No Math Or Science Skills Required At New Scientist

In its 2007 forecasts of sea-level rise, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change famously excluded contributions from the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets because the physics were too poorly understood and complex to model. As a result, the IPCC’s estimate that seas could rise by 18 to 59 centimetres by 2100 is almost certainly too low. Indeed, levels are already rising faster than the models predicted.

Various sea level measurements range from 7cm/century up to 32 cm/century. Nothing close to 59.

Using data from the last decade, Stephen Price of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has shown that his modelled ice sheet moves in the same way as the real one does. In particular, the model accurately reproduces how disruptions to the edge of the ice sheet leads to a large initial movement, which is followed by several decades of smaller movement.

Price has calculated that changes which the ice sheet experienced between 1997 and 2007 in response to a thermal disruption in the early 2000s will eventually lead to a rise of 0.6 centimetres. Assuming that similar thermal disruptions happen every decade, the moving ice sheet will raise sea levels by about 4.5 centimetres by 2100.

If Greenland is only going to contribute 4.5 cm of sea level rise, where is the rest of the multi-metre sea level rise going to come from? Hansen says it is dead certain. The alarmist sea level game is beyond pathetic.


About stevengoddard

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

8 Responses to No Math Or Science Skills Required At New Scientist

  1. DirkH says:

    They teach journalists to avoid numbers for a reason.

  2. No Math Or Science Skills Required At New Scientist

    And the news is?

  3. Note also the sleight of hand…levels are already rising faster actually means will eventually lead to a rise of 0.6 centimetres

  4. bubbagyro says:

    Maybe they are using a self-anatomical ruler as a reference? That would explain a lot.

    • Mike Davis says:

      Is that the one that allows you to have 45in biceps in 10 days? 😉
      Or is it the one that shows you losing 20 inches of body fat a week?

  5. A K Haart says:

    A scientist colleague of mine once described New Scientist as a comic. I was surprised at the time, but she was right.

  6. Andy Weiss says:

    Why isn’t peer review catching these outrageous, ridiculous statements?

  7. Sundance says:

    Interesting comments from Pfeffer who seems to support these findings that are 1/2 of his worst case scenario. I couldn’t agree more that this is pathetic and it’s time for climate hawks to stop abusing and exploiting children by scaring them with their “end of days” tipping point nonsense to push their political agenda.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s