No link between warming and seas level rise

As The Standard posts over 190 comments on a ‘debate’ about climate change, where the world’s best sysop ruthlessly bans anyone who is a ‘denier’ and thus turning the ‘debate’ into a circle jerk and echo chamber the rest of the world wakes up to the con job that is global warming:

THE latest science on sea level rises has found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years.

A paper published last month in Journal of Climate highlights one of the great uncertainties in climate change research – will ocean levels rise by more than the current 3mm a year? 

The peer-reviewed article, “20th-century global-mean sea-level rise: is the whole greater than the sum of the parts?” by JM Gregory, sought to explain the factors involved in sea-level rises during the last century. It found that sea-level rises had not accelerated “despite the increasing anthropogenic forcing” or human influence.

Australia’s pre-eminent sea-level scientist, John Church, contributed to the paper, which said it could not link climate change and the rate of sea-level rises in the 20th century.

No evidence…give us our carbon taxes back.

“We need to move from fear-based to fact-based evidence,” Dr Greene said. “We can trust the current models for the next 10 years, but there are problems after 15 years; sea level rises could be better or they could be worse.”

In other words it is all up in the air, so to speak.

It all make Al Gore’s fanciful 20 feet of sea level rise look like…well…a lie.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Apolonia

    The liar Al Gore should return the Nobel prize he was awarded.

    • Hey it only taken Armstrong a good decade to fess up, and he hasn’t made nearly as much out of being a liar a fraud and a hypocrite

  • surfisup

    Just because the study finds no link does not mean there is none. Climate change is so unbelievably complex with umpteen variables and black swans hiding in the detail.

    • They have fabricated “evidence” for over a decade. Led by the fundamentalist enviro nutters at Britain’s worst university they have led the world down a lane of lies that is all now unraveling. How many trillions have been shit down our legs on this global scam?

      • ConwayCaptain

        Not only the Uni but the UK Met Office has been pushing this agenda and their forecasts have been so far out it is incredible.
        There are Met log books going back 200+ years from HM warships and merchant zships and these are now bein corelated to see exactly what has happened in the atmosphere over that time.

    • In Vino Veritas

      So, by the same logic surfs, any study that does find a link can mean that there in actual fact, is none. Since climate change is so unbelievably complex and all. Therefore, based on the fact that science cannot prove nor disprove climate change, it can safely be concluded that the status quo can be resumed.

      Climate changers (and you) are using the classic argumentum ad ignorantiam.

      • surfisup

        Exactly. The converse is true too.

        But, it is no reason to stop climate research. The science will become more accurate over the long term.

        • Mostly_Harmless

          Who is arguing we should stop climate research?

    • stinkeye2

      Just because study’s find no link that Lady Gaga is an alien doesn’t mean she isn’t

    • Mostly_Harmless

      Complex or not, a scientific theory still needs to be supported with empirical evidence.

      • surfisup

        Interpretation of evidence is key. If you screw up the interpretation then evidence matters not. The chain between cause/effect is unclear in climate science. There are also self-feedback loops currently unknown by science. For example, maybe a warming earth can trigger a sequence of events that actually causes an ice age. The complete opposite of what you’d expect right?

        • Kapow

          Hey Surf, science dictates that if your hypothesis cannot be proven, it must be false. It doesnt therefore mean that you should carry on with expensive and ridiculous solutions for a false hypothesis.
          Why do you warmist still hold on to a false hypothesis?

  • SO anyone going to bother researching the largest by % volume and largest by energy storing value Green House gas – Water Vapour which makes up 1% of the Atmosphere (Carbon Dioxide makes up 0.1%)

    And if one wants a practical test on Global Warming Localised try a 35C day at 100% humidity AT NIGHT. The water vapour just does not let the heat escape…
    a few seconds ago · Like

  • Bob

    The line that ‘The climate change science is settled’ and that there is to be no futher discussion or we will brand you as a heretic and scream at you is beyond bollocks and must be fought at every turn. The issue is a scientific one and science should be questioned based on facts, not treated like some sort of climate change religion to be blindly followed.

    • Pete George

      Like the climate, climate change science will never be settled – but that works both ways. Claiming victory on a single research paper is like claiming sysop expertise on a single blog lecture from lprent.

      There are blind religious followers on both sides of the climate change argument/s.

  • Rodger T

    Whatever happen to the ozone hole? So beloved by the media as the latest doomsday theory in the 90s,has it healed up or just gone away?
    Or maybe it is just a naturally occurring event.

    • tarkwin

      We’re so far behind up North we’ve still got acid rain.

    • WayneO

      It’s still there. Go outside in the sun and see how quick you burn. Just nobody cares any more, it’s so last century news. Humans adapted and life continued more or less as normal. It varies in size and is trending to be smaller but it certainly is still there.

      At least the science of that is proven and it’s generally accepted that CFC’s were to blame for the ozone hole. Climate change is just a crock of shit.

      • Rodger T

        Google what creates ozone ,where the the ozone hole is and maybe put two and two together.
        While cfcs are indeed damaging to ozone,you don`t get burnt any quicker these days than when you did 20,30,40,50 ,60 years ago.

        • WayneO

          I don’t need to google it. I work in science.

  • Ronnie Chow

    That’s a real strange headline considering water expands as it gets warmer .

    • John1234

      Not really*. However it does expand significantly when it drops below 4 degrees to freezing.

      * thermal expansion factor of water, from 4 degrees to 100 degrees: 4.2×10-2

      • Ronnie Chow

        ‘Not really ” ? Are you stating that water does not expand when heated?
        And yes , to be specific and include most of the ocean , from 4 degrees upwards .

        • John1234

          No. I am saying that the thermal expansion factor of water from 4 to 100 is 4.2×10-2, i.e. very small.

          Try filling a glass with water, mark the level, and microwave it to say 60 degrees and see if you can measure how much it expanded. It will be too small to be measurable Then consider that the most alarmist *projected* temperature increase for global warming is only a couple of degrees over a century.

          Also note that melting ice caps do not significantly raise sea levels, as of course, the ice can only displace its own weight. So it is only the balance of water in the ocean to the balance of ice on land that can change sea levels.

          • BW_Lord

            Well explained. Seems pretty logical when put like that.

          • Steve (North Shore)

            I can see your method, but you would not find an increase in expansion using a microwave.
            You see, some of the water would evaporate – you may have less.
            Just saying

          • John1234

            Heh! Evaporation at less than boiling (I did say 60 degrees) would be insignificant.

            Lots of water evaporates off the oceans – after all, that’s where our rain comes from. But I don’t see the warmists allowing for increased evaporation due to increased temperatures in their sea level rise models!

      • jonno1

        Yeah, recently burst a perfectly good bottle of Pinot Gris by putting it in the freezer to chill then forgetting about it (even forgot to set the timer). Bummer.

      • Here’s an idea, why not actually read the paper they (incorrectly) quote?
        “We estimate the maximum rate of sea level rise caused by changes in deep water formation is 0.1 meter per century. Contributions from the cryosphere reported in the literature range from near zero to about 0.35 m. When added to the thermal expansion components, our total sea level rise scenario for 2050 for a temperature rise of 3.0°C (1.5°C to 4.5°C) is about 0.35 m (0.15 and 0.70 m).”

  • LesleyNZ

    EXACTLY – What a scam this is! Government must stop charging us the carbon tax that was imposed upon us – (think it is built into our power bills??????). Victoria University, Dr Sean Weaver, Ian Payton from Landcare Research the UN (and the other pro-carbon policy/trading – man-made global warming/climate change/Al Gore following lot), need to be held accountable for the assumption that man made carbon affects the climate. They also need to be held accountable for promoting the carbon market scam (that has cost us money and lined the pockets of others). The Pacific Islands are being targeted and indoctrinated into believing that rising sea levels are a threat and that man-made climate change is causing the sea level rise. Dr Sean Weaver is leading this campaign in NZ and the Pacific Islands through the company “Carbon Partnership” and REDD+.
    “We specialise in indigenous forest conservation in New Zealand and the Pacific Islands. We help communities, landowners and governments make a living from protecting their forests through payments for ecosystem services.
    Our New Zealand work focuses on financing indigenous forest protection through the voluntary carbon market. Our Pacific Island work focuses on policy, financing, and project development in reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+).” REDD+ is a UN based programme
    Check out the key people and associates. Have all these people had an influence in promoting the carbon tax scam?
    “Dr Sean Weaver is Principal, Carbon Partnership Ltd. – a climate policy, carbon market project design, and education consultancy. Over 20 years experience as a practitioner/educator in environmental policy and management. Experience and track record in carbon project design, project fund raising, and project management, together with domestic and international climate change policy (New Zealand, Vanuatu, and Fiji). UNFCCC negotiator for Vanuatu. An educational specialist in carbon markets and climate change science/policy. A recipient of 6 teaching excellence awards at Victoria University of Wellington, and a National Teaching Excellence Award. Now focusing on climate change and carbon markets education for policy and business leaders. Previously worked for Victoria University of Wellington (Senior Lecturer Environmental Studies Program); NZ Parliament (Policy Advisor), Environmental Consultant (IUCN, WWF), University of the South Pacific (Lecturer).”
    All roads seem to lead Wellington and to Victoria University (and no doubt other Universities in NZ) and the United Nations. What a wonderful time these experts on carbon must be having visiting all the Pacific Islands. We have been conned and our government needs to wake and see what has been happening in their own backyard – with taxpayer money. These carbon cons have managed to get funding from the NZ government, the UN and from our own pockets. They must be stopped in their tracks – immediately.

  • SteveWrathall

    I’m very proud to have been banned from The Standard for posting:

    “The 1990 IPCC report predicted “Under the Business- as- Usual scenano, the
    best estimate is that, for the year 2030, global sea level would be 18cm higher
    than today”
    Meanwhile back in the real world sea level continues it’s non-alarming 3.1
    mm/year rise , and there is no evidence that it is increasing.
    This puts us on track for 12.4 cm over 1990-2040. Below the average IPCC
    prediction from 1990, way below the upper-end IPCC estimate of 30 cm, and
    no-where near the fantastical Al Gore metres of sea level rise flooding NY
    before the WTC is even rebuilt.”

    And I was banned …. “for trying to disrupt the thread – quoting a 23 year old study as if it was current puts you directly into the extreme troll area.”

    How on earth are climate predictions supposed to be verified except by taking predictions that have have enough time elapsed since, in order to compare with actual observations? It’s called science.

  • cows4me

    No wonder the substandard has a post with more then 190 comments, two thirds of those will be the ravings of the useful idiots. These useful idiots will of course be defending their evil masters within the UN and IPCC, the sad thing is these clowns are so brainwashed they actually believe they are saving the planet. In reality they are simply pawns in a communist conspiracy.. AGW is horseshit, always has been but I would not expect the far left to surrender AGW simply because they continue to be caught out with their lies. To much has been invested, be it money, time, brainwashing the useful idiots in the universities and peddling vast amounts of fucking propaganda. To put it simply. AGW is all part of the communist plan or the NWO to implement environmental laws the supersede all other laws. If every law must in some way be tied to environmental law, which is the true wish of the AGW promoters, then any population can be control all because the planet( environmental law comes first) must be save. Those who set environmental law also dictate energy policy, the implications are huge. One only has to look at the EPA in the USA to see what power these so called environmentalist have over their fallow citizens.

  • Patrick

    WHAAAT – Al Gore is a bullshitter? Next you will be telling me Lance Armstrong is on the “roids”

    • stinkeye2


  • Mr_Blobby

    It’s a bit like the science of predicting earthquakes. More an art than a science.
    A carbon TAX does nothing except collect TAX for a greedy incompetent Government trying to beg,borrow or steal from any available source.

  • Great piece of evidence you found there Slater.
    Too bad The Australian has pulled the article down due to gross factual errors.

    They even posted an article saying the complete opposite on the same day…