Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels

Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels

www.guardian.co.uk

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century.

(visit the link for the full news article)

All of this hype, all of this "science" is no different than trying to predict the stock market or outcome of a sports match, no matter how much info and research you do at the end of the day it is more unpredictable than the "experts" are letting on.

I'm not saying we shouldn't think of our planet and take every step necessary to protect ourselves and our environment, but I do not think that humanity will ever know how much we effect the environment.

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Well, that is the whole idea behind peer review. But the withdrawal of the paper does not necessarily mean that sea levels are not rising. Just that, as the authors said, there were errors in their calculations.

Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more. Martin Vermeer of the Helsinki University of Technology, Finland and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany published a study in December that projected a rise of 0.75m to 1.9m by 2100.

reply to post by Blogbuster


Is there one thing that has been reported that is even true in regards to global warming. No proof of temp rise outside the norm, no proof of see level rise, no proof of glaciers melting.

I cannot believe they tried to use this ploy to redistribute wealth around the world. If that is what they want why not just present it to us and let us vote on it based on truth instead of a bunch of filthy lies piled on top of more lies.

7 and 82 is a big scale..

82 cm is a tad less than 3ft in standard terms its roughly 32.28in..

about 4 and 1/4in shy of 3 ft..

I don't see what the big deal is, we cant do anything to stop it, of mother nature has a pms attack then we are all screwed, no matter how much carbon tax we have to pay..

[edit on 2/21/2010 by ThichHeaded]

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by Blogbuster

 

Is there one thing that has been reported that is even true in regards to global warming. No proof of temp rise outside the norm, no proof of see level rise, no proof of glaciers melting.

... a bunch of filthy lies piled on top of more lies.

The retracted 2007 IPCC predictions said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, and stressed their predictions were based on incomplete information.

More recent studies predict a much MUCH higher rise: 0.75m to 1.9m.

From the source article, AND posted above:

Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more. Martin Vermeer of the Helsinki University of Technology, Finland and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany published a study in December that projected a rise of 0.75m to 1.9m by 2100.

reply to post by soficrow


So I am supposed to pay a bunch of carbon taxes because the sea MAY rise by a few feet? Why can't people just move inland? Is it my fault they chose to live by the ocean?

Also, can you guarantee me that if I pay a bunch of carbon tax that the sea won't rise just as much or even more by 2100 or I should I just expect my hard earned money to be pissed into the wind?


[edit on 21-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by soficrow

 

So I am supposed to pay a bunch of carbon taxes because the say may rise by a few feet? Why can't people just move inland? Is it my fault they chose to live by the ocean?

I addressed only the science.

Feel free to proceed with your political response.

reply to post by soficrow


What science? This is just a bunch of guys making up data. It isn't real science unless it is peer-reviewed and is widely accepted as correct. Global Warming "science" doesn't seem to be there yet. Seems more like the psuedo-science of guys who think they discovered the means of anti-gravity, but will not put their ideas up for review.

Hell, I could say we are headed for an ice age and then fudge my computer models, close down all the thermometers where it is hot around the world and go psycho on anyone who disagreed. Would that be science?

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]

"Since publication of our paper we have become aware of two mistakes which impact the detailed estimation of future sea level rise. This means that we can no longer draw firm conclusions regarding 21st century sea level rise from this study without further work. "One mistake was a miscalculation; the other was not to allow fully for temperature change over the past 2,000 years. Because of these issues we have retracted the paper and will now invest in the further work needed to correct these mistakes."

The info presented here uses 22,000 years of data and is still rife with error. I'm trying to read between the lines and connect the dots from similar previous reports. Here are my conclusions from their data:

Climate change = true, has always been and will always be.
Man made = not enough evidence
Try to predict the future = good luck, because that is all it is
paying someone to stop climate change = downright stupid

reply to post by Blogbuster


This does nothing to prove that global warming is a hoax.

Is does, however, go towards proving that the scientific method is working the way it should.

If one were to read the entire article, not just the sensationalist headline, you will see that:

"Retraction is a regular part of the publication process," he said. "Science is a complicated game and there are set procedures in place that act as checks and balances."

and that:

Siddall said that he did not know whether the retracted paper's estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

I ask a question:

What if this study is an underestimate?

Oddly, most deniers make the same two main points, often in the same paragraph:

1. The earth's climate is not changing, and sea levels are not rising.

2. The earth's changing climate and rising sea levels are completely natural; it's all part of a normal cycle.

reply to post by Blogbuster


Very interesting piece. I have taken the liberty to offer a few juicy excerpts to whet the appetite:

1. Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

2. The IPCC said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, though stressed this was based on incomplete information about ice sheet melting and that the true rise could be higher.

3. Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more.

4. Siddall said that he did not know whether the retracted paper's estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

Originally posted by soficrow
Oddly, most deniers make the same two main points, often in the same paragraph:

1. The earth's climate is not changing, and sea levels are not rising.

2. The earth's changing climate and rising sea levels are completely natural; it's all part of a normal cycle.

lol, you noticed, Sofi.

Six impossible things before breakast.

(hope you're well, btw)

reply to post by Blogbuster


Here we are, now everyone can be an expert!

reply to post by Phage


I am wondering you seem to be a very smart person when is enough going to be enough for you on this climate change issue? I know you should nor throw the baby out with the bath water but it is one lie after another on this issue. I think we need to start from scratch and really figure out what is going on and if governments are playing a hand in it.


But I have a felling they are playing around somehow with the atmosphere and that will make it impossible for us to ever get the truth. When they get involved lies become truth.