Sunday, 26 June 2022

SEA LEVEL SATELLITE MEASUREMENTS - NOT THE GOLD STANDARD

  Here is a recent article looking at the latest attempts to measure it using satellites: Sentinel-6: New International Sea Level Satellite – Watts Up With That? 

There are two related measures of sea level, the absolute sea level, which is the increase in the sea level in an absolute reference frame, and relative sea level, which is the increase in sea level recorded by tide gauges. The first measure is a rather abstract computation, far from being reliable, and is preferred by activists and politicians for no scientific reason.

 For local and global problems it is better to use local tide gauge data. Proper coastal management should be based on proved measurements of sea level. Tide gauges provide the most reliable measurements, and best data to assess the rate of change. We show as the naïve averaging of all the tide gauges included in the PSMSL surveys show “relative” rates of rise about +1.04 mm/year (570 tide gauges of any length). If we consider only 100 tide gauges with more than 80 years of recording the rise is only +0.25 mm/year. 

This naïve averaging has been stable and shows that the sea levels are slowly rising but not accelerating. We also show as the additional information provided by GPS and satellite altimetry is of very little help. Computations of “absolute” sea levels suffer from inaccuracies with errors larger than the estimated trends. 

The GPS is more reliable than satellite altimetry, but the accuracy of the estimation of the vertical velocity at GPS domes is still well above ±1 mm/year and the relative motion of tide gauges vs. GPS domes is mostly unassessed. The satellite altimetry returns a noisy signal so that a +3.2 mm/year trend is only achieved by arbitrary “corrections”. 

We conclude that if the sea levels are only oscillating about constant trends everywhere as suggested by the tide gauges, then the effects of climate change are negligible, and the local patterns may be used for local coastal planning without any need of purely speculative global trends based on emission scenarios. 

Ocean and coastal management should acknowledge all these facts. As the relative rates of rises are stable worldwide, coastal protection should be introduced only where the rate of rise of sea levels as determined from historical data show a tangible short term threat. 

As the first signs the sea levels will rise catastrophically within few years are nowhere to be seen, people should start really thinking about the warnings not to demolish everything for a case nobody knows will indeed happen.

For further reading on this topic, try this link:

The surprising news from scientists about rising sea levels! – Watts Up With That?

And: SeaLevel.info links to additional resources


The latest update from the Met Office is discussed here: UK Sea Level Rise Speeding Up–Claim Met Office: Data Proves Otherwise | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

and here: The Met Office’s Sea Level Trick | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

5 comments:

  1. I don't have time to read through WUWT view on climate science. But I do know this, they never find human caused climate change bad. Its completely the opposite. We are only beginning to see the destruction we have brought on our climate by our pollution.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unless you look carefully at BOTH sides of the argument you will never understand whether you are on the right side or not. as for the "destruction of the climate" - there never has been a perfect climate. It is a chaotic system and is ever changing. Extreme weather has always occurred and always will.

    ReplyDelete
  3. WUWT is not the other side of the argument. To have a fair and honest discussion, both sides have to have integrity. WUWT does not have integrity. I have been doing this for 16 years and have been in the comment sections for several hours at a time. In the beginning they denied co2 was a GHG. Which is false.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Up_With_That%3F

    ReplyDelete
  4. My links are to genuine scientific points, not denial. You ought not to take a third party's word for anything. Check it out for yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  5. WUWT is fake science. Always has been always will.

    ReplyDelete

Climate Science welcomes your views/messages.