North Carolina Sea Level Rising At Less Than One Half Of The Global Average Rate

According to the University of Colorado, sea level along the North Carolina coast is rising at  a rate of 1.4 mm/year. This is less than one half of their measured global rate of 3.1 mm/year.

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

The graph below plots the grid cells at (32.5, 281.5) (33.5,282.5) (34.5,283.5) (34.5,284.5) and (35.5,285.5)

Over the next 88 years, sea level would be expected to rise five inches in North Carolina.

The NC Coastal Resources Commission created a reporting saying that North Carolina will have one metre of sea level rise during the rest of the century – which would require an acceleration of 800% over current rates. In response, the North Carolina Senate passed a bill requiring that only historical data be used – and proposed a rise of 8 inches.

This has caused a huge backlash from people with a vested interest in spreading climate misinformation. The one metre number is ridiculous, unsupportable and has no evidence to back it up.

About these ads

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to North Carolina Sea Level Rising At Less Than One Half Of The Global Average Rate

  1. Hell_Is_Like_Newark says:

    How can the ocean rise 3+ mm per year in one part of the world and less than 2 mm in another? I am referring to the satellite data (ignoring rise and fall due to land changes)

  2. David says:

    Short term changes in air pressure, longer term primarily changes in ocean currents and or temperature.

    • Billy Liar says:

      The mass of the atmosphere is fixed. The inverted barometer has no relevance to a global measure of sea level.

      That’s my hypothesis and I await a rebuttal.

  3. P. Solar says:

    The mass of the atmosphere will likely vary due the mass of water vapour it contains. A globally warmer atmosphere will likely contain more water vapour.

    Appart from that I would agree that inverse barometer is supposed to account for localised (spacially and temportally) variations in sea level measurements. If the I.B adjustment makes the GMSL rise or fall over time it would seem to indicate a fundamental error in the way it is being applied.

    One thing that raises suspicions on this front is that Colorado no longer provide plots and data for the non IB versions in their public presentations like they did just last year.

    Neither do we get to see the REAL GMSL data plotted, just the ficticious GAIA corrected pseudo sea level that hovers mystically somewhere just above the water.

    This does not increase confidence in their work.

  4. P. Solar says:

    Satellite MSL measurements would need to be compared to estimates of land level movements. Once you have done that any realisistic estimate of the measurement uncertainty will be WAY bigger than the quantity being measured.

    Since the whole discussion in NC is about local effects on land and sea defences any discussion of any metrics other than the ACTUAL tide gauge measurements seems irrelevant.

  5. P. Solar says:

    Here is the actual station data from Wilmington NC.
    http://i46.tinypic.com/bfrzmu.png

    There have been rising AND falling sea levels since 1962 but not notable long term offset in either direction, certainly not of the order of mm per year change.

    since 1998 sea levels have been FALLING.

    Now that sample covers the period of “unprecedented” global warming at the end of the last century.

    On the basis of that data I would not be spending one cent on raising sea defences.

  6. David says:

    Help Please. I remember the CU chart, before the adjustments, and am fairly certain that from late 2006, until they stopped updating in 2011?, it was fairly flat. Do anyone know of a screen shot of that chart? It appears to me that the .3mm per year ocean floor GIA wag does not account for the current chart compared to the ones before they stopped updating to figure out how to hide the decline.

  7. Mark says:

    Even Al Gore’s mentor admitted before his death the whole Carbon Dioxide causing manamde global warming was a scam he createed to get grant money. Looks like the scam continues and the grant money continues to flow. CO2 levels rise due to the fact that the oceans release more in warmer weather. It is an affect not a cause. There are two factors that affect this theory: First and foremost grant money, and secondly is the government desire to create a global carbon tax for politicians to fill their piggy banks.

    If a decenting scientist speaks up, he will loose his grant money, will be viemently attacked by the eco nazi’s, and will most likely loose his job. Man Made Global Warming THEORY is the modern day McCarthyism.

  8. Pingback: Frontline Responds to complaints about Oct 23 “Climate of Doubt”: Here, the Rebuttal to Frontline that PBS Ombudsman Won’t Put Online | Watts Up With That?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s