are climate change deniers naturally gullible?, page-26

  1. 20,020 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 870
    Back to your BOM data Hanrahan. If you read this document...

    http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO60202/IDO60202.2009.pdf

    ...it clearly states that the following sea level anomalies, all postive, which means in ALL cases the sea level has risen since the measuring station was installed. I have extracted a few here from their Table 2:

    "Location.........Installation Date....Sea Level Trend (mm/yr)
    Cocos Islands..Sep 1992.............8.4
    Groote Eylandt.Sep 1993.............7.5
    Darwin..............May 1990.............7.7
    Broome............Nov 1991.............8.9
    Hillarys.............Nov 1991.............8.8
    Esperance.........Mar 1992.............6.1
    Thevenard..........Mar 1992.............4.5
    ...
    Rosslyn Bay.......Jun 1992.............1.9
    Cape Ferguson..Sep 1991.............3.0"

    Point to take away - they are ALL ABOVE ZERO, even those I have omitted (for no reason except it is laborious to tranpose them manually). This means there has been a general sea level rise at ALL BOM measuring stations since they were installed.

    Caveat as per the BOM: "Caution must be exercised in interpreting the 'short-term' relative sea level trends (Table 2) as they are based on short records in climate terms and are still undergoing large year-to-year changes."

    This data from the BOM, all data points taken from "a state of the art sea-level measuring station" (your words Hanrahan), does not support your implicit assertion that there is no sea level rise.
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.