Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
Gleick’s Institute Admits That There Has Been No Sea Level Rise On The West Coast
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
What is the time frame for short and long term? These people are crazy.
Do we know if this Gleick himself or a minion?
And as for the short/term long term bit, who’s been shouting about a supposed acceleration in SLR since 1993.
Proper scientists tell you that such things should be looked at over 60 cycles or more.
LOL! That last tweet cracks me up! Ha!
Funny, but really there is no vertical motion on a strike slip fault. More fittingly it would be a dip-slip fault.
Typical of fear mongering at the Los Angeles Times’s (Jan 2011):
When I contacted the staff writer, he responded with:
There ya go — how our national media sources science – the NYT’s. LOL
“DPO Phases” dumb people overcome
Maybe he needs some education on PDO phase. Pacific Decadal Oscillation
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_decadal_oscillation
DPO is actually is a phase when a woman ovulates..lol
http://community.babycenter.com/post/a15678045/counting_your_dpo_luteal_phase
One has to admit it’s tempting to focus on imaginary problems than real problems in the world, as imaginary problems are usually easier to fix.
The bad thing about fixing imaginary problems is that you never know when you are successful. Fixing imaginary problems would keep you employed for a indeterminate time!
Wait a minute…
“Rising sea levels threaten US ports”.
Call Homeland Security. Those dip slips will be able to arrest them.
Must be a case of voluntary dyslexia . . as you got your h’s and t’s mixed up with l’s and p’s.
These people need to start signing legal documents that state if their predictions fail to come true on such and such a date then they forfeit all their assets and they lose their present jobs. if they are deceased then their heirs will lose everything they inherited from their lying parent.
Force them by law to have some serious skin in the game. I’ll bet the fearmongering will stop immediately.
Sea level in San Francisco is falling about 0.06 mms/year since 1980 (although it is rising at 1.4 mms/year since 1854).
GPS receivers indicate San Francisco is subsiding at 1.12 mms/year.
Actual sea level change then: between +0.29 mms/year to -1.18 mms/year [far off the +3.2 mms/year from the sea level satellites].
Maybe Gleick is in the wrong institute.
Scientists Find That Sea Level Rise Is Much Slower Than Expected…No Human Fingerprint – See more at: http://notrickszone.com/#sthash.WYSNZe1E.dpuf and http://tucsoncitizen.com/wryheat/2013/04/25/rate-of-sea-level-rise-is-controlled-by-natural-oscillations/ and many other newer papers casting Gleick contentions into doubt.