Posted on 09/09/2025 7:16:36 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Editor’s note: We expected the leftist thought police at Google would declare that this editorial was “unreliable” and “harmful“— because it blasphemes the climate religion — and strip its AdSense ads from the page. And we were right! (See below.)
Al Gore famously warned that sea level rise caused by man’s use of fossil fuels was going to kill us. Barack Obama implied that he had magic powers that would control surging sea levels. A fresh study shows just how dishonest this pair and the many others who did their best to misinform the public have been.
Gore’s 2006 propaganda film told us to beware of sea levels rising by 20 feet, devastating New York and Florida. The uber-narcissistic Obama promised an adoring crowd that his nomination to be the Democratic Party’s 2008 presidential nominee “was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” California Gov. Jerry Brown predicted a little more than a decade ago that collapsing glaciers would submerge both the Los Angeles and San Francisco international airports.
These of course are just three of many examples of alarmists, hacks, globalist busybodies, NASA eggheads, academic ideologues and true believers fear-mongering over sea-level rise.
Obama, no climate refugee he, was later roasted for buying oceanfront compounds in Martha’s Vineyard and Hawaii. The purchases clearly show he didn’t believe what he said – he was just another political hack appealing for votes and hoping to burnish a legacy before he even set foot in the White House.
But how can we know it’s just fear-mongering?
Actual science, not Gore’s junk variety, now tells us that “approximately 95% of the suitable locations” researchers looked at showed “no statistically significant acceleration of the rate of sea level rise.” This “suggests that local, non-climatic phenomena are a plausible cause of the accelerated sea level rise observed at the remaining 5% of the suitable locations.”
“On average,” the European paper says, “the rate of rise projected by the IPCC is biased upward with approximately 2 mm per year in comparison with the observed rate.”
As it turns out:
The majority of the local causes of rapid sea level rise (or drop) appear to be geologic. Tectonic motion explains sudden changes of sea level rise found in a few places. More gradual but rapid rise (or fall) of sea level is mostly caused by glacial isostatic adjustment and in a few isolated cases by an excessive sediment load.
What else do we know about the oceans? It’s been well established that sea levels, like Earth’s climate, have been constantly changing without any human influence.
We acknowledge that we live in an era of rising sea levels, just as we live in a time in which we are escaping the lower temperatures of the Little Ice Age that lasted until the late 19th century, if not, according to some researchers, the early 20th century. But the rise we’re seeing is slow, not remotely catastrophic, and not outside of historical norms (even though the hysterics continue to claim the rise is “accelerating” and is “unprecedented”).
The climate cranks, warming crackpots, and those possessed of Marxphilia won’t be deterred by this or any other scientific evidence. But it’s news that can help persuade larger swaths of voters that the global warming scare is a con. As more Americans learn the truth, the radicals and zealots who perpetuate the fiction will fade into the oblivion they deserve.
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Only 5 years left.
(from another I&I article):
Democrats are exposed for the heinous morons they are.
Great wording, I'm gonna use that. Frequently.
The oceans are all connected as one massive body of water...Doesn’t the true level of water exist in all of the sea?????
If the Atlantic ocean rises 1 foot, doesn’t the Pacific ocean also rise 1 foot??????
If the Atlantic ocean rises 1 foot, doesn’t the Pacific ocean also rise 1 foot??????
Agreed, I don’t understand the concept that 5% of locations are seeing “local” rises in sea level. Like a big hill of water is parked offshore or something.
I don’t understand their way of thinking either...
I think it’s mostly BS...
There is a long-running tradition in the IPCC and other organizations to cherry pick their data, deleting that which does not agree with their preferred outcome of rising temperatures. They’re likely also doing that with sea level changes, but the problem with that is all the oceans are connected. If it rises in one area, it should rise in all the others.
IIRC one end of the Panama canal has sea level higher than the other. That was like 1962ish.
Like the pacific end was 3 feet higher than the Caribbean end.
Those in charge of me are coming, gotta go.
Caddis the Elder
“IPCC and other organizations to cherry pick their data”
This appears to be the method of operation with a lot of “science” these days—particularly when government funding is involved.
At this point I have no choice—my default view is that all scientists are lying until I am able to independently investigate and verify their work.
The “experts” can no longer be trusted.
If the Atlantic ocean rises 1 foot, doesn’t the Pacific ocean also rise 1 foot??????
There are also lots of dynamic effects from tides to currents to variations in rainfall and evaporation.
The point is the oceans are a very dynamic system which can easily rise or fall more in a particular place than in another, because of local variations.
Sure, if we can measure averages over a long period of time, we overall rise and fall in the various oceans should be pretty much the same - and this is what the researchers found in 95% of the suitable locations.
At this point I have no choice—my default view is that all scientists are lying until I am able to independently investigate and verify their work.
The “experts” can no longer be trusted.
Here is an article I wrote about selection bias and confirmation bias in papers published about bear spray and firearms.
https://www.ammoland.com/2024/04/bias-in-studies-of-the-efficacy-of-firearms-in-bear-attacks/
Possibly the 5% can be interpreted as a result of a slight rise in sea levels which is only problematic in 5% of locations sampled. A very flat place near sea level is going to see greater impacts from a one foot rise in sea level than a normal shoreline with perhaps a five to ten foot daily tidal range.
I am not any big backer of climate change or associated theories but it would be prudent to plan for rising sea levels, even if one firmly believes in random variability as the main driver of climate, that still leaves a measurable probability of rising sea levels at some point in the next two centuries. So in various places around the world, people should have plans for that. Even a climate change skeptic would have no reason to deny that sea levels are not necessarily at the highest point they will ever reach for the next 200 years.
Definitely. In New England, whever they point to "sea level rising" it's just beach erosion. 100%. And that's been going on for about a billion years.
I still have a difficult time with any idea that "rainfall" or "evaporation" will have actual local effects. Very short-term? Sure. I think of rivers -- a big rainstorm causes flooding and the river gets very high, it overflows it's banks, it floods the surrounding land. It is a localized phenomenon. But water flows downhill, eventually the flood subsides, the water reaches the ocean, and the river returns to its normal level.
This is even quicker in the ocean. Maybe it rains like hell off Miami. Millions of gallons of rainfall dumped in the ocean right off shore. The ocean smooths itself out, if not instantly, then pretty close to it. There is never a "hill of water" in the ocean because it rained a lot.
I think this is all bogus science from start to finish.
(Waits patiently for the left to concoct some BS where the fact that the oceans AREN’T rising is going to doom us all).
Some crap like “The ocean has to renew itself because so much of it evaporates each year, and the fact that it SHOULD have been rising but isn’t, means that it going to go dry soon, and we’re all going to die.
This is an excellent article, for marine engineers who need accurate information to build coastal infrastructure. Finding absolute sea level rise of 1.5 mm per year; that 95% of observations show no sea level acceleration, and the other 5% are due to tectonic movements.
One other major flaw in science these days is their insistence on jumping to conclusions when the data is in fact inconclusive.
The three words scientists hate to say:
“I don’t know.”
Many of the “average person” common views about science are based on publicists who have not dug deep into the data and analysis.
—
This is off topic but look at this Wikipedia science article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_wobble
“An investigation was done in 2001 by Richard Gross at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory managed by the California Institute of Technology. He used angular momentum models of the atmosphere and the oceans in computer simulations to show that from 1985 to 1996, the Chandler wobble was excited by a combination of atmospheric and oceanic processes, with the dominant excitation mechanism being ocean-bottom pressure fluctuations. Gross found that two-thirds of the “wobble” was caused by fluctuating pressure on the seabed, which, in turn, is caused by changes in the circulation of the oceans caused by variations in temperature, salinity, and wind. The remaining third is due to atmospheric pressure fluctuations.[6]”
A little voice in my head is telling me that “Gross” was winging it and the real world data would not support his computer simulation based conclusion.
I still have a difficult time with any idea that “rainfall” or “evaporation” will have actual local effects.
Water will reach a level, but it takes time. It can take years.
Currently, the ocean levels appear to be rising at about 1.5mm a year, and have been doing in so for a long period of time. This rise is attributed to the melting of ice as we continue to be in an inter-glacial period.
No. Mean "sea level" around the world is actually lumpy. Winds, Coriolis forces, and temperatures combine to mound the water in the middle of an ocean to varying degrees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.