by the AWI, there are also satellite evaluations concluding that there has been a positive ice mass gain in Antarctica (Fig. 2):

Figure 2  Antarctic ice growth. [6]

Interesting in the release are the AWI claims about the “somewhat hidden” limitations for Antarctica:

The rate of loss for the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has tripled for the same time period


The scientists observed the most rapid elevation changes…at the Pine-Island-Glacier in Western Antarctica.”


But: while the glaciers in Western Antarctica and on the Antarctic peninsula are shrinking, the ice sheet of Eastern Antarctica grew– however at such a minimal amount that the growth was unable to compensate for the loss on the other side of the continent.”

Firstly, here once again the Antarctic Peninsula and Western Antarctica – where the Pine Island Glacier is located – are being used as the poster child for the dramatic ice loss and for climate change. Unfortunately it has long been known that the ice calving and the melting there are related meteorological reasons: cyclic changes in the West-Wind-Drift (storms) and with associated sea currents [7]. The result: Almost the entire Antarctic continent has gotten colder over the past 30 years. The only exception is the Antarctic Peninsula.

West Antarctica and Antarctic Peninsula melt due to cycles

This is because the Antarctic Peninsula in located in the west wind zone of the southern hemisphere. This southern hemisphere wind belt is subject to stochastic cyclic atmospheric pressure variations, as is the case with all other global wind systems. This is analogous to the northern hemispheric North Atlantic Oscillation NAO). In the southern hemisphere it is known as the Antarctic Oscillation (AAO).

At the site “Wetter-Lexikon” (Weather Dictionary) [8] it is defined as:

The Antarctic Oscillation (AAO) is the fluctuation of the atmospheric pressure between the 40° south and 65° south latitudes. That means that this oscillation is defined by atmospheric pressure difference over the South Pole and the South Tropical regions. The strength of the AAO has an impact on the wind regime at the middle and upper latitudes of the southern hemisphere. The AAO influences the climate over a large part of the southern hemisphere, for example Antarctica, Australia, and the southern parts of South America.

The AAO index is computed from the atmospheric pressure differences. When the AAO is negative, then the cold high predominates over Antarctica. The polar east winds blow strongly around the South Pole. …. In the positive phase the west current shifts southwards so that more rain than normal falls in the southern part of South America and in Australia. Moreover mild air can reach down to the Antarctic coast.”

This means the Antarctic Peninsula can be affected!

This peninsula, including the South Shetland Island, is located in the west between 60°-75°S, and thus in the much feared cyclone zone of the Roaring Forties and Shrieking Sixties.

see caption

Figure 3: Antarctic Oscillation (AAO). [10]

Before about 1980 there was a dominance of meridional weather patterns, a time when zonal weather patterns predominated. That meant a strengthening of the westwind circulation and thus storm activity. At the same time milder air from the Pacific was led to the Antarctic Peninsula. Thus storms with mild air were led from the Pacific and resulted in ice meting processes. Moreover, higher waves mechanically broke up the ice. Here in recent times was the ice break at the Wilkins Ice Shelf at the west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula [9]. The causes are meteorological and have nothing to do with a “climate catastrophe”.

When it comes to climate, the Antarctic Peninsula is only 1% of the Antarctic area.

So where is the accelerated sea level rise?

Despite all the uncertainties mentioned above, the AWI still comes to the following result:

When one calculates both together, the volume of both ice sheets is shrinking by 500 cubic kilometers per year.”

This of course would have to lead to an acceleration in sea level rise which one could observe. However, there has been no detected sea level rise acceleration! A very thorough overview of the latest peer-review publications [11] in fact reaches the opposite result:

Numerous evaluations of coastal tide gauges over 200 years as well as the gravity measurements of the GRACE satellite deliver again and again a sea level rise of about 1.6 mm/yr. … Here…the trends are in agreement: The sea level rise has been linear for at least the last 100 years; there is no acceleration in sea level rise. A signal indicating man-made CO2 (AGW) is nowhere to be seen. This stands in stark contradiction to the claims and especially the alarmist prognoses of the IPCC and some climate institutes.”

Two other facts on ice that were glossed over (avoided?) in the AWI press release:

1. In Antarctica there is a “100-year record” maximum sea ice extent [12]:

The sea ice around Antarctica has steadily increased since satellite measurements began in 1979 and in June, 2014, (peak of the Antarctic winter) reached a new record with respect to total area.”

2. At its current condition, the Arctic sea ice will reach its low late-summer peak in September, and will be well above the minima of the last years:

Arctic Sea Ice Extent

Figure 4 [13]

AWI’s own Antarctic station has measured a cooling trend

Finally, in a release [14], the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) also itself announced a 30-year cooling trend at its Neumayer-Station (70°S). According to the definition of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), this is a climate trend. The AWI wrote:

The meteorological observatory at the Neumayer-Station III is an official climate observation station of the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Ocean Research…has been measuring daily the air temperature in Antarctica for 30 years.”

The AWI published the result in a chart with a linear regression trend (Fig. 5):


Figure 5: Temperature cooling trend at the NEUMAYER Station [14].

However the formulation used by the AWI to describe that cooling trend is quite peculiar (deceptive?):

A result of the long-term research: At the Neumayer-Station it has not gotten warmer over the last three decades.”

Indeed not! It has in fact gotten colder there. Why did they use the blurred formulation “not warmer” when the scientific finding on this AWI dataset is clear? Also at the Neumayer-Station there is an Antarctic climate trend showing cooling.

Most of Antarctica is cooling – not warming as the AWI implies

There are even more peculiar AWI formulations:

This development however is a regional change and the measurements from the Neumayer-Station III do not in any way represent the global climate changes.”

Here the question that comes to mind is: What is that supposed to be about?

Who could ever get the idea that a regional or a local temperature trend would allow conclusions to be drawn for global trends? Or should nobody get the idea that global warming” is not even global?

There are also other peculiarities in the AWI release:

Only at the center of Antarctica has it not gotten warmer.”

The Neumayer-Station (with its cooling trend) is located at 70°S, i.e. far away from the “centerof Antarctica. There it has gotten colder. Moreover the measurements and facts presented here and provided in the footnotes below contradict what the AWI is claiming: “Only in the center of Antarctica has it not gotten warmer“.

With the excption of the Antarctic Peninsula (<1% of the Antarctic area) there is a cooling trend in Antarctica and it also includes the surrounding sea ice [15]:

Both the UAH and the RSS datasets [16] show that the temperature surrounding Antarctica has slipped a few tenths of a degree Celsius 0.1°C from 1979 to today. The temperature anomaly in both datasets has dropped below zero, i.e. below the long-term reference mean value.” 


Measurements in Antarctica show a secular cooling trend. The exception is the Antarctic Peninsula and a part of West Antarctica (approx. 1% of the Antarctic area). In 2010 a new all-time record cold was measured: -93.2°C. The sea ice floating around Antarctica reached “100-year record” daily highs in 2014. With these observations, how anyone could conclude there has been a record ice sheet retreat” [3]  remains a secret of the AWI.


[1]  10 Dec 2013

[2] trend-in-der-antarktis/ 24 Dec 2012

[3] www.awi._maps/  20 August 2014

[4] 12 October 2012 and September 10, 2012

[5]  (1)  6 July 2014

       (2)  10 July 2014

[6]  12 October 2012

[7] 24 Jan 2012

[8] Wetter-Lexikon;

[9] Eisberg voraus, and:


[11]  (a)  8 July 2014

(b)  14 July 2014

(c)  11 July 2014

(d) 9 July 2014

[12] 2 July 2014


[14] Meteorologisches Observatorium wird Klimabeobachtungsstation – 30 Jahre Temperatur-Messungen an der Antarktis-Forschungsstation Neumayer, 12 January 2012:

[15]  Die Temperatur im Bereich des antarktischen Meereisgürtels sinkt und die Meereis-Ausdehnung  wächst”, 11 November 2008;

[16] Anm.: UAH = University of Alabama in Huntsville; RSS = Remote Sensing Systems


Comprehensive EIKE Review Of Sea Level Rise Shows TOPEX/POSEIDON/JASON Results Are Inflated, Faulty

One of the last remaining bastions of the global warming scare is sea level rise.

Unsurprisingly, a handful of alarmists are still desperately clinging to accelerating sea level rise, insisting that it is just around the corner. However a new analysis on the subject by veteran meteorologist Klaus -Eckard Puls of the European Institute of Climate and Energy (EIKE) shows that sea level rise is not accelerating, and that there are signs showing a deceleration. That bastion is on the verge of collapse.

The EIKE review first starts by focusing on German coastal sea level rise, sections 1-4, before shifting on global sea level rise, section 5-10. The focus here is on the latter.

Concerning global sea level data, Puls starts by looking at a peer-reviewed tide gauge analysis conducted by distinguished Swedish scientist Nils-Axel Mörner who evaluated 182 tide gauges scattered around the world, some going back more than 200 years.

Mörner’s results uncovered gaping differences when he compared the tide gauge results to those reported by the TOPEX/POSEIDON/JASON satellite. His conclusion:

Removing outliers of obvious uplift or subsidence, there are 182 records left, which forms a nice Gaussian distribution around a mean value of +1.65 mm/yr.

Satellite altimetry is a new and important tool. The mean rate of rise from 1992 to 2013 is +3.2 ±0.4 mm (UC, 2013). This value is not a measured value, however, but a value arrived at after much “calibration” of subjective nature (Mörner, 2004, 2011a, 2013a). The differences between the three data sets (±0, +1.65 and +3.2 mm/yr ) are far too large not to indicate the inclusions of errors and mistakes.”

He adds:

The evaluation of worldwide 182 tide gauges yields a mean secular sea level rise of 16 cm, without a GIA [Glacial Isostatic Adjustment] correction. A secular acceleration in rise was not found, and thus there is no AGW-CO2 climate signal.”

Puls also quotes an article by Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt at DkS:

Despite the satellite measurements, naturally the tide gauge measurements were continued. And they don’t mislead in any way as they stubbornly stick to their old course of being significantly below 2 mm/year.”

Puls provides three charts showing the glaring discrepancy:



“Amazing agreement between tide gauge data and GRACE”

So which is right? TOPEX/POSEIDON/JASON or the observed tide gauges? Next Puls looks at the data obtained from the GRACE satellite, which show they are practically in exact agreement with the tide gauge measurement. Puls writes, citing multiple sources of peer-reviewed literature:

Both extremely different measurement methods of tide gauges [1.7 mm/yr] and gravity measurements (GRACE satellite [1.6 mm/yr]) agree with each other amazingly well at [near] 1.7 mm/yr, They are off by only a millimeter!  That leads us to the question we often find in the literature of why the TOPEX/POSEIDON/JASON satellite measurement method – the only one of all methods – yields values that are almost double.”

From this Puls summarizes at the end:

The constant stream of alarmist announcements of a supposed dramatic sea level rise now taking place and in the future cannot be confirmed. Rather it is even refuted by the measurement data. Worldwide neither the tide gauge data (200 years) nor the satellite data (20 years) indicate an acceleration in sea level rise. This is in stark contradiction to all the former and current claims of the IPCC, some institutes and a number of climate models. Moreover there is evidence that indicate the satellite data have been ‘overly corrected'[28]: “Instead of the satellite data being adjusted to match the real measured data at the surface and being adjusted downwards, there is now a discrepancy between the tide gauge and satellite measurements, unfortunately even today. And it appears to bother no one. A mysterious case.”

Puls is telling us that if you wish to have the true story on sea level rise, then look at the tide gauge data and to be very careful with the (calibrated) data from TOPEX/POSEIDON/JASON. Again some, it would appear, are playing it very loose with the data.

Overall the review by Puls is comprehensive and an English version would be extremely useful, especially for the scientists at the IPCC.


Climate Profoundly Impacted Development Of Civilization…Cool Periods Brought On Plagues/Death

A Short History of the Human Race
Part 4/4. The Iron Age to the Present
Research by Ed Caryl

Climate historians usually recognize one Holocene Climate Optimum, from the end of the last ice age to about 4000 years ago. But as we have seen in this series of articles, there were three major warm periods, the first in the Upper Neolithic from 11,000 years BP to the 8.2 KY event, another from 8.2 KY to the 5.9 KY event, then the Bronze Age from 5.9 KY to 3.2 KY before present.

Each warm period resulted in a rise in sea level, the first melting most of the remaining ice from the ice age, the second finishing off the last ice in Canada and northern Europe. Each of these warm periods gave rise to a surge in population and technology. Each warm period advanced civilization. In the Bronze Age, empires arose in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Anatolia. At 3200 years ago, all this came to an end.

At 3200 years BP, cold dropped sea levels by over 2 meters. Populations went on the move in response to crop failures. The Egyptian, Hittite, and Mycenaean Greek empires collapsed. Piracy (the Sea People) reigned supreme in the Mediterranean. No one knows for sure who the Sea People were because their incursions did not result in their establishing another empire, they simply looted and destroyed most of the cities around the Mediterranean. This was the Greek Age of Heroes. The time Homer attempted to record in the Iliad and the Odyssey. The history of this period survives as myth. This was also the time of Moses as recorded in the first four books of the Bible.


Figure 1 (from upper to lower trace) is sea level, Greenland ice core, and Antarctic ice core temperatures, with the orange Alpine Recession time line at bottom. Some notable events are indicated on the Greenland temperature trace.

Trade was interrupted during this period, so tin imports for bronze were cut off. Bronze continued to be recycled, but the shortage encouraged the use of iron. This was the beginning of the Iron Age. The Iron Age should probably be called the steel age because pure iron is nearly as soft as bronze. Early blacksmiths learned quickly that working carbon into the iron made it much harder. Doing so results in steel, but making steel requires high temperatures making it more costly, so steel edges were welded to iron axes to produce an edge that would remain sharp with use while the whole tool remained less expensive. This is sometimes still done today.

Cool periods brought on plagues and death

The Greek Dark Age lasted for 300  years. Other areas recovered a bit more quickly, but Greece even lost their written language during this interval, only recovering it in the Greek Archaic Period. The Archaic Period began during a warm period seen in a 200-year period of Alpine Recession, sea level stabilization, and southern hemisphere warming. In this period, architecture, art and literature of all kinds flourished. Population increased. Greek colonies were established all around the Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts. All this came to a halt in another cool period.

In 430 BCE, the Plague of Athens struck. It has not been determined what pathogen caused this plague. Typhus, typhoid, the Ebola virus, Marburg, Small Pox, and Measles have all been suggested as possibilities. It killed a third to two-thirds of the population of Athens, including their general at the time, Pericles. It weakened the Greeks to the extent that the Macedonians, and then the Romans, dominated Greece until the middle ages. Population and trade growth at this time exacerbated the spread of disease across the then known world. If the Plague of Athens was caused by the Ebola or Marburg virus, import of animals from Africa, as well as overcrowding and poor sanitation, was the likely cause.

Temperatures and sea levels were rising after this time. Alexander the Great conquered most of the Middle East, but after he died, his generals couldn’t hold that territory. Rome began to flourish, and by 100 Common Era (CE), had conquered most of Europe and a large part of the Middle East. The glaciers in the Alps were in recession for 300 years, 150 years before, and 150 years after, the birth of Christ. Edpart4_2

Figure 2 is a map of the Roman Empire in the time of Emperor Trajan. (Wikipedia Commons)

A period of cooling then began in about the year 150 ACE. The Hatepe/Taupo Lake VEI 7 eruption took place in 186 CE. The dust and sulfates may have precipitated more cooling, and the effects were seen in Rome and China. Sea levels began to fall. Crops in northern Europe began to fail. Disease began to take a toll.

The Antonine Plague struck Rome in 165 CE, lasting for 15 years. It killed up to one million people and devastated the Roman army. A few years later, the Plague of Cyprian in 250 to 270 CE repeated this devastation. These plagues carried off several Roman Emperors and caused manpower shortages in agriculture and the Roman army. During this period, germanic tribes began moving south across Europe, putting pressure on Rome at a time when Rome could least resist.

As the temperature dropped from the high of the Roman Warm Period, conflict and migrations stirred Europe and the middle East. Plagues and warfare continued to impact populations. For example, the population of Rome went from one or two million at its hight in the 2nd Century to as low as 100,000 in the 6th Century. The Plague of Justinian struck the eastern Mediterranean in 541 CE. Over the next few years it killed perhaps 25% of the population. As many as 25 million people died over the next three centuries. More migrations took place. This population summary is taken from Wikipedia here. The population levels of Europe during the Middle Ages can be roughly categorized:[1]

•       280–400 (Late Antiquity): population decline.
•       400–1000 (Early Middle Ages): stable at a low level.
•       1000–1250 (High Middle Ages): population boom and expansion.
•       1250–1350 (Late Middle Ages): stable at a high level.
•       1350–1420 (Late Middle Ages): steep decline
•       1420–1470 (Late Middle Ages): stable at a low level.
•       1470–onward: slow expansion gaining momentum in the early 16th century.

Notice how this description follows the global temperature as seen in the sea level curve in Figure 1. During the Medieval Warm Period, 950 to 1250 CE, and the resulting population boom and expansion, the construction of large cathedrals began all across Europe. The Vikings expanded across the Atlantic to Iceland and Greenland, even briefly establishing a colony in Newfoundland. All this came to and end, again because of climate. Mt Rinjani in Indonesia, erupted in a VEI 7 event in 1257 CE. This event may have precipitated the Little Ice Age. There was a famine across Europe in 1315, caused by bad weather triggered by another volcano, Mount Tarawera in New Zealand. The Black Death struck in 1346, beginning in the Crimea. It is estimated that 30 to 60% of the European population died. The Spörer Solar Minimum from 1460 to 1550 contributed to low temperatures. Edpart4_3

Figure 3

The low-stand in global temperature in the Little Ice Age is reflected in the CO2 level as seen in the Antarctic Law Dome ice core data, Figure 3. This is because of lower sea surface temperatures. Low temperatures span the Maunder Minimum and end at the Dalton Minimum of the early 19th Century.

If the solar minimums of the 15th and 17th centuries contributed to the Little Ice Age, then the Modern Maximum must contribute to our current higher temperatures. As one can clearly see, high temperatures drive increasing populations, increasing crops, increasing innovation and technology.

Low temperatures drive famine, disease, social unrest, and declining populations. In the last 10,000 years, There were many times when the temperatures were higher than today. These were times when mankind expanded in many ways. We have had times of cold in the recent and far past. These were times when humanity declined.

We need not fear warmer temperatures. We do need to prepare for cooler temperatures, whether those arrive next winter, decade, century, or millennium.


Holocene Cold Spells Brought Drought And Famine…Sea Levels Were Often Much Higher Than Today

A Short History of the Human Race
The Climb Out Of The Ice Age
Part 2
By Ed Caryl

Below is a plot of sea level and temperature for the last 21,000 years, when the world warmed out of the last ice age, and civilization became possible. This is the end of the Upper Pleistocene and the dawn of the Holocene. Note, that at the end of the last ice age it took 12,000 years for all the ice to melt. It was a long slog out of the caves. That first warm period, from 10,200 Before Present (BP) to 8200 BP was warmer than it is today, even though a third of the ice was still melting. The last major ice melted about 6500 years ago.


Figure 1 is a plot of the last 21,000 years. The heavy purple and green traces are sea level with the scale on the right. The thin rust and blue traces are temperature from a greenland ice core and the Antarctic Dome C ice core respectively with the scale on the left. Three other time lines are: thick blue, the time of the last North African Pluvial period, when the Sahara was a grassland; dark orange, the time of the Persian Gulf flooding; and the light orange timeline, interrupted several times, were times of Alpine glacier recession. The short 8.2 kilo year cold period is marked in light blue. Various sea level high stands just above the green sea level trace are labeled in the legend. The grey time-line is the time of the Clovis Amerindian culture. The pink timeline is the time of the Folsom Amerindian culture.

I call your attention to several things in Figure 1. From right to left, old to more recent: The end of the ice age began about 20,000 years ago, when the northern hemisphere suddenly warmed by 5°C as seen at the source of the Greenland ice, the North Atlantic. The Southern Ocean, as seen at Dome C, did not warm for another 2000 years. But, the Bølling Interstadial warming took place simultaneously, globally, 14,500 years ago. During that short warming interval, the ancestors of the American Indians made their way across the Beringian plain, down either the west coast of what is now Canada, or down through an ice-free corridor through Alaska and central Canada, thence down across the length of the Americas to as far south as Terra Del Fuego in just a couple of thousand years.

In North America, by 13,500 years BP, the Amerindian Clovis culture was living off the megafauna, the large mammals present in this era, using beautifully worked large stone spear-points. 1500 years later, after the megafauna were killed off, either by the Clovis people or the cold Younger Dryas period, they morphed into the Folsom Culture, using smaller stone spear-points more suited to the smaller remaining animals.

In North Africa, and southwest Asia, beginning 15,000 years ago, because earth’s axis tilt began to favor the northern hemisphere during summer, the deserts were favored with additional summer monsoon rainfall. This allowed more human migration from north Africa into the Levant. At this time the Persian Gulf was a low valley watered by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and several others, some now dry wadis, combining into the Ur Schott river, and before the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), at least two large lakes. Fresh water springs, now 4 or 5 fathoms under the gulf off Bahrain, supplied additional water.


Figure 2 is a history of the Persian Gulf over the period from 74,000 years before present to 6,000 years ago. Source here.

There must have been people living in this valley, though because it is now flooded with 40 to 60 meters of water, the archeology necessary to prove it will be very difficult. But we do know that those occupation sites shown in the Stage IV panel above appeared very suddenly 8500 years ago on the Arabian shore and the people in those sites came from somewhere close by as they share a common and unique culture, the Ubaid culture. This valley may have been the source of the Eden stories. The sea level at the time of the Ubaid culture didn’t stop rising when it reached the level it has now. It rose an additional 5 meters in this area, flooding what is now southern Iraq for a hundred miles inland. Ur was established as a port, on the shore of this inland sea. There is evidence of reed-hulled sail boats in this time period, including bitumen fragments of the coating used to protect the reed structure, ceramic toy models, and an image on pottery showing a bipod masted craft. The ruins of Ur are now in the desert northwest of Basra, Iraq, far from the sea.

In this same period, Doggerland in what is now the North Sea, was also being flooded. The last bit of land there, what is now Dogger Bank, was an ever-shrinking island for several thousand years. Human produced artifacts have been dredged up by fishermen for many years. The last bit of land there went under about 6500 years ago.

Florida was also much larger before the sea level rose. Any coastal activity by Clovis culture people along the coast of the Americas is now under water. This is also true of many areas along in the Red Sea, the coast of India, and southeast Asia. A large area in what is now the South China Sea, the Sunda Strait, was also dry land and almost certainly settled.

The warm period from 11,500 to 8200 years ago was a time of many important advances for the human race. In this period, most of the important animals and agricultural crops we know today were domesticated in the Persian Gulf and Fertile Crescent region. Before this time people were nomadic, moving from one food source to another in the course of each year, building shelter as needed or living in caves. After this time many people lived in villages in permanent dwellings. By 8000 years BP, corn (maize) was domesticated in central Mexico.

As an example, Jericho is the oldest permanently occupied town, with the oldest level dating from 11,400 years BP. Before this time, the site had been used only as a temporary camp, as there is a large permanent spring nearby. The oldest level even had a 2 meter wall all around it with a watchtower that is still standing as it was buried in the tell. The dwellings were round pit houses, half sunken into the ground, with stone walls and a “wattle and daub” or adobe roof. World-wide, this type of house appears as the first permanent type dwelling in many cultures. It is still found in Northern Syria. At a similar village 5 miles north of Jericho, seedless domesticated figs have been found dating from this era. These would have had to have been propagated by cuttings, as the seeds never developed beyond the embryonic stage. Grains found at early Jericho were still of the wild variety, though they were gathered in quantity and stored for later use.

At Ur and H3 (above map, Figure 2, stage IV), domesticated grains were found, and 8200 years ago, evidence of irrigation, as well as domestic cattle, sheep, and goats. At this time, the domestic cat is found, though who domesticated who has not been established. Cats seem to have wandered in from the desert, found a source of food (domestic mice and domestic house swallows feeding on the stored domestic grain) and shelter, and decided to stay on. Some authors say this is “self-domestication.” I suspect cats domesticated us.

The first Holocene cold snap occurred 8200 years ago. Global temperature dropped about 2 degrees as seen at both poles. This lasted for about 200 years and was accompanied by drought and famine. This forced an increasing reliance on domesticated crops and animals, triggered the use of irrigation in Mesopotamia, and the domestication of corn (maize) in Central America. In North America, this split up the Folsom Culture people and drove the beginning of tribalism in the Paleo-Amerindians. This cold and arid spell was overcome by the technology, and the animal and plant domestication, that had developed in the earlier warm period.

Advances were made possible by the warm period that began more than 3000 years before all the ice melted. Sea levels were rising to be much higher than today and the human race was thriving on all continents except Antarctica. Warm is good. Cold is bad.

Next: The later Holocene and the rise of empires.


Data Show Holocene Sea Levels Trending Downwards…2 Meters Higher 4000 And 7000 Years Ago!

Holocene Sea Levels
By Ed Caryl

There are many indications that sea level was much higher immediately after the last ice sheets melted 7000 years ago. There were other high-stands in the intervening years. Two sources are presented here that attempt to measure past sea levels.

Most Holocene sea level studies depend on geological and archeological evidence and a good deal of speculation. Two studies were found that have substantial evidence, presented in detail.

The first (Aus K.-E. BEHRE, Probleme der Küstenforschung, Bd.28, Isensee-Verlag, Oldenburg, 2003) was found as second and third hand charts in Frans J.P.M. Kwaad’s paper here, in Dutch, translated with Google Translate. The original Behre papers are behind a paywall, here. Other sources cite Behre, but some cast doubt on his work without offering alternatives.

From the charts, new curves were constructed in Excel so that Post Glacial Rebound (PGR) corrections could be made, and curves compared. Behre never took PGR into account in his work. He was also charting the high water marks, not MSL, so his charts set the present sea level to 1.75 meters. To correct for this, 1.75 meters were subtracted from his data. The data were collected in the stretch of seacoast called the German Bight, the area from Dutch Friesland to Danish Friesland, the south coast of the North Sea, centered on Wilhelmshaven.

I took the Wilhelmshaven PGR uplift figure as the starting point for the correction. PGR changes over time, doubling in about every 2000 years as one goes back to the end of the glacial retreat 7000 years ago. Caryl_1

Figure 1a above


Figure 1b. Both Figures 1a and 1b are from F. J. P. M. Kwaad here. Click for larger view.

The next data are from the Western Pacific, specifically the Yellow River Delta and the Sunda Strait, taken from J. P. Liu et al, 2004, Holocene Development of the Yellow River’s subaqueous delta, North Yellow Sea. Marine Geology, 209(1-4): page 60. This chart describes the sea level rise at the end of the last ice age. Don’t be confused by the reversal in the horizontal axis. In the literature, time can run left to right or right to left. The time scales can also have zero at the birth of Christ, or at the present day.

Caryl_2 Figure 2 is the sea level rise from 22,000 to 6000 years ago.

The data from these charts, with PGR and High Water correction, results are shown in Figure 3:


Figure 3 is a plot of the last 10,000 years of sea level, combining data from figures 1a, 1b, and 2.

In Figure 3, we can see the agreement between the two data sources for the period from 6000 years before present to 10,000 years before present, validating the procedure.

Figure 4 focuses on the last 8000 years.

By focusing on the last 8000 years, we can also see the sea level high stands at the Medieval Warm period, the Roman Warm Period, and the Egyptian/Minoan Warm Period as well as the Holocene Climate Optimum after all the great ice sheets melted. These latter two high stands are roughly two meters above the current sea level. The low stands are about one meter below current sea level.

When looking at these, keep in mind that there is a delay between temperature and sea level. That delay depends on the amount of temperature change and the level from which the temperature changed. In Figure 4, the delay seems to average at least 200 years.

In the last 8000 years, sea level has been substantially higher than at present, up to 2 meters or more higher in two periods four to seven thousand years ago. Sea level during the Holocene has been falling since that period.


Most Of The World’s Coastal Population Is In Fact Personally Experiencing Very Little Sea Level Rise

Sea Level As We Experience It
By Ed Caryl

Nils-Axel Môrner is a Swedish sea level specialist. He claims that sea level is not rising more than about 1.1 mm/year, that the satellite data has been wrongly calibrated, and uplift and subsidence errors have contaminated the tide gauge records. In my research on sea level, some articles and papers show facts that indicate he might not be wrong.

The majority of tide gauges are at population centers that are also in areas where uplift and subsidence occur. For example, most of the east coast of the U. S. is subsiding, and most of Scandinavia is rebounding. The Pacific rim is very tectonically active with a mixture of up and down. So the real question is:

What is the sea level trend that most people are experiencing?

It is the sea level average trend for all tide gauges without any correction for uplift or subsidence. Here is that figure, their Figure 10, from here,


Figure 1 is a simple mean trend of all raw data from all tide gauges, with no corrections, simply normalized relative to their 1961 to 1990 values. The lower plot is the number of extant stations in each year. The trend in the upper plot from 1900 to 2000 is about 0.5 mm/year or less.

Figure 1 would seem to indicate that sea level might have been higher in 1900 than at present. This is not true. The problem is that in 1900 there were only 40 or 50 stations, and they were skewed toward stations with subsidence problems showing rapidly rising sea level. As the station numbers increased, more stations were added with uplift or stability, rather than added stations with subsidence, skewing the data in the opposite direction. But, the upper plot in Figure 1 is the sea level experience of most of the population.

Additional resources:


Long Term Tide Gauge Data Show 21st Century Sea Level Rise Will Be Approximately As Much As The 20th Century

330 Years of Sea Level

By Ed Caryl

Sea level data suffer from the same problem as temperature and other climate measures; there isn’t enough of it. Satellite sea level data only goes back twenty years, even less than the satellite temperature data. Fortunately, because the West was civilized by seafaring nations, we have some tide gauge records back into the 19th century for locations in Europe and a few locations around the world. These go back far enough that the chief source of error becomes not measurement accuracy or care in record keeping, but Post-Glacial Rebound (PGR) or Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA).

As described in Rebound, my last article, PGR for the Nordic countries, and other ports around the Baltic Sea, make sea level measurements in those ports a measure of PGR, not sea level. Fortunately, accurate GPS PGR measurements have been made for nearly all the tide gauges in the world, and these measurements can be used to correct the tide gauge sea level measurements.

Fifteen tide gauge records from around the world were downloaded from PSMSL Explorer, and one record from Amsterdam NAP. These were selected based on quality: (no quality red flags), length (over 100 years preferred), good continuity, low PGR, and low tectonic activity in the area. These were normalized to their average level in the period from 1960 to 1980, then corrected for PGR. The result is Figure 1.


Figure 1 is the normalized data from 16 quality long record tide gauges.

Figure 2 below is the average of the tide gauge data in Figure 1.


This is the average of 15 Mean Sea Level (MSL) records since 1958, 11 from 1948 to 1958, at least 10 since 1900, at least 7 from 1885, at least 5 since 1864, 4 since 1849, and 2 for most of the period since 1807.


Figure 3 is a chart from This is presented as a validation of figure 2.

We see an indication here that sea level has been rising since about 1855 to 1860. Before that, sea level was flat or falling. Here is a chart showing trends in thirty-year intervals.


Figure 4 is chart of sea level trends since 1810 using the averaged data from figure 2.

The sea level trend was nearly flat in the whole of the 1800’s, trending up 0.4 mm/year in the first half of the century, then up by 0.9 mm/year in the last half, as the Little Ice Age ended in mid-century. In the whole of the 20th century the trend was up by less than 1.7 mm/year. All together, there has been a sea level rise of about 25 cm in the last 150 years, or about 10 inches. There the trend slowed during the cool 1950 to 1980 period, then increased to 2.25 mm/year in the warming years late in the century. The satellite record begins in the bottom of the cooling years of the Pinatubo volcanic eruption. That is why that record, combined with the artificial GIA/PGA 0.3 mm/year “correction” is listed in U of Colorado satellite data as having a 3.2 ± 0.4 mm/year trend.


Figure 5a, the sea level trend since 1890. Figure 5b, the sea level rise in the last 33 years.

The recent upward tick in 2012 and 2013 due to rebound from the 2011 La Niña is just two years long, and is not nearly as dramatic as several previous short increases and decreases in the record. These are all due to short periods of warming and cooling associated with El Niños, La Niñas, and volcanic events. The 1983 and 1992 El Chichon and Pinatubo volcanic cooling events are particularly obvious in Figure 5b.

We do have one good sea level record from before 1800. The Dutch have been very concerned about sea level for a very long time, as a third of their country is below it.


Figure 6 is a Huddestenen, named for Amsterdam Mayor Hudde, a marble block set in 1684, 2.67 meters above Amsterdam level.

After a severe flood in 1675, the mayor of Amsterdam decided that the only way to make sure dikes were high enough to prevent flooding was to know precisely where the tops of the dikes were relative to the normal high water mark. To that end, during the year 1683 to 1684, September to September, daily records were kept of the tide, and an average high water mark was calculated. Since that time records have been maintained and an almost continuous sea level record exists from 1700 to 1925. This record is called the “Normaal Amsterdams Peil” (NAP) or the Amsterdam Ordinance Datum sea level record. Here is that record, corrected for PGR (or GIA), normalized to and plotted with the average from Figure 2.


Figure 7 is 330 years of measured sea level data.

The sea level rise over the last 200 years, from 1807, is no more than 27 cm, or about 11 inches. In the 125 years before that, there was no rise at all.

So…what will happen in the future? If the cooling predicted by the adherents to the solar climate driver hypothesis comes to pass, then in the next thirty years we will get a hesitation in sea level rise similar to the 1950 to 1980 period. Much of the easily melted ice stored during the Little Ice Age has melted already, so only the large ice reservoirs, Greenland and Antarctica, can contribute to sea level rise. Most of the rise from pumping aquifers and draining land-locked lakes has reached a limit. Thermosteric rise due to ocean heating has reached a limit due to increased evaporation from tropical seas. If all these are taken into account, sea level rise in the remainder of the the 21st century cannot exceed that in the last century, or about 1.7 mm/year, and perhaps less. This indicates a sea level rise by the year 2100 of less than 15 centimeters, or less than six inches.

In areas with glacial rebound, sea level rise will not be noticed at all. In areas with subsidence, the subsidence should be of concern. In the rare areas where neither is happening, normal dike and seawall maintenance and normal replacement of infrastructure will suffice. Coral Islands can grow upwards at 1 cm/year, so will have no problem with a sea level rise 1/6th of that. If the past is any indication of the future, there is little to fear from sea level rise.


University of Colorado Sea Level Rise Adjustment Appears To Be Unreasonable, Not Justifiable

Rebound and Sea Level
By Ed Caryl

During the peak of the last ice age, enough ice was collected in the great ice sheets that the global sea level was reduced by more than 120 meters. The ice sheets themselves were, in places, more than two kilometers thick. The great weight of that ice depressed the earth’s crust and mantle by hundreds of meters. In some places, ground that is now a hundred meters above sea level, was pressed down below the sea level that existed before and shortly after the ice melted. Because the earth’s mantle has a high viscosity, and the earth’s crust a high bending strength, these areas are still slowly rising after 12,000 years, and will rise for another 12,000, barring another ice age to press them down again. This “isostatic rebound” or “post-glacial rebound” (PGR) complicates sea levels worldwide because it continually changes the sea bottom and coastline shapes. The University of Colorado sea level measurements add 0.3 mm/year to sea level rise to “adjust” for this. Is this adjustment reasonable?

Locally, this rebound can be measured by precision GPS. Geological studies have also determined the prehistoric amount of rebound that has taken place. I will just mention three areas that have been and will be vastly changed by rebound: the St Lawrence Seaway area in Canada and northern New England in the U. S., an island beach in Nunavit, northern Canada, and Finland in northern Europe.


Figure 1 is a world map of PGR from the Wikipedia article on that subject, here.

The present day St. Lawrence River Seaway sits at the edge of the present PGR area that marks the boundary of the great Laurentide Ice Sheet of the last ice age. North of the river, the Provence of Quebec is rising. South of the river, southern New England is rising much slower or falling. This is apparent at Lake Ontario, where the tilting has resulted in the northern shore rising faster than the southern shore, and wetlands on the north draining and drying out, while on the southern shore, beaches are drowning and wetlands are being created from formerly dry land. The whole lake is very slowly rolling southward.

At the end of the last ice age, ice had blocked the St. Lawrence valley and formed the glacial Lake Candona, covering what is now the lower three Great Lakes, Ontario, Erie, and Huron. When the ice dam failed, the water level fell 300 feet (100 meters) in a few days. At this point, Lake Ontario may have been connected to the world ocean through the Champlain Sea. The Champlain Sea covered the whole area that is now Lake Champlain and all the St. Lawrence River Valley up to Lake Ontario. Pierre’s boyhood home in Northern Vermont was under seawater, or at the shore during this period. The Champlain Sea lasted from 12,500 years ago up to 9800 years ago, when the rising land finally cut off Lake Champlain from the waters to the north. The land has continued to rise in the Lake Champlain area, and now the lake is 29 to 30 meters above mean sea level.

In the far north of Canada, where the center of the ice sheet was thickest, the land is currently rising at nearly 2 cm a year. In the past, when the last ice had melted, the rate was even higher, and the land will continue to rise into the future until the next ice age returns. The PGR uplift is constant, without fits and starts, in contrast to land in tectonically active areas like California and Japan, and other areas that are near plate boundaries where earth movements will abruptly change sea level.


Figure 2. At Bathurst Inlet, on the east side of Cockburn Island, Nunavit, northern Canada, is a wedge-shaped beach called Rebound Beach. Source.

Here at Rebound Beach are many fossil beaches, one above the other, preserved because for most of the year the ground is frozen and snow-covered, there is little rain, and very little tidal action. The beaches seen here are like a stereo tape recording (with a stream dividing the tracks) of rising and falling sea levels recorded on a steadily rising, evenly sloped land form. It appears that since the last time the tape was erased, when the ice scrubbed the slope clean over 12,000 years ago, there have been about 20 rises, falls, or hesitations in the sea level, where the rate was different from the steady PGR. A dating of each of these fossil beaches would result in a good record of sea level over the last 12,000 years.

C_3Figure 3 (left) is a map of Finland as of 11,000 years ago. Source. The blue area was water.

Finland 11,000 years ago was mostly sea-bottom with an archipelago of islands. Many place-names in Finland reflect this history with high ground that has island or other maritime feature names. As the land rose, lakes were cut off from the sea, and the Gulf of Bothnia became smaller. The current rate of uplift here approaches 1 cm a year in the northern Gulf. On this map, at the left edge just below center is a narrowing of the Gulf of Bothnia at Kvarken. This narrowing separates Bothnian Bay from the outer Bothnian Sea further south. The water at this point is only about 25 meters deep. Bothnian Bay is already nearly fresh water due to the number and size of the rivers flowing into it. The salt content is now too low to be tasted and there are many freshwater fish species. In about 1500 years uplift will create a further narrowing, reducing the depth to about 10 meters, creating a river flowing south across the Kvarken. At that time Bothnia Bay will be a freshwater lake.

The rising of the bottom of the Bay of Bothnia and the Baltic Sea in general will reduce the volume of the Baltic and force that water into the world ocean, raising the sea level generally. Just to estimate the amount of rise, if the average PGR is 5 mm/year for the Baltic, and the Baltic is roughly 1/1000th of the total ocean area, then the world ocean will rise 0.005 mm/year.

But the Baltic is small compared to Hudson Bay, and Hudson Bay is also rising. The tide gauge at Churchill is rising (sea level falling) at 1.2 cm/year. Hudson Bay is 0.34% of the World Ocean. The PGR here will contribute 0.041 mm/year to general sea level rise. The other waters around the islands of Nunavit in northern Canada will contribute about another 0.004 mm/year, making a total for the Baltic and Canada about 0.05 mm/year.

But the PGR rising is offset by sea bottom sinking. As the earth’s mantle rises, the mantle in the surrounding area must flow down and under to compensate. As can be seen in figure 1, the North Atlantic, the bottom between Newfoundland and Greenland, and the ocean bottom north of Canada, is sinking. These areas are totally under ocean, unlike the rising areas that are mostly land. The sink rate seems to be 3 to 4 mm/year over an area much greater than the rising sea bottoms, which would appear to more than cancel any sea level rise due to PGR. The 0.3 mm/year positive “adjustment” to sea level rise by the UC sea level group does not appear to be justified.

The source for tide gauge PGR data is here.

Much of the material for this article is drawn from Wikipedia here.

The University of Colorado Sea Level website is here.


Extreme Absurdity: Potsdam Institute Sea Level Science Reaches New All-Time Low!

Oh no!

Our great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren might drown in the ocean 2000 years into the future, in the year 4014!

The idiotic UK Guardian reports today on a global warming theory of unprecedented absurdity, one fabricated with the help of crystal balls by Prof Ben Marzeion of the University of Innsbruck in Austria and Anders Levermann of the bedwetting Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. The Guardian writes:

Marzeion said that by looking at sea level rises over such a long timespan – 2000 years – such short-term uncertainties would be smoothed out. His co-author, Anders Levermann, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said: ‘After 2000 years, the oceans would have reached a new equilibrium state and we can compute the ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica from physical models. At the same time, we consider 2000 years a short enough time to be of relevance for the cultural heritage we cherish.'”

Meanwhile the Niagara Falls and Great Lakes freeze

Meanwhile as hysterical scientists and journalists fret over their fraudulent melting sea ice horoscopes, today we read that the Niagara Falls and the Great Lakes have frozen.


Coast Of Wales: Recent Storm Uncovers Ancient Forest That Was Under Sea Water 4500 Years Ago

Spiegel reports that a recent storm blew the beach sand away at Cardigan Bay in Wales, uncovering something unusual: a prehistoric forest from 4500 years ago. Apparently the forest had become the victim of sea level rise back at the time.

Spiegel writes:

The trees died more than 4500 years ago. Once the forest covered an area of several miles between the Welsh locations of Borth and Ynyslas. With climatic changes the sea level rose and peat, sand, and salt water swallowed the trees. The forest disappeared.”

Imagine that. Flat-temperature-earthers would like to have us believe that climate of the Holocene was more or less constant and that sea levels are higher than ever today. Turns out in Wales sea level is lower.

Obviously things were probably even warmer back then and sea levels were indeed higher. This is confirmed by NASA here, which discusses sea level findings for Northern England and Scotland, and possible implications for the UK:

Since the end of the last Ice Age 20,000 years ago, land and sea-levels around the UK coastline have changed in response to the retreat of the ice sheets. As the ice melted, the release of this enormous weight resulted in the landmass slowly tilting back up in the north or down in the south, a process called isostatic adjustment. […]

The action of the Ice Age on our landmass has been like squeezing a sponge which eventually regains its shape. The earth’s crust has reacted over thousands of years and is continuing to react. […

]The new map shows how the UK and Ireland are responding to the ice sheet compression of the earth’s core and the current rate of land tilt across the UK. In Northumberland, researchers found sediments from 7,000 years ago five metres below, and others from 4,000 years ago at 1 metre above the present sea level. This indicates that the sea level rose above present levels from around 7,500 years ago to 4,500 years ago, and then dropped and is continuing to fall.”

But North Cumberland is much further north than Cardigan, where the ice sheets were likely much thinner, and so isostatic adjustment at Cardigan Bay should be less.

The uncovered forest remnants tell us one thing: Wales is higher today than 4500 years ago and it’s going to take long time, if ever, for Cardigan Bay to return to where it’s been before. Climate change is normal and there is nothing we can do to re-establish and preserve the climate we had 50 years ago. It’s going to change by itself.


Major German Daily ‘Die Welt’ Wildly Exaggerates Western Antarctic Ice Shelf Melt By 1100 Times!

Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt write here how German online flagship daily Die Welt here published an alarming article about Antarctic sea ice melt some two weeks ago. Die Welt wrote:

Giant Antarctic glacier melting unstoppably
The Pine Island Glacier in the Antarctic is melting irreversibly according to a study. Scientists expect that sea level will rise enormously because of the melting of this glacier. […] International scientists from the University of Grenoble expect the shrinking glacier could allow the sea level to rise 1 centimeter in 20 years. The shrinking of the glacier is ‘irreversible’. The glacier is located in western Antarctica. Since the beginning of this century it has gotten about 10 km shorter, the scientists of the Institute for Glacier Research and Geophysics write. The melting has accelerated over the last decades. On average for the years 1992 to 2011 20 billion tonnes of ice have melted. In total until today the western Antarctic ice sheet has reduced about 20 percent.”

All of course this sounds quite dramatic and alarming.

But unfortunately, the media neglect to mention another study appearing in the Journal of Geophysical Research. In it a team of scientists led by L.H. Beem of the University of California in Santa Cruz studied another Western Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) glacier: the Whillans ice stream Ice Plain. Much to their surprise, the scientists discovered that the melting of the glacier actually had decelerated over the last 50 years.

Die Welt also could have checked another study from the Geophysical Research Letters from October 2013 titled: “A 308 year record of climate variability in West Antarctica”. The study’s authors discovered that the warming rate seen at the Pine island Glacier since 1950 was nothing different from what had been observed in the 18th and 19th centuries. Elizabeth Thomas told the press:

“The new record captures climate variability in this globally important region and suggests that the warming observed here since the 1950s is not the largest in the past 300 years.”

The abstract states:

The record shows that this region has warmed since the late 1950s, at a similar magnitude to that observed in the Antarctic Peninsula and central West Antarctica; however, this warming trend is not unique. More dramatic isotopic warming (and cooling) trends occurred in the mid-nineteenth and eighteenth centuries, suggesting that at present, the effect of anthropogenic climate drivers at this location has not exceeded the natural range of climate variability in the context of the past ~300 years.”

In February 2014 yet another study led by Alexandra Witus of Rice University appearing in the Quaternary Science Reviews found three episodes where ice had melted rapidly at the Pine Island Glacier over the last 10,000 years. In summary: the melt that has taken place over the last decades at the WAIS is nothing new, and it even now appears to be decelerating.

So what does all this say about the wild claims made by Die Welt that a “dramatic” ice melt is taking place at the Pine Island Glacier, i.e. 20 billion cubic meters per year resulting in a 20% ice mass reduction? Die kalte Sonne checks the numbers, which I’ve corrected using figures from Wikipedia:

1) West Antarctica Ice Shelf (WAIS) has an estimated volume of 2.2 million cubic kilometers.

3) When 20 billion tonnes has melted every year over the last 20 years, it means a total of 400 billion cubic meters (400 cubic kilometers) has melted.

3) So what percent is 400 cubic km from the total of 2.2 million? It’s certainly not 20% – rather it is only 0.0182%. Less than the concentration of trace gas CO2 in our atmosphere!

We know that alarmists love to announce exaggerated disasters, but Die Welt really overdid it this time. Die Welt exaggerated the ice melt by a factor of 1100!


German Review: Sea Level Rise Way Below Projections – No Hard Basis For Claims Of Accelerating Rise

IPCC 1990: “No convincing evidence that sea level rise accelerated in the 20th century

By Dr Sebastian Lüning and Prof Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated, edited and condensed by P Gosselin)

In recent posts we examined sea level rise, and in our last segment here we will look at the current sea level rise from a historical context and projections for the future.

Last 180 million years

On a geological scale, sea level over the last 180 million years was higher than it is today about half of the time (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Seal level over the last 180 million years. Source: David Middleton.

The last 12,000 years

Since the end of the last ice age, we see a rapid rise of more than 10 mm per year until about 8000 years ago. Then came a slowdown 4000 years ago (Figure 2). Today’s sea level rise of 1-3 mm per year is what we are seeing at the end phase of this interglacial period.

Figure 2: Sea level rise over the last 14,000 years. Source: David Middleton.

Today we find ourselves deep into a post-ice age interglacial warm period. During the last ice age the sea level was 120 m lower than today’s level. During the last interglacial, the Eem interglacial of 126,000 to 115,000 years before present, sea level was up to 9 m higher than today – without any help from man. This has been shown by a number of studies (Dutton & Lambeck 2012 in Science, Muhs et al. 2012 in Quaternary Research, O’Leary et al. 2013 in Nature Geoscience).

Last 300 years

The overall general trend shows cyclic behavior that follows the rhythm of warm and cold periods. Ice increased during the Little Ice Age, and so sea level rise stopped (Figure 3). During the transition to the current Modern Warm Period, which began around 1850, sea level began to rise once again and reached its top speed by 1920. The overall speed has not changed in the last 100 years, and thus it is difficult to see any evidence of a man-made impact in this development. There was a rapid increase from 1860 to 1879, but because industrialsation was barely beginning, the cause cannot be man-made. Today’s rate of rise is similar. In fact man-made global CO2 emissions did not begin in earnest until 50 years ago.

Figure 3: Sea level over the last 300 years. Source: Roger Andrews.

Although we keep hearing media reports of an accelerated sea level rise, hard measurement data show that it is merely a resumption of the post little Ice Age rise. Interestingly the IPCC in its first 1990 assessment viewed this similarly. There they wrote:

Excerpt from the IPCC first assessment report of 1990 concerning sea level development. Thanks to Climate Depot.

The estimate of the IPCC from 1990 is still solidly based – as Judith Curry confirmed at Climate Etc. in 2012:

The evidence for accelerating anthropogenic sea level rise is pretty weak, and lost in the noise of natural variability.”

And when one looks at the approximately 200 existing coastal datasets with long measurement periods, one comes up with an average rise of only 1.1 mm per year. This is much less than the values from satellites, which are more than 3 mm. One reason may be calibration problems. Satellite data has been corrected upwards as the versions from 2004 and 2013 show (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Satellite sea level data were adjusted considerably upwards. Source: The Hockey Schtick.

Currently the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of NASA is investigating possible sources of error in satellite sea level measurement.

The last decades

We observe that sea level rise is pulsing with an about 60-year cycle (Figure 5), which we have discussed on several occasions in the past. This has to do with the PDO, AMO and NAO ocean cycles (see our blog article: Forscherteam der University of Colorado Boulder: Ozeanzyklen haben Meeresspiegelanstieg in den letzten 20 Jahren verstärkt).

The impact of ocean cycles was recently examined by a team led by Benjamin Hamlington of the University of Colorado in Boulder. The authors reported in an article appearing in the Geophysical Research Letters October 2013: “Contribution of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation to global mean sea level trends”. According to the authors, over the last 20 years the PDO contributed about 0.5 mm per year to the observed sea level rise. The scientists say that the PDO’s contribution have to be taken into consideration over the long term and taken into account in prognoses. The PDO will act to reduce the long-term rise, the scientists write.

Figure 5: Sea level rise over the last 90 years. Source: David Middleton.

In January 2014 a group of scientists led by Xianyao Chen published an analysis of global sea level trends based on satellite data in the journal Global and Planetary Change. Here they detected a deceleration in sea level rise, from 3.2 mm in the period 1993 – 2003, to only 1.8 mm per year in 2008. The reason: Pacific ocean cycles.

Figure 6: Sea level development over the last 20 years based on satellite data in comparison to prognoses from the Rahmstorf group.

Under the bottom line: sea level rise has been pretty much constant over the last 80 years. Using the same rate, sea level can be projected to rise only 20 – 30 cm by the year 2100.

Spectacular sea level rise projections unscientific

The IPCC bases its 1-meter plus sea level rise on assumptions that sea level rise will accelerate in the future (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Sea level rise over the last 100 years and prognoses for the coming 85 years. Source: Roger Andrews.

The apocalyptic scenarios come from a group of scientists led by Stefan Rahmstorf. Interestingly Rahmstorf and his colleagues even float prognoses of 2.3 meters by 2300, even though the figure scientifically cannot be taken seriously. Forecasts for the year 2100 or 2300 can never be verified and so those making projections will never have be held accountable. So easily can spectacular projections be made.

Sea level rise far below earlier projections

Things are different for near and mid-term prognoses. Here as time goes by, earlier projections can be compared to observations. In its first report in 1990, the IPCC predicted a sea level rise of 120 mm by 2014. Today, 24 years later, we are able to see how accurate that 1990 prediction really was: It turns out to be only about one fifth of what was projected. In a nutshell: the IPCC 1990 projection was off by a mile.

Scientists made a number of false assumptions, according to Alberto Boretti of the University of Ballarat in Australia. In a study in the journal of Coastal Engineering, Boretti expressed deep doubts over the models from the Rahmstorf group. Overly simplistic models were also criticized by a group of 18 scientists led by Jonathan Gregory of the University of Reading in an article appearing in the Journal of Climate, July 2013. Gregory and his team found no accelerated glacial melting over the last decades. More info on this at The Hockey Schtick. The abstract reads:

Semiempirical methods for projecting global-mean sea level rise (GMSLR) depend on the existence of a relationship between global climate change and the rate of GMSLR, but the implication of the authors’ closure of the budget is that such a relationship is weak or absent during the twentieth century.

To sum it up, the following seafaring saying aptly applies in the current climate discussion:

The rat that leaves the sinking ship is smarter than the captain who goes down with it. Jonathan Swift (1667-1745)


Climate Superstition: Professor Robert Devoy Defies IPCC’s Findings, Attributes Severe Weather To Humans!

The Irish Examiner here reports that Robert Devoy, professor of physical geography at UCC, says the greater wind speeds and flooding in Ireland of the last few days are “what we would expect from a warming climate caused by the impact of humans”.

However, he cites no substantial data to support that. In fact global data on accumulated cyclone energy, hurricanes, droughts, tornadoes, etc. all show no trend, or in many cases even a decline. Yet Devoy claims:

We have had some exceptional events in recent years and these exceptional events are becoming more common.”

How Devoy can claim this is a mystery. Even the alarmist IPCC in its last fifth assessment report stated that there is no link between severe weather and humans.

Prof Devoy also says that “weather patterns had gone outside the natural pattern of weather events and this is a continuation of that” and that “the nature of these storms is changing.”

The nature of storms? What exactly? Prof. Devoy is hiding behind vague statements and doesn’t provide a single measure. He is just saying that storms are different. Scientifically his comments are a dustbin overflowing with rubbish.

He also claims sea level near Dublin is accelerating, claiming that “in the past decade, a regional rise of 2mm-3mm has been recorded by satellite stations and tidal gauges.”

We don’t know if Prof Devoy and the Irish Examiner are oblivious to history, or if they are maliciously trying to mislead the public. Why look only at the past decade? The available data for Dublin from the NOAA go back 80 years and shows very little overall sea level rise trend. Moreover, ten years is by far too short a time to infer a trend.

chart: Mean Sea Level Trend, 175-071 - Dublin, Ireland


Dublin Sea Level PSMSL

Up-to-date chart. Source:

This leads us to wonder why Professor Devoy would make so many outlandish claims. We suppose it has something to do with money. The Irish Examiner quotes Devoy at the end of the article:

He called for further investment in weather monitoring in this country so that scientists can better chart patterns.”

I think the weather is monitored just fine in Ireland with all the satellite and weather station data constantly being collected. What we need are scientists who are not too lazy to go back more than 10 years.

UPDATE: Ed Caryl has provided a link with an updated chart, now posted above. It appears that Professor Devoy’s Dublin sudden sea level rise came in a single year: 2001. In 2001, the gauge changed hands. More research on this could be most interesting.


Top Swedish Climate Scientist Also Confirms No Sea Level Acceleration…Desperate Pachauri Insisting No Acceleration “Is An Acceleration”!

My last post on sea level rise here led to Swedish blog site Stockholms Initiativet to post on the subject as well.

That post in turn sparked a reader comment from top Swedish climate scientist Lennart Bengtsson, translated in English (my emphasis):


We now have satellite measurements for 20 years which indicate a steady rise of about 3 mm per year, and during that time no acceleration, See:

However, it is important to be clear that this is an average and that there were considerable local variations related to tectonic changes, among others, after the last ice age. The isostatic adjustment that needs to be done in order to obtain useful data are being evaluated by the experts now. As you can see from the graph, it is clear that we need a relatively long time to obtain a realistic trend, but 20 years is certainly enough. On Monday I was involved in a public panel discussion with Pachauri who insisted that this is an acceleration. I found that I think I know more about this than Mr. Pachauri. The reference above appears to me quite compelling.

You just gotta love it. So even though the observations show there is no real detectable acceleration in sea level rise, Pachauri “insists that this is an acceleration“. It’s all in their fantasies and crystal ball models. None of it is real. This is what the panic is based on.

Also note that Bengtsson calls the comprehensive compilation of by K.E. Puls “quite compelling”. No surprise here as real observations tend to be so.

PS: Some of Lennart Bengtsson awards:
2007 Rossby Prize 2007 by the Swedish Geophysical Society (SGS)
2007 Elected Honorary Member of the American Meteorological Society (AMS)
2006 International Meteorological Organization (IMO) Prize of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
2005 Descartes Research Prize
1999 Fellow of American Meteorological Society
1998 Umweltpreis 1998 der Deutschen Bundesstiftung Umwelt
1998 Member of the Finnish Academy of Science
1996 Milutin Milancovic medal by the European Geophysical Society
1995 Member of the Nordrhein-Westfälischen Wissenschaftsakademie
1993 Member of the Swedish Academy of Science
1991 Honorary Member of the Swedish Meteorological Society
1990 Doctor honoris causa, University of Stockholm
1990 Förderpreis and the Golden Rosette for European Science by the Körberstiftung, Hamburg
1989 Member of Academia Europea
1986 Julius von Hann´s Gold Medal by the Austrian Meteorological Society



Veteran Meteorologist: “Old And New Data Show Sea Level Rise Deceleration”…Alarmist Projections “Contradicted”

Retired German meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls has written an analysis at the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) website here. He concludes:

Old and new measurement data show that sea level rise has decelerated.”

The article is a bit long and so I’ll focus on the main results only.

North Sea rise stagnates

First he discusses a 2013 study by T. Wahl, et al.: “Observed mean sea level changes around the North Sea coastline from 1800 to present”; Earth-Science Reviews; Volume 124, September 2013, Pages 51, which examined 30 North Sea tide gauges, of which some of them go back up to 200 years and most of them 100 years. The results:

Source: T. Wahl, et al.

The Wahl paper writes:

In summary the long term trends in the North Sea are not significantly different from global sea level trends, while the inter-annual and decadal variability are much bigger in the North Sea and hardly comparable to those derived from the global sea level reconstruction considered here.

The recent rates of sea level rise (i.e. over the last two to three decades) are high compared to the long-term average, but are comparable to those which have been observed at other times in the late 19th and 20th century.”

Puls concludes: “There are variations, but no acceleration on a 100-year scale!!!”

Sea level rise at the German bight

Puls then examines data from the German bight. The results are depicted by the following graphic:

Evaluation of coastal tide gauges at the German bight: “No acceleration!” Data: Albrecht, F., T. Wahl, J. Jensen and R.Weisse (2011).

Puls’s conclusion: “The data going back in part over the last 160 years show no acceleration in sea level rise. Rather there is a slight weakening as the polynomial indicates.”

Global sea level rise slowing down

Although variations at the North Sea are greater than those of global sea level, Puls writes that the overall trend is practically the same. He provides a graphic of the data taken by satellite:

Evaluation of satellite altimetry – data source:

Puls writes: “Even over the two most recent decades no acceleration can be detected, rather there is a weakening.”

Meteorolgist Puls then summarizes the results of the GRACE data for the last 9 nine years: “Only 1,7 mm per year.”

The EIKE article then looks at the “grotesque” discrepancy between satellite data and tide gauge data, and that to this day there is still no reasonable explanation for it. One thing is sure: the collection of tide gauges doesn’t lie.

Puls concludes

The constant stream of alarm reports of supposedly dramatic sea level rise at present and in the future cannot be confirmed by observations. Rather, the data as a whole contradict it. Worldwide neither tide gauges nor satellite data indicate an acceleration in sea level rise. Rather they show a weakening. There is a glaring contradiction between earlier and current statements from a number of institutes, climate models and the IPCC. Moreover there are strong indications that the satellite data showing higher values were “over-corrected”.


Scientists Find That Sea Level Rise Is Much Slower Than Expected…No Human Fingerprint

Veteran journalist Ulli Kulke of the German blog Die Welt has a report claiming that how sea levels are not rising anywhere near as fast as climate science alarmists are claiming.

First Kulke reminds readers that measuring sea level is no easy task because, depending on the location, sea levels can vary by several decimeters – even up to a meter. Much of the science relies on complex statistical computations and the results depend on the methods used.

Kulke writes:

A scientific study by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has closely examined data from the measurement stations located mainly at the coasts and reached the result that sea level rise calculations were exaggerated upwards. In the study Michael Beenstock and colleagues reached the result that sea level rise on a global average is only 1 millimeter and that by the end of the century it will rise only 10 centimeters; only 1/3 of the stations showed a detectable rise, 61% showed no movement and 4% showed a drop.”

Overall 1 mm/year is about 67% less than what Jason TOPEX satellite altimetry is showing (3 mm). If anything, Beenstock’s result indicate a sea level rise slowdown.

Beenstock is not the only scientist who has found sea level rise is much slower than believed. Kulke writes that other peer-reviewed studies reach similar conclusions. For example Nicola Scafetta of Duke University (see full paper here) shows that sea level is subject to 60-year cycles and concludes that the human impact on sea level is too small and is statistically insignificant.

Unfortunately these finding were not available in time to be included in the last IPCC assessment report AR5. Kulke writes that this was also “the case for other studies which recently showed that Co2’s effect on the global climate is present, but is however greatly exaggerated“.

Kulke cites another study that shows that the extraction of groundwater has caused close to half of the sea level rise of the last years. Kulke concludes that there’s no indication that sea level is rising faster because of man-made CO2 and that we are facing the fall of civilization, even if “scientists like Stefan Rahmstorf tirelessly paint pictures of man-made apocalypses on the wall“.

The studies cited here tell us one thing: Whoever tells us that there is a consensus among scientists that climate change is happening faster and faster, is just plain wrong.”

Little wonder developers are planning to build hotels in the Maldives: