"Sea level along the U.S. coastline is projected to rise, on average, 10-12 inches (0.25 - 0.30 meters) in the next 30 years (2020 - 2050), which will be as much as the rise measured over the last 100 years (1920 - 2020). Sea level rise will vary regionally along U.S. coasts because of changes in both land and ocean height.”

Fact Check:

The claim that global warming is resulting in rising sea levels is demonstrably false. It really hinges on this statement: “Tide gauges and satellites agree with the model projections.” The models project a rapid acceleration of sea level rise over the next 30 to 70 years.” However, while the models may project acceleration, the tide gauges clearly do not.

All data from tide gauges in areas where land is not rising or sinking show instead a steady linear and unchanging sea level rate of rise near 4 inches/century, with variations due to gravitational factors.

It is true that where the land is sinking as it is in the Tidewater area of Virginia and the Mississippi Delta region, sea levels will appear to rise faster but no changes in CO2 emissions would change that. The implication that measured, validated, and verified Tide Gauge data support this conclusion remains simply false.

All such references rely on “semi-empirical” information, which merges, concatenates, combines, and joins, actual tide gauge data with various models of the reference author’s choosing. Nowhere on this planet can a tide gauge be found, that shows even half of the claimed 3.3 mm/yr sea level rise rate in “Tectonically Inert” coastal zones. These are areas that lie between regions of geological uplift and subsidence. They are essentially neutral with respect to vertical land motion, and tide gauges located therein show between 1 mm/yr (3.9 inches/century) and 1.5 mm/yr (6 inches/century rise). The late, great Swedish Oceanographer, Nils-Axel Morner, has commented on this extensively, and his latest papers confirm this ‘inconvenient truth’.

(Enlarged)

Holgate (2007) actually showed a slowing began in the late 20th century.

Source:
(Enlarged)

Furthermore, alarmist claims that “Satellites agree with the model projection” are false. Satellite technology was introduced to provide more objective measurement of the sea level rise because properly adjusted tide gauge data was not fitting Alarmists’ claims.

(Enlarged)

However, the new satellite and radar altimeter data lacked the resolution to accurately measure sea levels down to the mm level. Moreover, the raw data from this technology also conflicted with Alarmists’ claims. As a result, adjustments to this data were also made - most notably a Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA). GIA assumes that basically all land is rebounding from long ago glaciations and oceanic basins are deepening. The assumption is that this rebounding is masking the true sea level rise. Alarmists continue to proclaim that their models project a rapid acceleration of sea level rise over the next 30 to 70 years, when those same models have failed to even come close to accurately predicting the past 25 years.

Natural Factors

Sea level rises are influenced by factors like El Nino and La Nina. El Nino’s produce warming and ocean expansion, increasing sea levels rises. La Nina’s produce cooling and ocean contraction and slower rises.


Source: UCO GMSL and the MEI (Enlarged)

Hansen had predicted in the late 1980s, flooding of the West Side Highway and water lapping on the steps of GISS in New York City within 20 years (by 2010). Sea levels have increased a little over an inch over that period. ABC predicted in that Manhattan would look like this by 2014. Again no appreciable change has occurred.

(Enlarged)

Global warming is not resulting in rising sea levels.

For much more detail see. Also see here how scientists were caught adjusting sea level data.

In this important paper, involving 17 co-authors from 13 European countries, we looked at the various “temperature homogenization adjustments” that have been applied to the European temperature records in the widely used “Global Historical Climatology Network” (GHCN) dataset over the last 10 years.

The GHCN dataset is the main data source for thermometer records used by several of the groups calculating “global warming” - including NOAA, NASA Goddard Institute and the Japan Meteorological Agency.

Because these thermometer records typically are several decades to centuries long, they often are contaminated by “non-climatic biases” whenever the weather station undergoes a major change, such as being moved to a new location or a change in the type of instruments used.

In an attempt to try to correct for these non-climatic biases, NOAA, the group in charge of the GHCN dataset had been running a computer program to try and statistically identify “non-climatic jumps” in the records by comparing each station record to 40 of its nearest neighbors. This process is called “temperature homogenization”, and until now, most groups had been assuming the process was working correctly.

However, for this study, we analyzed 10 years of different “homogenization adjustments” applied by NOAA to more than 800 European temperature records. We found that the adjustments NOAA was applying to each station record changed dramatically every time they re-ran their homogenization computer program!  And they have been re-running this program almost every day since 2011.

We found that only 16% of the adjustments NOAA had been applying to the thermometer records were consistent from run to run.

Moreover, by compiling the “station history metadata” associated with each of the stations we analyzed from the various national meteorological services and other scientific studies, we were able to compare the adjustments applied by NOAA to the documented station changes that were known to have occurred. We found that less than 20% of the adjustments NOAA had been applying corresponded to any event noted by the station observers - such as a change in instrumentation, station move, etc.

The findings of our study suggest that many of the “homogenization adjustments” that have been applied to the main thermometer records used for studying climate change over the last 10 years may have been spurious.

We conclude our study by making various recommendations for how these problems might be resolved with more careful scrutiny of the data.

See Tony Heller’s killer video here on how the US state data is corrupted with these ‘adjustments’.

See this paper I authored “A Critical Look at Surface Temperature Records” for Evidence Based Climate Science in 2011 here.  See a major compilation of earlier studies SURFACE TEMPERATURE RECORDS: POLICY-DRIVEN DECEPTION? here

See are more recent history of the issues here.

09 Feb 2022 | News Roundup

The New York Times “Climate Fwd.” runs a touching feature on West Windsor, VT, rocked by the closure of the local ski resort “because of erratic snowfall and mismanagement”, whose plucky inhabitants responded by creating “a model for how a small ski area and its community can thrive in the era of climate change” that replaced bad private enterprise with good government and downhill skiing with mountain biking, endurance running and… um...downhill skiing. Actually there’s no less snow there than there ever was. Still, beware, because “A 2019 study showed that in northeastern states besides Vermont, at least half of ski areas will close by the mid 2050s if high greenhouse gas emissions continue.” Yeah, we heard that one before. So a modern news story doesn’t describe something that happened, or even check if it did. Instead it describes something that the writer thinks should have happened and some scientists say eventually will except it’s a scientifically impossible scenario. And they wonder why their circulation is falling faster than snow in a Vermont winter.

In case anyone at the paper still remembers when fact-checking meant checking facts not censoring opinions, the study in question wasn’t even published in 2019. It was published in 2017. And it’s remarkably coy about details like whether RCP 8.5 is lurking amid the moguls. Instead it basically looked at a bunch of papers saying climate change would wipe out skiing and found a strong tendency for them to say skiing would be wiped out by climate change. And also that papers saying climate change will wipe out skiing are a growth industry, in case you’re on the scrounge for a grant in order to study vital questions like whether skiers are unhappy if there’s not enough snow.

Incredibly, they are. The researchers “found that in general demand related to ski lifts (e.g. revenues, skier days, number of transported people) is more sensitive to a lack of snow than overnight stays.” And no sum is too high for that kind of insight.

Speaking of insights, an accompanying Times piece describes one enthusiastic skier at the tiptop of Mt. Ascutney pointing to other snow-covered peaks with ski resorts and lamenting that more than a decade ago they would get lots of snow and it would “just bypass Ascutney”. We couldn’t win”. Put that together with the fact that bad management closed the resort and you get...nothing. Not a decrease in snow. Not a hit of climate change. Not even an estimate of when it hit. Was it already causing less snow on this one mountain though not others nearby in 2010? In 2005? Never? (Mind you a new paper says fisheries will be rocked as “On average, the ToE of the deoxygenation signal in the mesopelagic zone is projected to emerge in 2021” if… we use RCP 8.5. So it’s here now, unless it’s not. But far too late to finish off that resort which, in any case, is open under new management.)

Still, let’s not nitpick. How bad is the snowfall crisis in the area now? Well, it turns out the actual town of West Windsor now gets a mere 76 inches of snow a year, doubtless baffling local children whenever it does fall in a thick white blanket every year. And a resort inexplicably located on nearby bare-dirty-rock Mt. Ascutney, home of the failed resort, boasts that “Alpine skiers have been thrilled about Ascutney’s varied terrain and friendly appeal for over 60 years” before inviting you to experience “8 trails/ 26 acres of skiable terrain for all ability levels/ a 450-foot vertical drop/ the longest run of 3100 feet.” Who are these fools to think you can ski there?

By the way, for non-skiers, “alpine” isn’t a creative climate-era alternative to “downhill” skiing. It is downhill skiing. And Wikipedia reports that one of Ascutney’s hated rivals, the cleverly named “Killington Mountain Resort & Ski Area” (see, it’s a mountain resort and ski area on Mt. Killington), “is the largest ski area in the eastern U.S., and has the largest vertical drop in New England at 3,050 feet (930 meters). Since 2013-14 ski season, it has been called the ‘Beast of the East.’” Not, be it noted, “the place there used to be snow”.

To be fair, in what the Times calls “the era of climate change”, Killington has a mere 155 runs, of which just 39% are black diamond, as part of a complex with only 21 lifts barely capable of taking 37,000 people up the mountain per hour to enjoy its feeble 10 feet of natural snow per year plus the artificial stuff. And if it sounds bleak, nearly Okerno Mountain Resort, rated “the Top US Family Snow Resort” by Parents Magazine back in 2010, is even smaller than Killington despite getting 16.6 feet of snow a year.

If you’re now thinking whoa, that’s too much snow, it’s also close to Mount Sunapee with just eight feet of the stuff. But it somehow maintains 66 runs, while a fourth local competitor, Stratton Mountain, has 99 runs and 15 feet of snow. As for poor doomed barren Ascutney it gets… what’s this? Over sixteen feet of snow a year? (And if you care about the global ski industry crisis, with CO2 skyrocketing, January temperatures in Germany have been falling since 1988, presumably melting the nearby Alps and ruining Austria’s ski industry too.)

If you’re not a skier you might be wondering what all the fuss is about. So are we, but for a different reason. We’re worried about the incredible failure of media outlets to check basic facts when peddling climate change. There isn’t the slightest indication that skiing in Vermont is in any kind of danger, nor that Mount Ascutney is not getting snow. Ottawa gets under six feet a year and it sometimes feels like a lot. They get nearly three times that.

The Times hallucinated the whole thing. Typically. This sort of story gets published nowadays without any sort of editorial oversight or scruples. The end of winter as we know it, unnoticed. And to think people sometimes doubt the urgency of the climate crisis.

See this fact check on the claims of disappearing snow here.

Given the NYT’s litany of failed claims over the years, you might expect this is more likely the situation in the not to distant future plowing access roads to the slopes.

Dr. Roy Spencer has written: More Snow Hits the Fan this Week: Climate Change Alarmists Still Want it Both Ways

....or now I don’t plan on appealing the decision, because it’s not worth the aggravation. If you are considered a “climate skeptic” (whatever that means) Google has already said you are targeted for termination from their Adsense program. I can’t expect their liberal arts-educated “fact checkers” to understand the nuances of the global warming debate.

-------------
ICECAP Update:

A new storm, this more problem with ice will create havoc in a large area this week.

Enlarged

Enlarged

Enlarged

More cold follows later week 2.

Enlarged

In early December, the Washington Post reported that because of climate change, snow in the Mountain West “may vanish for years at a time.”

The headline did not age well.

Only days later it started to snow in the West.

And snow.

And snow.

An incredible photo on Twitter showed a towering wall of snow on Donner Summit in California around Christmas.

Lake Tahoe got 18 feet of snow in December, an all-time record.

In Virginia, some motorists were stuck on I-95 for more than 24 hours after snow and ice made the road impassable.

A Long String of Failed Climate Change Predictions

Add the Washington Post headline to a long string of failed climate change predictions.  A now-deleted headline from the London Independent in 2000 predicting no more snow is more than 20 years old.

Climate experts now seem to have hedged their bets, saying global warming will both increase and decrease snowfall.

Weatherbell Meteorologist Joe Bastardi, the author of The Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate War, says more snow or less snow, it’s called a normal winter.here. It might be more snow in one place and less snow in another place, but then it balances out.”

“The weather is always going back and forth,” Bastardi said. “This is within the realm of what you can expect in the kind of winter we have

New Calls for ‘Climate Lockdowns; (And It’s Not a Conspiracy Theory)

But climate activists continue to insist that we face a worldwide climate emergency, and there has been more talk of the need for “climate lockdowns.”

Over the holidays, environmentalists staged what they called “Occupy Biden” - an 8-day protest outside Joe Biden’s Delaware home, demanding that he take action on the climate.

“Occupy Biden” Spokesman Ted Glick said, “We want Joe Biden to issue an executive order declaring a climate emergency. He’s already said it’s a code red emergency.”

Dozens of nations have declared climate emergencies, including the entire European Union.

And now, after accusing climate skeptics of inventing a conspiracy theory about future climate lockdowns, there has been increasing talk of instituting climate lockdowns, modeled after COVID lockdowns, and under what’s being called environmental authoritarianism, in which your right to drive a car, fly on a plane or own a big house could be suspended by the government in order to fight climate change.

Climate Lockdown: Less Driving, Flying, and Eating Meat

“Americans are going to have to deal with less,” warns Marc Morano, author of Green Fraud: Why the Green New Deal Is Even Worse Than You Think. “We’re gonna drive less, fly less, eat less meat. They’re already talking about sustainable housing and shutting down the suburbs.”

“This is the progressive vision of how you make people do with less in a climate emergency,} Morano says.

A recent article in the influential magazine Foreign Policy suggested Democracy may not be compatible with reaching climate goals.

The Weather Record Shows There is Not a Climate Problem

This climate extremism is all escalating even though the weather record shows there is not a serious problem with the climate. The Environmental Protection Agency’s own website says our air continues to get cleaner year after year. Statistics also show the number of wildfires is much lower than it was decades ago.

Theoretical Physicist Dr. Steven Koonin, former Undersecretary of Energy during the Obama Administration and author of Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters, says the weather record shows there is no climate emergency.

Heatwaves in the U.S. are now no more common than they were in 1900 and they haven’t gone up in 60 years,” Koonin said, “No global trends in drought or in floods. Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t melting any more rapidly now than it was 80 years ago. There’s no long-term trend in hurricanes over the last hundred years.”

But climate activists are advancing their agenda anyway, and new government regulations continue to punish and de-fund more reliable fossil fuel sources in favor of less reliable renewable energy sources.

Occupy Biden’s Glick said Joe Biden “should issue, have the federal agencies oppose any new fossil fuel infrastructure.”

Environmental expert Dr. Marlo Lewis at the Competitive Enterprise Institute says, “Basically this political movement has declared war on fossil fuels. And a lot of people have concluded in the industry, and also people who are investors, that this sector has no future.”

The Cost to ‘Stop Climate Change’? $1 Quadrillion

Rising energy prices this winter could be only the beginning. A recent study in the journal Nature found that meeting reduced carbon emission targets will cost more than $2 trillion annually - that’s more than $5,000 per American per year - with costs by the end of this century totaling $1 quadrillion dollars.

This piece originally appeared at CBN News and has been republished here with permission.

Lake Tahoe got 18 feet of snow in December, an all-time record.

In Virginia, some motorists were stuck on I-95 for more than 24 hours after snow and ice made the road impassable.

A Long String of Failed Climate Change Predictions

Add the Washington Post headline to a long string of failed climate change predictions.  A now-deleted headline from the London Independent in 2000 predicting no more snow is more than 20 years old.

Dozens of nations have declared climate emergencies, including the entire European Union.

And now, after accusing climate skeptics of inventing a conspiracy theory about future climate lockdowns, there has been increasing talk of instituting climate lockdowns, modeled after COVID lockdowns, and under what’s being called environmental authoritarianism, in which your right to drive a car, fly on a plane or own a big house could be suspended by the government in order to fight climate change.

Climate Lockdown: Less Driving, Flying, and Eating Meat

A recent article in the influential magazine Foreign Policy suggested Democracy may not be compatible with reaching climate goals.

But climate activists are advancing their agenda anyway, and new government regulations continue to punish and de-fund more reliable fossil fuel sources in favor of less reliable renewable energy sources.

Occupy Biden’’s Glick said Joe Biden “should issue, have the federal agencies oppose any new fossil fuel infrastructure.”

Environmental expert Dr. Marlo Lewis at the Competitive Enterprise Institute says, “Basically this political movement has declared war on fossil fuels. And a lot of people have concluded in the industry, and also people who are investors, that this sector has no future.”

The Cost to ‘Stop Climate Change’? $1 Quadrillion

Rising energy prices this winter could be only the beginning. A recent study in the journal Nature found that meeting reduced carbon emission targets will cost more than $2 trillion annually - that’s more than $5,000 per American per year - with costs by the end of this century totaling $1 quadrillion dollars.

This piece originally appeared at CBN News and has been republished here with permission.i