If you ask me, looking at data over such a short period of time does not reveal anything about the big picture.
How do the warmists explain these contradictory facts:
During the last interglacial period (the Eemian), global sea level was at least three metres, and probably more than five metres, higher than at present.
So, why is the sea level not beating the last interglacial period if humans have contributed so much to global warming?
I have been visiting my local rock pool for over 60 years. During the high tides, the waves just come over the rock pool wall. During the low tides, you can walk around on the rock below the rock pool wall. There has been no notiecable change to sea the level over that time period of time. (Or since the rock pool was built 150 years ago.) Furthermore, the same consistent tide lines are visible in most stable harbours all over the world. Most of them were built over 200 years ago.
So, why should I believe the warmists when they tell me the sea is going to rise up by around 1m over the next few decades if we don't cut CO2 emissions?
Also, how do the warmists explain the fact that the Antarctic land and sea ice is expanding and has been doing so for the past 200 years?
It is also worth mentioning that the northern hemisphere often encounters warmer periods. Just ask the Vikings what Greenland was like during the Medieval Warm Period. Since, CO2 had nothing to do with that, how can we be so sure CO2 is having any effect on the climate now?
