The sea is rising? Where’s the proof of this?
Twice a day. Of course it lowers twice a day too.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level
The graph makes it seem YUGE, but, since 1881, the global sea level is a total of 6.29 inches higher today.
What they don't tell you is before 1881 they had no clue as to what the “global” sea level was, only local data from various sources, all with different accuracies of measuring.
Also in the webpage (and it is a US Government site), they mention that sea levels started a higher rate of climb around 1993, and this is now being monitored by satellite.
HOWEVER, that year was when those satellites started the monitoring in the FIRST place.
The “fact” that Norfolk and other areas will soon be underwater is a “projection” of that rise in the graph. It hasn't actually happened...
They're just assuming so, and even a higher rate is plugged in for future years in some cases, based on the absolutely not-proven idea that the climate will continue to warm at an alarming rate and start melting the vast Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, in a kind of accelerating feedback loop. But we certainly do not know that as a fact. In fact, the ice sheet in Antarctica has been GROWING these past several years.
I think to me the biggest debacle of CO2 causing global warming is that as--currently--CO2 (parts per million in the atmosphere) levels have been growing, and this can be shown in a chart as a steady growth, BUT the overall corresponding air temperature is not matching that same rate of growth. The hiatus we've had is proof of a not so steady rise, or even leveling, AND, as we've learned about El Nino, peak temperatures from it can cause anomalies in the data depending on the time length of the measurement. So, for example, 1985-2000 looks huge, due to a massive El Nino in 1998. But again, where's the steady rise in temperature? Now some of these Climate Believers say that the increase got swallowed up by the oceans, but it'll be back, just wait and see.
NONSENSE. If carbon dioxide growth doesn't match temperature growth, than carbon dioxide is not the cause.
Also, they say some of this change is the result of “land subsidence”. Which means, in many places, like Canada, Scandinavia, Russia, etc., the land is still rising 14,000 years after the mile thick glaciers have melted, which is causing other land masses to get slightly lower, in a reaction to the rising elsewhere.
It's complicated, but these so called floods are predictions based on sometimes still incomplete data sets and understanding of what's really happening.