Skip to content

Do Guardian Readers Really Believe This Crap?

October 17, 2014

By Paul Homewood  




It just had to be the Guardian, didn’t it?


They say all politics is local so this week when scientist John Church published a report in the world’s most prestigious science journal, Nature, about sea level rise, it made me look out my kitchen window.

I live in a town where sea level rise is not just academic. My life is spent surrounded by salt water. My home is a very modest south coast fibro cottage on a promontory at Moruya Heads, four hours drive south of Sydney.

Writing about his new paper, Time of Emergence for Regional Sea-Level Change, Church said:

Our new analysis of sea-level projections … indicates that regional sea-level rise will be generally noticeable before 2030. By then the average sea-level rise globally will be about 13 centimetres higher than the average sea level calculated between 1986 and 2005.

As soon as I had read Church’s report I went and scrabbled through my files for a letter that had arrived in my letterbox a couple of months ago from the Eurobodalla Shire Council.

Across the road from me is the main channel of the Moruya River and my back boundary is a tributary of the estuary, known as Gilmours Creek. At the end of my road are two spectacular beaches that are part of the Batemans Marine Park. I don’t need to consult charts to see whether it is high tide or low – I just look across the water.

It’s the kind of sleepy little place where the postman is the same guy nearly every day, and he waves when he delivers the mail. In August he dropped off an envelope from the council.

I am writing to advise you of a draft report relating to sea level rise that is currently on public exhibition … As the owner of a property that is currently identified as ‘potentially at risk from future sea level rise’ we invite you to comment and give feedback during the exhibition period.

If the report is adopted, it will provide the basis for consideration of sea level rise in future plans and policies including the preparation of the Coastal Zone Management Plan for Eurobodalla which will include public consultation.

Like most people, I have been concerned about climate change as an esoteric issue. I have worried about how it will impact on my children and grandchildren. But here was climate change in my actual letter box – formal correspondence about how climate change was going to impact on me.




I am afraid, Mr Woodford, you have been conned.



Just up the road at Sydney, sea levels have been steadily rising at just 0.65mm/yr since the 19thC, and far from accelerating, sea levels have actually flattened off in the last decade or so.




If sea levels are to rise by 130mm by 2030, as John Church claims, they would need to rise by 5.7mm/yr for the next 16 years.


Mr Woodford finishes:

I have always reassured myself that this coast where I live has looked the same ever since I first started coming to this area as a toddler. There are individual rocks on beaches that I have forever known to watch out for when I am catching a wave, sand spits and bays that have, for decades, seemed immutable.


And so they are likely to remain for the rest of your lifetime.  


Why are people so prepared to believe every bit of propaganda they are fed by politicians, and their government funded lackies? If Mr Woodford really is so paranoid, I suggest he checks the data himself, (while at the same time keeping his eye on those rocks on the beach).

  1. prcgoard permalink
    October 17, 2014 11:46 pm

    Policies for future sea-level rise by NSW state and local government have been tossed about for years with some of the story above. It is really too long a story for here, although some has appeared elsewhere on the web. Some years ago the NSW government adopted the IPCC projections, then later left it to local councils to set their own, ours seeking comment (as above).
    With several others and myself, submissions were made to convince the councilors and their staff that real data was a more reliable guide (as from Fort Denison) than Whitehead & Associates, CSIRO, IPCC and BoM fantasies. We are yet to hear the result. I have only been living at North Narooma since 1999, some 35 km south of Mr Woodford, but one of the locals, a life-long resident in his sixties, has not been able to discern any significant change in sea level along the coast.
    Heavy rain over last Monday night (about 240 mm at my home) caused some flooding in the area, but quickly drained away.

  2. saveenergy permalink
    October 18, 2014 12:09 am

    Having read the comments page, the level of logical thinking & knowledge of even simple science is abysmal, but like all religions you cant question ‘the Gospel’ because without blind belief the religion fails.

    Therefor to answer the question –
    Do Guardian Readers Really Believe This Crap?

    Sadly yes

  3. Earl Goudie permalink
    October 18, 2014 3:23 am

    Reason and Objectivity are no longer taught in most primary, secondary and post secondary schools and have not been for some time now. Given that, is it really surprising that the climate change (aka global warming) fraudsters have had such an easy time of it with the Mr. Woodfords of the world.

    The con job did not start wirh AGW. If you look back you will find various versions of (what used to be called) The Big Lie have been circulating for a very long time, centuries in fact.

  4. October 18, 2014 4:35 am

    You certainly cannot see sea level rise outside your window even if you do measurements for 75 years.

    The reason is very simple: In many places it is the land that is sinking. All geologists and geodesists learn that in their first year course in plate tectonics and glaciology.

    Parts of USA are still rising and parts are still sinking as a result of the melting of the glaciers many thousands of years ago. The same thing is happening in Russia.

  5. Retired Dave permalink
    October 18, 2014 7:20 am

    The answer to your question Paul is YES, but you knew that.

    Graun readers are religious believers and will trumpet any rubbish they are fed. One of my acquaintance tells me that Arctic sea ice is rapidly disappearing and any data you have (no matter how official) is simply big oil falsehoods.

    Some of these religious believers will have mental problems in the coming decades as events unfold in much the same way that 19th century Christians did, as more evidence made it obvious that the world was not 6000 years old.

  6. October 18, 2014 2:55 pm

    I used to excuse the idiots who printed such things by telling myself that I was lucky to have had more practical experience. Now fast approaching a decade later, I know there are some people who are just plain stupid when it comes to science and unfortunately those are the people who tend to do well in politics.

    Fortunately, the public aren’t so daft, particularly now that anyone can get up to speed on this subject from the numerous blogs. So, I will be very surprised if many of these daft politicians aren’t voted out at the next election.

  7. October 18, 2014 3:01 pm

    What is ‘esoteric’ about this garbage?
    Maybe the author also needs to understand that there is nothing secret about so-called climate change, including sea-levels.

  8. robinedwards36 permalink
    October 18, 2014 4:15 pm

    I presume that you have all spotted the major discontinuity in the Fort Denison data. There is more than one, but the others are not so easy to see. The sea level rise computed from the whole data set is dominated by a step change, which became obvious in October 1950, of about 0.048 mm/Yr. This is so obvious that I presume that something might have happened to the technology at that date, or possibly a month or two earlier. Just try fitting two regressions, pre 1950 and 1950 onwards. The outcome is very interesting. You will find a difference in the mean values for these periods to be 0.0497 (I’m using the CSV file, produced in Excel, but I never use Excel, I simply import the file into my software). Recent data, 2000 to the end of the series, has a totally non-significant “trend” – actually negative. When will the levels start to rise again, and when will the next step change occur? Anyone’s guess! Incidentally, I detect these step changes using cusum analysis, and confirm them with standard least squares on appropriate sections of the data. By this I mean over sections for which the cusum is roughly straight. When /you/ do this sort of analysis you will see immediately what I mean by “roughly”.

  9. October 19, 2014 11:49 am

    Yes, and unlike many other failed cults who commit mass suicide this desperate lot increasingly look like they are about to go on a killing spree….to save the planet!

    A cornered rat is most dangerous.

Comments are closed.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: