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
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
- CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Deadly Cyclones And Arctic Sea Ice
- What About The Middle Part?
- “filled with racist remarks”
- Defacing Art Can Prevent Floods
- The Worst Disaster Year In History
- Harris Wins Pennsylvania
- “politicians & shills bankrolled by the fossil fuel industry”
- UN : CO2 Killing Babies
- Patriotic Clapper Misspoke
- New York Times Headlines
- Settled Science At The New York Times
- “Teasing Out” Junk Science
- Moving From 0% to 100% In Six Years
- “Only 3.4% of Journalists Are Republican”
- “Something we are doing is clearly not working”
- October 26, 1921
- Hillary To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
Recent Comments
- Jack the Insider on Election Results
- Caleb Shaw on Election Results
- Caleb Shaw on Election Results
- Mac on Election Results
- Disillusioned on Election Results
- Francis Barnett on Election Results
- Robertvd on Election Results
- Disillusioned on Election Results
- arn on Election Results
- William on Election Results
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.