Sea Level, a contradiction in terms.

treeve

Major Contributor
You want stability? You have come to the wrong place. The whole world in its universe depends upon forces great and miniscule. Flexibility is what keeps the wheels turning. Sea Level depends upon other factors, which have changed dramatically over eons. Man attempts to put a label on it all with flawed and blinkered computer models, driven by politics and commercialism. The CO2 myth is the latest. (See The Air that I breath). Satellite observation and prediction depends upon correct interpretation using a broad spectrum of thought and parameters. For one thing satellite observation depends upon the relationship between a perfect sphere (that which is created spacially by the satellite orbit) and the Earth globe, which is no where near a true sphere. Then there is the matter of callibration. Using satellites for observation is one thing, using it to monitor sea levels is quite another.

A cardinal tenet is that it matter cannot be destroyed. Each goes through a process of change and the components go somewhere. Any alteration to the quantity of water on the planet has to relate to the original mechanism involved in combining hydrogen with oxygen, or its division. Water finds its own level. There is a fixed amount of water on the planet. It is there in various forms, as steam, water vapour, liquid and ice. It is on land as 'fresh water' and in the oceans as sea water. To alter the level of the sea as a global concept depends upon factors such as the amount of land borne ice to be melted, the general atmospheric pressure, changes in gravitational effect outside of the accepted 11 year maximum cycle, temperature and expansion of liquid, weight of water on ocean floor (and therefore on the edges of the plates which make up our continents). It is all very well to assume that the present measured and observed rise in locations around the world will continue or has been continuing over any particuar period of time, as measurements have only recently been able to have been taken. There is no yardstick in observed satellite data, Geological evidence offers that yardstick. Ice Cores offer that yardstick.

The amount of ice on planet Earth is the main consideration. Whatever is afloat, makes no difference on displacement and sea level. It is what is on land; Antarctica and Himalaya, for example.

The danger is to assume it is so because of Man, as opposed to what would be happening naturally in any event. The parameters are so wide, the model has no base or starting point.

If the Whole of the world's ice were to melt, this would take thousands of years and produce a sea rise of 66 metres. But there is no supposition in global warming scenarios from scientist that the whole of Antactica's ice will melt; That would take up to 10,000 years in any event. The fact is that a block of cold in the world's surface tends to keep the global temperature in check. Temperature also finds its own level, as does a volume of gas, which is why we get winds.

The area of our Oceans is to all intents and purposes 355,000,000 sq km (with 1,350,000,000 cu metres of water), as a continuing effect of the recovery from the last ice age the ice continues to melt slowly as it has been over the last 18,000 years and then it has been with the loss of approximately 60% of that ice (residually at 2% of the world's water), with its attendant effects on the supporting land mass under isostasis. The world has seen a sea rise of perhaps 120 metres, after the melting of ice from the last ice age. 4,000 years ago the rate of sea level rise was 900mm per year; from 1,000 AD it has been 'steady at its marginal rate.

Since isostatic rebound varies with each block of land mass, the relation of that block will give a false panic relationship with predicted sea level changes with regard to any perceived global warming. This world has been changing and evolving for millions of years, it will be around for many more until the sun eats it up again, but in the meantime to have any illusions about preserving our commercially maintained status quo is tantamount to the greasers that made much of Knut's abilities, and which he (with the wise sense of reality ) personally discredited.
 
Last edited:

ibrowze

Senior Member
Carbon Trading promotes rises in sea level

There's a bloke called Peter Taylor, a climatologist who points out that Al Gore, before he released his oscar winning movie 'The Inconvenient Truth' conveniently set up up a carbon trading bank, now there's interesting. Peter also points out that we're currently in a state of global cooling which all the major movements behind climate change have chosen to ignore. There's more information from this link: Climate Change: The Alternative View (Peter Taylor), page 1
 

ibrowze

Senior Member
Trying to read between the lines

Sorry treeve but i didn't read any mention of Al Gore, Peter Taylor or Global cooling in your thread initiation so really when you post
Just what I was saying ....
It's not exactly true is it?..and that's a fact. Perhaps continuing the conversation on the thread topic would be better than self assertion bordering on oneupmanship....just an observation....and here's billy with the weather....
 

treeve

Major Contributor
'one upmanship' is as far removed from 'me' as is possible. A less competetive person you would be hard pressed to find. No I did not mention Al Gore, as any reference to him and his completely false scenario, his alterations of official documents and alteration of scientific documents and findings is an offence to reality and is a purely commercially driven exercise conning the public in a political and financial end, and the worse for global disaster. My readings show, I hope, the false picture being painted by the carbon view.
This planet, as I see it from what I have read, is still in the throes of cooling from the last ice age.
This man knows what he is talking about,
Johnston's Archive
Al Gore and the like - I have had enough of these devoid evil 'men' with their devious methods.
 

treeve

Major Contributor
Just trying to find the related thread 'The air that I breath' .. not here as far as I can see, in that I remember talking about the CO2 myth. I will see if I still have it on PC.
 
Top Bottom