Climate Change bullshit from the Herald

Isaac Davidson has an article in the Herald today about allegedly rising sea levels, in particular the unique scientific anomaly where water levels are rising faster in the Marshall Islands than anywhere else on the planet…yes I’m not kidding they really claim that.

The Marshall Islands have a population of 55,000 spread over 180sq km of coral atolls and islands.

* 2m above sea level on average.

* Sea levels have risen 7mm a year since 1993, compared with a global average of 0.4mm.

* Sea levels are expected to increase by up to 15cm by 2030.

Really? …Does Isaac know anything about fluid dynamics? How can a sea level rise faster in the Marshall Islands…than say Fiji, or Samoa?

Quite apart from the fact that this is impossible…go on I dare you to try and raise the water level in your pool in just one spot…say…at the shallow end…go on try it…add in more water at the shallow end…it should according to Isaac Davidson raise the water level just where you added the water…and increase it more than the rest of the pool.

But hey, let’s not let facts get in the way of a good story from the “decent journalists, trained and skilled” at the Herald. 

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has been measuring the sea levels in the Pacific and the results are published on their website.

The 2010 report on the Marshall Islands can be found there also.

The report on the Marshall Islands shows a sea level rise of ‘+3.8 mm/year’ (Executive Summary, page 2).


This disagrees with the Herald’s figure of ‘7mm a year since 1993’. In addition to this it can be seen in figure 14 on page 26 that the rise in sea level occurred in 1993-1994 when the gauge was first installed, and that it has been relatively stable ever since (except for the drop in 1997/98 due to the el nino).


Having examined the observed empirical scientific data I’m interested as to why Isaac Davidson and the Herald can claim that sea levels have been rising ‘7mm a year since 1993’ when the science says it is around half of that, and why it is they neglect to mention that the rise only occurred in 1993 and there has been no rise in sea level in the 17 yrs ending in 2011?

Once again the media manipulate the facts and in this case ignore them to push the meme that catastrophic anthropogenic climate change if killing us all.

It is fanciful to suggest that water levels can rise faster in the Pacific Ocean at the Marhsall Islands, faster than anywhere else. The Pacific Ocean is, according to NOAA, 161,760,000km2, has a volume of 660,000,000 km3 at an average depth of 4080m and for some reason defies all known physics properties for water and rises faster in the Marshall Islands than anywhere else.

Have thes guys gy passed flat earth theory and moved on to concave earth theory?


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.

  • lofty

    Oh FFS..this is just ……………..I give up, they win, I am converted, scientific and natural laws obviously mean nothing, all hail to gaia, and its adherents, I wish to be known as disciple Lofty now.
    Right.. I am off to my cave for fear of the sky falling in. Mung beans in good supply.

  • Adrian with a W.

    “Really? …Does Isaac know anything about fluid dynamics? How can a sea level rise faster in the Marshall Islands…than say Fiji, or Samoa?”

    Whilst the article does have a lot of rubbish in it, I believe the sea level can rise there more than Fiji or Samoa because of it’s proximity to the equator.

    • Andy C

      Yep, right you are Adrian:

      So that’s me calling bullshit on Cam’s, er, bullshit claim. I think.

      • Orange

        The gravitational disturbances mentioned in the article 1) are just not subtle enough to affect the Marshall atolls without affecting the surrounding pacific islands, 2) are related to the possible complete melting of the arctic polar cap by the year 2100 and the run on gravitational displacement – by definition a non-local event. If the effect measured is local that means it is precisely *not* the cause mentioned in the article.

    • Doodle

      If proximity to the equator did have an effect, surely that effect would be constant i.e. the same effect would have been apparent pre 1993 & could therefore not explain the rise?

    • You can get transitory differences in level but they will always trend back to equality. I suspect the Marshall Islands are actually sinking, i.e. a land movement, and that sure ain’t as a result of global warming.

  • BW_Lord

    Was scratching my head at this one last night. Glad that you could call them on this bullshit WO.
    Now if only we could see a retraction … (I’ll hold my breath here)

  • GregM

    The other issue here that nobody in the MSM seems to bother covering, is that a lot of these atolls are actually sinking. Tuvalu is a good example.

    • lofty

      It is no use Greg, there is no reasoning with us, give up and join me on gaias team.
      My cave is big enough for you and your family.. All the usual suspects live here, you will get along famously with you know who.
      I do hope you know how to grow lentils and mung beans though, we all have to do our bit to live in harmony with mother (am I allowed to use that term?) gaia.

    • Muffin

      I was going to suggest the same, sinking would appear more likely to be returning these results

      • lofty

        Come on Muffin, you too can join us in our virtual cave, give up and repent your utterances.
        Sinking or rising, it is of no consequence, we are all doomed one way or the other.
        By the way I must ask that you stop reproducing (if you still do) as there are far far far too many of us destroying gaia, some must go.
        Oh and to live in our cave you must be young and productive, we cannot support elderly, sick, “special” or plain dumb people..oh wait.

        • GregM

          Oh shit, I all of the above, except young. Can I still come?

          • lofty

            Only if you bring your guitar so we can all singalong to kumbaya at our campfire group hugs.

          • nellie

            But won’t a fire cause dirty smoky stuff?

          • Hazards001

            It’s an organic fire fuelled by wind power and solar energy.

          • Euan Ross-Taylor

            Is that when one of those windmills catches fire?

          • Hazards001

            Ignited by the spark of hypocrisy that created it in the first place.

    • Euan Ross-Taylor

      There are many incalculable things happening also that we hear nothing about ie new volcanic islands being formed under the sea ie. new islands in Hawaii and Tonga for a start. There are also land movements happening caused by the last ice age where land masses are still expanding after being compressed by glaciers 10s of kms deep. I’d love some scientist to begin to calculate the affects of these on sea levels.

      • AnonWgtn

        One should look at the strong possibility of a new Volcano just off the coast of Leigh, just north of Auckland.
        Ask the Volcanologist where Auckland is most vulnerable.

    • AnonWgtn

      Simply the weather, in natural phenomena, is eroding theses islands, and has been doing so for hundreds of year – and will continue to do so until they are submerged from whence they came.

  • Hmmm remembering back to high-school Geography lessons, aren’t these chaps forgetting to take into account subsidence?

  • BJ

    My understanding is that the sea is not rising – it is the coral reef (atoll) that is eroding and compacting – a natural phenomena throughout the millennia. Atolls come and go. Any climate changes are due to forces that leave mans influence for dead.
    I would suggest these affected island communities accept the fact and settle somewhere else

  • conwaycaptain

    Sea levels in various parts of the ocean can be different. In the Pacific the Southern Oscillation (El Nino/La Nina) can cause this but the hydrographers can allow for this in their measurements. With modern sattilites they can measure the ocean height v accurately indeed.

    • lofty

      pfft to your logic Cap’n.
      It means nothing to those of us enlightened ones who know what mother gaia is saying.
      Take your facts and stick em up your hawsepipe. metaphorically speaking of course.

    • In Vino Veritas

      Thats all fine and dandy, but they then should not be using an world wide average as a comparison, surely?

  • Adolf Fiinkensein

    I wonder if it might just be possible that the Marshall Islands are sinking and the bloody sea level is not rising very much at all? I know it hasn’t risen much at Takapuna beach since I first went there in 1954.

  • Josh Metcalfe

    I don’t a damned thing about fluid dynamics, but surely it could be possible, otherwise why would we need the locks in the Panama Canal?

    • AnonWgtn

      Another Panama Canal is ready to start being cut in South America ??Honduras?? China financed.

      • Euan Ross-Taylor

        As far as I’m aware it has only been proposed. I think they are still working out what route it might take.

      • chris

        Locks=lakes in the middle

    • sweetd

      The locks are solely to act as a lifting mechanism to hoist the sea
      lanes up and over the elevation of the Isthmus of Panama and then to
      lower them back down.

      • Josh Metcalfe

        So not that the ocean is higher on one side than the other?

        • philbest

          The earth’s direction of rotation causes the ocean’s water to bank up against the mass of land that extends from the arctic to the antarctic, on one side.

          This obviously can’t be happening somewhere in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

        • workingman

          See this example diagram. The locks also cope with different tide levels on either side.

    • Sooty

      The highest water level is 26 metre above the ocean.

      • Josh Metcalfe

        Ahhh, I see. That’s where I must have gotten mixed up. Thanks all, so much for the supposed hate culture that exists here haha.

        • It’s really weird. People treat us nicely, and we respond in kind. It’s almost as if we have no control over it.

  • tarkwin

    Similar problem here, the sea rose about 2.4 metres a while ago and now it’s dropping again. Should I report this to the Horrid?

  • Markm

    Maybe exploding 67 atomic bombs under the island has had some effect.
    Just a thought

  • Vlad

    Shrinking, sinking, drowning, growing….whatever. Here’s a past gem from WO in May this year:

    “Climate scientists have expressed surprise at findings that many low-lying Pacific islands are growing, not sinking.

    Islands in Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Federated States of Micronesia are among those which have grown, largely due to coral debris, land reclamation and sediment.

    The findings, published in the magazine New Scientist, were gathered by comparing changes to 27 Pacific islands over the last 20 to 60 years using historical aerial photos and satellite images.

    Auckland University’s Associate Professor Paul Kench, a member of the team of scientists, says the results challenge the view that Pacific islands are sinking due to rising sea levels associated with climate change.

    “Eighty per cent of the islands we’ve looked at have either remained about the same or, in fact, gotten larger,” he said.”

    The Marshall Islands are only 400 km from these “rising” Pacific states. The one constant is that they are all on the international aid drip, and the Warming scare is a potential bonanza for their non-existent economies.

  • Plue

    You are being terribly unfair WO, when was the last time you met a journalist with any sort of science qualifications. How can you expect them to understand fluid dynamics. I am sure whomever actually wrote the article for him was a researcher from Greenpeace and they are sure to be suitably trained in science.
    I mean everything I know came from Dr Bunsen Honeydew
    And I am sure they have equally reputable sources.

  • cows4me

    Does it really matter what the truth is the Horrid has an agenda and the agenda is all that matters. Isaac sounds like another paid up member of the useful idiot brigade. The Horrid isn’t printed with articles like this to influence a discerning public, that will question the facts, it’s printed for the mindless masses. The lie must continue at all costs, there are too many professional reputations and egos that have risked it all. A long with greedy cash strapped politicians and political movements that see the climate change issue as a chance to implement rules and taxes on their poor victims.

    • philbest

      What pisses me off all the more, is that they don’t even print one single letter calling them on any of their PC lefty BS.

  • Harry B’Stard

    I like to know how the hell polar melt can flow all the way to just the Marshall Islands and congregate there, absolutely amazing physics!!!!

    • Andy C
      • Harry B’Stard

        yes thats regional not just around the Marshalls

      • philbest

        None of those effects can possibly be happening in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

        This reminds me of the switch in alarmism, from “global warming”, to “climate change”, because the main statistic, “average global temperature”, was not obliging. If “average sea level rises” are not obliging, then the alarmism resorts to “change”, always all our fault of course.

        How is it possible to calculate a “global average” anyway, for something as chaotic as temperature and sea level? And if it is all about “change”, when was there ever not change, or less change?

  • If a glacier is suspended in water then it’s already displacing it’s weight, therefore no change in sea level when it melts.

    And it’s snowing in Peru that should make up for it …

    • philbest

      Also, the melting of on-land ice, such as Antarctica, is a nonsense impossibility anyway – at minus tens of degrees C?

      How much faster can it break off at the edges if it is b—–y freezing everywhere it is forming? Not fast enough to ever drown the planet, I suggest.

      And in Greenland, the ice is resting in a huge basin. The amount going out to sea via glaciers also ain’t enough to ever drown the planet. This is apparently news to Michael Mann et al.

      • Exactly , I was ripping into CNN about it, and I was constantly being branded a Denier and moderated , they had no science , and couldn’t even discuss the issues, bloody A.D.D children have grown into something truly F’d in the head IMHO.

        They just want to “feel” another Global Threat so they can be special all over again , freakin morons M8!

  • rouppe

    I seem to remember watching a David Attenborough documentary on the Galapagos Islands. He sowed how the islands have – for millenia – been created through volcanic action, then slowly eroded away, ultimately to disappear.

    No reason to think that same process doesn’t happen elsewhere. In fact this information says the Marshall “atolls lie on top of ancient volcanic peaks that are thought to have erupted from the ocean floor 50–60 million years ago” while this information says the Galapagos Islands were formed “by the interaction of Plate Tectonics and Hot Spot Volcanism” which sounds pretty similar to me…

  • Vlad

    The only thing to keep in mind is that the Pacific Islands Forum, on this very topic, takes place this week. So, as with every one of these troughing gab-fests, the Conference is preceded by a blizzard (in the figurative, non-climate sense) of alarmist bullshit.

  • Euan Ross-Taylor

    This topic has got me thinking; just what is the loss of land to the sea due to erosion? This material will be displacing water so will be a factor in gradual sea level rise. After a lot of looking around I only came up with 1 stat which is for Ethiopia and can be found here
    The stat is this: Ethiopia loses 1 billion cubic metres of top soil every year to erosion. If that all ended up in the Indian Ocean alone and displaced water It would cause a 10mm increase in the sea level in the Indian Ocean, and this erosion is apparently happening every year. So my question is, how much erosion is happening worldwide, and what percentage is ending up in the oceans causing just how much sea level rise?

  • Marty

    What they moaning about? According to Wikipedia it sounds like the Marshall’s are in need of a good salt water bath:

    “… 1956, the Atomic Energy Commission regarded the Marshall Islands as “by far the most contaminated place in the world”……”

  • Lord_Montrose

    TV3 tonight said that the sea at the Marshall Islands is rising at 70mm per year. Will they correct their story? It’s supposed to be 7mm. In fact the islands are sinking by almost all of that amount. John Key is there right now. Why doesn’t he correct them?

  • icicle

    The f*#@er wants a noble prize for global warming .Sorry, Al Gorey has got it.! Funny that from reading what he says, only the Marshall islands have the sea rose, whereas, the likes of Solomon island, Fiji, Samoa doesis not affected,these isles must be on a different planet…..strange that?

  • WayneO

    It’s the centrifugal force caused by the Earth’s rotation. Extra water added to the seas naturally rises higher at the equator (it’s more attracted to those points so to speak) due to the increased circumference of the earth at that point. As the earth spins, the equatorial mass has a higher rotational velocity to keep going around at the same rate (rpm if you like) as a point say 1cm off the poles. This is a similar principle to how a diff needs to work on a single fixed axle in a car. The centrifugal forces at the equator are higher due to the faster spin, therefore the water rises slightly higher at that point. The same applies to weight, so if you want to lose weight (when measured with reference to a spring scale) move to the equator.
    So the Herald may be right, but physically the differences are very, very small and below an order of magnitude from gravitational force. Nonetheless it is measurable.
    There, an actual physics based answer. But I still hate the Herald and the bullshit call on this story could still be valid. I can’t be bothered doing the maths to work out how much influence it will have on a body of water. I have a beer to drink. And I gave up being a physics nerd years ago when I realised the pay was shit.

    • Lord_Montrose

      But the height of the sea due to centrifugal force would not change unless the earth spins faster or slower – which it doesn’t significantly. So the only reason for apparent differences in sea level are because the land is rising or sinking, and we know that it is. The Marshall Islands are sinking at about 6mm per year according to their tide gauge.

  • LesleyNZ

    Dear Issac – read this – it is quite long. You will learn something about coral atolls and how they work. Greenpeace need to start doing something worthwhile – save the parrotfish and other beaked fish campaign. “What goes unremarked is the loss of the reef sand, which is essential for the continued existence of the atoll. The cause for the loss of sand is the indiscriminate, wholesale killing of parrotfish and other beaked reef-grazing fish. A single parrotfish, for example, creates about half a tonne of coral sand per year. Parrotfish and other beaked reef fish create the sand by grinding up the reef with their massive jaws, digesting the food, and excreting the ground coral.”
    Read the whole article here –
    Coral Atolls and Sea Level Rise
    – a guest blog by Willis Eschenbach

    Much has been written of late regarding the impending demise of the world’s coral atolls due to sea level rise. Recently, here in the Solomon Islands, the sea level rise has been blamed for salt water intrusion into the subsurface “lens” of fresh water under some atolls. Beneath the surface of most atolls, there is a lens shaped body of fresh water which floats on the seawater underneath. The claim is that the rising sea levels are contaminating the fresh-water lens with seawater.

    These claims of blame ignore several facts. The first and most important fact, discovered by none other than Charles Darwin, is that coral atolls essentially “float” on the surface of the sea. When the sea rises, the atoll rises with it, and when the sea falls, they fall as well. Atolls exist in a delicate balance between new sand and coral rubble being added from the reef, and sand and rubble being eroded by wind and wave back into the sea.

    When the sea falls, more sand tumbles from the high part, and more of the atoll is exposed to wind erosion. The atoll falls along with the sea level. When the sea level rises, wind erosion decreases. The coral grows up along with the sea level rise. The flow of sand and rubble onto the atoll continues, and the atoll rises. Since atolls go up and down with the sea level, the idea that they will be buried by sea level rises is totally unfounded. They have gone through sea level rises much larger and much faster than the current one.

    Given that established scientific fact, why is there water incursion into the fresh water lenses? Several factors affect this. First and foremost, the fresh water lens is a limited supply. As island populations increase, more and more water is drawn from the lens. The inevitable end of this is the intrusion of sea water into the lens. This affects both wells and plants, which both draw from the same lens. It also leads to unfounded claims that sea level rise is to blame. It is not. Seawater is coming in because fresh water is going out.

    The second reason for salt water intrusion into the lens is a reduction in the amount of sand and rubble coming onto the atoll from the reef. When the balance between sand added and sand lost is disturbed, the atoll shrinks. This has two main causes — coral mining and killing the wrong fish. The use of coral for construction in many atolls is quite common. At times this is done in a way that damages the reef as well as taking the coral. This is the visible part of the loss of reef, the part we can see.

    What goes unremarked is the loss of the reef sand, which is essential for the continued existence of the atoll. The cause for the loss of sand is the indiscriminate, wholesale killing of parrotfish and other beaked reef-grazing fish. A single parrotfish, for example, creates about half a tonne of coral sand per year. Parrotfish and other beaked reef fish create the sand by grinding up the reef with their massive jaws, digesting the food, and excreting the ground coral.

    In addition to making all that fine white sand that makes up the lovely island beaches, beaked grazing fish also increase overall coral health, growth, and production. This happens in the same way that pruning makes a tree send up lots of new shoots, and in the same way that lions keep a herd of zebras healthy and productive. The constant grazing by the beaked fish keeps the corals in full production mode.

    Unfortunately, these fish sleep at night, and are easily wiped out by night divers. Their populations have plummeted in many areas in recent years. Result? Much less sand.

    The third reason for salt water intrusion into the lens is the tidal cycle. We are currently in the high part of the 18 year tidal cycle. The maximum high tide in Honiara in 2008 was about 10 cm higher than the maximum tide in 1996, and the highs will now decrease until about 2014. People often mistake an unusually high tide for a rise in sea level, which it is not. There has been no increase in the recorded rate of sea level rise. In fact, the global sea level rise has flattened out in the last couple years.

    What can be done to turn the situation around for the atolls? There are a number of essential practical steps that atoll residents can take to preserve and build up your atoll, and protect the fresh water lens:

    1. Stop having so many kids. An atoll has a limited supply of water. It cannot support an unlimited population. Enough said.

    2. Catch every drop that falls. On the ground, build small dams in any watercourses to encourage the water to soak in to the lens rather than run off to the ocean. Put water tanks under every roof. Dig “recharge wells”, which return filtered surface water to the lens in times of heavy rain. Catch the water off of the runways. In Majuro, they have put gutters on both sides of the airplane runway to catch all of the rainwater falling on the runway. It is collected and pumped into tanks. On other atolls, they let the rainwater just run off of the airstrip back into the ocean …

    3. Conserve, conserve, conserve. Use seawater in place of fresh whenever possible. Use as little water as you can.

    4. Make the killing of parrotfish and other beaked reef grazing fish tabu. Stop fishing them entirely. Make them protected species. The parrotfish should be the national bird of every atoll nation. I’m serious. If you call it the national bird, tourists will ask why a fish is the national bird, and you can explain to them how the parrotfish is the source of the beautiful beaches they are walking on, so they shouldn’t spear beaked reef fish or eat them. Stop killing the fish that make the very ground under your feet. The parrotfish and the other beaked reef-grazing fish are constantly building up your atoll. Every year they are providing tonnes and tonnes of fine white sand to keep your atoll afloat in turbulent times. You should be honoring and protecting them, not killing them. This is the single most important thing you can do.

    5. Be very cautious regarding the use of coral as a building material. An atoll is not solid ground. It is is not a constant “thing” in the way a rock island is a thing. An atoll is an eddy, an ever-changing body constantly replenished by a (hopefully) unending river of coral sand and rubble. It is a process, wherein on one side healthy reef plus beaked coral-grazing fish plus storms provide a continuous stream of coral sand and rubble. This sand and rubble are constantly being added to the atoll, making it larger. At the same time, coral sand and rubble are constantly being eaten away, and blown away, and eroded away from the atoll. The shape of the atoll changes from season to season and from year to year. It builds up on this corner, and the sea washes away that corner.

    And of course, if anything upsets that balance of sand added and sand lost, if the supply of coral sand and rubble per year starts dropping (say from reef damage or coral mining or killing parrotfish) or if the total sand and rubble loss goes up (say by heavy rains or strong winds or a change in currents) the atoll will be affected.

    So if coral is necessary for building, take it sparingly, in spots. Take dead or dying coral in preference to live coral. Mine the deeps and not the shallows. Use hand tools. Leave enough healthy reef around to reseed the area with new coral. A healthy reef is the factory that annually produces the tonnes and tonnes of building material. You mess with it at your peril.

    6. Reduce sand loss from the atoll in as many ways as possible. This can be done with plants to stop wind erosion. Don’t introduce plants for the purpose. Encourage and transplant the plants that already grow locally. Reducing water erosion also occurs with the small dams mentioned above, which will trap sand eroded by rainfall. Don’t overlook human erosion. Every step a person takes on an atoll pushes sand downhill, closer to returning to the sea. Lay leaf mats where this is evident, wherever the path is wearing away. People wear a path, and soon it is lower than the surrounding ground. When it rains, it becomes a small watercourse. Invisibly, the water washes your precious sand into the ocean. Invisibly, the wind blows the ground out from under your feet. Protect your island. Stop it from being washed and blown away.

    7. Monitor and build up the health of the reef. You and you alone are responsible for the well-being of the amazing underwater fish-tended coral factory that year after year keeps your atoll from disappearing. Coral reseeding programs done by schools have been very successful. Get the kids involved in watching the reef. Educate the people that they are the guardians of the reef. Talk to the fishermen.

    8. Expand the atoll. Modern coastal engineering has shown that it is quite possible to “grow” an atoll. The key is to slow down the water as it passes by. The slower the water, the more sand builds up. Slowing the water is accomplished by building low underwater walls perpendicular to the beach. These run out until the ends are a few metres underwater. Normally this is done with a geotextile fabric tubes which are pumped full of concrete. In the atolls the similar effect can be obtained with “gabbions”, wire cages filled with blocks of dead coral. Wire all of the wire cages securely together in a triangular shape, stake them down with rebar, wait for the sand to fill in. It might be possible to do it with old tires, fastened together, with chunks of coral piled on top of them. It will likely take a few years to fill in. Here’s a before and after picture of the system in use on a beach (not an atoll), taken three years apart. Note the low height and triangular shape of the wall extending out from the beach and continuing underwater (made of 3 concrete-filled geotextile fabric tubes). This triangular shape does not attempt to stop the water currents. It just slows them down and directs them toward the beach to deposit their load of sand. Eventually, the entire area fills in with sand.

    Of course to do that, you absolutely have to have a constant source of sand … like for example a healthy reef … with lots of parrotfish. That’s why I said above that the single most important thing is to protect the fish and the reef. If you have beaked fish and a healthy reef, you’ll have plenty of sand and rubble forever. If you don’t, you’re in trouble.

    Coral atolls have proven over thousands of years that, if left alone, they can go up and down with any sea level rise. And if we follow some simple conservation practices, they can continue to do so and to support atoll residents. But they cannot survive an unlimited population increase, or unrestricted fishing, or overpumping the water lens, or unrestrained coral mining.