Skip to content

Aussie Sea Level Hysteria

December 12, 2014

By Paul Homewood




Thank heavens for a little bit of Aussie sanity.



Fort Denison, an old penal colony in the middle of Sydney Harbour, has one of the oldest tide gauges around, having been located there for 128 years. During this period, the sea level has risen just 6.5 cm, or about two and a half inches.

Despite these trivial sea level rise over the past century and a bit, moonbat councils on the east coast of Australia are still tying up waterfront properties in miles of green tape, justified by predictions of massive sea level rises by climate alarmists, and property values have plummeted as a result:

In mid-2010, the Eurobodalla council, south of Shoalhaven, introduced a unique interim sea level rise policy that shackled more than a quarter of all properties in the shire to restrictive development controls. Predictably, there was an immediate shire-wide decline in property values.

In three years, individual Eurobodalla properties lost about $40,000 in value. With 22,000 properties in the shire, this represents a capital loss of $880m at a rate of $293m a year. This steady loss of rateable value means householders will face higher rate increases.

If similar policies were implemented along the entire east coast there would be annual property capital losses of billions of dollars.

So it is not surprising that NSW and Queensland governments are reconsidering their coastal management policies.

Queensland Deputy Premier Jeff Seeney recently notified Moreton Bay Regional Council of his intention to direct it to amend its draft planning scheme “to remove any assumption about a theoretical projected sea level rise due to climate change from all and any provisions of the scheme”. Seeney said his intention was to use a statewide coastal mapping scheme “that will remove the ‘one size fits all’ approach that incorporates a mandatory 0.8m addition to historical data”.

At last, a responsible government has recognised that global average sea-level change is no more relevant to coastal management than average global temperatures are to the design of residential heating and cooling systems — local weather and local sea-level change is what matters. (source)


And here are the official sea level data from NOAA to prove the point.




Since 1880, sea levels have been rising at 0.65mm/yr, with absolutely no evidence of acceleration. The nonsensical assumption of 0.8 metre would, at the current rate, take 1230 years to materialise. By which time, the next Little Ice Age would have come and gone, and we would probably be in the middle of the next one.

  1. December 13, 2014 12:10 am

    Thanks, Paul.
    Beautiful photograph of Fort Denison.
    It’s a disaster it will be underwater in just 1,230 years!
    Maybe good for SCUBA tourism in Sydney Harbour?

  2. December 13, 2014 9:09 am

    In other Aussie news, the seat of government is to relocate atop Ayres Rock.

  3. December 13, 2014 10:25 am

    I recently did some work on Papua New Guinea sea levels in connection with the alleged “semi submerged” lighthouse, and found that the problem was the lack of contiguous records in the area.
    There has been an apparent increase in SL at Lombrum since the late 1990’s but that is largely the result of a large fall around 1997 at Lombrum (and other locations) which also seems to be apparent on the above graph. The rise since then seems to have merely restored SL to the pre 1997 levels.
    This gives the impression that SL is rising faster than it is historically.
    Is the reason for the fall in 1997 known?

    • Bloke down the pub permalink
      December 13, 2014 11:35 am

      A connection to El Niño?

    • December 13, 2014 11:37 am

      Was that the lighthouse that the greenies did a march to? I tried to track it down at the time.

      • December 13, 2014 12:40 pm

        Yes, I have a picture of it but I don’t think I can post it here.

        Is there an e-mail address I could sent it to?

        It was basically the foundations of the lighthouse, on the tide line, which went under water at high tide.

        This is what my contact said at the time:

        “Good evening Sir….the Lighthouse was once 100metres from the shoreline, that picture was taken during the construction of the new lighthouse….over the last 10 years the shoreline around the tip of HOOD POINT (traditionally known as raukele) has receded to where the lighthouse was and moved a further 15 metres past this lighthouse foundations inward…..shortly after the construction of the new lighthouse it was since washed away and only the cement foundations of it remain…these cement foundations are the only remains of the lighthouse…during tides the cement foundations are semi-submerged…

        My conclusion is based not on any scientific opinion but on what the community have seen in real time…

        I will send a photograph of the lighthouse foundations following this email.”

        The lighthouse first referred to above is the one on this site:

        But that is NOT the “semi submerged” one.

        Effectively they are saying that the sea has moved 115 metres inland but I think that is more likely to be coastal erosion than sea level rise.

        I think the press release from the march organizers was completely misleading. They don’t appear to have checked the facts.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: