NASA Confirms Falling Sea Levels For Two Years Amidst Media Blackout

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

Most media outlets cannot be bothered to report something that dramatically deflates their narrative. So it goes without saying that when NASA confirmed that ocean levels have actually been falling for the past few years, the media would be more than silent.

As the global warming narrative quickly unravels, and leftists scramble to throw accusations at those who dare question the false data, the media brushes facts under the rug. Amidst revelations of scientific fraud, data alteration and faked “hockey stick” data models, the fake news media remains suspiciously silent over the fact that NASA now confirms ocean levels have been falling for nearly two years.

On a NASA page intended to spread climate alarmism (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/), NASA’s own data reveal that worldwide ocean levels have been falling for nearly two years, dropping from a variation of roughly 87.5mm to below 85mm. 

This data clearly contradicts the false narrative of rapid, never-ending rising ocean levels that flood continents and drown cities. The narrative is climate alarmists key element of the climate change fear mongering fiction that’s used to scare gullible youth into making Al Gore rich.

Global warming alarmists might say this is only a “pause” in the rising ocean levels, and that the long-term trend is clearly in the direction of rising oceans. However, these people wildly exaggerate the degree of ocean level increases to the point of absurdity and have been caught red-handed completely fabricating data to continue scaring the public into supporting a non-issue.

Even in a worse case scenario, sea levels will rise only about a foot over the next 100 years. That amount is far short of what climate alarmists would need to create an apocalyptic event based solely on the weather.  Looking at current events right now, we’d say that Armageddon would more likely be created by a world war or a global economic collapse. 

Even a warmer planet would be more hospitable to plants. But again, warmth as a benefit for plant life is not something climate alarmists want to hear. They need their backsides patted by the same lies.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Overflow-admin's picture

The Evil Russians ate the baby sea level rise

Tenshin Headache's picture

That looks more like a return to trend than a decline. Beats a further increase, however.

No Time for Fishing's picture

I think the God of the Sea saw that Obama signed the Paris Climate Agreement and started behaving. Once the God of the Sea see's that Trump has left the agreement I am sure he will again force the Seas to rise. 

Too-Big-to-Bail's picture

The frog is asking why he hasn't boiled yet

Ryan Langemeyer's picture

The most important thing to remember here, and I'm surprised that so many of you commentors missed it is that............ NASA is a government agency. So, do you believe the unemployment numbers? Do you believe the CIA? Do you believe the inflation numbers? Maybe believing in NASA is a similar experience. They are ALL politicized! Remember that!

 

 

Is-Be's picture

Do I believe the scientists?
Why, yes indeed, I do.

Do you prefer the proclamations of Carnival Barkers?

A carnival barker has a job. He does it for the money.
The Scientist has a vocation. He does it for the truth.

Ryan Langemeyer's picture

Even scientists (like Budget economists and CIA spokespersons) who are on the government dole? Whew! I've got a bridge in NY........

Moving and Grooving's picture

In your fantasies.

 

Scientists, which is a loose term indeed, are human. They can be wrong just as easily as you or I. If the scientific search for truth were conducted the way we think it should be, there would not be an Al Gore leading people to believe nonsense.

 

But it is not. The existence of grants and tenure have corrupted all of it hopelessly. They get caught manipulating the data, cherry picking, and out and out fraud to keep the rent up to date. This isn't about science winning over minds, it's about continuous employment.

afronaut's picture

Ha ha. Scientists in this day and age? 

There are a few left. But they have been shunned by the consensus. AGW is a make work project for PhDs that would otherwise spend their lives teaching second year calculus to undergrads. It's a scam.

TheRunningMan's picture

The Earth changes...it always has and always will.  Humans adapt...they always have and always will, barring a 2 mile wide roid dropping out of the sky.  I'm not going to lose much sleep...100 years is a bit outside of my planning horizon.

Ryan Langemeyer's picture

How about your grandchildren? Do you think that they will mind?

No Time for Fishing's picture

Expecting them to be coastal dwelers such as myself I think I'll buy some mountain land to to leave them just in case and they'll have a place to summer. 

chosen's picture

Since 1993 the sea level has risen 85 mm. That is .33 inches.  So in the last 24 years, oceans have risen a third of an inch.  Somehow, I am not too worried.

FrankIvy's picture

85 millimeters is a third of inch?  You do the flag proud southern boy.  Yuck yuck.

chosen's picture

We prefer to use inches and feet in the south, not that damn Euro-fag metric system.

are we there yet's picture

85 mili-meters is 8.5 centi-meters which equals about 3 inches. 3 inches is not noticeable. Ask any woman.

stilletto2's picture

He botched his decimal point. (like Nasa do)

8.5mm

 

slice's picture

85mm = 3.3"

Still not worrisome.

Is-Be's picture

Still not worrisome.

Now.

And I'll bet you don't live in Bangladesh or Holland.

Moving and Grooving's picture

Ever been to either place and saw for yourself? The Netherlands is not called Holland - that's a piece of Europe with deep historical roots that happens to be in the Netherlands. Theres a Flemish area too.

 

Bangladesh is a climate hell hole. 

 

The Dutch people decided a long time ago to build levees out in the ocean along their coast and then spend decades pumping out the water. They then start working on the white sand left behind, making it into farmland mostly. In the meantime, a new levee goes up further out.

 

The amount of land they have 'created' is astonishing. Sea level changes of the orders we're talking about are not a concern to them - they have much more important things on their plate.

pine_marten's picture

Anyone who believes a government that uses depleted uranium munitions is concerned about furure generations is a moron.

chosen's picture

Thanks.  Those damn decimal points.

No Time for Fishing's picture

Well all I have to say is the climate scientist better figure out a way to get the sea level rising again. They said the seas were going to rise if we didn't act and the world as a whole has not acted. I bought near beach front property because they promised me that property would soon be beach front. If the seas don't rise I'm suing them for all the grant money they can muster and then some. 

pine_marten's picture

Apparently that was enough to starve Al Gore's brain of oxegen.

gmak's picture

Rut-roh. Now the alarmists have to spin the sea level fall as due to the "heat" from Global Warming. 

 

Note to self:  In the absence of ice melting that is on land, sea levels will rise and fall due to movements in the earth's crust. Pay no attention to the alarmist behind the curtain.

Rebelrebel7's picture

This is the coolest summer that I recall in about 30 years. Arctic and Antarctic sea ice have both severely diminished. Hopefully the sudden decrease in sea levels is not the result of increased evaporation due to rising ocean temperatures.

On the other hand, we have also ended the cyclical drought and the evaporated ocean may be recycling as rain. 

smacker's picture

I'm not sure where you are but the opposite is happening where I live most of the time. In fact 21-June was the hottest June day since 1976! reaching about 31C (88F). Apart from short periods of cooler wet days it's been consistently warmer, hotter and drier since late May, reaching 27C-31C (81F-88F) quite frequently.

smacker's picture

"Global warming alarmists might say this is only a “pause” in the rising ocean levels, and that the long-term trend is clearly in the direction of rising oceans."

  • 1. It may be so that a pause is happening. But why? It may also be true that the recent period of rising sea levels were themselves an aberration. Nobody knows.
  • 2. Why should a pause happen at all unless it's caused by unpredictable mother nature? If I fill up a saucepan with water and put it on the stove to boil it, it doesn't have a "pause" during that process while the water becomes cooler for a while only to resume heating up again afterwards. If global warming exists as a result of mankind then the effect would be on a constant rising trend without "pauses".
FrankIvy's picture

I'm in the camp that says that AGW may be occurring, and we need to study it and figure it out without being too alarmist, but this article is terribly written and not compelling.  Anybody looking at that graph should be able to conclude that a 2 year trend is not worth crowing about given that it's practically a straight line for 25 years.

That written, global warming is waaaaay down on my list of things to worry about, well after poison ivy, stray pitt bulls, and Zionism.

Whodathunkit's picture

And black mob violence Read Don't make the Black Kids Angry

giorgioorwell's picture

You guys are a special kind of math-morons, aren't you? Well, that's no surprise if you were edu-ma-cated in 'murica.

Have you rocket scientists never read any kind of measurement chart before..nothing is a straight line up or down, there's always noise, just like any Peak Oil chart, it's bumpy... This drop mentioned is just chart noise from taking the high point to the current point.   If that's how you guys measure trends then I'd love to see your analysis on any other chart based fact.

Pick any point on this chart prior to January of 2015 and compare to the most recent reading, and it's is SIGNIFICANTLY higher.  

Draw a freakin trend line idiots.

 

 

Fishthatlived's picture

Not sure if 8-10 inches per hundred years is "significant." And even then, there is only semi-accurate data since about 1880. Thats a tiny sample size. Draw your own trend line to insanity yourself. Idiot.

giorgioorwell's picture

What are you basing significant vs. not signifcant on?  It's the rate of change, moron, the rate.

Tiny sample size...so you're saying we shouldn't measure and observe since we weren't doing so accurately before 1880?   

Where is your science degree from, DeVry University?   

mijev's picture

NASA says sea levels have risen 120M+ in the past 20,000 years. It's called melting ice. Any year that the sea levels drop is because more ice is forming in one of the poles. 125K years ago it was 5M higher than now.

"Global sea level has fluctuated widely in the recent geologic past. It stood 4-6 meters above the present during the last interglacial period, 125,000 years ago, but was 120 m lower at the peak of the last ice age, around 20,000 years ago."

Is-Be's picture

And you are comforted?

mijev's picture

Comforted? There is nothing in the charts that leaves me uncomfortable. Nothing extraordinary happening in the data. What am I supposed to feel? The climate is changing as it has done for the past 5B years. The normal state of the planet is ice free in between fairly short ice ages (five so far). The coldest area on the planet during the current ice age is in the antarctic where it is below -115C during the southern winter. For the earth to have spent ~80% of its life ice free means that the average temperature of the planet must be at least 75C warmer than it is now.

Moving and Grooving's picture

NASA.GOV -

 

'But a new analysis of satellite and weather station data has shown that Antarctica has warmed at a rate of about 0.12 degrees Celsius (0.22 degrees F) per decade since 1957, for a total average temperature rise of 0.5 degrees Celsius (1 degree F).'

 

This seems more pertinent to this discussion than citing record temps. BTW, 2013 saw temps at -135 degrees. Your data appears to be poop.

mijev's picture

M&G, you said, "'But a new analysis of satellite and weather station data has shown that Antarctica has warmed at a rate of about 0.12 degrees Celsius (0.22 degrees F) per decade since 1957, for a total average temperature rise of 0.5 degrees Celsius (1 degree F).'"

>>I know you're trying to make a point but what is it? Do you realize that this is the first ice age where the poles have been situtated above solid ground? We are in an ice age - we will stay there for longer than is usual because of where the poles are situated. Humans came into being within the current ice age. They won't/can't survive outside of this ice age but if the planet freezes they can't survive that either. Sucks to be us I guess.

sinbad2's picture

And of course the warmer it gets, the more snow you get, but that's too complicated for most.

dlfield's picture

I am drawing the trend-line back several thousand years, and it looks about the same to me.

abgary1's picture

If NASA is admitting to a small drop, it is probably twice that.

Do they manipulate sea level data like they do temperature data?

To understand the complete climate story read THE DELIBERATE CORRUPTION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE  and/or HUMAN CAUSED GLOBAL WARMING: THE BIGGEST DECEPTION IN HISTORY by Dr. Tim Balll (phd. Historical Climatology, Univer. prof. for 25 years, 23 peer reviewed papers, written Univer. textbook and other books).

 

Dimwit's picture

Well at least some scientists are honest and say they can only guess 'Global Sea Level' to the nearest metre. Brilliant 3min video here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q65O3qA0-n4

Buster Cherry's picture

There was some concern during the building of the Panama Canal as to whether the Pacific sea level is the same as the Caribean.

Turns out, sea level is sea level.

Now tides can and do vary greatly depending on location.

mcmc's picture

Hey, I guess they didn't really need all those locks to raise and lower ships as they passed through the canal. Stupid engineers, always building expensive, useless public works projects!

slice's picture

I've worked in the packaging fabrication industry for 35 years. Back in the 90s, I became the "Recycled Material Guru" when everyone was jumping on the bandwagon to use expensive recycled materials that took more resources to reprocess due to collection, sorting, and transportation just so people could feel better. Post-consumer recycled materials still require more resources than virgin materials. "Waste to Energy" plants make much more sense, but I digress...

One evening, still back in the 90s, I struck up a conversation with one of the head meteorologist for the local electric utility. He said the fall of the Soviet Union was the mother of the "Global Warming" conspiracy. He said the R&D cabal who suckled .gov and .mil grant money lost their boogey man and had to make a new boogey man to restart the grant money flow. The "Peace Dividend" was bad for business.

He also said the most effective and efficient "Greenhouse Gas" is WATER VAPOR. Everything he said made sense then and it still does.

Is-Be's picture

And I once met a woman who swore the voices in her head were real.

Moving and Grooving's picture

I only do what the telephone tells me to do.

roddy6667's picture

When the Soviet Union dissolved, thousands and thousands of weather stations were closed. These were  in areas much colder than the average. No adjustment was ever made for this, although it bumped the average temerature significantly.