Sea Rise Faster on East Coast of US than Rest of Globe

If nothing changes, nothing changes.
:rain:

I am very skeptical of scientists who only look at half the picture.

I saved my quick research on a blog that is now gone, so I would have to run through it all again. Here's the skinny: Take the Co Ops Sea Level Trend data for a given area. Then take the GPS velocity data for the closest CORS station. Now apply the uplift or subsidence to the Sea Level Trend.

Funny how the Pacific Northwest has a negative sea level rise because the ground is uplifting faster than the sea is rising.

Funnier how New Orleans is seeing a V. V. Rapid sea level rise because they are subsiding at a V. V. rapid rate.

Most of the East Coast is subsiding so relative sea level rise is faster than elsewhere.

Yes the seas are rising. They have been for quite some time (10k-15k years)
Before that, they were rising even faster.

Application to the article:
From Co Ops
Sewells Point, Virginia 8638610
The mean sea level trend is 4.44 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.27 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1927 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of 1.46 feet in 100 years.

From CORS DRIVER 6 (DRV6), VIRGINIA
IGS08 VELOCITY |
| Computed in Aug 2011 using data through gpswk 1631. |
| VX = -0.0148 m/yr northward = 0.0038 m/yr |
| VY = 0.0015 m/yr eastward = -0.0140 m/yr |
| VZ = 0.0011 m/yr upward = -0.0033 m/yr

(The NAD83 velocity is more than the IGS velocity, but I believe the IGS is more appropriate.)

The results! Sea Level Rise of 1.1 mm/yr -> about 6" per century Of course, this was a quick and dirty solution, one of these scientists should spend some more time with the data to make a better determination.

I blame it on the excessive population numbers East of the Mississippi. All those sewer treatment plants required to support the population need to drain somewhere, what else could you expect.
jud

gee Jud. I hope nobody organizes a 'flash' flush.

It could be catastrophic!

> I blame it on the excessive population numbers East of the Mississippi. All those sewer treatment plants required to support the population need to drain somewhere, what else could you expect.
> jud

At least we don't have to completely suck the rivers dry in the east like they do out west.

Scientists who only look at half the picture?

Yeah, because isostasy, subsidence, uplift, 3rd order level runs, and other such "special terms" never appear in papers on sea level change.

Is your "research" from the actual scientific literature, because your claim that scientists are ignoring the movement of the land screams of ignorance about the field.

> Scientists who only look at half the picture?
>
> Yeah, because isostasy, subsidence, uplift, 3rd order level runs, and other such "special terms" never appear in papers on sea level change.
>
> Is your "research" from the actual scientific literature, because your claim that scientists are ignoring the movement of the land screams of ignorance about the field.

When I read the paper I found the following:

"As we are concerned with detecting departures from long-term trends, rate differences, or accelerations, can be compared between gauges without first removing signals that are approximately linear over the time series. Processes contributing solely to the longer-term trend (for example, glacial isostatic adjustment) do not affect our analyses.".

So as I expected Sallenger et al did consider subsidence and isostatic rebound.

The fact is that even Antarctica was once able to support plant life just as greenland once had far less ice than today and was far warmer. So were those tremendous earth "warmings" man's fault too or should we blame the dinosaurs?

Every bit of the global warming "science" is proven BS and none of the models have come even close to true. Didn't Gore say that by 2010 if we didn't "turn things around" it would be too late? So does anyone still agree with the genius?

For sea levels to rise anywhere close to what they're predicting the sea level graph would look like exactly like a hockey stick, a false graph that has already been thoroughly debunked and the same graph that Al Gore famously became known to his most passionate supporters as "the scissor lift cowboy". What a sick joke, now go buy a dam Prius and some recycled Birkenstocks for God's sake and get outta my hair!!!!

Sigh.

I actually wrote a lit review, on sea level rise, as part of my studies for a BSc.

The current observed sea level rise, over the last two decades, is tracking at the high end of the IPCC projection. If you compare the actual observed sea level rise against the projection, then the concern that the IPCC is shooting a little low is valid.

Stick your head in the sand all you like.

Unless you actually read the science, not faux news, or whatever your favourite info source is, then your opinion is pretty well irrelevant. The only thing you're doing is arguing from ignorance for a position that you have chosen, based on your own biases and beliefs.

Sorry Sean. I should have added sarcasm tags to my post. I think we're in agreement.

> Sorry Sean. I should have added sarcasm tags to my post. I think we're in agreement.

That's OK, we agree, I noticed later that it should have been addessed to an earlier post.