Obama chief scientist Steven Koonin says sea levels rising no cause for alarm

[no worries]

I see that the cuckoo season has started.

You should know, thanks for posting.

[no worries]

Don't believe your lying eyes, believe Primavera.

Primavera, of course listens to Trump.

Speaking to a Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) gathering in Kansas City, Trump implored his audience to forget about what they see and read — and instead just listen to him.

“Don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news,” Trump said, pointing at reporters as the crowd broke out in boos. “Just remember, what you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”

“Sick with us,” he pleaded. “Just stick with us.”

[cancel2 2022]

Koonin points out scientific facts supported by hard data and the peer-reviewed literature that stand against the reigning climate change narrative: humans have had no detectable impact on hurricanes over the past century; Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was eighty years ago; tornado frequency and severity are not trending up; the number and severity of droughts are not rising over time either; the extent of global fires has been trending significantly downward; the rate of sea-level rise has not accelerated; global crop yields are rising, not falling; the net economic impact of human-induced climate change will be minimal through at least the end of this century even if global average temperatures rise by 3C which is double the Paris Agreement goal.

Yeah, HIS PEERS. Total BS.

I'll take NASA's, NOAA and EPA's word over this crack pot.

Dr. Steven Koonin was the undersecretary for science at the U.S. Department of Energy in the Obama admin. You're just another gibbering fool on a low traffic forum.

NOAA says that hurricanes haven't increased in either frequency or intensity, NASA says that global average sea level is 3.3mm per year or 10 inches by 2100.

[no worries]

Dr. Steven Koonin was the undersecretary for science at the U.S. Department of Energy in the Obama admin. You're just another fool on a low traffic forum.

Who cares, I'm allowed to disagree with democrats, Obama and Biden, AND I am.

Too bad teabaggers (www.teaparty.org) aren't allowed to.

A scientist for the dept. of energy?

'll take NASA's, NOAA and EPA's word over this crack pot".

They actually study that and more everyday.

[cancel2 2022]

Who cares, I'm allowed to disagree with democrats, Obama and Biden, AND I am.

Too bad teabaggers (www.teaparty.org) aren't allowed to.

A scientist for the dept. of energy?

'll take NASA's, NOAA and EPA's word over this crack pot".

They actually study that and more everyday.

Crazy bugger, ignored from now on.

[cancel2 2022]

.
The Arctic was much warmer in the Holocene than it is now.

The Holocene Thermal Maximum around Svalbard, Arctic North Atlantic; molluscs show early and exceptional warmth

Jan Mangerud, John Inge Svendsen First Published June 30, 2017 Research Article

Abstract

Shallow marine molluscs that are today extinct close to Svalbard, because of the cold climate, are found in deposits there dating to the early Holocene. The most warmth-demanding species found, Zirfaea crispata, currently has a northern limit 1000 km farther south, indicating that August temperatures on Svalbard were 6°C warmer at around 10.2–9.2 cal. ka BP, when this species lived there. The blue mussel, Mytilus edulis, returned to Svalbard in 2004 following recent warming, and after almost 4000 years of absence, excluding a short re-appearance during the Medieval Warm Period 900 years ago. Mytilus first arrived in Svalbard at 11 cal. ka BP, indicating that the climate was then as least as warm as present. This first warm period lasted from 11 to 9 cal. ka BP and was followed by a period of lower temperatures 9–8.2 cal. ka BP. After 8.2 cal. ka, the climate around Svalbard warmed again, and although it did not reach the same peak in temperatures as prior to 9 ka, it was nevertheless some 4°C warmer than present between 8.2 and 6 cal. ka BP. Thereafter, a gradual cooling brought temperatures to the present level at about 4.5 cal. ka BP. The warm early-Holocene climate around Svalbard was driven primarily by higher insolation and greater influx of warm Atlantic Water, but feedback processes further influenced the regional climate.


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs...59683617715701

[goat]

Yes he is, because he is one of them nut jobs, that believes humans and all their inventions, farming and deforesting and don't have any effect on the earth.

You're the fuckwit for believing the same.

I didn't realize what a fuckwit Primavera is until she replied to me. Now I have proof.

[Bigdog]

Here we continue our interview with Dr Steven Koonin, chief scientist in the US Department of Energy during the Barack Obama administration and author of the just-published book, Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, And Why It Matters.

JT: The media and NGOs have propagated the notion of that we are facing a climate disaster of apocalyptic dimension, time is running out and we need to declare a global state of emergency. What would you say to somebody who has this idea that we’re facing an apocalypse?

SK: What I would say is, the models show no signs of apocalypse. A lot of the bad things that people talk about just have not been happening, and the quantitative projections that are in the reports explicitly say this is not a big deal.

In fact, one of the key findings is climate is only one, and a relatively minor, factor in determining economic well-being. It’s right there in the report. So I don’t understand why people think this is going to be a disaster.

JT: Well, one effect, which is very much up front in the media and in people’s minds, is sea level rise. People are used to seeing pictures in television of masses of ice breaking off from glaciers and falling into the ocean. This is really horrifying. What do you say about that?

SK: Well there is both a quantitative and a qualitative issue. Let me start with a quantitative issue first. As I talk about in the book, global sea level rise is not easy to measure. Data on local sea rise is a lot better. But if you look at the rate of global sea level rise, as well as we have been able to measure over the last century, it’s got ups and downs.

JT: For many ordinary people, just to hear that the sea levels are rising at all is enough to terrify them. Popular media coverage of global warming often leaves the impression that sea level rise per se is something new and caused by humans.

And yet it is well known that sea levels have been rising more or less continuously for the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age. Sea rise is nothing new, nor is large-scale melting of continental and polar ice.

Everyone ought to have learned that in school. In your book you note that the rate of sea level rise varies quite a bit. What has been happening in the recent period? Are there signs that the rise is accelerating?

SK: If you go back to 1940 or so, global sea level was going up two and a half millimeters a year. And then if you go to 1960 it was going up only one millimeter per year. The rate went down tremendously. And then it went back up again; currently it’s at about three millimeters a year, just a bit higher than it was in 1940.




Eighteen-year leading trends in rate of Global Mean Sea Level rise since 1900. Estimates from three different tide gauge analyses are shown, together with a single value from satellite altimetry. (Courtesy Steve Koonin)

We’ve got a good deal of natural variability in the records that we have, and we are only just beginning to understand why it did that. Greenland ice 70-80 years ago was melting agt about the same rate as – or even faster than – it is now. So, we have got to untangle the natural variability before we get really excited about what we’ve seen over the last 30 years.

If you look at the example in the book of sea level as recorded by the tide gauge at the Battery – the tip of Manhattan – it has got very clear oscillations in the rate of rise.




Thirty-year trailing trends in the sea level rise at The Battery, Manhatten from 1923 to 2020. The horizontal line indicates the average rate of 3.02 mm per year. (Courtesy Steven Koonin)

It’s really hard to judge what the cause is because although human influences have been growing during that trend, you see this very strong oscillatory behavior, which says that natural variability is playing an important role here.

Now, that said, it’s clear that the warming of the planet will lead to less ice and therefore a higher sea level. But according to the IPCC projections of what the rate of rise will be – it’s different in different places – you know, we might see another 30 centimeters by the end of the century or equivalently the rate would go from the current average of three millimeters to something like four millimeters per year. But we don’t see that yet.

https://asiatimes.com/2021/05/rising...-change-alarm/

Yep, sea level naturally rises and falls.

[cancel2 2022]

.
Threads like these really do flush out the loonies, I consider it to be like snails in a fish tank removing the detritus.

[Trumpet]

.
Threads like these really do flush out the loonies, I consider it to be like snails in a fish tank removing the detritus.

Written by the JPP slug.

[goat]

.
Threads like these really do flush out the loonies, I consider it to be like snails in a fish tank removing the detritus.

When spring is sprung, you become the fungus among us.

[Legion]

Dr. Steven Koonin was the undersecretary for science at the U.S. Department of Energy in the Obama admin.

That's not a reason to trust him.

[cancel2 2022]

[Yakuda]

Here we continue our interview with Dr Steven Koonin, chief scientist in the US Department of Energy during the Barack Obama administration and author of the just-published book, Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, And Why It Matters.

JT: The media and NGOs have propagated the notion of that we are facing a climate disaster of apocalyptic dimension, time is running out and we need to declare a global state of emergency. What would you say to somebody who has this idea that we’re facing an apocalypse?

SK: What I would say is, the models show no signs of apocalypse. A lot of the bad things that people talk about just have not been happening, and the quantitative projections that are in the reports explicitly say this is not a big deal.

In fact, one of the key findings is climate is only one, and a relatively minor, factor in determining economic well-being. It’s right there in the report. So I don’t understand why people think this is going to be a disaster.

JT: Well, one effect, which is very much up front in the media and in people’s minds, is sea level rise. People are used to seeing pictures in television of masses of ice breaking off from glaciers and falling into the ocean. This is really horrifying. What do you say about that?

SK: Well there is both a quantitative and a qualitative issue. Let me start with a quantitative issue first. As I talk about in the book, global sea level rise is not easy to measure. Data on local sea rise is a lot better. But if you look at the rate of global sea level rise, as well as we have been able to measure over the last century, it’s got ups and downs.

JT: For many ordinary people, just to hear that the sea levels are rising at all is enough to terrify them. Popular media coverage of global warming often leaves the impression that sea level rise per se is something new and caused by humans.

And yet it is well known that sea levels have been rising more or less continuously for the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age. Sea rise is nothing new, nor is large-scale melting of continental and polar ice.

Everyone ought to have learned that in school. In your book you note that the rate of sea level rise varies quite a bit. What has been happening in the recent period? Are there signs that the rise is accelerating?

SK: If you go back to 1940 or so, global sea level was going up two and a half millimeters a year. And then if you go to 1960 it was going up only one millimeter per year. The rate went down tremendously. And then it went back up again; currently it’s at about three millimeters a year, just a bit higher than it was in 1940.




Eighteen-year leading trends in rate of Global Mean Sea Level rise since 1900. Estimates from three different tide gauge analyses are shown, together with a single value from satellite altimetry. (Courtesy Steve Koonin)

We’ve got a good deal of natural variability in the records that we have, and we are only just beginning to understand why it did that. Greenland ice 70-80 years ago was melting agt about the same rate as – or even faster than – it is now. So, we have got to untangle the natural variability before we get really excited about what we’ve seen over the last 30 years.

If you look at the example in the book of sea level as recorded by the tide gauge at the Battery – the tip of Manhattan – it has got very clear oscillations in the rate of rise.




Thirty-year trailing trends in the sea level rise at The Battery, Manhatten from 1923 to 2020. The horizontal line indicates the average rate of 3.02 mm per year. (Courtesy Steven Koonin)

It’s really hard to judge what the cause is because although human influences have been growing during that trend, you see this very strong oscillatory behavior, which says that natural variability is playing an important role here.

Now, that said, it’s clear that the warming of the planet will lead to less ice and therefore a higher sea level. But according to the IPCC projections of what the rate of rise will be – it’s different in different places – you know, we might see another 30 centimeters by the end of the century or equivalently the rate would go from the current average of three millimeters to something like four millimeters per year. But we don’t see that yet.

https://asiatimes.com/2021/05/rising...-change-alarm/

Snake oil salesmen have always existed. Why? Because theres money to be made in it.

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-...c-predictions/

[Yakuda]

Who cares, I'm allowed to disagree with democrats, Obama and Biden, AND I am.

Too bad teabaggers (www.teaparty.org) aren't allowed to.

A scientist for the dept. of energy?

'll take NASA's, NOAA and EPA's word over this crack pot".

They actually study that and more everyday.

What a leftist cunt you like science only when it fits the narrative. Fuck you scrotum mouth