ZERO Change in the Rate of Sea Level Rise — for All of Recorded History

EDIT: This post was picked up at Citizen Free Press, my favorite news site and one of the largest as well. Over 20,000 views so far.

This is a post which writes itself in a single graph. We will throw other graphs in because we like controversy. Figure 1, from the NOAA, shows CO2 launching upward since 1960 on the left side, with graphs of tide gauge data from multiple stations on the right. The data on the right stays perfectly straight while the data on the left is springing upward, ostensibly causing global energy increases in the ocean in the form of heat.

Referring to the right side above, nobody claims global warming started prior to 1900, although they may have to soon because there is literally zero change in slope. The problem with all of this, however, is that it is the smoking gun proof that global warming is not a major effect. For global warming to be real, we literally NEED the oceanic level to change (at least a little) in response to CO2.

Check the X axis below. This curve doesn’t change from horse-apples to rockets. No effect on sea level whatsoever. From here.

As one who is somewhat represented at the UN, I believe I’m allowed skepticism to flow into the discussion. To fix this problem we use ScienceTM (capital with superscript). Check this graph out.

From Columbia.EDU, the EDU must mean education but I’m not sure these days. Prolly could find a more appropriate word or acronym with little effort.

In Mannian fashion, they cut the historic graph nicely stopping tide gauge data in 1993 and pasted on satellite data right after. It makes one wonder, what is special about 1993?

Well dear, that is when we launched the first satellite with a sea level altimeter built in.

‘Disingenuous’ is a long word, but ‘lie’ is overused, so we will go with a word that sounds funny —‘shenanigans’. Might be the greatest nonsense word ever invented but ‘buffoonery’ gives it some solid competition. EVERYONE in science knows that these two measurement types have different ground ‘zero altitude’ points and in every case the zero moves a little. Because of that tiny FACT, EVERYONE knows this graph is not to be used in climate modeling tests, which is why they don’t EVER use it there.

The self-answering question becomes, “That being the case, why then would ANYONE make the graph?”

The measurement of sea level requires a zero point. This is not as easy as it sounds from a scientific standpoint, I wish they would pick a global surface point like the flame of the Statue of Liberty and work from there but each measurement type is referenced to some object, per the laws of both Newtonian and Relativistic physics.

Some other examples from NOAA, again we don’t care about slope but are looking for curvature starting around 1940-1960 as CO2 was released in the atmosphere.

In all cases, there is ZERO curvature in the measured data. This is proof that man has NOT impacted sea level in a measurable way. This is important because oceans, like coffee cups, cannot be deeper on one side for any length of time. Liquids self-level. All of humanities coal plants, all concrete manufacturing processes, all cars, all fossil fuels across the entire history of sea level measurement has had precisely zero impact on sea level. Joshua will predictably say that I’m wrong — somehow.

But then there is the satellite data. Surely, ScienceTM (capital with superscript), can find some kind of curvature such that we know HUMAN’s have impacted the GAIAN balance somehow.

ZERO curvature

There is no curvature in satellite data either, however if you squint really, really hard, you may find something.

Again, from over 10 years ago, the problem is this:

Four completely different satellites were used to make the measurements. Their measurements were ‘knitted’ together to make a trend. Note how poorly the red satellite (Jason 1) fits with TOPEX (blue). For those that do science, you know how prone to problems knitting (regressing data from) satellites with decaying orbits together can be. Instrument calibration drift, synchronization with lunar cycles, measurement points, altitude loss, etc…. Readers will recognize that there is no global warming curvature signal to argue with here either way, there is absolutely nothing.

All of human emission has made zero impact on sea level.

32 thoughts on “ZERO Change in the Rate of Sea Level Rise — for All of Recorded History

  1. Jeff –

    Can you put your mad investigative and statistical skillz to work on this? They’re much needed. This has to be exposed.

        1. I’ve read the CAM1 climate model’s code. Don’t see any ‘impact of weather manipulation’ sections in it. How would a model predict a hurricane that was created by some idiot without that section?

          BTW, Hurricanes are insanely powerful, meaning lots of watts, not just high winds like you chicken brains think. You cannot start or stop one with our technology. Including CO2 apparently.

        2. Just saw that the shot against your bud, the pillow guy, is now going to proceed as per SCOTUS.

          $1.3 billion for making unsuppprtable claims of massive voter fraud.


          The technology exists! They can do it!

          1. Unsupportable? When there is never an investigation into those claims then of course it’s unsupportable because the evidence has not been released. Cases regarding standing that have been submitted don’t count because no evidence is submitted. Watch “2000 Mules”. Why would anyone be against full discovery unless they’re afraid the truth will come out? Don’t we all want the truth? Too many anomalies. Oh, and what happened in the 2000 election where Dems took it all the way to the Supreme Court? What about 2016 when Hillary and the media and Democrat Party claimed the election was hacked and infiltrated by Russia? Complete and total hoax.

          2. As always with conspiracies, the proof of the conspiracy is that people say there wasn’t a conspiracy.

            No different than with the “9/11 was an inside job crowd.”

            They have their absolute “proof” just like Jeff and 2,000 mules.
            Abdcghe proof is that the claims are rejected by any and all investigative authorities. What more evidence could you require that the conspiracy exists other than that the cases brought into court never went anywhere?

            The logic of the unfalsifiable conspiracy theory is ALWAYS foolproof.

          3. Anthony –

            Have you even looked at the claims that the pillow guy made, that he’s being sued for?

            Keep waiting for that Kraken. It’s still going to be released.

            Any day now.

  2. NOAA failed to adequately predict Ian’s path. I reject those who make such predictions, thereby creating the unnecessary and dangerous movement of hundreds of thousands of people, saying that hurricanes are hard to predict. You failed and chances are very good that your failure caused needless death and destruction. You can’t get a job in most fields where you are expected to miss — A strike is hard to throw. A bus is hard to drive. A plane is hard to fly — F’ing incompetent government.

    1. Actually, the Fort Meyers government is catching hell for not telling the residents to evacuate 3 days earlier. But, NOAA didn’t show the hurricane hitting FM until 24 hours before landfall. Before that, the hurricane was going to miss Fort Meyers.

    2. Let’s blame the “experts” and gubment ’cause we did something stupid.

      Except when we’re saying “experts” and gubment shouldn’t be trusted.

      Oh, and except when we’re asking “experts” and gubment to bail us out ’cause we did something stupid.

    3. Let’s also blame gubment for not forcing us to evacuate, when we’re not complaining that gubment forces us to do shit.

        1. Already addressed prolly a dozen times. Just because you shorten the quote and cut out key language and then beg me to address it yet again doesn’t mean I didn’t address it.

  3. You fail to ask the most important question. The oceans are warming. The oceans contain the vast majority of the climate energy and they control the global climate, and yes, they moderate atmospheric CO2 (Henry’s Law). Just look at the CO2 chart for 2019 through 2021. What do you notice? COVID and the extreme economic slowdown that it caused didn’t alter the atmospheric CO2 trend at all, in fact, it may have EXCELLERATED. Wavelengths have different properties, and the Greenhouse Gas Theory is based upon that fact. Outgoing Long Wave Infra Red Radiation interacts with a Green House Gas causing it to vibrate, converting EM radiation to kinetic thermal energy. No one will deny that. The problem is however that CO2 only interacts with 15 micron LWIR Radiation. Those wavelengths have very very little energy, ice emits higher energy LWIR than CO2, and those wavelengths don’t penetrate or warm water. To warm the oceans you need more incoming visible radiation. How do you get more visible radiation reaching the oceans? You slightly alter the jet stream and clear the skys over the oceans of clouds. Has that happened? You betcha, fewer clouds have resulted in warming oceans, resulting in higher atmospheric CO2 and higher atmospheric temperatures. Every climate scientist knows that but their funding is totally dependent upon blaming CO2.

  4. One other note, Hurricanes are basically Mother Nature’s Temperature Release Valve, that is why all these claims of Catastrophic Global Warming are Pure Nonsense. Global Warming has its limits because greater temperature differentials will trigger more Hurricanes that release ungodly amounts of energy from the system. So much energy that the oceans actually cool by multiple degrees C. Why is this important? Water has the highest specific energy of all common materials. It takes a whole lot of energy to warm the oceans. Energy reaches the oceans on a continual basis or flux measured in Watts per Meter Squared. The problem for CO2 is that CO2 provides very little energy, and the Oceans take a whole lot of energy to warm. One can simply calculate the amount of energy CO2 can provide between Hurricanes and you will see that CO2 is like trying to fil an Olympic Sized Pool with a straw-sized hose with a kink in it. Visible radiation is needed to warm the oceans, not LWIR back radiation of 15 microns.

  5. I have 200 year old tree rounds that show regular growth cycles and few anomolies. Droughts come at regular intervals. When variations in growth do occur, I can count back from when the log was cut to see what was going on in historical record. Questions to ask climate scientists, “Why are there old tree stumps beneath glaciers and polar ice?” “Why are ancient human developments being exposed as waters recede?”

  6. Playing Devils Advocate, Around 10 years ago I was in the local post office talking to the owner about the miserable Summer we were enduring. I am not a denier of Climate change in general as it has existed as long as Earth, but very sceptical of our alleged input as Humans and the effects. Mutually agreeing he told me how his daughter a professor of midges study at the University of East Anglia had been silenced. Contrary to popular belief and general indoctrination her studies in weather patterns using various insects suggested poor summers and Colder winters over the next few years. The fact that her and her team were correct with their predictions was irrelevant. She was told not to publish her findings as they contradict the agenda and message they are preaching. This would just confuse the people. She told the authorities it was good news, as it is great evidence that the likes of Norwich & Florida may not be shortly under the Sea as predicted, and repeated daily on all MSM through their various propaganda machines. She was told if this information was leaked all funding would be taken away. To this day I am amazed how many people are still buying $30m properties in places like Florida by the Sea, long term leases, insurances etc for properties by the coast all over the World. Surely if Al Gore was correct in his propaganda documentary an “inconvenient truth” nobody would waste their money. And lenders would not lend? The day the rich leave coastal areas in droves to me is the time to start panicking.

    Currently whenever we have heavy rain we are shown a million images of flooding and the impact of climate change. If this is the reason why would we stop dredging rivers, build on flood planes, take down flood defences and no longer clean drains?
    Anyone would think they wanted floods to make their predictions seem more plausible!!

    1. Joshua,

      You disappoint me, your name was viewed by over 24000 different people. You aren’t supposed to agree this time.

      A little secret that those in climate science know, no trends in rainfall, drought or hurricanes either.

      East anglia was home of the climate gate email release. I appreciate the anecdote.

  7. I was under the impression that the jump from 1.4 mm/year to 3.4 mm/year was due to the insertion of the GIA, Glacial Isostatic Adjustment, into the data set. Basically, a fudge factor to increase the slope of the line.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s