Sea level is about 2mm higher than it was seven years ago. It will only take 3,500 years to achieve 1 metre of rise, or 17,500 years to reach Hansen’s five metres this century forecast.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
- Extreme Weather
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Nicholas McGinley on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Nicholas McGinley on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Bob G on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- stewartpid on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Jehzsa on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Robertvd on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Bob G on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Walter on Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
the keyword is “unadjusted”
The “waves” ARE getting higher.
PS: I think Hansen was born ahead of his time, about 117,500 years ahead of his time. Maybe after the next Glacial Cycle, during the next Inter-Glacial, he just might be right for a day or two. Today he sounds like a cracked, scratched, warped, old broken record. I’m sorry, what is it that American Taxpayers are paying him and GISS to do? I keep forgetting.
So do he and his co-workers!
So when the data is adjusted, what is it adjusted for? Are these adjustments valid or are they open to question?
The main point of the adjustments is to remove seasonal and other temporal variations. They should not change the trend however, which they do. Indicating that they are wrong.
raw data should be indicated as “unfudged”
How long are the seasonal and other temporal variations?
People in low lying areas have plenty of time to adapt, assuming they need to adapt at all. Another example of crying “wolf” when there is no wolf.