Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden. He is past president (1999-2003) 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. He was interviewed by Gregory Murphy on June 6 for EIR.
"Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [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" in an area of Hong Kong that had been subsiding, or sinking.
Morner says that the claim that salt water invasion of a fresh water aquifer indicated a sea level rise ignores the more likely cause due to draining the aquifer for the pineapple industry.
Sea level in the Maldives actually fell during the 70's according to Morner, but the area is cited as evidence of a sea level rise. He accuses Australian global warming advocates of knocking down a tree on one island to attempt to prove sea levels were rising.
Telegraph article here
Full interview here
Well I think you're pretty good. I can't think of a single thing to say. If you think you are on the money get onto Bob Carter and do an op-ed for the Australian.
You owe it to your fellow Australains to inform them don't you think?
Of course if you're not sure and just frothing ....
Lets face it Luke, you and your spiv mates have been caught out again. The sea level drops all the time, as Church's graphs make very clear.
I just can't wait to get that video footage of Fort Denison onto Youtube. No change in sea level at Sydney for over 60 years, don't ya just love it?
Well I imagine you would need a good knowledge of such in your position.
Luke, unlike yourself, I have a good understanding of defamation law. So go ahead, send him a copy and see how keen he is to get himself under oath in the witness box to explain the missing elements of the truth. Who knows, he might even consult a lawyer who recognises an easy fee when he sees one and reels him into court with overly optimistic assurances of his "prospects". Either way, "fish will fry".
And such a threat from a serial defamer like yourself is more than a bit rich. So run along now, laddie.
More drivel from droopy draws. Love it how the guy backs stooges. Probably the story of his life.
Should I email Church your libel. Let's see - heads or tails. CSIRO might be short a few bob.
Did you notice the straw men, courtesy of the dudes supposedly refuting Morner? Morner stated that sea level actually dropped IN THE 1970s. Yet, the climate rentacrowd implied that Morner was claiming sea level was dropping (ie present continuous). And not surprisingly, they had solid evidence to confirm that sea level was not dropping at present.
And that qualifies as a rebuttal?
So the IPCC has also used Church's skanky line about the increase from 1993 to 2000 being greater than the long term trend? This is true, but it is also true of seven other similar periods over the past 80 years. And each one of them was balanced by a similar period when sea level actually dropped.
Church is guilty of a very serious misrepresentation by omission, of a kind that, if made by a Company Director in any of the OECD nations, would earn him a lengthy stretch in prison. So when ARE we going to see core community standards applied in the scientific community?
So Morner was abolutely correct. Sea level did drop in the 1970s, just as Church's own data makes it clear that sea level also declined from the late 1980s to 1993, from whence it then rose again.
By the way, are the Maldives of volcanic origin, by any chance? Could they be subsiding, like most coral atolls are, or will be?
Goodwill time again as some celebrate Xmas New Year and getting around another orbit. I was reminded of poor little Virginia (who was unsure that Santa Claus existed)when I saw a cartoon of Santa adrift on a warmer higher ocean way up North past Alaska. A contemporary Virginia would have sceptic little friends doubting global warming. As the editor wrote (of course foreshadowing the power of climate models to overcome our limitations) in response to a letter from Virginia in 1897 'Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the scepticism of a sceptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men's or children's are little. In this great universe of ours man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect, as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.'
The South Pacific science is done with those methods. Tuvaluvians don't have any carbon credits to offer only soggy land. They'll go to NZ or Australia eventually if it gets bad with sinking land. You're dreaming if you think anyone is going to pay them vast amounts of money. Relocation is the best one could hope for.