1. 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report
A Brief Critique
By Dave Burton
Member, North Carolina Sea Level Rise Risk Management Study Advisory Committee (NC SLRRMS)
Raleigh, NC Nov. 15, 2011
Slides will be here: tinyurl.com/ncleg2burton

2. How Much Sea Level Rise Should We Expect by 2100?

3. Claim:
(p.3): “This report synthesizes the best available science on SLR...”
No, it doesn’t!
But the Report’s problems are far from unique. 3

4. Climate misinformation is rampant
For example…
On the National Science Foundation web site…

5. Climate misinformation is rampant
On the National Science Foundation web site…
for 6.5 years!
…and any competent high school science teacher could tell you that it is nonsense. (Archimedes!)

6. Climate misinformation is rampant
Finally fixed …
after 6.5 years! 6

7. NOAA’s list of 159 GLOSS-LTT tide gauges
Sea level rises or falls at different rates in different places: -8 mm/year to +6 mm/year
Median: mm/year (4” / century)
Geographically-weighted average: mm/year * 7

8. Why it varies: Subsidence & uplift
Crust of the earth floats on a ball of molten magma, and it’s sloshing!
Post-glacial rebound (GIA) – mostly uplift
Water, oil & natural gas wells – subsidence
Northeastern NC has less bedrock than SE NC

9. Problem # 1 Science Panel Report
Why Duck?
Wilmington: 75 years
Southport: 75† years
Beaufort: 58† years
Duck: 24* years!
† With gaps
* 32 years available for Duck, but only 24 used
“A drawback to [NC] tide gauges… is that most of them don’t extend back in time more than 50 years, making it difficult to resolve changes in the rate of rise”
[2010 NC SLR AR, p.6] 9

10. Problem # 1 Science Panel Report
Why Duck? 10

11. Problem # 2 Science Panel Report
Mythical acceleration
Claim (p.6): “Currently, MSL is rising at a rate of approximately 2 mm per year (0.08 inches/yr) if averaged over the last hundred years,
and around 3 mm per year (0.12 inches/yr) over the last fifteen years.
The rate of MSL rise has increased in response to global warming.” 11

12. Problem # 2 Science Panel Report
Mythical acceleration
“2 mm/year” comes from averaging and adjusting coastal tide station trends
“3 mm/year” is measurement of a different quantity (satellite-measured mid-ocean sea level). 12

13. Problem # 2 Science Panel Report
Mythical acceleration
2010 NC SLR AR predicts huge acceleration in SLR 13

14. Problem # 2 No actual increase in rate of SLR in last ~80 years!
Science Panel Report
No actual increase in rate of SLR in last ~80 years! 14

15. CO2 is up…
+1 ppm/yr
+2 ppm/yr
but… 15

16. Tide gauges show no acceleration
(Graphs downloaded from NOAA.gov)

17. Tide gauges show no acceleration
At 25% of the GLOSS-LTT tide stations, LMSL is falling

18. Tide gauges show no acceleration
(Not since 1930, anyhow)

19. Tide gauges show no acceleration

20. Tide gauges show no acceleration
Wilmington is the only GLOSS-LTT tide station in NC

21. Tide gauges show no acceleration
Full record (76 years):
Last 20 years:

22. But what about satellite data? we have about 18 years of it, now
(But see “Great Sea Level Humbug.pdf ” link at nc-20.com)

23. Satellites show no acceleration

24. IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (2001) “observational finding of no acceleration in sea level rise during the 20th century.”

25. Satellites show no acceleration in SLR, tide stations show no acceleration in SLR, SO, where does CRC Science Panel get their projected acceleration?
Church & White (2006)
Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
Confirmation Bias
Rahmstorf (2007)

26. Church and White (2006)
Their claim: “A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise.”
But “no 20th century acceleration has previously been detected” by other researchers. 26

27. Church and White (2009)
In 2009, they posted updated data to their web site.
I applied their regression analysis method to the new data…
Result for 20th century: deceleration!
I told Drs. Church & White about it. Dr. Church replied:
“…thank you … For the 1901 to 2007 period, again we agree with your result and get a non-significant and small deceleration.” (June 18, attachment) 27

28. Sources for the error: Acceleration myth Church & White (2006)
Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
Confirmation Bias
Rahmstorf (2007)

29. Sources for the error: Acceleration myth Church & White (2006)
Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
Confirmation Bias
Rahmstorf (2007) 29

30. NASA JPL Climate Symposium, Oct 24, 2009 (Lee=Leung Fu)
Bias
NASA JPL Climate Symposium, Oct 24, (Lee=Leung Fu)

31. Bias

32. Sources for the error: Acceleration myth Church & White (2006)
Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
Confirmation Bias
Rahmstorf (2007) 32

33. Problem # 4 Science Panel Report
“the Science Panel believes that the Rahmstorf method is robust and 1.4 meters a reasonable upper limit for projected rise.” [2010 NC SLR AR, p.11]
“In hindsight, the averaging period of 11 years that we used in the 2007 Science paper was too short to determine a robust climate trend… [Stefan Rahmstorf's 2009 mea culpa, on the RealClimate blog ]
“It turns out that Rahmstorf has pulled an elaborate practical joke on the Community…” [Steve McIntyre]
More on Rahmstorf’s Method here: tinyurl.com/rahmstuff 33

34. Problem # 5 Science Panel Report
Rahmstorf “projected sea-level rise in 2100 of 0.5 to 1.4 meters above the 1990 level.” (110 years)
2010 NC SLR Assessment Report projects for a 90 year period

35. “IPCC estimates are conservative…” [2010 NC SLR AR, p.7]
IPCC “Conservative?”
All of the IPCC scandals have been about their exaggeration of global warming and its effects:
Climategate
“Hockey stick”
Melting Himalayan glaciers goof
Extreme weather events error [1]
African crop yield error
WWF sourcing scandal 35

36. We’ve done the experiment!
Last ¾ century of anthropogenic CO2 (>30% increase) caused no acceleration in SLR.
Irrational and unscientific to presume that the next ¾ century will be different.

37. Errors: Cherry-picked a single, outlier tide station (Duck, NC)
Conflated coastal tide gauges with mid-ocean satellite data, creating the illusion of accelerated SLR
Used discredited “Rahmstorf 2007” method, and exaggerated even his predictions
Realistic projection for Wilmington and Southport is only about 7” by (10” for Morehead City, 16” for Duck)

38. 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report
A Brief Critique
By Dave Burton
Member, North Carolina Sea Level Rise Risk Management Study Advisory Committee (NC SLRRMS)
Raleigh, NC Nov. 15, 2011
Slides will be here: tinyurl.com/ncleg2burton 38