Re: OT: sea level 'rise' hmmmmm....



Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:11:29 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

From an interview in 2007.

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

Sorry, forgot the direct link.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Rising_Sea_Level_Claim_a_Total_Fraud.htm

Graham

I must have missed your dealing with the summary found in the IPCC AR4
report, chapter 5, pages 408ff.

Or these papers, which cover subjects as diverse as TOPEX/Poseidon and
Jason satellite measurements to tide guages to specific areas in the
globe where longer term measurements have been consistently taken, to
Earth geoid changes, to circulation changes in the oceans that relate
to sea level, to thermosteric changes, to ocean density changes, and
so on:

Ekman, 1988
Woodworth, 1990
Douglas, 1992
Lambeck et al., 1998
Bouligand and Pirazzoli, 1999
Nerem et al., 1999
Woodworth et al., 1999
Mithcum, 2000
Zhang et al., 2000
Cabanes at al., 2001
Church et al., 2001
Douglas, 2001
Folland et al., 2001
Gregory et al., 2001
Mitchell et al., 2001
Mitrovica et al., 2001
Nerem and Mitchum, 2001
Peltier, 2001
Andersson, 2002
Antonov et al., 2002
Chambers et al., 2002
Lambeck, 2002
Woodworth and Blackman, 2002
Bromirski et al., 2003
Wakelin et al., 2003
Woodworth and Player, 2003
Woolf et al., 2003
Cazenave and Nerem, 2004
Church et al., 2004
Donnelly et al., 2004
Firing and Merrifield, 2004
Gehrels et al., 2004
Gille, 2004
Guinehut et al., 2004
Holgate and Woodworth, 2004
Lambeck et al., 2004
Leuliette et al., 2004
Miller and Douglas, 2004
Proshutinksy et al., 2004
Sivan et al., 2004
Willis et al., 2004
Woodworth and Blackman, 2004
Antonov et al., 2005
Carton et al., 2005
Levitus et al., 2005 (two papers that year)
Ngo-Duc et al., 2005
White et al., 2005
Church and White, 2006
Gregory, 2006
Lombard et al., 2006
Ishii et al., 2006
Tsimplis et al., 2006
White, 2006

That's just a list of papers I have in a directory here that came up
with a Windows file search I entered on the subject.

I see you continue to be VERY selective in the evidence you consider
-- most especially NOT selecting any science papers to study. You
read selections from an interview, instead.

Worse, you are completely unable to defend anything on that page as
your own argument, since you remain uninformed and just cherry pick
web pages of people saying what you like hearing.

So why isn't Tuvalu sinking ?

Graham

.