Skip to content

Sea Levels Have Risen By 8 Foot Since 1990 – BBC

November 1, 2015
tags: ,

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Quaesoveritas

 

ScreenHunter_2964 Oct. 31 23.00

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06pvdn8/house-of-lords-climate-change-debate

 

The BBC, who laughably claim to providetrusted World and UK news”, broadcast the BBC Parliament Channel. Last week they carried the House of Lords debate on climate change, featuring a load of superannuated old duffers reading from their Greenpeace scripts.

The BBC, being ever helpful, provided a ticker tape of all the relevant “facts”. Including the information that sea levels around the UK have been increasing by 10cm a year since the 1990’s. (About 3 mins in).

 

Now it may of course be that the reporter does not understand metric measurements, in which case he might like to know that, according to his figures, sea level has risen by 98 inches since 1990!

Even if he had intended millimeters though, 9.8 inches would still be many times to high.

 

 

 

newlyn

new

index

index

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_country.htm?gid=1222

 

The reality is that sea levels have been increasing by less than 2mm/year since the early 20thC, and trends in the last 50 years have shown a slow down.

NOAA’s graphs only take us up to 2011, but at the end of 2014 sea levels were actually lower than they were 25 years before.   

 

I am not saying that the BBC have deliberately sexed up the numbers. But it is clear that they are so obsessed with their own propaganda that they don’t bother to question what is obviously nonsensical data when it comes along.

18 Comments
  1. November 1, 2015 2:27 pm

    Today ResearchGate exposes seventy years (1945-2015) of deceit to hide the Sun’s influence on humanity:

    https://www.researchgate.net/post/Have_seventy_years_of_worldwide_deceit_1945-2015_been_exposed

  2. Ben Vorlich permalink
    November 1, 2015 3:33 pm

    The there are two problems here. Firstly because it’s the BBC it will become fact across the MSM and public consciousness within a week. Secondly it shows the quality of scientific reporting across the MSM, earlier this week the Daily Mail had an anomaly of 1’C being an anomaly of 34’F.

    Personally I think both should be sacked for terminal ignorance and stupidity.

  3. November 1, 2015 5:02 pm

    None of the BBC’s reporters do any fact checking, not even the quick mental ones. In other words, they report without thinking. If they worked in industry and made these regular gaffs they would be getting their p45s.

    • wert permalink
      November 1, 2015 5:42 pm

      It’s not just about fact checking, it is about being totally incapable of doing a simple multiplication and getting it right. If you -assume- sea level rises 4mm a year, erroneously multiply it with 2.5 to get cm, well that’s 10cm. And you are off by factor of 25.

      About 80% of journalists struggle with a multiplication, if it includes more than one digit. 20% struggle with a one digit multiplication.

  4. quaesoveritas permalink
    November 1, 2015 6:12 pm

    I realized that the BBC figures were wrong as soon as I saw them.
    Why did nobody at the BBC do likewise?

  5. Canadian Climate Guy permalink
    November 1, 2015 6:29 pm

    Reblogged this on Canadian Climate Guy.

  6. Bitter&twisted permalink
    November 1, 2015 7:03 pm

    What do you expect from a bunch of Guardian reading arts graduates?
    Numbers and facts have never been their strong points.
    The trouble is because it comes from the Biased Bull$hit Cartel, people will believe it.

  7. Bruce of Newcastle permalink
    November 1, 2015 10:09 pm

    That error bar style graph for North Shields is nice. Looks to be a fine correlation with the AMO.

    Of course the BBC or the Met Office couldn’t ever say that as it might give the impression that the ~60 year cycle caused most of the warming since 1970. Which it did.

  8. November 1, 2015 10:54 pm

    Stupidity or a deliberate attempt to mislead?

    Simply the latest in the procession of idiotic claims emanating from the state broadcaster. If previous useful misrepresentations are anything to go by they will – if forced to explain seek to misdirect further and do so entirely on their own turf – and present it as a misunderstanding on the part of the viewer…

    Institutionally – they don’t care *at all* about factual errors since they cannot be effectively challenged and there are no sanctions for telling lies – none.

    I wonder at that other institution with a deep reach into UK homes – The Press Association who regularly kite made up eco-climate BS into hundreds of local newspaper titles across the UK.

  9. Sceptical Sam permalink
    November 2, 2015 2:40 am

    The BBC’s policy is that one needs to be in the UK to view its video recording. As a colonial that means I’m excluded from my right to laugh at the stupidity.

    Could somebody please do the world a big favour and upload the vid to You-tube, so that more of the best humour the world has ever seen (British humour) can be universally enjoyed?

  10. cheshirered permalink
    November 2, 2015 8:18 am

    Given that the error shown is a factually incorrect statement, shall we expect the BBC to issue a public correction of said factual error, or am I being naïve?

    • roger permalink
      November 2, 2015 8:49 am

      Seventy years ago the world hung on every word emanating from the BBC for a truthful account of the happenings in Europe, where German spin and deceit ruled the airwaves.
      Very little has changed over those seventy years with the exception of the BBC, where the ghost of Lord HawHaw now roams the corridors and studios.

  11. quaesoveritas permalink
    November 2, 2015 10:08 am

    I sent a message to the BBC, pointing out the error (but received no acknowledgment), and one to the Met. Office, drawing attention to what the BBC were quoting the M.O. as saying, and asking for the source of the figures, but again, no reply so far.

    I expect both parties will say it was just a mistake but I don’t think that is good enough.
    Some people may actually believe those figures.

  12. 1saveenergy permalink
    November 2, 2015 10:49 am

    • I listened to the 2.5 hrs Lords global warming debate 29 Oct 2015
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06pvdn8/house-of-lords-climate-change-debate
    I’ve now lost the will to live !! these are supposed to be our guardians & elder statesmen I’ve seen more comprehension of climate at the local pig farm; they had their snouts in the trough too !!

    Opened by – Julian Charles Roland Hunt, Baron Hunt of Chesterton FRS is a British meteorologist who was Director General and Chief Executive of the British Meteorological Office from 1992 to 1997

    The man is an idiot, he doesn’t even understand the figures from the met office & suggests CO2 equates pollution.

    John Prescot Lab,
    has been to china 30 times ….to cut CO2 !!!
    Mixes CO2 & pollution & says it causes 1,000 of deaths

    Lord Stern says we can “manage climate” the world will flood, we must tax carbon
    UK Pollution kills 15x more than road accidents

    Lord Whitty Lab,
    geo-polititical force is required to manage; links greenhouse gas & pollution

    Lord Giddens Lab,
    climate change is (51.25) Catastrophic illustrated by hurricane Patriser (51.55) “nature is like a wild beast” even managed to get “weapons of mass destruction” in.

    Lord Borwick con
    Wants electric cars

    Baroness Kennedy Lab
    (1.06) Oceans rising Maldives drowning, polar caps melting, we will see more refuges drowning,

    Lord Krebs
    Wants energy efficiency, (1.13)flooding from rising seas & increased rainfall. (1.15) “By 2050 daytime temperatures of 30°C in UK could be the norm”

    Lord Haskel Lab
    Uses a ‘Financal Times calculator that tells him we will have 4°C tempriture increase. Gives a long list of catastrophic disasters

    Lord Judd lab
    (1.21)it’s Survival of the species !!!

    Baroness Young
    Good points on energy & pollution in the fashion industry

    Lord McFall lab
    Pushes the popes encyclical (1.41) potential disaster,

    Lord Berkeley lab
    Clean air. Thinks cutting diesel cars will also help climate change

    Lord Teverson lib
    Talks at length about refrigeration

    Baroness Worthington lab – shadow energy & climate change minister
    Dreadful summing up (telling everyone how wonderful they are)

    Lord Bourne con – energy & climate change minister
    Don’t know what he said in the last 15 min, sorry…… I fell asleep.

    • quaesoveritas permalink
      November 2, 2015 11:35 am

      Well done for having the stamina to get (almost) through the debate. I have only got as far as Prescot so far and that was enough. I thought his “bragging” about the number of trips to China was ironic, obviously he didn’t. I find his rapid delivery and “butterfly” mind, almost impenetrable. He jumps from topic to topic like a grasshopper and obviously considers quantity more important than quality.

    • nightspore permalink
      November 2, 2015 7:59 pm

      Wow! What an assortment of Nietzsche’s Last Men.

    • wert permalink
      November 14, 2015 6:52 am

      Lord Krebs
      Wants energy efficiency, (1.13)flooding from rising seas & increased rainfall. (1.15) “By 2050 daytime temperatures of 30°C in UK could be the norm”

      – Promise?

Trackbacks

  1. Sea Levels Have Risen By 8 Foot Since 1990 – BBC | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT | Cranky Old Crow

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: