CCD Editor’s Note: The following is a third excerpted chapter from Lynne Balzer’s new book, The Green New Deal and Climate Change: What You Need to Know, available from Amazon in paperback and Kindle. You can read her previous chapter here and here.
MYTH Due to human-caused global warming, the sea level is rising rapidly at an accelerated rate, and as a result, many coastal areas will soon be underwater.
An article by Brandon Miller, “Satellite observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating.” CNN.com, March 13, 2018: “Global sea level is on the rise at an increasing rate, according to a new study. By the end of the century, it could rise another 2 feet.”
THE FACTS This map appeared in November 2013, issue of National Geographic magazine. The projected sea-level rise used in this map is based on a sea-level increase of 262 feet that was predicted in 2000 by the US Geological Survey (USGS). But such a sea-level increase could occur only…
- If all of Alaska’s glaciers melted. In that case, sea level would rise -0.05 meters (about 0.16 feet).
- If all of Earth’s temperate glaciers melted. That would cause the sea level to rise -0.3 meters (about one foot).
- If all of Greenland’s glaciers melted, sea level would rise -6 meters (or 19.7 feet).
- If all of Antarctica’s glaciers melted, the Earth’s sea level would rise -73 meters (about 240 feet).
In other words, such a phenomenon would occur only if all of the ice on Earth were to melt. Although there have been periods in Earth’s history when there were no glaciers or ice caps, nothing like that has occurred for at least fifteen million years.
The periods of warming that have occurred in the last few hundred years, within natural limits, have provided no evidence that this could occur for a long, long time.
So, this picture in National Geographic magazine is a figment of the imagination and obviously another scare tactic. The editors of National Geographic should be ashamed that they ever published such a picture.
The fact is that the Earth’s sea level has been slowly rising at a constant rate for the last few thousand years. Recently Nils-Axel Mӧrner, a UN IPCC scientist who is a world-renowned expert on global sea level measurement, warned the IPCC that it was publishing false information which would inevitably be found to be incorrect.
When they ignored him rather than heeding this warning, he resigned. Dr. Mӧrner has affirmed that Earth’s climate is cooling and that ocean levels will decrease.
He states that the sea level has been rising at an average rate of only 1.1 mm – about the thickness of your fingernail – per year. This figure is confirmed by NOAA. It amounts to about seven inches per century, not the 1-2 meters per century predicted by some government agencies.
Sea level is tricky to measure because the level of the land can be rising or sinking, a phenomenon called isostasy. For example, freed from the weight of glaciers that covered it in the last ice age, Scotland is rising.
Meanwhile, Miami, Florida, is sinking partly because of the removal of so much water from the water table and the construction of many large buildings close to the shoreline.
Currently, the northern end of the North American continent is rising, due to the melting of the mile-thick Laurentide glacier that covered it 20,000 years ago.
When that glacier melted between 15,000 and 8,000 years ago, the land it had covered slowly started rising, causing the southern end of the continent, bordering the Gulf of Mexico – including the Miami area – to sink.
These facts are simply ignored by the alarmists. So we still see statements in articles such as the following: “The rate of sea-level rise has tripled over the last decade, according to a recent study from the University of Miami, bringing with it more frequent coastal flooding.”
But this is because Miami and the surrounding area are sinking due to isostasy and other causes.
Sea level measurements are made both by averaging tidal gauge data and by satellite altimetry. It was reported to Dr. Mörner that the satellite data had been tampered with to show a rise in sea level.
Another system called GRACE – made up of gravitational-anomaly satellites – computes the mass of the ocean, from which changes in sea-level can be directly calculated. According to these data, sea level fell slightly from 2002-2007.
Media reports falsely claim that, due to the rising sea level, the Maldives Islands in the Indian Ocean are being submerged underwater and that its people will thus have to be relocated.
However, Dr. Mӧrner stated, “Clear observational measurements in the field indicate that sea level is not rising in the Maldives, Bangladesh, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and French Guyana. (Mӧrner, 2007abc, 2010ab). All these are key sites in the sea level debate, where the IPCC and its ideological associates have predicted terrible flooding.”
A group of Australian environmental scientists uprooted a 50-year-old tree that was near the shore because it was a landmark showing where the sea level had been. There are too many such instances of dishonesty to promote a political – not scientific – agenda.
“The president of Tuvalu continues to claim that his islands are being flooded. Yet the tidal-gauge data provide clear indications of stability over the last 30 years. In Vanuatu, the tidal gauge also indicates a stable sea level over the last 14 years.”
These graphs show that the rate of sea-level increase has not increased but has actually slowed slightly in the past decade.
Dr. Mӧrner points out that the sun is the main driver of climate. At the present time the sun has very few sunspots, and, as a result, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn are also showing the effects of decreased solar activity.
He says there’s something “sick” in the IPCC’s methods. “In science we discuss. We don’t forbid or neglect…They are working with lobbyists. They blacklist those who disagree.”
As with everything they do, the IPCC starts with the assumption that their estimates of global warming are accurate and therefore their extrapolation of a perceived trend going forward of increased sea level is also accurate.
Attributing 50 percent of the increased sea level to the expansion of the ocean due to what is done with a computer model that eliminates almost all the variables that cause temperature change is extremely arrogant and foolhardy.
THE MYTH OF OCEAN ACIDIFICATION 2004 saw the beginning of an intense propaganda campaign which stated, in effect, “The oceans are becoming more acidic as a result of all the carbon dioxide man has put into the atmosphere. This will lead to the extinction of all marine species starting with phytoplankton at the bottom of the marine food chain.”
THE FACTS Just the opposite is true. Due to the warming trend that has been occurring since the Little Ice Age ended in the late 1700s, the oceans have been gradually warming.
Since more carbon dioxide can dissolve in cold water than in warm water, some of the vast quantity of carbon dioxide dissolved in the oceans has come out of solution into the atmosphere.
Here’s an experiment you can do that demonstrates this scientific fact:
Pour out two glasses of room temperature soda pop – which is CO2 dissolved in water, syrup and favoring’s – one of which contains ice cubes and the other which doesn’t. In fifteen minutes compare the pop in both glasses. The one with the ice cubes will still have some fizz. The other will be fat. More CO2 remains in the glass of colder soda pop. This shows that colder water is able to hold more carbon dioxide than warmer water.
When ocean water warms, it can’t hold as much carbon dioxide as it did before, so some of it is released. This is a natural cause of the increased CO2 in the atmosphere. So, rather than having more carbon dioxide in warmer ocean water, there is less.
Carbon dioxide reacts with water to form a weak acid [H2CO3: carbonic acid]. So, when CO2 comes out of solution, there’s less, not more acid in the water. Therefore, as the ocean warms, releasing CO2, it becomes less, not more, acidic.
Neutral liquids, containing equal amounts of H+ and OH-ions, are designated a pH of 7.0 on the pH (potential hydrogen) scale. An acid is any liquid having a pH of less than 7.0. A base has a pH that’s higher than 7.0.
The pH of ocean water ranges from 7.5 to 8.3. Therefore, ocean water is basic, and it is extremely unlikely that it could become acidic for many thousands of years.
Due to the unequal heating of water at different latitudes, ocean currents are constantly circulating. Colder water sinks and warmer water rises since colder water is denser than warmer water.
In an uncommon case where there is upwelling, and cold water finds its way to the surface, or if there is a tidal pool into which acid from the land is flowing, the pH in that area could become slightly reduced.
But Dr. Don Easterbrook, a geologist, stated that in no case would ocean water in general ever become close to acidic.
The idea that ocean water is becoming acidic as a result of climate change is nothing but another falsehood perpetrated by fearmongers for the purpose of frightening the public.
It’s a shame that the climate change alarmists’ argument is so weak that they feel inclined to make up stories such as these. Unfortunately, the unwary will accept anything the “experts” tell them.
Lynne Balzer taught science at the high school and college levels for about twenty years. A project director for Faraday Science Institute, she has studied this issue for a long time. Her new book, The Green New Deal and Climate Change: What You Need to Know, is available from Amazon in paperback and Kindle format.
You want truth. Here you go we are in a species war with all things that cover themselves with shells, diatoms shell fish, plankton, that use co2 to build their shells. For the last billion years they have reduced co2 at a constant rate from over 4000 ppm to 185 ppm another 35 ppm and they would have annihilated us and all plant life completely. As luck would have it our co2 levels have increased slightly only 415 with a optimal amount the same as green houses around 1500 to 2000 ppm. If anything we are an intervention that would have decimated our species.
The vast problem is that for all our current knowledge and theory derived from it and observation, we still know very little indeed about the vast complexities of the earth’s systems, patterns, what controls them, the sun, solar system orbital and axial tilt shifts, gravity, interactions of the total solar system, and so on and on. What evidence we do have shows that vast or subtle changes have happened down the millenia, longe before modern humanity, or even before humanity itself. so no proper scientist would present anything such as these politicised reports as established fact. Hence always the use of the words “could”, “might”, “if” etc. Add on the fact that what was established “Fact” so often proves to be changed later, maybe some modesty and huge uncertainty is called for by the AGW alarm religion.