We are the high end of the temperature (long term) curve as per ice core data. If I had to guess I would have guessed a trend up in the mean sea level short term.
1. Holocene Ice Level chart shows no significant movement in the last few thousand years. Now I know some of you will jump onto the fact that this is precisely because of the recent human history. But look closely at the graph. It is not moving too far from zero in the last 1000 years. Now explain the fact that GIA correction is 0.3mm/year. Seems rather large of a correction if long term data points are close to zero!
2. Observational and modelling studies of mass loss from glaciers and ice caps indicate a contribution to sea-level rise of 0.2 to 0.4 mm/yr averaged over the 20th century. - Again a 0.3mm/year GIA correction seems rather large compared to the data points.
3. The sum of these components indicates a rate of eustatic sea level rise (corresponding to a change in ocean volume) from 1910 to 1990 ranging from �0.8 to 2.2 mm/yr, with a central value of 0.7 mm/yr. Same issue. Almost 50% in correction!
4. The sum of components indicates an acceleration of only 0.2 (mm/yr)/century... Wow correction larger than acceleration. Faceplant.
I think we have a long way to go yet before we understand the factors involved measuring sea level rise (GIA correction is a very recent knowledge/fudge). There is obviously going to be enough sceptics when your correction is larger than your acceleration.
P.S. I haven't had time to dig into the GIA correction itself. But the simple fact the correction is of similar magnitude as the data should be enough for my post.
