Skip to content

Four New Scientific Papers Show No Detectable AGW Sea Level Rise

August 30, 2016

By Paul Homewood 




No Tricks has an interesting post by Kenneth Richard:


It is widely assumed that sea levels have been rising in recent decades largely in response to anthropogenic global warming. However, due to the inherently large contribution of natural oscillatory influences on sea level fluctuations, this assumption lacks substantiation. Instead, natural factors or internal variability override the detection of an anthropogenic signal and may instead largely explain the patterns in sea level rise in large regions of the global oceans.

Scientists who have recently attempted to detect an anthropogenic signal in regional sea level rise trends have had to admit that there is “no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming,” or that the “sea level rise pattern does not correspond to externally forced anthropogenic sea level signal,” and that sea level “trends are still within the range of long-term internal decadal variability.”

Below are highlighted summaries from 4 peer-reviewed scientific papers published within the last few months.



Read the full article here.

  1. August 30, 2016 9:42 am

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News.

  2. joekano76 permalink
    August 30, 2016 9:47 am

    Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.

  3. RAH permalink
    August 30, 2016 10:57 am

    So to sum it up. Once again as with the fluctuations of ice at each pole, natural variation reigns so supreme that a AGW “signal” in the data cannot be discerned.

    Then president elect Barack Hussein Obama at his victory speech, for his first term,   June 3, 2008
    “I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow .”

    Of course these are the clowns he choose to “advise” him on the subject:
    Which of course are really just the top level of his Climate Change propaganda team.

  4. RAH permalink
    August 30, 2016 11:08 am

    Correcting myself: That quote was from his victory speech for the Democrat party nomination and not for the General election. He was not yet president elect and would not be until Jan, 9th, 2009 when the election results were certified by Congress.

    • Broadlands permalink
      August 30, 2016 12:44 pm

      These new studies here are especially inconvenient?

      Here is what Mr. Obama said on December 20th….2008 as President-elect…

      “The truth is that promoting science isn’t just about providing resources—it’s about protecting free and open inquiry,” “It’s about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology. It’s about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient—especially when it’s inconvenient. Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us. That will be my goal as President of the United States…..”

      • RAH permalink
        August 30, 2016 5:27 pm

        So show us Federal funding of climate scientists or those in related fields which are skeptics of climate change. Dr. Bill Gray, who probably advanced the field of tropical storm forecasting more than any other is an example. When he denied any connection between tropical storm formation or intensity and climate change he lost his Federal funding. That’s just a single example.

        Name one “denier” on Obama’s science team.

        “free and open inquiry”? What a hoot. Right up there with your can keep your Dr. and health plan if you like your doctor and health plan and “Shovel Ready Jobs”.

  5. CheshireRed permalink
    August 30, 2016 11:19 am

    Quick, someone had better tell the Guardian. They’re breathlessly quoting NASA, who’re claiming CO2 is “already likely to raise sea levels by around three feet by the end of the century, and potentially by 70 feet in the centuries to come.”

    ‘Nasa: Earth is warming at a pace ‘unprecedented in 1,000 years’

    They’re utterly bonkers, aren’t they?

    • Sara Hall permalink
      August 30, 2016 12:46 pm

      I was really tempted to comment on that ludicrous article but held back because, in the words of Bill Murray, “it’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person”.

      • CheshireRed permalink
        August 30, 2016 2:14 pm

        Almost all sceptical voices have been silenced on the Guardians environment section. It used to be very lively indeed but now accommodates almost zero sceptical views. A shame, but that’s the left for ya.

  6. August 30, 2016 11:54 am

    ‘Thus, we found that there is (yet) no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming in the world’s best recorded region.’

    We’ll just have to wait for all that heat hiding at the bottom of the seas to force its way up 😉

  7. August 30, 2016 1:29 pm

    Reblogged this on Patti Kellar and commented:
    Just sayin’

  8. August 30, 2016 5:18 pm

    How sad for all the little Pacific ocean islands that thought that COP 21 was their open cheque.

  9. catweazle666 permalink
    August 30, 2016 10:11 pm

    Admittedly somewhat peripheral, but upon reflection I wondered if Length of Day variation over time and anomalies might have shed some light on sea level rise.


  10. August 31, 2016 2:12 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: