So, how high is the sea level, anyway?
My legend: Blue is sea level which, I guess, is not really the sea level, but an extraction of trend data to show a correlation with red Pacific El Nino and Nina. Sounds open to hockey stick redesign.
So, Greg, set us straight.
There is no water gage, nor any land gage. There is a relationship, our simple silvestrist minds understand, between the two as expressed in a time frame inconsequential to the earth, based upon very recent memory. If the it snowed more when I was twelve, as I perceived it, then everything is broken. This common sense, if you will, is used to announce as facts things designed in the clouds.
It is like Wall Street guys explaining to an Iowa banker how it is smart to invest in default swaps.
The meteoric stuff is all good fun, I suppose, though I don't like having tax money pay for it, but no one should take any of it as truth, nor correlation as causation, nor a global trend measured in a lifetime. We have learned not to nod when Goldman Sachs says, "You can trust us."
Take a tour of the University of Colorado's center by clicking a link above. While it is all very impressive, notice that the work of the center is to define information.
---------
By following the global warming banner into battle, money and attention was secured; the government funded studies, as it always does, to promote what it wants - a world in need of a big brother.
The banner is tattered and low. The army entourage is fading away. However, the damage is done and visible for all to see, though only recently.
There is little abstract research in the mainstream labs and universities.
The intellectual exercises that developed the twentieth century are gone, at least in the US, in favor of government contracts to develop a part for a weapon designed for a previous war, solar power and ethanol projects that a high school student could research and find stupid, in stem cells chaos, in CCD cameras and computers to follow me around everyday.
On the other hand, the government spends billions attempting to stop research into politically incorrect work, pipelines, unfavored ideas. Natural gas and small nuclear plants (safe) will provide the U.S. with all the energy we need, at a low price, both are blocked. We are told to buy electric cars which ravage the earth in their production and still require generators. We are told to use wind power, uneconomical without government grants, but not off the Kennedy compound.
Every town, every college, even many companies hire experts in soliciting money from the government, which means finding out what it is it wants. This is not even commercial science; it is political and, as such, will provide nothing useful to anyone other than the ruling class and oligarchs.
We are a fascist state, fronted by socialists, and the evidence is everywhere. Now, if only people would pay attention. We ar becoming England of 1950.
So, Greg, set us straight.
2011_rel2: GMSL and Multivariate ENSO Index
Edited: 2011-07-29
Discussion
The Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI) is the unrotated, first principal component of six observables measured over the tropical Pacific (see NOAA ESRL MEI, Wolter & Timlin,1993,1998). To compare the global mean sea level to the MEI time series, we removed the mean, linear trend, and seasonal signals from the 60-day smoothed global mean sea level estimates and normalized each time series by its standard deviation. The normalized values plotted above show a strong correlation between the global mean sea level and the MEI, with the global mean sea level often lagging changes in the MEI. Since the MEI has recently sharply increased (coming out of a strong La Niña), we expect the global mean sea level estimates to also reverse their recent downward trend and begin to increase as the La Niña effects wane.
--------------------------
The correlation is interesting; however, remember it is not showing causation.
Recent sea level readings showed a mean 5mm decrease in sea levels, which is well out of the trend since 1990, as defined by those who make money by claiming my car will flood NYC.
Here is my question: Rising sea levels compared with what? Land moves, too. The Adirondacks have been "rising" for twenty million years after the last glacier and for it to be where it is, now, it had to have risen an average of 1-3 mm/year. Islands in the Pacific sink each year. Then again, what are they rising and sinking against?
Sea level, as my model Homo Silvestris thinks (No, I will not explain it), is usually thought of as the standard; you know: 150 feet above sea level. So, now, it is not the standard. Our standard is relative! Then, what is the standard?
In the past, I would accept that the big brains, who make a living creating reports, would begin with basic facts, assumptions. Since I have not really seen that in experience, it takes no courage to ask the basic questions. If the answer starts with five second of double talk, you have your answer.
Query: What is the standard?
Answer: There is no standard, there are computer models and equations. This is the work of my Homo Meteoris (OK, man with head in the clouds. Silvestris is forest)
The term "sea level" has many meanings depending upon the context. In satellite altimetry, the measurements are made in a geocentric reference frame (relative to the center of the Earth). Tide gauges, on the other hand, measure sea level relative to the local land surface (see the tide gauge discussion and FAQ). ... [Painful deletion of descriptions of how premises are designed with many references.]
The term "global mean sea level" in the context of our research is defined as the area-weighted mean of all of the sea surface height anomalies measured by the altimeter in a single, 10-day satellite track repeat cycle. It can also be thought of as the "eustatic sea level." [I am sorry, I don't get the multiple definitions used as the baseline of data.]
The eustatic sea level is not a physical sea level (since the sea levels relative to local land surfaces vary depending on land motion and other factors), but it represents the level if all of the water in the oceans were contained in a single basin. Changes to this eustatic level are caused by changes in total ocean water mass (e.g., ice sheet runoff), changes in the size of the ocean basin (e.g., GIA), or density changes of the water (e.g., thermal expansion). The time series of the GMSL estimates over the TOPEX and Jason missions beginning in 1992 to the present indicates a mostly linear trend after correction for inter-mission biases between instruments. The GMSL rate corrected for GIA represents changes in water mass and density in the oceans. These changes are thought to be predominantly driven by thermal expansion of the oceans and land ice melt (Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and glaciers).There is no baseline. There are averages, means of anomalies by height (what height?), estimates, satellites, local surface comparisons, parts I could not follow, the eustatic sea level over time, and the corrections for density, and land ice melt. All of the definition flows from mathematical expressions, like the hockey stick.
There is no water gage, nor any land gage. There is a relationship, our simple silvestrist minds understand, between the two as expressed in a time frame inconsequential to the earth, based upon very recent memory. If the it snowed more when I was twelve, as I perceived it, then everything is broken. This common sense, if you will, is used to announce as facts things designed in the clouds.
It is like Wall Street guys explaining to an Iowa banker how it is smart to invest in default swaps.
The meteoric stuff is all good fun, I suppose, though I don't like having tax money pay for it, but no one should take any of it as truth, nor correlation as causation, nor a global trend measured in a lifetime. We have learned not to nod when Goldman Sachs says, "You can trust us."
Take a tour of the University of Colorado's center by clicking a link above. While it is all very impressive, notice that the work of the center is to define information.
---------
By following the global warming banner into battle, money and attention was secured; the government funded studies, as it always does, to promote what it wants - a world in need of a big brother.
The banner is tattered and low. The army entourage is fading away. However, the damage is done and visible for all to see, though only recently.
There is little abstract research in the mainstream labs and universities.
The intellectual exercises that developed the twentieth century are gone, at least in the US, in favor of government contracts to develop a part for a weapon designed for a previous war, solar power and ethanol projects that a high school student could research and find stupid, in stem cells chaos, in CCD cameras and computers to follow me around everyday.
On the other hand, the government spends billions attempting to stop research into politically incorrect work, pipelines, unfavored ideas. Natural gas and small nuclear plants (safe) will provide the U.S. with all the energy we need, at a low price, both are blocked. We are told to buy electric cars which ravage the earth in their production and still require generators. We are told to use wind power, uneconomical without government grants, but not off the Kennedy compound.
Every town, every college, even many companies hire experts in soliciting money from the government, which means finding out what it is it wants. This is not even commercial science; it is political and, as such, will provide nothing useful to anyone other than the ruling class and oligarchs.
We are a fascist state, fronted by socialists, and the evidence is everywhere. Now, if only people would pay attention. We ar becoming England of 1950.
posted by Gene | 9:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home