Skip to content

Hull To Be Wiped Out By 9m Of Sea Level Rise-Says Telegraph

July 30, 2020
tags:

By Paul Homewood

h/t Mike Jackson

 

 

 It’s little wonder that confidence in Britain’s press has plummeted to record low levels, with garbage like this:

 

 

 image

Boston, Grimsby and Hull could become some of the world’s worst hit coastal flooding hotspots in the next 80 years as climate change raises sea levels and increases the severity of storms, according to a new study.

Coastal flooding worldwide will rise by 48 per cent and threaten assets worth up to 20 per cent of global GDP without flood defences or action to mitigate global emissions, according to research from the Universities of Melbourne and East Anglia.

If emissions are mitigated, the figures are lowered to an increase of 33 per cent of land at risk of flooding and threats to assets worth $12.7 trillion, or around 17 per cent of global GDP.

The study, published in the journal Nature, says the north-east of the UK will be among the worst hit areas.

It predicts a rise of 5-9 metres along the coast of Boston, Grimsby and 2-5m in Hull in a worst-case scenario, though the researchers say more detailed local modelling is needed. 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/30/boston-grimsby-hull-could-become-global-flooding-hotspots-2100/

 

Nine meters by 2100? What planet is this dopey bird on?

On the NE coast, sea levels have been rising at just 1.9mm a year, a rate over the next 80 years of 152mm, or 6 inches:

 

 mean trend plot

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=170-053

 

 

Worse still for the fraudsters, the rate of rise has declined since the mid 20thC.

50 year trend plot

 

Studies like this one are written by so-called scientists, who know their grants rely on propagating rubbish like this.

 

It is noticeable that the Telegraph has not dared to include comments on this ludicrous article, because it knows its readers would destroy its credibility.

I reported about a poll last week, which showed that confidence in the press had collapsed in the last year amongst both Tory and Labour voters, while it had increased in the tiny rump of Lib Dim voters.

This article shows exactly why. The press nowadays is now part and parcel of the London metropolitan bubble, which has sold its soul to the global warming scam. Meanwhile, out here in the sticks, the vast majority outside of the illiterate, young woke mob, have not fallen for this nonsense.

This is painfully obvious from comments in the Telegraph, when they are allowed, which regularly expose the articles for the nonsense they are.

 

The Telegraph, which has probably lost more readers than most in the past year because of its shift to the woke left, will not recover credibility until it takes editorial content away from babies like Emma Gatten, and returns it to the adults.

41 Comments
  1. GeorgeLet permalink
    July 30, 2020 10:41 pm

    Such Twilight Zone Science Fiction
    Just meant to scare people into submission.

    • July 31, 2020 8:56 am

      The scare giveaway phrase: ‘in a worst case scenario’ — i.e. Hollywood fiction.

      • Curious George permalink
        July 31, 2020 4:13 pm

        Why Hull and not Hollywood? How unfair.

  2. Alan permalink
    July 30, 2020 11:01 pm

    Thevbigger worry is that these nutjobs are still allowed to teach the young in our universities

  3. ianprsy permalink
    July 30, 2020 11:04 pm

    This article came online after I received a “reply” to my chase up of a FOIA request to my council, asking them serious questions about their knee-jerk policy in reaction to the “climate emergency” hysteria:

    “Thank you for your interest we will ensure that you are invited to all our
    events to ensure that a full and rounded discussion including all opinions,
    please look out for the formal consultation which is being developed.

    “I apply regulation 12(4)(b) to this request for information as it is an
    exception to protect public authorities from a disproportionate burden or an
    unjustified level of distress, disruption or irritation in handling information
    requests. Manifestly unreasonable requests can place a strain on
    resources and prevent public authorities to deliver mainstream services.
    Therefore, I consider that we have responded to your original request and
    provided the information and I apply the exception to future
    correspondence regarding this request.”

    I’ve been granted leave to complain to their internal complaints department and, if I’m still not satisfied, I can go to the Information Commissioner! I may cut out the middleman. When is somebody in authority going to grow a pair?

    • Adam Gallon permalink
      July 31, 2020 9:01 am

      Simple, “Authority” is behind this. Local councils depend upon central government for most of their funding, they get extra funding to declare a “Climate Emergency” & to appoint a “Climate Change Officer”. Nobody’s going to break ranks.

      • ianprsy permalink
        July 31, 2020 9:59 am

        That looks like the basis for another FOIA request!

      • JBW permalink
        July 31, 2020 11:18 am

        Thats a new one on me. Can you give a reference for a council getting funds for declaring an emergency?

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      July 31, 2020 5:31 pm

      “ When is somebody in authority going to grow a pair?”

      … or even give a damn?

  4. July 30, 2020 11:32 pm

    The oceans have been rising and falling forever it’s what they do.
    The next twenty years may see ocean levels rise in places and dip in others then we have twenty years … you get the picture.
    You’d think the American government and especially The Pentagon would know about these things and I reckon they do.
    So what are they doing about their military base in the Indian ocean that carries a 70,000 strong personnel with billions of dollars in equipment.
    They have major computer satellite and radar installations connected up to satellites.
    They have war ships war planes submarines coming and going to be restocked with medicine food ordnance and more.
    They have industrial size fuel tanks on the beach and some of that fuel is bunker fuel.
    The island is called Diego Garcia which is on average a meter … three feet …. above sea level.
    Are they building flood defences?
    No.
    Are they panicking and getting the hell out of there?
    No.
    So maybe there is no sea level rise happening there?
    There’s never going to be any sea level rise there?
    Or maybe the only sea level rise anyone is seeing is perfectly normal or …. the people in charge of all this are climate change deniers and will all be swept away by the sea for their sins?

    This is Diego Garcia …. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/diego-garcia-why-base-about-get-much-more-important-us-military-45682

    These are pictures of Diego Garcia notice the fuel tanks on the beach and the runway ….
    https://www.google.com/search?q=diego+garcia&safe=strict&sxsrf=ALeKk00A_wiamUco6YSNla0peaRBgCD_Lg:1596148257217&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwje_ITPg_bqAhWFh1wKHU2wCXsQ_AUoAnoECB4QBA&biw=1920&bih=981

    Anyone think they’ll just let this place go the way of Hull?

  5. manicbeancounter permalink
    July 30, 2020 11:47 pm

    It predicts a rise of 5-9 metres along the coast of Boston, Grimsby and 2-5m in Hull in a worst-case scenario..

    They authors should have checked on a map. Hull is located on the North side of the Humber Estuary, Grimsby on the South side. They are about 25 miles apart. Unless CO2 emissions cause Grimsby to sink by up to 5cm a year relative to Hull for the next 80 years, the model assumptions are wrong. The problem is that the climate modellers are incapable of sense-checking the outputs of their models.

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      July 31, 2020 9:06 am

      There should be a really good spot for a tidal barrage, what with the permanent difference in sea levels. What’s not to like?

    • CheshireRed permalink
      July 31, 2020 11:36 am

      Of course in reality it doesn’t PREDICT any such thing. It PROJECTS.
      There is NO remotely likely scenario that would deliver 9 meters of sea level rise in the next 80 years. Literally none.
      This ‘paper’ is as near to academic fra*d as you’ll find.

  6. James L. Neill permalink
    July 30, 2020 11:55 pm

    These are the NOAA figures you have used. Who is responsible for publishing that data in the UK used by the NOAA?

  7. Graeme No.3 permalink
    July 30, 2020 11:56 pm

    Would that be the University of Melbourne in Victoria? Hardly the best place to judge local sea rises in Hull etc. or perhaps the distance makes it harder to be accurate.

  8. July 30, 2020 11:58 pm

    BTW it’s quite easy to produce flood scenario maps showing much of this region being covered by water.
    Why’s that ?
    Cos the land is already very low and in the last 3,000 years used to be covered by water.
    Drained areas include the east coast salt marshes south of Grimsby
    The Ancholme Valley, The isle of Ancholme, Sunk Island next to Hull etc.

    There are no Roman ruins in Hull, cos it used to be a marsh
    Then at the start of the medieval period heavy storms changed the path of the River Hull and created the island that Hull City centre stands on.
    4-5,000 years ago much of the region was Lake Humber.

    • July 30, 2020 11:59 pm

      typo : Isle of Axholme

    • sean2829 permalink
      July 31, 2020 2:08 am

      Same thing is true in Boston. Most of the city is land recovered from marshes and swamps.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      July 31, 2020 12:26 pm

      I’d love to see that as a letter in the DT, Stew. Go for it!

  9. July 31, 2020 7:33 am

    The Rev Harrabin is on manoeuvres again

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53601257

    • July 31, 2020 8:53 am

      So 2019 was UK’s 12th warmest year since 1884? Pathetic from the Met Office dullards – but it’s all your fault, they claim.

  10. NeilC permalink
    July 31, 2020 7:56 am

    It’s that word “could” again, when have they ever been right in any sence of the word?

  11. Alec Tritton permalink
    July 31, 2020 9:04 am

    Excellent commentary

  12. richardw permalink
    July 31, 2020 9:10 am

    It’s a report of a report of a study. The only intelligence applied to writing the article was transcribing press releases and applying political spin.

  13. C Lynch permalink
    July 31, 2020 9:21 am

    The propaganda is relentless at this point. I see that temperatures in the the South East of England are due to break 30°C for the first time this month today. Watch out for some bogus “record” from the Met Office such as “the third hottest day ever recorded in Lyme Regis.”
    The more it ratchets up the more convinced I am that the Warmists know a cooling period is imminent.

    • MrGrimNasty permalink
      July 31, 2020 10:58 am

      31C at Heathrow by 10am.

    • MrGrimNasty permalink
      July 31, 2020 11:14 am

      33C…………

    • MrGrimNasty permalink
      July 31, 2020 12:03 pm

      34C

      • Mike Jackson permalink
        July 31, 2020 5:42 pm

        38.5° in southern Burgundy! Damn! What happened to my promised 40°??

        I’m thinking of leasing a square metre of space for a recording site just where my (white-painted) garage door meets my (white-painted) garden wall. South-west facing: currently 53.2°! Makes you realise how meaningless the whole farce is.

  14. deejaym permalink
    July 31, 2020 11:07 am

    Hull to be wiped out…………. perhaps not a bad thing ?

    https://www.ilivehere.co.uk/heaven-hull.html

  15. CheshireRed permalink
    July 31, 2020 11:27 am

    All designed to get screaming media headlines as usual. Once that’s achieved, this nonsense has served its purpose and will be quietly forgotten.
    Science really should demand that these projected scenarios are given a % likelihood, with supporting evidence, of their occurring.
    That would expose this garbage for what it is.

    • dennisambler permalink
      July 31, 2020 11:47 am

      Correct. The headline is the objective. There is no concern with facts, just the agenda.

      • CheshireRed permalink
        July 31, 2020 12:23 pm

        Indeed, Dennis.

        PS How the Telegraph expects to secure new conservative-minded subscribers by promoting this type of rubbish is beyond me. As it stands I won’t even sign up to their free offer, let alone pay them anything, and this ‘article’ is typical of the reasons why.

  16. EyeSee permalink
    July 31, 2020 11:27 am

    When did a string of words become a ‘study’? Because The Scam long ago outsourced its ‘reports’ to the roomful of monkeys.

  17. Tim Spence permalink
    July 31, 2020 12:27 pm

    Hull to be wiped out.

    Mixed feelings everywhere.

  18. jack broughton permalink
    July 31, 2020 7:23 pm

    I’ve just sent a copy of this to a friend originally from Ull who now lives in Holland about 2m below sea-level. “Doomed, we’re all doomed”.

  19. JCalvertN permalink
    August 2, 2020 12:59 pm

    RCP8.5 – say no more!
    From the paper: “Results show that for the case of, no coastal protection or adaptation, and a mean RCP8.5 scenario, there will be an increase of 48% of the world’s land area, 52% of the global population and 46% of global assets at risk of fooding by 2100”

    I found the paper here (a subscription might be necessary) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67736-6.pdf

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: