Are Global Sea Level & Ocean Heat Content Rising?
This is quite interesting: There is now peer-reviewed publish evidence that sea-level (SL) data have unjustifiably been manipulated to show a non-existing rising trend. Reality: SL of Indian Ocean has been completely STABLE during the 20th Cent.! FRAUD! https://www.newstarget.com/2019-02-18-sea-level-data-altered-by-scientists-to-create-false-impression-of-rising-oceans.html …
The actual paper on seal level changes in the Indian Ocean by Parker & Ollier (2017) can be downloaded here: http://www.gccmet.net/libraries/download/26 … The authors found that SL data were "adjusted" (faked) in a way similar to surface temperature records: lowering the past & increasing the present!
More scientific evidence that global Sea Level (SL) has been stable for the past 35 years: Using satellite data Luijendijk et al (2018: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24630-6 …) found that 76% of World's sandy shorelines were either sable or growing during the period 1984 - 2016. No SL rise!pic.twitter.com/jANzcYCdsk
The shoreline change rates found by Luijendijk et al (2018), presented at an alongshore resolution of 500 m along the World’s shoreline are publicly available through this interactive website using Google Map: http://shorelinemonitor.deltares.nl . Note the ZERO change for most shorelines!pic.twitter.com/GoIUSKsDsP
SEA LEVEL: According to Luijendijk et al (2018: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24630-6 …), only 2 continents (Africa & Australia) show a slight average decline of sandy shorelines for past 35 yrs, while 4 continents display an average increase of shoreline. This implies NO sea-level rise globallypic.twitter.com/XW8AzesX1B
NASA's official Global Mean Sea-Level (GMSL) record derived from satellite microwave altimeter measurements (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/ …). According to this data set, the global sea level rose ~92 mm in 26 yrs. Note the nearly perfectly linear GMSL trajectory over the period.pic.twitter.com/pVFd6rW3Er
A 2018 paper in WIREs Climate Change (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wcc.557 …) studied 709 atoll islands in areas of supposedly rapid sea-level rise in Pacific and Indian Ocean and found stable shorelines & NO size contraction in 88.6% of islands over the past 100 years! Where is sea-level rise?pic.twitter.com/bx2ECgMbwc
The conclusions reached by this comprehensive 2018 study of the stability of 709 atoll islands in Pacific & Indian Ocean (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wcc.557 …) indicate that that there has been NO measurable sea-level rise in about a century. We need to investigate official sea-level records!pic.twitter.com/aKgzwYz5OA
This 2018 paper presents satellite-based measurements of 101 Island in the Pacific atoll nation of Tuvalu, where sea-level rise is claimed to have been twice the global average: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-02954-1 … Yet, 74% of islands INCREASED in size for the past 40 years. Hence, no SLR!pic.twitter.com/R5M07dpAJF
This is the question we should be asking @NASA regarding the satellite-based Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) record: "Why does GMSL so strongly correlate with CO2, when CO2 is so poorly related to global temperature?" What's the physical reason for the 0.99 #CO2-GMSL correlation?pic.twitter.com/MGrHN4Nblf
IMPORTANT: NASA's Global Mean Sea-Level data series correlates PERFECTLY with NOAA's global CO2 concentration record (r2 = 0.99), while those two series show a rather poor correlation with global temperature (r2 = 0.31)? This means that sea-level data have likely been faked!pic.twitter.com/ywsQpYR3Ca
Observed surface temperature changes do not indicate any significant or linear warming of the ocean. Besides, IPCC claims that the reported rise of CO2 is mostly due to human C emissions, not ocean warming! ... Any way one looks at this relationship, it makes NO physical sense!
pic.twitter.com/lCenV0JvDQ
Not possible! How could #CO2 affect sea level other than through surface temperature (assuming that it actually can impact temperature)? CO2 cannot directly rise sea level! The only possible explanation is: Sea-level data have purposefully been "adjusted" to mimic the CO2 record!pic.twitter.com/pwmu5pzJl9
All data used to generate the attached figures are publicly available. Anyone can reproduce my results! - @NASA Sea Level: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/ … - @NOAA #CO2: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/gl_data.html … - @UAHuntsville LT Temp: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt … - RSS LT Temp: http://data.remss.com/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v04_0.txt …pic.twitter.com/kAHKsZby2r
Use your reasoning/commonsense, Tom. This high correlation between SL rise and atmos. CO2 is physically impossible without data faking especially in view of the fact that CO2 is so poorly correlated with surface temperature!pic.twitter.com/J3NgEswpHO
You are not thinking clearly! 1. I used mean annual values in my graphs, not smoothed time series. 2. #CO2 is supposed to raise sea level ONLY through its effect on global temperature causing warming, but temperature is POORLY correlated with CO2 suggesting no causal link.pic.twitter.com/n9n6Tjhumq
Given the above, it's inconceivable how in the reality the CO2 record would have a 0.99 correlation with global mean sea level. The only plausible explanation for the observed high correlation is that sea-level data have artificially been "adjusted" to match the CO2 trajectory!pic.twitter.com/8GetKb5hlr
Whatever processing of the satellite radar signal was done by NASA, it's simply not possible to ACCIDENTALLY produce a 0.99 correlation between an objectively constructed GMSL series and NOAA's global CO2 record. There is no physical causal relationship between CO2 and sea level!pic.twitter.com/umdIN2JA3J
POLL: Do you think that NASA has intentionally manipulated satellite altimetry data to artificially increase the global sea-level rise for the purpose of enhancing the #AGW alarm. Before answering, see this Moment for evidence about sea level changes : https://twitter.com/NikolovScience/moments/1136112695755694080 …
Thank you to all 2,176 people, who cast their vote on this crucial question. The vast majority (79%) interpreted the available evidence as PROOF that @NASA has inappropriately manipulated the satellite-altimeter sea-level data to create alarm. SCANDALOUS!https://twitter.com/NikolovScience/status/1137473021302599681 …
I further analyzed official data on Sea-Level Rise (from NASA), Ocean Heat Content (from Institute of Atmospheric Physics), and Sea-Surface air Temperature (from UAH satellite record). Results are presented on this slide: More evidence has emerged for MASSIVE DATA TAMPERING!pic.twitter.com/pcaZ2wTUZs
I plotted the data and calculated the correlations to see, if climate parameters relate to each other in a physically meaningful way. The result from this simple analysis suggests that OHC and sea-level data must have been doctored, since they make no sense with respect to SST.
Michael, read again the questions I posited and pay attention to the plots. These correlations make NO sense from the standpoint of actual physical mechanisms. The only plausible explanation is that both OHC and GMSL data series have been fabricated to match the increasing #CO2.
This analysis combined with physical reasoning suggests that both @NASA 's Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) record and IAP's upper Ocean Heat Content (OHC) were largely CONTRIVED to align with NOAA's atmos. #CO2 series in attempt to support the unphysical "Greenhouse" climate theory!pic.twitter.com/yPqGQETHul
This is the relationship between upper Ocean Heat Content (OHC), atmospheric #CO2, and sea-surface air temperature from 1980 to the present according to official data sets. The emergent correlations pose a serious question about the TRUTHFULNESS/VALIDITY of the claimed OHC rise!pic.twitter.com/SHfEG5Tcim
OHC is supposed to be estimated from actual measurements of ocean temperatures at different depths. Changes in OHC are proportional to observed changes in ocean temperatures (via a linear relationship), see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_heat_content … No #CO2 information is supposed to affect OHC!!
The top 200-m ocean layer called "Epipelagic Zone" is thermally well mixed and has a uniform temperature profile. Therefore, sea-surface temperature variations MUST be well visible in the top 300-m Ocean Heat Content, but they are not in the official OHC data set from IAP. Why?pic.twitter.com/7BhJMAeHSO
This is the official record of changes in global ocean temperature and estimated total heat content (0-2000 m depth) from 1940 to 2016 by the Institute of Atmospheric Physics: https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/ocean-temperature-analysis-and-heat-content-estimate-institute-atmospheric-physics … Note that the temp. change from 1980 to 2016 is only 0.1C! What an accuracy! pic.twitter.com/3dhVbYTKbd
Do we really have the necessary technology to detect a warming of 0.1 C in the World oceans (0-2000 m depth) over a period of 36 years? I doubt that we do ... This tiny temperature change is the basis for estimating MUCH larger Ocean Heat Content variations. Yes, OHC is modeled!pic.twitter.com/Fxh9TdUBBS
What reveals the implausibility of NASA's sea-level rise since 1993 is the fact that their curve lines up almost perfectly with NOAA's global atmospheric #CO2 record while showing almost no correlation with satellite-measured global sea-surface temperature, which is nonsensical!pic.twitter.com/NYUVpCqHt3
In other words, sea-level data have been made up to follow the CO2 trend. It's impossible to obtain a 0.99 correlation between SLR and #CO2, if these were REAL measurements, simply because, according to physics, SLR is supposed to correlate with ocean temperature, not atmos. CO2!
I think the data tampering began with Keeling's #CO2 curve, then transferred to the entire modern global atmos. CO2 record. Other data such as sea level rise, ocean heat content, and (to some extent) global surface temperature have been manipulated to MATCH trends in CO2 record.pic.twitter.com/VP82XlwvQd
You're welcome, Jon. I've completed an analysis involving the latest global data from the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL): https://www.psmsl.org/products/reconstructions/jevrejevaetal2014.php …. The results are similar: SL time series have a MUCH higher correlation with #CO2 than with sea-surface temperature!? pic.twitter.com/ZyVIsIOFxQ
I think you're right, Jon. The improper manipulation & faking of climate data is likely done by a small group of #AGW "devotees" with access & authority to manage global data sets. I believe that the leadership of Scientific Institutions may not even be aware of the ongoing fraudpic.twitter.com/34Kii34htK
I agree - the data faking is likely done by a small group of "gatekeepers" spread around the Wold, who know each other & communicate regularly with each other to make sure that different global data sets including #CO2, temperature, OHC, and sea level ALL tell the "same story"!
This is evident in the field of "climate science". It was blatantly obvious in the "climategate" emails, for example. Almost all share the same few fundamental datasets, methods, and algorithms, and peer review each others' papers. It is a very incestuous field of science.
Recent published studies of shoreline changes based on satellite data suggest that the Global Mean Sea Level has been STABLE or DECREASING for the past 40 years. No island nation is endangered! - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24630-6 … - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wcc.557 … - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-02954-1 …pic.twitter.com/P6SkcYNeKU
Sea level matters on the coasts where people live, and that is where it is best measured. The average rate of SLR from all of NOAA's 375 L-T gauges is 1.56 mm with no sign of acceleration.pic.twitter.com/AuUzfmFYUD
More Moments
