Al Gore says the seas are rising.......

........this guy says they're not.



Claim that sea level is rising is a total fraud

Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner interviewed for EIR

27 Jun 07 - Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner was interviewed by Gregory Murphy on June 6 for EIR. Dr. Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden. He is past president of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. Dr. Mörner has been studying the sea level and its effects on coastal areas for some 35 years.

EIR: I would like to start with a little bit about your background, and some of the commissions and research groups you've worked on.

Mörner: I am a sea-level specialist. There are many good sea-level people in the world, but let's put it this way: There's no one who's beaten me. I took my thesis in 1969, devoted to a large extent to the sea-level problem. From then on, I have launched most of the new theories, in the '70s, '80s, and '90s.

Working in this field, I don't think there's a spot on the Earth I haven't been in! In the northmost, Greenland; and in Antarctica; and all around the Earth, and very much at the coasts. So I have primary data from so many places, that when I'm speaking, I don't do it out of ignorance, but on the contrary, I know what I'm talking about.

EIR: What is the real state of the sea-level rising?

Mörner: You have to look at that in a lot of different ways. ... we can see that the sea level was indeed rising, from, let us say, 1850 to 1930-40. And that rise had a rate in the order of 1 millimeter per year. Not more. 1.1 is the exact figure.

That ended in 1940, and there had been no rise until 1970 ... There's no trend, absolutely no trend.... and then we go to satellite altimetry, and I will return to that.

Another way of looking at what is going on is the tide gauge. Tide gauging is very complicated, because it gives different answers for wherever you are in the world. But we have to rely on geology when we interpret it. So, for example, those people in the IPCC choose Hong Kong, which has six tide gauges, and they choose the record of one, which gives 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level. Every geologist knows that that is a subsiding area. It's the compaction of sediment; it is the only record which you shouldn't use.

... Not even ignorance could be responsible for a thing like that. ...So tide gauges, you have to treat very, very carefully. Now, back to satellite altimetry. From 1992 to 2002, [the graph of the sea level] was a straight line, variability along a straight line, but absolutely no trend whatsoever. We could see those spikes: a very rapid rise, but then in half a year, they fall back again. But absolutely no trend, and to have a sea-level rise, you need a trend.

Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in [the IPCC's] publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge. And that didn't look so nice. It looked as though they had recorded something; but they hadn't recorded anything. It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a "correction factor," which they took from the tide gauge. So it was not a measured thing, but a figure introduced from outside. I accused them of this at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow —I said you have introduced factors from outside; it's not a measurement. It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you don't say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!

That is terrible! As a matter of fact, it is a falsification of the data set. Why? Because they know the answer....

I have been the expert reviewer for the IPCC, both in 2000 and last year. The first time I read it, I was exceptionally surprised. First of all, it had 22 authors, but none of them—none—were sea-level specialists. They were given this mission, because they promised to answer the right thing....Three of them were from Austria, where there is not even a coast! The others were not specialists. So that's why, when I became president of the INQUA Commission on Sea-Level Change and Coastal Evolution, we made a research project, and we had this up for discussion at five international meetings. And all the true sea level specialists agreed on this figure, that in 100 years, we might have a rise of 10 cm (3.9 inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10 cm—that's not very much.

(Four inches of sea level rise in 100 years - plus or minus four inches.
Not exactly earth shattering.)

Then we went to the Maldives. I traced a drop in sea level in the 1970s, and the fishermen told me, "Yes, you are correct, because we remember"—things in their sailing routes have changed, things in their harbor have changed. I worked in the lagoon, I drilled in the sea, I drilled in lakes, I looked at the shore morphology—so many different environments.

Always the same thing: In about 1970, the sea fell about 20 cm, for reasons involving probably evaporation or something.

Another famous place is the Tuvalu Islands, which are supposed to soon disappear ... There we have a tide gauge record, a variograph record, from 1978, so it's 30 years. And again ... absolutely no trend, no rise.

You have Vanuatu, and also in the Pacific, north of New Zealand and Fiji— there is the island Tegua. They said they had to evacuate it, because the sea level was rising. But again, you look at the tide-gauge record: There is absolutely no signal that the sea level is rising. If anything, you could say that maybe the tide is lowering a little bit, but absolutely no rising.

If you go around the globe, you find no rise anywhere.

http://www.iceagenow.com/Atlantic_Sea_Level_Falling.htm

Sea levels in the Atlantic have fallen at least 19 inches in the last 1,000 years



Contrary to popular belief in climatic stability during recent times, the Earth's climate of the past 1000 years has changed significantly.

The Medieval climatic optimum (AD 700-1200) was a time of extremely favorable climate in northern Europe. Harvests were good, fishing was abundant, sea ice remained far to the north, vineyards flourished 300 miles north of their present limits, and famine was rare. This was the period of great Viking expansion from Scandinavia. Viking settlements were based on cereal grains (wheat and barley) and dairy herds (goats, sheep, and cattle).

Iceland began settling in AD 874 and soon became an independent republic. Greenland was colonized in AD 985 by Erik the Red. By the 12th century, two sizeable communities existed in southwestern Greenland.

During the Medieval climatic optimum, sea level stood at least a half meter higher in southern Florida than today from the first through tenth centuries.

In other words, sea levels in the Atlantic have fallen at least
19 inches in the last 1,000 years.

Climatic deterioration began in the 1200s; glaciers expanded in Iceland and in the Alps. Vineyards began declining in Germany and by the 1300s had completely disappeared in England. Fishing replaced cereal grains as the main source of food in Iceland, and sea ice expanded southward between Greenland and Iceland.

Around 1340-50 the more northerly of the two Greenland communities was abandoned to the Inuits. By 1510, only Inuits remained. Cold climate reduced dairy production, and extensive sea ice hampered essential trade with Europe.

Across the Pacific Islands, during the period AD 1270-1475, sea level fell by more than a meter and temperatures declined an average 1½EC. El Niño increased in frequency, and precipitation increased.

Sea levels fell by more than three feet in a thousand years!
And we’re worried about a rise of .03 millimeters (supposedly)
per year?

Please note that "El Niño increased in frequency, and
precipitation increased."

That’s exactly what is happening today!
That’s how ice ages begin!










TomLama

The complex climate.....


http://dsc.discovery.com/news/afp/20031117/elnino.html

Study: Volcanoes Unleash El Niño

Nov. 20, 2003 — Volcanoes are a prime cause for El Niño, the climate phenomenon that can catastrophically disrupt weather patterns across the Pacific and beyond, a study said.

A major eruption doubles the chance that an El Niño will be unleashed in the following winter, according to research published Thursday in the British scientific journal Nature.

The research is the first to supply statistical support to the theory that volcanic fallout may affect the world's climate system, spewing out billions of tons of fine ash that lingers in the upper atmosphere, reflecting back solar heat.

Climate experts led by Brad Adams of the University of Virginia looked at so-called geological indicators — dust preserved in polar ice cores as well as tree rings and coral growth that reflect sudden changes in the climate — and compared this with the dates of major known eruptions from 1649 onwards.

They found a "significant, multi-year El Niño-like response" that kicked in just after big volcanic activity in the tropics.

"The results imply roughly a doubling of the probability of an El Niño event occurring in the winter following a volcanic eruption," they wrote.

El Niños occur in cycles that vary from three to 11 years, when the sea surface temperature in the western tropical Pacific Ocean is warmer than usual.

The prevailing east-west trade winds die, causing a huge buildup of warm water in the western part of the ocean.

This has effects on climate that can reverberate around the southern hemisphere, inflicting snowfalls and landslides in South America, drought in southern Africa, a weak hurricane season in the Atlantic and forest fires in Indonesia.

The shift in weather is so abrupt that crops and fish migrations are hit, having a dramatic effect on human life.

Adams' team believes that the fine shroud of volcanic ash kick-starts the process.

A thin layer of "aerosolized" particles hangs in the stroposphere, causing an overall cooling of the planet's atmosphere of a few tenths of a degree Celsius (about half a degree Fahrenheit). But the effect regionally is different.

There is a complex interaction between atmospheric temperatures and vast, circulating masses of water. Although the rest of the world cools, there is a slight warming in the tropical zone of the Pacific, fueled in part by a convection of warm water from elsewhere.

That small rise is enough to trigger an El Niño, which is highly susceptible to small changes in sea surface temperatures.

According to the study, the El Niño usually lasts for the first three years after a big tropical volcanic eruption, and then goes into reverse, with the so-called El Niña phenomenon, for the three years after that.

But the researchers add a big caveat: eruptions themselves are not the only factor. Man-made global warming — the spewing out of greenhouse gases by the burning of fossil fuels — is also likely to play a role.

"Volcanic eruptions, such as that of Mount Pinatubo [in the Philippines] in 1991 may have a larger effect on Earth's climate than previously thought," said Shanaka de Silva of the Department of Space Studies at the University of North Dakota, in a commentary.

"If they influence the [El Niño] cycle as proposed, then explosive volcanism is a vital catalyst in global climatic interconnections, and a major player in Earth's climate system."

Arctic ice melt.....


Could Volcanoes Be Melting The Arctic Ice?

From the Agence France-Presse:

Volcanic eruptions reshape Arctic ocean floor: study
Wed Jun 25

PARIS (AFP) – Recent massive volcanoes have risen from the ocean floor deep under the Arctic ice cap, spewing plumes of fragmented magma into the sea, scientists who filmed the aftermath reported Wednesday.

The eruptions — as big as the one that buried Pompei — took place in 1999 along the Gakkel Ridge, an underwater mountain chain snaking 1,800 kilometres (1,100 miles) from the northern tip of Greenland to Siberia.

Scientists suspected even at the time that a simultaneous series of earthquakes were linked to these volcanic spasms.

But when a team led of scientists led by Robert Sohn of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts finally got a first-ever glimpse of the ocean floor 4,000 meters (13,000 feet) beneath the Arctic pack ice, they were astonished.

What they saw was unmistakable evidence of explosive eruptions rather than the gradual secretion of lava bubbling up from Earth’s mantle onto the ocean floor…

The mid-ocean ridge runs 84,000 kilometres (52,000 miles) beneath all the world’s major seas except the Southern Ocean, and marks the boundary between many of the tectonic plates that make up the surface of the Earth.

When continental plates collide into each other, they can thrust up mountain ranges such as the Himalayas.

But along most of the mid-ocean ridge — including the Gakkal Ridge — the plates are pulling apart, allowing molten magna and gases trapped beneath the crust to escape…

Both sonar and visual images showed an ocean valley filled with flat-topped volcanos up to two kilometres (1.2 miles) wide and several hundred metres high.