Sea Level Rises?

[blueg33]

Facefirst said:

Lots of interesting stuff

I need to find my dissertation now! I may have mis-remembered some stuff.

I would love to discuss this with you as its a huge an compelling subject. I am not of the tinfoil hat brigade, but have seen a number of questionable tests of hypotheses including my own. Now I am merely a slightly educated layman I can look at it all a bit more subjectively, the problem is that there was and is still much conflicting data.

If I can find my source about volcanic heat, I will post the reference. I know its credited in one of my essays somewhere.

[Facefirst]

blueg33 said:

I need to find my dissertation now! I may have mis-remembered some stuff.

I would love to discuss this with you as its a huge an compelling subject. I am not of the tinfoil hat brigade, but have seen a number of questionable tests of hypotheses including my own. Now I am merely a slightly educated layman I can look at it all a bit more subjectively, the problem is that there was and is still much conflicting data.

If I can find my source about volcanic heat, I will post the reference. I know its credited in one of my essays somewhere.

Not to worry; it was a long time ago! I barely remember what I had for breakfast let alone something I wrote 30 years ago! There are loads of other threads on here about climate change as you probably know. My only advice, should you wish to participate in these, would be to check people's claims for yourself. Especially mine!

Take it easy.

[Diderot]

Facefirst said:

As you can see even before 1970 scientists were beginning to take the idea of an enhanced greenhouse effect seriously. By the 1980's there was enough evidence to take a very close look at the evidence in a coordinated way. By 1988 the first modelling was used to form policy and those very old models are still pretty accurate even by today's standards. They're not perfect though, but in 1988 technology was pretty primitive compared to today, and there is more observational data available to help tweak the model parameters.

The reason that there has been a 'paradigm shift' as you put it is because the evidence demands it; it doesn't ignore other effects at all and there is a mountain of work investigating natural variability and climate forcing. Indeed, it is precisely because of all this work that climate scientists are able to quantify drivers of climate change, putting CO2 from emissions are the main climate forcing.

Thanks for that comical interlude Face First. Do do give up the day job, you've got a great talent for stand up.

Actually, have another

[turbobloke]

There is no evidence visible in the data for carbon dioxide doing anything causal to anything in terms of global climate. Including global sea level change. That's nothing new, the IPCC have said as much in the past.