Why do you post lies about what researchers write? Why do you always do this? Are you really such a slimy person or do you really read so poorly.
"There is a good agreement between the rate of sea level rise (3.2 ± 0.4 mm·yr? 1) calculated from satellite altimetry and the rate of 3.1 ± 0.6 mm·yr? 1 from tide gauge based reconstruction for the overlapping time period (1993–2009). "
- S. Jevrejevaa, b, J.C. Moorea, c, d, Corresponding author contact information, E-mail the corresponding author, A. Grinsteda, e, A.P. Matthewsb, G. Spadaf -- the researchers you pretend to quote.
"We calculate an acceleration of 0.02 ± 0.01 mm·yr? 2 in global sea level (1807–2009). In comparison the steric component of sea level shows an acceleration of 0.006 mm·yr? 2 and mass loss of glaciers accelerates at 0.003 mm·yr? 2 over 200 year long time series:
- S. Jevrejevaa, b, J.C. Moorea, c, d, Corresponding author contact information, E-mail the corresponding author, A. Grinsteda, e, A.P. Matthewsb, G. Spadaf -- the researchers you pretend to quote.
The study that Kano pretends to quote is here.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art...
Kano has in the past been mistaken. In this case readers can read directly from the study's authors and compare it to what Kano says they say. You shouldn't care what I say, you should read the research directly and judge Kano from here on out accordingly.
Kano, you are busted. Your integrity is clearly shown for what it is.
The researchers that Kano pretends to quote here have confirmed the satellite measurements and found that there IS an acceleration.
**************
This is not the first time you have been "misled". You insist on peppering this site with deceit from your chosen deceitful blogs. If you actually cared about scientific truth you would avoid those blogs and read from real science sources. At least you can fact check rather than posting "mislead" rants.
And yes it is pay-walled. The journals are supported by serious subscribers. As with all the journals, the abstracts are free.
It would take a great amount of sea level rise in a few years to make the mean rise The mean is entirely different than actual rise Deniers banked on the same no change in mean temp rise over 150 years to say there had been no rise in temps This is a bullsh*t cherry picking strategy attempting to overshadow the actual rise
They tend to say that without global warming, the sea level would have lowered. They call it an isostatic adjustment, that they are free to change if actual sea level stops rising.
Pegminer: That is what everyone keeps telling him yet he continues to talk about what they say as if they are fact and, no doubt, will continue.
Those sites are in the business of misleading--that's what we keep telling you.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/05/new-paper-finds-sea-levels-rising-only.html
Quote from conclusions paragraph
"most comprehensive data set available suggests that there has been no dramatic increase - or any increase, for that matter - in the mean rate of global sea level rise due to the historical increase in the atmosphere's CO2 concentration.[Therefore, there is no evidence of any human influence on sea levels]
