December 2023
« Nov    

Rising nonsense about sea levels from the lying BBC

Friday/weekend blog

Be afraid, be very afraid

There was a report on the BBC Breakfast programme today (Friday 23 September) about the threat of rising sea levels to historic castles on our coast. The BBC bleated that these castles, which had protected Britain’s coasts for hundreds of years, were now being destroyed by rising sea levels due to climate change. The BBC claimed that “scientists have predicted that sea levels could rise by a metre by the end of this century”.

This reminded me of a BBC documentary Earth Under Water made by the BBC in 2010. In this documentary the BBC presented two scenarios – a 2-metre sea-level rise by 2100 and a 5 metre sea-level rise by 2200. Using these two ‘scenarios’ the BBC showed the terrifying consequences for coastal cities and low-lying land from these predicted sea-level rises.

I guess the one positive one can take from the two programmes is that the useless BBC have reduced their prediction of sea-level rise by 2100 from 2 metres to a mere 1 metre.

More BS from The BS Broadcasting Corporation

But let’s test whether a sea-level rise of 2 metres or even 1 metre by 2100 is credible.

Here’s a table of sea-level rises from 1880 to 1980:

(left-click on the table and then left-click again to see wonderfully clearly)

Hopefully you’ll notice at least two things:

  • the sea-level is rising somewhere between 10cms and 12cms per hundred years. We have just 78 years till the year 2100. Yet at the current rate, it would take about 1,000 years for the sea level rise by 1 metre and around 2,000 years for the sea level to rise by 2 metres. So the idea that the sea level could rise by 1  metre (or even 2 metres) in the next 78 years is complete nonsense
  • the sea level is rising by different rates at different locations and is even apparently falling by 37cms per century around Scandinavia. I realise that climate activists don’t have any common sense and prostitute scientists-for-sale will say anything that the highest payer wants them to say, but hopefully most readers know that, when you take a bath, the water spreads out evenly and cannot rise more in one area of your bath than in another
What’s really happening?

It’s a pity that nobody at the BBC has read  my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS. If they had, they would know what’s really happening and stop making their wildly-exaggerated, nonsensical claims of impending climate catastrophe. Here’s just a small excerpt from my book about supposed rising sea levels:

The changes, or more accurately apparent changes, in sea levels are also partly due to factors like Tectonic Plate Movement, Glacial Isostatic Adjustment, Post-Glacial Rebound and subsidence due to water abstraction around major cities. Tectonic Plate Movement is, of course, the continual movement of the Earth’s tectonic plates which give us earthquakes and tsunamis. Glacial Isostatic Adjustment has been going on for at least two million years. Massive glaciers grow and then melt, alternately depressing the Earth’s crust and then releasing it again. As we are now in an interglacial, which has led to melting ice, Scandinavia is slowly rising. Hence, the sea level at Stockholm appears to be falling.

The Post-Glacial Rebound, which is causing much of the East Coast of North America to sink, occurs because large areas of Canada and America were weighed down by massive ice sheets in the last Ice Age. When that ice melted between 26,500 and 7,000 years ago, land in the centre of the North American began to rise while land around the periphery sank in what has been described as a ‘sort of sea-saw effect.‘ Hence sea levels at the East Coast of America seem to be rising faster than in many other areas of the world. Meanwhile in California on the U.S. West Coast, around 8 million of the state’s 40 million inhabitants are believed to live in areas where the land is subsiding probably partly due to Tectonic Movements and partly due to subsidence caused by increased water abstraction.

Looking at the table above one of the largest apparent sea level increases has been 30 cms in 100 years at the East Coast of North America where the land has been sinking due to Post-Glacial Rebound. The sea level for Scandinavia has apparently ‘dropped’ by 37 cms in 100 years as the land has risen due to Glacial Isostatic rebound. A National Land Survey of Finland study completed in early 2021 calculated that the South Coast of Sweden was rising by at least 1 mm a year, further north the uplift was 2 mm to 3 mm a year and in central Finland the land uplift might be as much as 8 mm to 9 mm a year.

Jakarta is thought to be subsiding by 25 cm a year largely because of groundwater extraction. Houston is sinking as the oil wells beneath it are depleted. Bangkok’s and Shanghai’s skyscrapers are weighing the two cities down. London is slowly sinking partly due to water abstraction and partly due to Post-Glacial Rebound which is causing Scotland to slowly rise, like Sweden and Finland, after having been weighed down by glaciers during the last ice age.

A report by scientists in 2019 suggested that the real sea level rise due purely to thermal expansion caused by global warming was just 0.7 mm a year: ‘Sea level rise by thermal expansion is likely less than 0.7 mm/year……..Subsidence is main contributor of sea level rise in many areas of the world.’

What about rising CO2?

And just to finish off today’s blog. Here’s a simple chart comparing rising sea levels with rising levels of atmospheric CO2. Hopefully it’s clear that there is no relationship between the two:

6 comments to Rising nonsense about sea levels from the lying BBC

  • A Thorpe

    You could call the last graph the inconvenient truth. The climate fraudsters show us graphs of CO2 and temperature apparently correlated and then claim that the higher temperatures caused by CO2 are causing sea level rises, but they ignore the inconvenient evidence in the graph above.

    What is being measured when we have daily tidal ranges of 2-3m, and at some locations much higher? It is the storms and rains that do the real damage, not a few centimetres of sea level rise.

    I am putting my faith in Saint Obama. He wouldn’t have bough a house by the sea on the east coast where the sea level rise is the highest if he thought there was a danger of flooding. On the other hand perhaps he knows he was wrong and this is why he doesn’t want the immigrants. He is just trying to protect them from the dangers of flooding.

  • Ed P

    AS AT says, it’s strange how many billionaires have seaside properties – it’s almost as if they don’t believe the doomsayers.

  • Hardcastle

    Excellent article David and I see it is also published on the Daily Sceptic.These people are just ignorant or evil or both.Anyone who has a background in earth sciences knows it is nonsense.Thinking of castles,what about Harlech? Originally constructed on the coast but now somewhat inland? Do they not know about deposition and the concept of equilibrium.School children used to ask,” is Britain getting smaller?,no it is just changing shape,very,very slowly.That is without all the other geological and geomorphological processes you rightly outlined.The earth is dynamic and it is the height of arrogance to believe we have even the slightest effect on its evolution.In fact,when man tries to intervene,it usually leads to problems.The BBC are one of several dangerous organisations leading us down the garden path to God knows what.

  • Jeffrey Palmer

    For decades, ‘Scientists’ have been lecturing us that the Maldive Islands are about to disappear beneath the waves.

    Yet a few years ago the Saudis and the Chinese combined in a multi-year, multi-million project to build a new airport on the Maldives capable of handling the world’s largest new airliners, and a new fuel depot to refuel the same.

    I somehow doubt that either of those nations would be investing their cash in a territory that was going to be inundated in the foreseeable future.

    In fact, in 2020 a three-year study at the University of Plymouth found that as tides move sediment to create higher elevation, the Maldive islands may rise instead of sink. We can make an educated guess that the boffins who came up with this study have now had their funding removed.

    If you question climate change ‘science’, you are a climate ‘science’ denier.
    ‘Trust the science’ has become a meaningless slogan. If you challenge a hypothesis, you are a ‘science denier’
    When you are not allowed to question science, it is no longer science; it’s propaganda.

  • Sea level is not falling around Scandinavia. The land is rising due to post-glacial rebound, which Anders Celsius noted in the 1730s:

    I can also see where you got your see-saw bit on the east coast of the USA:

    Your article doesn’t have any references. It is also very similar to one that appears to be by you on the Daily Sceptic.

    I have seen your book The great university con, and it is clear from this that you are not capable of good research. You include bar charts to compare a couple of numbers – this is the kind of thing that a weak school kid would do for a school project in early secondary school. And bar charts are, sadly, as sophisticated as your “analysis” gets. Most of your references are just media articles. Media articles are not credible references. Many of them are created by bots, for goodness sake.

    The point I am making is this: your “work”, whether it is on climate or university, is weak and shoddy and the kind of thing I would expect from a weak early secondary school pupil.

    It is true that there is no climate crisis and that university today is a con, but you are not the person to write about these things. You are like a man down the pub who likes to pontificate and hear his own voice. You should stay down the pub, as people will be drunk and won’t remember you making a fool of yourself down the pub. If you wish to do something positive, it should be to encourage other people to write about things like climate and university. That is your greatest possible gift – to try to encourage others to write about the truth, but not to do this yourself, as you clearly lack the tools to do this yourself.

    Neil Ferguson,
    Imperial College

  • Bob Spicer

    Are you even aware of where the quotation “Be afraid, be very afraid” comes from? It is from the film The Fly (1986). I doubt you are aware of this. Like everything else you write, it is just regurgitated words without context.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>