Skip to content

Coastal Flooding? Blame It On Climate Change!

November 1, 2018

By Paul Homewood


What is it about climate change that makes otherwise perfectly sane, logical people lose their critical faculties?

Reader Paul Matthews has been having a twitter debate with this guy:



People have been living close to the sea since time immemorial, and if you live there you will inevitably run the risk of storms and floods. Yet to Michael Holder, these storms and floods = climate change.


Has he never heard of the catastrophic North Sea floods of 1953, which left more than 2000 people dead?



Maybe that was due to “climate change” too. So what about the Middle Ages?


DocFile (2)

HH Lamb – Climate, History and the Modern World

At least King Canute realised that we cannot hold back the tide, which is apparently more than Mt Holder does.

  1. November 1, 2018 3:01 pm

    Somewhere I read that England is slowly tipping into the North Sea at around 1mm/year, due to tectonic plate movement. Am I right?

    • November 1, 2018 4:13 pm

      Yep, except that it is the effect of glacial isostatic adjustment. not tectonics

      Essentially the North of Britain has been rising since the ice age ended, as the weight of the glaciers. As the north tilts up, the south tilts downwards, thus sinking.

      See this map:

      • November 1, 2018 4:45 pm

        Thanks Paul. knew something was happening. – Trust the Scots to do it differently!!! Cheers.

  2. November 1, 2018 3:39 pm

    “This ‘will’ double to 1.2 meters in 2080.”

    Good God – ‘will’ is a very specific term. How about, ‘some [lunatic] scientists are predicting that SLR will increase to 1.2 meters by roughly 2080?’ Of course, that’s nuts, as well . . . but. Otherwise, he is simply lying – like most all of them.

    PS – wonder how coastlines performed when GSL was rising roughly 400 feet during the several thousands of years just prior to this wonderful Holocene warm period? During some periods it was rising at a rate of as much as 4.5 meters/100yrs.

    • dave permalink
      November 1, 2018 4:36 pm

      “…1.2 m…”

      Not 1.2 meters, but 1.2 million. I think he means the number of affected homes will double from 500,00 to 1.2 million by 2080.

      But the writer is virtually illiterate, as well as innumerate, as well as excited, as well as stupid. So who knows?

      The green blob people live in a world of their own. I wish they would stay in it.

      • November 1, 2018 4:58 pm

        Oops – that’s embarrassing. What I get for reading on the fly and assuming. But still – I could re-write the same analysis, simply changing the terms. Right?

        Thanks for catching that.

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        November 2, 2018 10:00 am

        Dave, of course, the other interpretation of what he said, that is also illiterate, is that the 500k ‘currently’ under threat will [more than] double by 2080: which means the currently under threat are safe until at least 2080 – so they’re not really at threat. For his prophecy to come to pass the 500k would be gone by 2080 and another 700k become threatened.
        Either way, the guy does not understand soil erosion or sea currents.

  3. Ben Vorlich permalink
    November 1, 2018 4:45 pm

    I recall reading an article or perhaps listening to a radio programme which expounded the theory that Anglo Saxoninvasion of England was driven at least in part by rising sealevels affecting the coastal areas of Germany and Jutland that were home to the Jutes, Angles and Saxons.

    • dave permalink
      November 2, 2018 11:50 am

      “…Jutes, Angles and Saxons.”

      It is notable that, in their early stories and myths, their worst demons live in water.
      In Frisia,they were at constant risk of surging incursions from the North Sea, on the one hand, and sudden floods from the rivers, on the other. No wonder they came to Britain!

  4. BLACK PEARL permalink
    November 1, 2018 5:53 pm

    Perhaps mental health issues should be extended to these climate change people.
    Indoctrination I believe is the condition.

  5. November 1, 2018 7:04 pm

    “What is it about climate change that makes otherwise perfectly sane, logical people lose their critical faculties?”

    A form of superstition called confirmation bias, maybe

  6. rich permalink
    November 1, 2018 11:03 pm

    Coastal sand erosion is significantly affected by sand extraction for the construction industry.

  7. John F. Hultquist permalink
    November 2, 2018 4:12 am

    So the statement by Michael Holder is apparently that 1,200,000 is double 500,000. This is a simple arithmetic error of 200,000 but never mind. It is wrong for a more interesting reason.
    He suffers from the alarmist’s linear thinking. First, some of the current 500,000 homes will be gone, for various reasons, including coastal erosion and flooding. The “climate” need not change one bit for this to be true.
    Second, many countries are becoming increasingly resistant to building homes on vulnerable land. Insurance is more costly and sometimes unavailable. Better planning and building design and construction make for less risky homes even near coastal areas. Further, all the hype about the rising sea will influence some to rethink the balance of being on the coast and being near the coast.
    All in all, in 2080 there will be fewer homes at risk than there are now.

  8. November 2, 2018 9:26 am

    Here we go again…

    Weather: UK experiencing hotter days and ‘tropical nights’ – Met Office
    By Matt McGrath
    Environment correspondent
    2 hours ago

    The Met Office says these changes are consistent with warming driven by human activities.

    Consistent with alarmist propaganda, always assuming what they are trying and failing to prove.

  9. Tim Spence permalink
    November 2, 2018 10:38 am

    Just seen this clanger on sky news …..

    And our hottest days are an average of 0.8C (33F) warmer than the hottest days between 1961 and 1990.

    On the other hand, our coldest days are 1.7C (35F) milder than they were between 1961 and 1990.

    • Joe Public permalink
      November 2, 2018 11:45 am

      Hi Tim

      The degC to degF converter has converted to temperature rather than ∆t 😉

      ∆0.8C (∆1.44 F)

      ∆1.7C (∆3.06 F)

      • Tim Spence permalink
        November 2, 2018 2:41 pm

        Hence we have uncontrolled runaway climate change in ºF and not in ºC, now that’s a difficult problem to fix.

  10. dave permalink
    November 2, 2018 12:03 pm

    I liked the ending rubbish from somebody called Dr McCarthy,

    “…these average figures have a tendency to mask…climate events.”

    Since climate is, by definition, the ‘average’ how the hell can the ‘average’ mask the ‘average’?

    However, as I have said before, ‘they’ are in their ‘rapture’ (mad) and proud to be ‘speaking in tongues’ (gibbering).

  11. Nigel Sherratt permalink
    November 2, 2018 9:16 pm

    We did bomb and blow up Heligoland quiet a lot too (6,700 tons on 18 April 1947 for instance), that can’t have helped.

  12. Chris, Leeds permalink
    November 2, 2018 11:11 pm

    The historic loss of land to the sea around some parts of England, particularly the North Sea coasts, has been huge. These natural processes have operated since the North Sea was first created and why should it be any less so in the next centuries?. I have a book by Richard Muir, “The Lost Villages of England’, published by the History Press in 2009. Just taking the Holderness Coast of East Yorkshire he notes that no fewer than 19 villages were lost to the sea in the medieval period, a further 3 villages were lost between 1610 and 1772 and 2 more villages have been lost after 1772. This does not include the loss of the two towns of Ravenser and Ravenserrod in the Humber mouth, which were lost totally after a series of storms in the 14th Century.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: