No Sea Level Rise says Isle of the Dead

[elektra]

My favorite part is when they claim the sea level is rising in some places, but not others.

Ah, another of my favorite really dumb asses chimes in. Thanks for once again demonstrating the vastness of the ignorance on the far right. Yes, the sea level does vary from place to place for a number of different reasons.

Sea Levels Rising Fast on U.S. East Coast

Sea levels worldwide are expected to rise as global warming melts ice and causes water to expand. Those levels, though, are expected to vary from place to place, due to factors such as ocean currents, differences in seawater temperature and saltiness, and the Earth's shape.

Now it seems scientists have pinpointed just such a variance.

Analyzing tide-level data from much of North America, U.S. Geological Survey scientists unexpectedly found that sea levels in the 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) stretch of coast from Cape Hatteras (map), North Carolina, to the Boston area climbed by about 2 to 3.8 millimeters a year, on average, between 1950 and 2009.

Global sea level rise averaged about 0.6 to 1 millimeter annually over the same period.

"If you talk with residents of this hot spot area in their 70s or 80s who've lived there all their lives, they'll tell you water is coming higher now in winter storms than it ever did before," said study co-author Peter Howd, an oceanographer contracted with the USGS.

But, there have been less winter storms, the weather has been mild, so what are you talking about Old Crock? No link to al those winter storms? I guess you are a filthy liar, your rule old crock, no link makes you a filthy liar, your words, you rule. Link to all the storms, or you are a liar (which we all know you are anyways).

 

[elektra]

I had lived on the West Coast for 30 years, nothing has disappeared, steps to the beach, piers, harbors, they are all there, the beach is the same, the rich homes have their beach, nothing has experienced any loss, there has been no sea level rise in Southern California or around Monterey, two places I have lived. Since 1981.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I see. So, scientists don't know anything, and you know everything. LOL

you might just have a point there.

Some water is more equal than other. The places were it refuses to rise are "denier seas"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I see. So, scientists don't know anything, and you know everything. LOL

Some sea level is more equal than others, right?

 

[Crick]

I had lived on the West Coast for 30 years, nothing has disappeared, steps to the beach, piers, harbors, they are all there, the beach is the same, the rich homes have their beach, nothing has experienced any loss, there has been no sea level rise in Southern California or around Monterey, two places I have lived. Since 1981.

Good for you. Here's what the world as a whole has been doing.

At 3.3 mm/yr, the world's ocean have risen 112 mm since 1981.

 

[elektra]

I had lived on the West Coast for 30 years, nothing has disappeared, steps to the beach, piers, harbors, they are all there, the beach is the same, the rich homes have their beach, nothing has experienced any loss, there has been no sea level rise in Southern California or around Monterey, two places I have lived. Since 1981.

Good for you. Here's what the world as a whole has been doing.

At 3.3 mm/yr, the world's ocean have risen 112 mm since 1981.

That is an awful pretty drawing, not to scale, which means nothing compared to a mark etched into a rock on the Isle of the Dead.

Ever notice how all the AGW nutters have is pretty pictures not drawn to scale.

 

[Crick]

Are you REALLY that stupid? No one seems to know what that mark actually signifies? Was it high tide? Was it MSL? Was it a fucking chicken scratch? What was the pertinent knowledge level of the fellow who made it? How long did he observe the ocean before he concluded he knew where MSL actually was? Or high tide for that matter. Has any subsistence taken place there? Uplift? Tilt?

And no matter what is actually happening at Devils Dead or wherever the fuck this is, how can you possibly think that it trumps tide gauge and satellite data from across the planet, corrected for isostasy and the lot? This is like you telling me that the national average for a gallon of gas is wrong because you've found some different number at the Hess station down the street. C'mon, engage your fucking brain.

 

[elektra]

Are you REALLY that stupid? No one seems to know what that mark actually signifies? Was it high tide? Was it MSL? Was it a fucking chicken scratch? What was the pertinent knowledge level of the fellow who made it? How long did he observe the ocean before he concluded he knew where MSL actually was? Or high tide for that matter. Has any subsistence taken place there? Uplift? Tilt?

And no matter what is actually happening at Devils Dead or wherever the fuck this is, how can you possibly think that it trumps tide gauge and satellite data from across the planet, corrected for isostasy and the lot? This is like you telling me that the national average for a gallon of gas is wrong because you've found some different number at the Hess station down the street. C'mon, engage your fucking brain.

Yet, that is all explained and linked to in my thread, you are the only one in denial Crick. The mark is not in question, historically it stands as a testament that the sea has not risen.

 

[Crick]

I read your article. Your mark is one big fucking question mark. And, again, let me emphasize the "ONE". What do you believe the odds to be that this one mark is the truth and that thousands of tide gauges and the data from a dozen satellites is all wrong? You obviously believe those odds to be high. WHY?

 

[elektra]

I read your article. Your mark is one big fucking question mark. And, again, let me emphasize the "ONE". What do you believe the odds to be that this one mark is the truth and that thousands of tide gauges and the data from a dozen satellites is all wrong? You obviously believe those odds to be high. WHY?

Why, because this Sea Level mark is set in stone and it is not underwater.

 

[Crick]

You've got to be one of the stupidest individuals I've ever come across.

Did you not say you had some sort of business degree from FAU?

 

[elektra]

I read your article. Your mark is one big fucking question mark. And, again, let me emphasize the "ONE". What do you believe the odds to be that this one mark is the truth and that thousands of tide gauges and the data from a dozen satellites is all wrong? You obviously believe those odds to be high. WHY?

Well, cricket, lets go through your post, item by item.

1. "a dozen satellites", which dozen satellites do you speak of? Do they have names, is there a link to these, "dozen" of satellites?

2. "thousands of tide gauges", we only need to address one, that one being at the Isle of the Dead, which this thread is about.

3. "Your mark is one big @#$$%#% question mark", no, it is a simple mark set in stone

 

[jc456]

I had lived on the West Coast for 30 years, nothing has disappeared, steps to the beach, piers, harbors, they are all there, the beach is the same, the rich homes have their beach, nothing has experienced any loss, there has been no sea level rise in Southern California or around Monterey, two places I have lived. Since 1981.

Good for you. Here's what the world as a whole has been doing.

At 3.3 mm/yr, the world's ocean have risen 112 mm since 1981.

where is this information taken from? Please, posting a graph with a line in it doesn't make your post anything more than crap collected and plotted. yet the actual data that created was made up. DOH!!!!!

 

[jc456]

I read your article. Your mark is one big fucking question mark. And, again, let me emphasize the "ONE". What do you believe the odds to be that this one mark is the truth and that thousands of tide gauges and the data from a dozen satellites is all wrong? You obviously believe those odds to be high. WHY?

because everything you point out as reason to not trust his site, is true for every, every gauge in the world. Do you think that the oceans are a constant and there are no waves or tides or anything else that causes water to go up and down? Really? Dude, I don't get you. I thought you were smarter than that. Look at photos say Pearl harbor where there are sunk ships, they have platforms and they are unchanged since being built. Since being built. now point to some location anywhere on the planet where there is past pictures and current ones, let's see your rise in levels there.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

In 1841 Captain Sir James Clark Ross, marked the mean level of the sea. It is funny to note, that back in 1841 that people had a better understanding of the Earth and Oceans, that they observed changes in Sea Level dramatic enough, that they determined a need to record a benchmark for future studies.

Isle of the Dead

The ‘Isle of the Dead’ may yet prove to be another nail in the coffin of global warming and its gruesome companion, Disastrous Sea Level Rises.

The `Isle of the Dead’ is over two acres in size and is situated within the harbor of Port Arthur opening directly to the Southern Ocean. The isle itself is actually a graveyard (thus its eerie name), containing the graves of some 2,000 British convicts and free persons from the 19th century who lived and died at the nearby convict colony of Port Arthur between 1832 and 1870.

In 1841. renowned British Antarctic explorer, Captain Sir James Clark Ross, sailed into Tassy after a 6-month voyage of discovery and exploration to the Antarctic.

Ross and Governor Franklin made a particular point of visiting Port Arthur, to meet Thomas Lempriere, a senior official of the convict colony there, but who was also a methodical observer and recorder of meteorological, tidal, and astronomical data. It is important to note what Captain Ross wrote about it.

“My principal object in visiting Port Arthur was to afford a comparison of our standard barometer with that which had been employed for several years by Mr. Lempriere, the Deputy Assistant Commissary General, in accordance with my instructions, and also to establish a permanent mark at the zero point, or general mean level of the sea as determined by the tidal observations which Mr. Lempriere had conducted with perseverance and exactness for some time: by which means any secular variation in the relative level of the land and sea, which is known to occur on some coasts, might at any future period be detected, and its amount determined.

The point chosen for this purpose was the perpendicular cliff of the small islet off Point Puer, which, being near to the tide register, rendered the operation more simple and exact. The Governor, whom I had accompanied on an official visit to the settlement, gave directions to afford Mr. Lempriere every assistance of labourers he required, to have the mark cut deeply in the rock in the exact spot which his tidal observations indicated as the mean level of the ocean.

That mark is still there today, as can be seen in the photo.The photo was taken at midway between high and low tides.

There is intensive research presently underway by several institutions including the now corrupt CSIRO assisted by the head of the Inter-Agency Committee on Marine Science & Technology, Dr David Pugh, who is based at the University of Southampton, UK. But in spite of plenty of time we have yet to see their detailed explanation of just why this mark confounds all the predictions about sea level rise.

Dr. Pugh airily waves his hands and says in effect that poor old confused Lempriere, in spite of the detailed instructions about getting a Mean Sea Level (half way between high and low tide), he just put in the high water mark. This, of course, sounds logical to anybody steeped in the Green religion.

But not to anyone else and not to real scientists who look at evidence unflinchingly.

View attachment 64841

Tasmanian Sea Levels - Lessons from the Isle of the Dead

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

150 year old mark shows no ocean rise

I added some links to the OP.

Dude. From the article you posted it says this. Do you stand by your links or nah?

Dramatic changes in sea-level are possible during the next hundred years as the release of greenhouse gases enhance the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. While there may be some extra water added to the oceans by melting of ice caps and glaciers, much of the initial sea-level rise will be caused by the oceans expanding as they warm up (thermal expansion).

 

[elektra]

Dude. From the article you posted it says this. Do you stand by your links or nah?

Dramatic changes in sea-level are possible during the next hundred years as the release of greenhouse gases enhance the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. While there may be some extra water added to the oceans by melting of ice caps and glaciers, much of the initial sea-level rise will be caused by the oceans expanding as they warm up (thermal expansion).

Did you post in the right thread? Could you quote and link, cause the post you replied to contains nothing you attribute to it?

 

[jc456]

I have not noticed anybody mention the Isle of the Dead and the physical evidence that indicates the level of the Oceans are more or less constant.

In 1841 Captain Sir James Clark Ross, marked the mean level of the sea. It is funny to note, that back in 1841 that people had a better understanding of the Earth and Oceans, that they observed changes in Sea Level dramatic enough, that they determined a need to record a benchmark for future studies.

Isle of the Dead

The ‘Isle of the Dead’ may yet prove to be another nail in the coffin of global warming and its gruesome companion, Disastrous Sea Level Rises.

The `Isle of the Dead’ is over two acres in size and is situated within the harbor of Port Arthur opening directly to the Southern Ocean. The isle itself is actually a graveyard (thus its eerie name), containing the graves of some 2,000 British convicts and free persons from the 19th century who lived and died at the nearby convict colony of Port Arthur between 1832 and 1870.

In 1841. renowned British Antarctic explorer, Captain Sir James Clark Ross, sailed into Tassy after a 6-month voyage of discovery and exploration to the Antarctic.

Ross and Governor Franklin made a particular point of visiting Port Arthur, to meet Thomas Lempriere, a senior official of the convict colony there, but who was also a methodical observer and recorder of meteorological, tidal, and astronomical data. It is important to note what Captain Ross wrote about it.

“My principal object in visiting Port Arthur was to afford a comparison of our standard barometer with that which had been employed for several years by Mr. Lempriere, the Deputy Assistant Commissary General, in accordance with my instructions, and also to establish a permanent mark at the zero point, or general mean level of the sea as determined by the tidal observations which Mr. Lempriere had conducted with perseverance and exactness for some time: by which means any secular variation in the relative level of the land and sea, which is known to occur on some coasts, might at any future period be detected, and its amount determined.

The point chosen for this purpose was the perpendicular cliff of the small islet off Point Puer, which, being near to the tide register, rendered the operation more simple and exact. The Governor, whom I had accompanied on an official visit to the settlement, gave directions to afford Mr. Lempriere every assistance of labourers he required, to have the mark cut deeply in the rock in the exact spot which his tidal observations indicated as the mean level of the ocean.

That mark is still there today, as can be seen in the photo.The photo was taken at midway between high and low tides.

There is intensive research presently underway by several institutions including the now corrupt CSIRO assisted by the head of the Inter-Agency Committee on Marine Science & Technology, Dr David Pugh, who is based at the University of Southampton, UK. But in spite of plenty of time we have yet to see their detailed explanation of just why this mark confounds all the predictions about sea level rise.

Dr. Pugh airily waves his hands and says in effect that poor old confused Lempriere, in spite of the detailed instructions about getting a Mean Sea Level (half way between high and low tide), he just put in the high water mark. This, of course, sounds logical to anybody steeped in the Green religion.

But not to anyone else and not to real scientists who look at evidence unflinchingly.

View attachment 64841

Tasmanian Sea Levels - Lessons from the Isle of the Dead

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

150 year old mark shows no ocean rise

I added some links to the OP.

Dude. From the article you posted it says this. Do you stand by your links or nah?

Dramatic changes in sea-level are possible during the next hundred years as the release of greenhouse gases enhance the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. While there may be some extra water added to the oceans by melting of ice caps and glaciers, much of the initial sea-level rise will be caused by the oceans expanding as they warm up (thermal expansion).

it stated possible. And we now know that it won't. your point?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Dude. From the article you posted it says this. Do you stand by your links or nah?

Dramatic changes in sea-level are possible during the next hundred years as the release of greenhouse gases enhance the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. While there may be some extra water added to the oceans by melting of ice caps and glaciers, much of the initial sea-level rise will be caused by the oceans expanding as they warm up (thermal expansion).

Did you post in the right thread? Could you quote and link, cause the post you replied to contains nothing you attribute to it?

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

Its your second link:

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

 

[elektra]

Dude. From the article you posted it says this. Do you stand by your links or nah?

Dramatic changes in sea-level are possible during the next hundred years as the release of greenhouse gases enhance the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. While there may be some extra water added to the oceans by melting of ice caps and glaciers, much of the initial sea-level rise will be caused by the oceans expanding as they warm up (thermal expansion).

Did you post in the right thread? Could you quote and link, cause the post you replied to contains nothing you attribute to it?

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

Its your second link:

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

I still do not see that picture in the link?

The link is not mine, the MOD added it after I made the thread, I had forgotten to add my link so they did me a favor, right? You can tell it is the mod's because he added the big red letters.

Yes, that article in a link that was not part of my OP, states what you claim, "Possible". It is possible? Is it likely? Will it definitely happen? If it does it will have nothing to do with CO2, that is clear.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Dude. From the article you posted it says this. Do you stand by your links or nah?

Dramatic changes in sea-level are possible during the next hundred years as the release of greenhouse gases enhance the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. While there may be some extra water added to the oceans by melting of ice caps and glaciers, much of the initial sea-level rise will be caused by the oceans expanding as they warm up (thermal expansion).

Did you post in the right thread? Could you quote and link, cause the post you replied to contains nothing you attribute to it?

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

Its your second link:

Measuring sea-level rise at Port Arthur

I still do not see that picture in the link?

The link is not mine, the MOD added it after I made the thread, I had forgotten to add my link so they did me a favor, right? You can tell it is the mod's because he added the big red letters.

Yes, that article in a link that was not part of my OP, states what you claim, "Possible". It is possible? Is it likely? Will it definitely happen? If it does it will have nothing to do with CO2, that is clear.

The photos is Texas and what it looks like when oceans expand into areas they werent previously.

But if you say that is possible then you cant at the same time say that the waters have to "rise" over that mark as proof either, right?