Sea level rise is complicated. But some people think its future course is oh so simple, and the recent visit by a certain Mr. Wakefield showed just how determined he is to stick with what I call the “simpleton’s view.”
How one plots the data can have a big impact on whether or not one can “see” acceleration or deceleration of sea level in tide gauge data. Here, for instance, is a plot of sea level at Boston (data from PSMSL, and I’ve removed the annual cycle):
Let’s find out.
He wrote a new post at WUWT claiming this about James Hansen’s 1988 prediction of the course of temperature change over the following 30 years:
Because scientists, you’re doing it wrong.
There’s a mistake you keep making, as many times as I point it out, even in the peer-reviewed literature, you keep doin’ it wrong. If you’re a scientist, then maybe yes this means you. There are at least two new papers (yes, new) that did it again. And yes, they’re about the so-called “hiatus.”
I’m not just going to show you how you’re doin’ it wrong. I’ll show you how to do it right — or at least, better. And I’ll share some programs to help.
The Sea Level site of the University of Colorado has an interesting graph which shows quite plainly that there’s a relationship between global sea level and the el Niño southern oscillation:
Share this video.
Thank you, Arnold.
Several readers mentioned that the plot of sea ice anomaly in the Arctic shown in the last post has much greater fluctuation after about 2007. Anomaly values are the difference between a given time’s extent, and the average for that time of year, so to get anomalies you take the original values and subtract the average seasonal cycle. It was correctly concluded that the exaggerated fluctuations after 2007 are because the seasonal cycle itself has changed; subtracting the average seasonal cycle still leaves that difference in place.