NASA shows 3.24 mm/year sea level rise on their web site. They call it “Facts” – when in fact it is blatant fraud.
Until early December 2015, NOAA had this web page up showing about half that much sea level rise. NOAA just made it disappear ahead of COP 21.
the absolute global sea level rise is believed to be 1.7-1.8 millimeters/year.
Here is the web archive link from September 10, 2015
September 10, 2015 : Sea Level Trends – Global Regional Trends
So let’s look at how NASA committed their fraud. The first thing they did was to add in a 0.3 mm/year “Global Isostatic Adjustment” (GIA) to their satellite data. This is a completely fraudulent adjustment based on theoretical sea floor sinking – which should be used to calculate the sea floor height, not the sea surface height. Even if sea surface height rise was dead zero, the GIA adjustment would show sea surface height increasing by 0.3 mm/year. Mind-blowing malfeasance.
The next fraud was bait and switch. Until 1993, they use tide gauges, but after 1993 they switched to satellites.
This change in instrumentation to uncalibrated satellites produced an immediate doubling of sea level rise rates. Tide gauges do not show any change after 1993. They are attempting to blame an instrumentation change on climate change. Once again, mind-blowing malfeasance.
But it gets much worse. Their tide gauge data is also fraudulent, and does not agree with any historical publications, or current NOAA tide gauge data.
pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1982/1982_Gornitz_etal_1.pdf
The composite below shows all of the above in one graph. Earlier studies consistently showed half the rate of 1880 to 1980 sea level rise, as NASA shows now.
NOAA has 240 tide gauges globally, and 86% of them show less sea level rise than the claimed average of 3.2 mm/year. The average of all of the NOAA tide gauges is 1.14 mm/year, just over one third of the NOAA climate claims.
tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/MSL_global_trendtable.html
In 1982, NASA showed 1 mm/year. Now they claim 3.24 mm/year
Tide gauges show that sea level rise rates peaked around 1950. The claimed increase since 1993 is completely fraudulent.
Sea level has been rising for 20,000 years – and raise rates have slowed considerably.
The 1990 IPCC report said there is “no convincing evidence of acceleration” during the 20th century.
Every single thing NASA says about sea level is fraudulent. NASA’s own data says that Antarctica ice growth is reducing sea level.
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses | NASA
Their sea level operation is a propaganda outlet. They are not scientists and are not doing any legitimate science.
As far as I can tell, sea level really should not fall under the purview of NASA, since references to the oceans don’t seem to appear as part of their name. Somehow, the focus of this agency has crept into the mission assigned to NOAA, including the monitoring of temperatures. This duplication is wasteful and unproductive to say the least, and is the real issue concerning NASA today. They need to again set their sights much higher, so to speak, in a manner consistent with their true purpose.
Excellent documentation, thank you.
A tour de force. Well done.
Tony, you wrote:
Here’s a link directly to that quote:
https://archive.is/k6AGa#selection-1751.397-1751.475
However, even that rate is too high. The measured number is more like 1.4-1.5 mm/yr. To inflate it to 1.7-1.8 mm/yr, they’ve added 0.3 mm/yr GIA adjustment, to account for and remove the hypothesized influence on sea-level of the likely sinking of the ocean floor, which Richard Peltier estimates to be equivalent to 0.3 mm/yr sea-level decline.
That’s a useful calculation for doing ice mass budget calculations, etc., but the sum is not a rate of sea-level rise, and certainly should not be used for coastal planning. It’s the rate at which they think sea-level would be rising, if it were not for the fact that the ocean floor is probably still very slowly sinking, since the great ice sheets melted ~10,000 years ago.
I wrote: “…they’ve added 0.3 mm/yr GIA adjustment, to account for and remove the hypothesized influence on sea-level of the likely sinking of the ocean floor… [that] sum is not a rate of sea-level rise, and certainly should not be used for coastal planning. It’s the rate at which they think sea-level would be rising, if it were not for the fact that the ocean floor is probably still very slowly sinking…”
Greg Goodman explained it like this:
I have lived in New York City my whole life. I can tell you no significant change has taken place as regards to the level of the sea. Everything is the same. Beach front property is expensive for a reason.