Munging The Sea Stage Information – Watts Up With That?

Visitor Publish by Willis Eschenbach

Visitor Publish by Willis Eschenbach

/mənj/ [pronounced “munge”]
gerund or current participle: munging
to control (information)
EXAMPLE: “you might do what anti-spammers have performed for years and mung the URLs”

For greater than a decade now, I’ve been questioning about a few questions.

First, why does the satellite-based sea-level information present that the ocean degree is rising a lot sooner than the rise measured at tidal stations on the coastlines world wide? Information from tidal stations present an increase on the order of a few mm per yr, a charge which is little modified over the century or so for which we’ve got ample data. However the satellite tv for pc report (Determine 1) exhibits an increase of three.Three mm/yr. Why the massive distinction?

Second, why does the satellite-based sea-level present such vital acceleration? As talked about above, the sea-level data from tidal stations, that are for much longer, present little or no acceleration. However the satellite tv for pc report claims that the speed of sea-level rise is growing by a few tenth of an mm per yr. That quantity of acceleration would double the speed of sea-level rise in about thirty years. Once more, why the massive distinction?

To start out with, right here’s what the satellite tv for pc information says, in response to the College of Colorado Sea Stage Analysis Group.

Determine 1. College of Colorado sea degree information, exhibiting the development and acceleration. Observe that the graph exhibits no overlap between the person satellite tv for pc data. SOURCE: UCSLR Group

I obtained to eager about these questions once more this week, so I went to NOAA and obtained their Excel spreadsheet exhibiting the complete dataset for every of the 4 satellites.

I plotted up the NOAA information. However in contrast to the Colorado information above, I included the complete overlap between the person satellites. I then seemed on the charge of sea-level rise proven by every of the 4 satellites individually. Determine 2 exhibits that end result.

Determine 2. NOAA sea degree information, exhibiting the development of every of the complete particular person satellite tv for pc data and the general development. SOURCE: NOAA Excel Spreadsheet

Properly, go determine … looks as if in spite of everything these a few years of questioning, I lastly have a solution to my two questions. The development is so giant and the acceleration is so nice for a easy purpose. The 2 most up-to-date satellites present traits which can be considerably bigger than the sooner two satellites. The primary two satellites agree fairly effectively, however they each present a a lot smaller development than the latter two satellites. And neither half of the satellite tv for pc report exhibits any acceleration.

Now I freely admit, I’m only a man with no scientific coaching in any respect. I took Physics 101, Chemistry 101, and one yr of Calculus in school, and that’s it. However the great thing about science is that it’s all concerning the details and the proof, and never concerning the qualifications of the particular person presenting the details. What you see above are the details as given by NOAA, and I’ve linked to the supply of these details above. And it appears to me that these details are greater than ample to thoroughly discredit the satellite tv for pc sea-level report.

So if in case you have an evidence for these details, effective. However don’t hassle busting me since you suppose I’m not certified to current and talk about the details. “The Captain”, my great-grandfather who was a Mississippi riverboat captain, used to say “If you must hold your diploma in your lounge wall, there was one thing unsuitable together with your schooling”.

And to return to the problems at hand, why does the NOAA information present an total development which is Zero.Three mm per yr smaller than the Colorado information? It’s as a result of the Colorado information accommodates what is named the “GIA”, and the NOAA information doesn’t.

“GIA” stands for the “glacial isostatic adjustment”. There’s an outline of it on the Colorado website right here. It pertains to the adjustments within the earth’s total form as a result of melting of the massive and immensely heavy ice sheets from the final glaciation.

In response to that web page, the GIA is “independently estimated from fashions at -Zero.Three mm/yr (Peltier, 2001, 2002, 2009; Peltier & Luthcke, 2009)”.

Now, I’ve been programming computer systems since 1963, arising on 60 years now. In consequence, I’m very conscious that a pc mannequin is nothing greater than a bodily realization of the beliefs, understandings, and specifically the misunderstandings of the particular person programming the pc. Since Mr. Peltier has been intimately concerned in programming all 4 of the mannequin realizations listed on the Colorado website, their declare that the 4 fashions are “unbiased” is laughable. What we’ve got is one man’s declare that he can calculate the GIA.

What impact does the GIA have? The Colorado website says (emphasis mine):

Previous to launch 2011_rel1, we didn’t account for GIA in estimates of the worldwide imply sea degree charge, however this correction is now scientifically well-understood and is utilized to GMSL estimates by practically all analysis teams world wide. Together with the GIA correction has the impact of growing earlier estimates of the worldwide imply sea degree charge by Zero.Three mm/yr.

So there’s the lacking Zero.Three mm/yr, utilized by “practically all analysis teams” … I suppose NOAA didn’t get the memo.

For me, the declare that a pc mannequin can calculate the altering of the full volumes of the entire world’s numerous ocean basins to the closest Zero.Three mm per yr of sea degree … effectively, let me simply say that it strains credulity far past the breaking level and go away it at that. Right here’s why.

For the land portion of the calculation, these “unbiased” pc fashions have to be utilizing GPS altitudes. By utilizing split-phase GPS and repeated measurements, these might be as correct as ± 10 mm or higher, an incredible scientific feat … however that’s a far cry from a tenth of a millimetre, and that’s simply on land. Not solely that, however we don’t have GPS measurements everywhere in the land. They’re concentrated within the US and Europe, with solely spotty protection elsewhere.

At sea, the “unbiased” fashions have to be utilizing satellite tv for pc measurements, so we get into the query of the accuracy and precision of the satellite tv for pc sea degree measurements themselves. These measurements are performed by bouncing radar waves off of the ocean floor and measuring how lengthy it takes them to return to the satellite tv for pc. Right here, repeated measurements usually are not attainable as a result of the ocean degree at any level adjustments consistently, and the satellite tv for pc isn’t in the identical place twice. A current NASA press launch describing the Sentinel-6 satellite tv for pc, the successor to the Jason-Three satellite tv for pc, quotes the oceanographer Josh Willis:

Sentinel-6 will orbit about 800 miles up and use radar to measure the floor of the ocean. An instrument on the satellite tv for pc sends a radar wave right down to Earth. The radar bounces off the floor of the ocean and returns to the satellite tv for pc. By measuring how lengthy it took for the radar to go down and again — and accounting for moisture within the environment which slows the radar down — scientists can measure how far-off the floor of the ocean is from the satellite tv for pc.

In different phrases, the satellite tv for pc can inform scientists on Earth how excessive the oceans are, and the way that top is altering over time.

“It’s actually sort of an unimaginable feat of know-how,” [Josh] Willis says. “We will precisely measure the water degree with an accuracy of 1 inch from 800 miles up.”

An accuracy of 1 inch, that’s 25.four mm … they usually’re claiming they know the annual change within the quantity of the oceans from the GIA to the closest tenth of an mm of sea degree top? I do know that accuracy is completely different from precision, and that measurement of adjustments in size over time (precision) might be an order of magnitude higher than the measurements of the size itself (accuracy), however nonetheless … sorry, however I’m not shopping for the GIA declare.

Let me see if I may give you a way of the problem of the satellite tv for pc measurements of sea degree. The satellites orbit at an altitude of about 830 miles, which is about 1.34 billion millimetres. So to measure the change in sea degree to the closest tenth of an mm, we’d want to have the ability to measure the gap from the satellite tv for pc to the ocean floor to a precision higher than one half in 13 billion … and that may be a laborious problem even in a managed laboratory setting.

Listed below are a number of the difficulties in that measurement. First is the measurement of the altitude of the satellite tv for pc itself. Except we all know that to the closest mm or so for each second of daily, we’re going to get inaccurate solutions. Subsequent is the various composition, temperature, cloudiness, and humidity of the environment. All of those change the time it takes the radar sign to return to the satellite tv for pc. Then there are the ocean waves, which clearly change the peak of the ocean by hundreds of mm. Lastly, there may be “instrument drift”, the inevitable adjustments that happen to digital measuring devices over time.

Internet end result? Properly, the online end result might be seen in Determine 2 above, the place in response to the College of Colorado one satellite tv for pc says the ocean degree is rising at 2.5 mm/yr, and a mere eight days after the tip of that satellite tv for pc’s information (the interval between one satellite tv for pc and the following within the Colorado sea-level report) the successor satellite tv for pc says it’s rising at four.1 mm/yr … no bueno. They’re claiming that in eight days, the speed of rise jumped by 1.6 mm per yr. Observe additionally that there’s completely no acceleration in both half of the satellite tv for pc report, only a step-change between satellites. Clearly, they’re not in a position to measure annual sea-level adjustments to the closest millimetre, a lot much less to the closest tenth of a millimetre.

Nevertheless, the folks engaged on the mission are all true believers. In the identical article, Josh Willis is quoted as saying “We all know that the oceans are rising due to human-caused interference with the local weather.”

Dang people, at all times interfering with the local weather … for instance, our new “Local weather Czar”, John Kerry, has 5 homes, quite a lot of vehicles, a yacht, and a personal jet, and he tells us to take the bus to keep away from the dreaded “human-caused interference with the local weather” … however I digress.

The issue is that beginning out with a hard and fast “scientific” perception like that results in the folks engaged on the satellite tv for pc sea-level datasets splicing collectively what are clearly incompatible satellite tv for pc outcomes, spreading peanut butter over the cracks to allow them to’t be seen, and asserting to the world that the satellites present a harmful acceleration in sea-level rise, so we must always all be very frightened …

Me, I’ve stated for a while that we shouldn’t put any weight on the satellite tv for pc outcomes. Nevertheless, I’ve primarily based this solely on the very giant variations in each development and acceleration between the satellite tv for pc and the tidal station data, and the identified difficulties in satellite tv for pc measurements mentioned above. I investigated this query in a number of posts, together with “Inside The Acceleration Manufacturing unit” and “Accelerating The Acceleration“

However now, in the end, I’ve the details to again up my declare. There’s no proof of any acceleration within the charge of sea-level rise in both the tide gauge or the shabbily-spliced satellite tv for pc data. It’s been going up at on the order of eight inches (200 mm) per century for fairly a while, and there’s no signal of any change in that charge of rise.

So that you’re free to do what Obama and Invoice Gates have performed—purchase seaside property. They proclaim loudly that the ocean degree is rising dangerously, however like the vast majority of local weather alarmists, their actions belie their phrases.

My best needs to everybody in these most unusual of occasions,


PS—My standard request. To keep away from misunderstandings, please quote the precise phrases you’re discussing. I can defend my phrases, however I can not defend your understanding of my phrases.

PPS—My publish linked to above, “Accelerating The Acceleration“, earned me a laughable “fact-check” on Fb by some well-meaning people who had been apparently quick on cranial horsepower … now that Fb has introduced it’s taking up as the worldwide arbiter of scientific reality, we’ll see what occurs to this publish.


Article Score

You May Also Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *