Skip to content

We’re All Going To Drown–Part 98

September 2, 2020

By Paul Homewood


The latest sea level scare!



Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica whose melting rates are rapidly increasing have raised the global sea level by 1.8cm since the 1990s, and are matching the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s worst-case climate warming scenarios.

According to a new study from the University of Leeds and the Danish Meteorological Institute, if these rates continue, the ice sheets are expected to raise sea levels by a further 17cm and expose an additional 16 million people to annual coastal flooding by the end of the century.

Since the ice sheets were first monitored by satellite in the 1990s, melting from Antarctica has pushed global sea levels up by 7.2mm, while Greenland has contributed 10.6mm. And the latest measurements show that the world’s oceans are now rising by 4mm each year.

“Although we anticipated the ice sheets would lose increasing amounts of ice in response to the warming of the oceans and atmosphere, the rate at which they are melting has accelerated faster than we could have imagined,” said Dr. Tom Slater, lead author of the study and climate researcher at the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling at the University of Leeds.

“The melting is overtaking the climate models we use to guide us, and we are in danger of being unprepared for the risks posed by sea level rise.”

The results are published today in a study in the journal Nature Climate Change. It compares the latest results from satellite surveys from the Ice Sheet Mass Balance Intercomparison Exercise (IMBIE) with calculations from climate models. The authors warn that the ice sheets are losing ice at a rate predicted by the worst-case climate warming scenarios in the last large IPCC report.

Dr. Anna Hogg, study co-author and climate researcher in the School of Earth and Environment at Leeds, said: “If ice sheet losses continue to track our worst-case climate warming scenarios we should expect an additional 17cm of sea level rise from the ice sheets alone. That’s enough to double the frequency of storm-surge flooding in many of the world’s largest coastal cities.”

This is a case of “Watch The Pea”!

For a start, sea levels are not rising by 4mm a year. According to satellites, the rate is 3mm:


We are then told:

Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica have raised the global sea level by 1.8cm since the 1990s.

And that:

If these rates continue, the ice sheets are expected to raise sea levels by a further 17cm by the end of the century.

Over a 25-year period, 1.8cm works out at 0.72mm a year. At this rate, seas would rise by 57mm, not the 170mm promised.

So why the difference? Watch the pea:

If ice sheet losses continue to track our worst-case climate warming scenarios we should expect an additional 17cm of sea level rise from the ice sheets alone”

So, the threatened 170mm is not derived from the current ice loss, but based on “worst-case scenarios”, which have been proven many times to be nonsensical.

Of course, it may be that ice melt and sea level rise are accelerating. Except that they aren’t. Ice mass loss from Greenland’s ice sheet has actually slowed down since 2012.

Last year, ice melt increased again due to a warm summer, but this has already been reversed this year, which is not yet reflected in DMI’s chart below:


And according to tide gauges, sea levels have been rising at steady rate since the mid 19thC, with the exception of a slowdown between the 1960s and 80s:


That slowdown was associated with a drastic cooling of the climate in Greenland, and indeed across most of the Arctic between 1958 and 2001:


Since then, of course, temperatures in Greenland have returned to earlier levels, with a consequent of increased ice melt. But there is no evidence that temperatures will carry on rising, or ice melt increase. Indeed the opposite is likely the case, when the AMO turns cold, as it did around 1960.

As for the Antarctic, scientists cannot even agree whether the ice sheet is growing or sinking, with NASA sure it is the former.

In short, there is no evidence that sea level rise will be any different in the next hundred years than it was in the last.


The press release which has been widely reported word for word claims that sea levels will rise by 40cm by 2100:


This is even more absurd than the 17cm quoted for ice melt.

  1. dearieme permalink
    September 2, 2020 2:49 pm

    My sealevelometer is based on observation – the observation that wealthy people are still buying seaside properties.

    F’rinstance Barack Obama. The buggers are consciously lying.

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      September 3, 2020 1:44 am

      You wonder at the motive for the Obama purchase. After all, it’s close to Chappaquiddick.

  2. jack broughton permalink
    September 2, 2020 2:56 pm

    The real foolishness of this is that it is well covered by IPCC reports who stated that short term (below 20 year) changes can be very misleading. The long-term average rise rate is 1.7 mm / y, but there have been a number of periods where this has been greatly exceeded for a few years (1920s-30s) then settled back. These people believe that knowledge started wit computer models and satellites, and that all previous information can be discounted (when they fancy).

  3. John Garrett permalink
    September 2, 2020 3:13 pm

    Thank you for providing the facts and thes cogent rebuttal of the usual media regurgitation and exaggeration.

  4. Coeur de Lion permalink
    September 2, 2020 3:25 pm

    Surely you mean Part 97?

  5. September 2, 2020 3:40 pm

    Info from warming Greenland ice sheet. Seriously cold for August, and the decline from the peak of the most recent interglacial warming is due around now…. Source not to hand, I have asked but am posting now as I trust the author Scott Rose.,

  6. Broadlands permalink
    September 2, 2020 3:47 pm

    “The melting is overtaking the climate models we use to guide us, and we are in danger of being unprepared for the risks posed by sea level rise.”

    (1) Climate models are wrong.
    (2) Adjust and adapt.
    (3) Ask for more funding (to correct models).

  7. tonyb permalink
    September 2, 2020 4:06 pm

    You can joke Paul, but I have been down twice to our local beach today and the second time the sea level was nearly 10 foot higher than it was in the morning. Don’t scoff at the experts, Armageddon is clearly upon us.

  8. Joe Public permalink
    September 2, 2020 4:16 pm

    I see your BBC headline, and raise you this BBC headline:

  9. Mad Mike permalink
    September 2, 2020 4:58 pm

    Hang on a minute. Weren’t the alarmist talking about sea level rises in metres a few years back. Whats happened to that?

  10. tom0mason permalink
    September 2, 2020 5:36 pm

    If, as many say, we have left the Little Ice Age (LIA) then all NH ice should retreat. So too for mountain top glaciers, and the frozen tundras should defrost and change to productive lands.
    It is said we are now nearly 200 years since the end of the LIA, and yet we still have much ice and frozen land about us. Surely this indicates that it would be far too easy for the climate to slip back again to conditions like the late 1950s to the early 1970s, or worse to the Dalton or Maunder minimums.
    If our climate was significantly warming then these nasty icy areas would go! The tundra would be gone, to become the great savanna and forests it once was. Greenland would stop being an icy desert, becoming once again a green and productive land. Life in all its glory would rapidly expand into these currently inhospitable and nearly sterile areas.

    All this begs the question of how high were the oceans when the Vikings lived on Greenland? Some research says that during early Viking times, sea level was three feet higher than currently.
    Also of interest may be the way The Roman Warm Period marked an era of widespread climatic changes, of which one was sea level rise.
    HH Lamb records the effect this had on migration, in Climate History & The Modern World:

    Humans have adapted to sea level rises in the past and shall adapt again should it happen again.

    Also of note it that sea levels (and their rise) does NOT equally affect the oceans globally — see

    • September 2, 2020 6:47 pm

      As long as there has been sea, sea level has been going up and down and bullcrap like this passing for academic endeavour can only pass the review process IF the reviewers were not doing their job correctly. Indeed if someone asked me to review a papers with such unnecessarily convoluted prose I would send it straight back with the words “not clear” and “rewrite for clarity” repeated all over in red ink.

      If I see such text in a document from another company my first thoughts are “what are they trying to hide” and I would go through the text carefully with a pencil and there as Peter has so ably teased out is the devil in the detail.

      We need to be careful about relative sea level and how it changes because the way the NASA handle isostasy would get a school science paper an F grade. There is no need for net increase or loss of volume to create relative changes in sea level, something almost completely ignored by the Climate Porn addicts. In the UK area for example due to isostatic readjustment Scotland is rising and the South Coast of England is sinking because the Upper Crust is a bendy flexy thing These need to be understood accurately before any net change +/- in “sea level” is recorded as being due to heat expansion or net increase due to ice loss. Sub surface mapping using high resolution seismic data developed a whole area of study 30 or more year ago called Sequence Stratigraphy mapping high stands and low stands of sea level over geological time. The point is that the land has been going up and down all by its’s self as well as net gain and loss due to temperature maxima/ minima. Anyone who has been to Pembrokeshire standing on the coast and looking back landward can see what were islands surrounded by wave cut platforms but also drowned valley like Solva Estuary (a Ria Valley) for example so just in that one view it can be seen that sea level was a lot higher then went a lot lower then went up ….a bit… all very fascinating stuff and NOT a 21st century phenomenon as the climate weasels would have you believe..

  11. Vernon E permalink
    September 2, 2020 7:01 pm

    I can only comment from the personal experience of growing upon on the River Clwyd estuary from where the Romans shipped out the metal ores they were in Britain for and I cannot detect one iota of sea level change (remembering that we have huge tidal ranges).

  12. September 2, 2020 10:36 pm

    Where are any of the actual locations the public can go to and verify these claimed sea level rises for themselves? Or at least some reliable tide gauge data? Forget computer models.

  13. I_am_not_a_robot permalink
    September 2, 2020 11:16 pm

    There doesn’t seem to be a field related to climate change sciencology where raw data has not been corrupted:

  14. September 3, 2020 2:13 am

    Yes I’ve been getting a glimpse of these stories – got a new phone and it defaults to Google news. Was waiting for a good solid debunking by someone having the talent and time to do so. Thanks for all you do Paul. Love this site.

  15. September 3, 2020 2:16 am

    One more thing:

    The word on sea-level rise just isn’t getting out. Wake me up when Miami is being evacuated from sea-level rise.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: