London To Drown : Rahmstorf’s Nature Trick

Global warming study warns sea levels are rising far faster than we thought | Mail Online

Looks like Rahmstorf used the 1990 IPCC projections (before they went alarmist)  for his baseline to compare against the satellite data, offset the y-axis of the satellite data – and used the completely inappropriate GIA adjustment.

The key thing to note is that the satellite trend is not as steep as the pre-1985 tide gauge trend.

What a scumbag.

About these ads

About stevengoddard

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

7 Responses to London To Drown : Rahmstorf’s Nature Trick

  1. palantir says:

    The UK is tilting on a NE/SW axis, so the London area is sinking. This was the main reason for building the Thames barrier. There was a severe storm surge in 1953 – a combination of a high spring tide and a severe windstorm caused a storm tide. In combination with a tidal surge of the North Sea the water level locally exceeded 5.6 metres (18.4 ft) above mean sea level. 307 people died in the UK and more in the Netherlands.

  2. RobertvdL says:

    The good news 90+ % of the people reading this newspaper in the Netherlands know it’s B S

    http://www.telegraaf.nl/buitenland/21115037/__VN__wereld_warmt_echt_op__.html?page=1

    • Marco says:

      That is indeed good news. You will hardly find any AGW skepticism in Dutch mainstream media, but there are apparently plenty of Dutch skeptics!

  3. Don B says:

    Check my math. If the sea rises 3.2 mm per year, that is about one foot per century, so it would take only 30,000 years for the Statue of Liberty to be covered up to her chin. No wonder the NY Times was so worried.

  4. Chuck L says:

    But Steve, it was peer-reviewed! /sarc

  5. Rahmstorf is about as cranky as they get.

  6. suyts says:

    They used the 90s prediction, but, said they were using the 4th assessment.

    “Here, the sea-level projections provided in figure 5 of the summary for policy makers of the third assessment and in table SPM.3 of the fourth assessment are shown.

    Which of course, by then their estimates didn’t come close to what Foster and Rahmy said.

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