Satellite Measurements-- Sea Level Rise

IBdaMann wrote:
You are intolerant of any differing views/opinions. Ask me how I know.

You lump all differing views together as the same view. Ask me how I know.

You are a gullible moron. Ask me how I know.

duncan61 wrote:
Roj475. May I suggest you research how NASA claim to know sea levels with satellites and then tell me if it is possible to get it right to a millimetre

duncan61 wrote:Its on NASA website.They claim to park a boat over a known depth

duncan61 wrote: and measure it with a transducer then a satellite sends a beam to the deck of the boat and then they work it out.

duncan61 wrote: I am still alive the question will be asked.Where is this apocalyptic warming?

Roj475 wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
The next one is a pretty graph.

It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content.

Swan says it is rising and turning desert green...

Swan wrote:
Not possible because in reality the rise in CO2 is causing greening of desert area's as we speak.

You guys need to get your story straight on which one will be more believable in your world.

James_ wrote:
You are welcome to visit my world if you like. I am pursuing an experiment so
I can explain what the IPCC doesn't. As for myself, I don't need to be serious all of the time. Sometimes it's fun to mess with ITN.
An example is whe he said it's useless to compare summer and winter. This tells me that he's never been skiing at Stevens Pass or at Snoqualmie Pass. The difference between the two is that Stevens Pass has steeper runs while Snoqualmie Pass is more for the recreational skier.
Of course in summer instead of skiing there is hiking and mountain bike riding. So it is important to know the difference between the seasons. Even in summer the Cascades can have deep snow at elevation so it helps to know the difference between things.
As for the website, I own it.
http://climate-cycling.com/

GasGuzzler wrote:

James_ wrote:
You are welcome to visit my world if you like. I am pursuing an experiment so
I can explain what the IPCC doesn't. As for myself, I don't need to be serious all of the time. Sometimes it's fun to mess with ITN.
An example is whe he said it's useless to compare summer and winter. This tells me that he's never been skiing at Stevens Pass or at Snoqualmie Pass. The difference between the two is that Stevens Pass has steeper runs while Snoqualmie Pass is more for the recreational skier.
Of course in summer instead of skiing there is hiking and mountain bike riding. So it is important to know the difference between the seasons. Even in summer the Cascades can have deep snow at elevation so it helps to know the difference between things.
As for the website, I own it.
http://climate-cycling.com/

Matthew 12:11; He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out?

If only America were a Christian country.


James you are rambling all over the place. Are you sure you're not just an AI bot with a horrible programmer?

GasGuzzler wrote:Are you sure you're not just an AI bot with a horrible programmer?

Roj475 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
You are intolerant of any differing views/opinions. Ask me how I know.

You lump all differing views together as the same view. Ask me how I know.

You are a gullible moron. Ask me how I know.

I have not given my viewpoint at any point in my posts... Feel free to direct me to where I have.

Roj475 wrote:
You and another poster have made your positions and I am confused... Which one is correct to prevent me being gullible please.

Either you are correct...., or the other poster is correct. I do not know, that is directed to you.

Roj475 wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
Roj475. May I suggest you research how NASA claim to know sea levels with satellites and then tell me if it is possible to get it right to a millimetre

I have tried but I am unable to locate the source you are referring to.

Roj475 wrote:
Where do I find this claim you know information about, my life would be easier if I responded to the same source you used.

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:Are you sure you're not just an AI bot with a horrible programmer?

... or worse ...

.

Roj475 wrote:
I have not given my viewpoint at any point in my posts... Feel free to direct me to where I have.

Roj475 wrote:
Additional plant food is good but only if there are sufficient plants to feed on it.

Into the Night wrote:
Lie. You are even making your viewpoint heard right here in this post.

I don;t know my viewpoint... You will have to help me on that one.

At no point have I said which camp I am in...

unless asking for some help to understand your position is a problem, I don;t know...

It is late, I need some sleep so maybe I am missing things I wrote?


Roj475 wrote:
You and another poster have made your positions and I am confused... Which one is correct to prevent me being gullible please.

Either you are correct...., or the other poster is correct. I do not know, that is directed to you.

Word games.

Into the Night wrote:
Lie. You are even making your viewpoint heard right here in this post.

I don;t know my viewpoint... You will have to help me on that one.

At no point have I said which camp I am in...

unless asking for some help to understand your position is a problem, I don;t know...

It is late, I need some sleep so maybe I am missing things I wrote?


Roj475 wrote:
You and another poster have made your positions and I am confused... Which one is correct to prevent me being gullible please.

Either you are correct...., or the other poster is correct. I do not know, that is directed to you.

Word games.

duncan61 wrote:
Its on NASA website.They claim to park a boat over a known depth and measure it with a transducer then a satellite sends a beam to the deck of the boat and then they work it out.The satellite could be between 9000-10,000 kms away which would affect the time and the deck could be moving.GPS satellites are calibrated to plus minus 100ft which is why sometimes it will tell you to do a U-turn and you are parked where you need to be.At the risk of being cynical if scientists set out to get a result they will get a result.Our CSIRO and BOM have been busted many times fudging numbers.Recently our BOM (Bureau of Meteorology) adjusted all the Alpine thermometers to not record below -10 yet it was -13.7 for a month at Thredbo.Thats 3.7 degrees gone for a month.In 20 years if I am still alive the question will be asked.Where is this apocalyptic warming?

Roj475 wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
Lie. You are even making your viewpoint heard right here in this post.

I don;t know my viewpoint... You will have to help me on that one.

At no point have I said which camp I am in...

unless asking for some help to understand your position is a problem, I don;t know...

It is late, I need some sleep so maybe I am missing things I wrote?


Roj475 wrote:
You and another poster have made your positions and I am confused... Which one is correct to prevent me being gullible please.

Either you are correct...., or the other poster is correct. I do not know, that is directed to you.

Word games.

Are you correct or is the other poster correct?

It is a simple question.

James_ wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
Its on NASA website.They claim to park a boat over a known depth and measure it with a transducer then a satellite sends a beam to the deck of the boat and then they work it out.The satellite could be between 9000-10,000 kms away which would affect the time and the deck could be moving.GPS satellites are calibrated to plus minus 100ft which is why sometimes it will tell you to do a U-turn and you are parked where you need to be.At the risk of being cynical if scientists set out to get a result they will get a result.Our CSIRO and BOM have been busted many times fudging numbers.Recently our BOM (Bureau of Meteorology) adjusted all the Alpine thermometers to not record below -10 yet it was -13.7 for a month at Thredbo.Thats 3.7 degrees gone for a month.In 20 years if I am still alive the question will be asked.Where is this apocalyptic warming?

NASA uses radiowaves. They do not park a boat somewhere. This is from the European Space Agency, satellites use radar to bounce a signal off of the surface of the water.
https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-6/New_Copernicus_satellite_to_monitor_sea-level_rise_launched

Into the Night wrote:

And how high does the satellite deem to recon itself at any given time?
Where is the zero reference?

James_ wrote:
And yet as a patriotic American you deny that George Washington waited for the Delaware river to thaw. He and his army had to wait until Christmas. It hadn't frozen solid enough to cross it on foot and they couldn't break the ice with boats because that would be too slow.
You deny American history while claiming to be a patriotic American. That's an oxymoron if I ever heard one. Do you hate America that much?
Have you ever noticed that Christians do not associate the most famous military campaign of the Revolutionary War with Christmas and the birth of America? And as it turned out because it was much colder in that century that this one the break in the weather happened just in time for a Christmas crossing.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/washington-crosses-the-delaware

GasGuzzler wrote:

James_ wrote:
You are welcome to visit my world if you like. I am pursuing an experiment so
I can explain what the IPCC doesn't. As for myself, I don't need to be serious all of the time. Sometimes it's fun to mess with ITN.
An example is whe he said it's useless to compare summer and winter. This tells me that he's never been skiing at Stevens Pass or at Snoqualmie Pass. The difference between the two is that Stevens Pass has steeper runs while Snoqualmie Pass is more for the recreational skier.
Of course in summer instead of skiing there is hiking and mountain bike riding. So it is important to know the difference between the seasons. Even in summer the Cascades can have deep snow at elevation so it helps to know the difference between things.
As for the website, I own it.
http://climate-cycling.com/

Matthew 12:11; He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out?

If only America were a Christian country.


James you are rambling all over the place. Are you sure you're not just an AI bot with a horrible programmer?

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

And how high does the satellite deem to recon itself at any given time?
Where is the zero reference?

It's too easy to use stations around the world that monitor sea level.

James_ wrote:
Satellites really aren't necessary.

James_ wrote:
They have shown large waves that are over 300 miles long.
I mean when the oceans shift because of the Moon would you expect a small effect? Just is a lot of water that's being moved.

duncan61 wrote:
https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-6/New_Copernicus_satellite_to_monitor_sea-level_rise_launched

How long has this been working?

duncan61 wrote:
https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-6/New_Copernicus_satellite_to_monitor_sea-level_rise_launched

How long has this been working?

HarveyH55 wrote:
No measurement is possible. The oceans aren't contained in a graduated cylinder on a lab bench. The water is dynamic, constantly moving. Tides, currents, waves, weather all effect sea level, all the time. Water is added and removed all the time. There is no way to measure those changes in real-time, to adjust any depth measurements.

Even high tide at the shores aren't consistent, day to day, year after year. Beach front properties would have suffered, and been torn down decades ago. In Florida, we have seawalls over a hundred years old, that still do a good job protecting properties from tide and storm surge. The aren't submerged either. Still plenty of sandy beach. The sand does need to be replace every couple years, but nothing new.

duncan61 wrote:
https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-6/New_Copernicus_satellite_to_monitor_sea-level_rise_launched

How long has this been working?

HarveyH55 wrote:
No measurement is possible. The oceans aren't contained in a graduated cylinder on a lab bench. The water is dynamic, constantly moving. Tides, currents, waves, weather all effect sea level, all the time. Water is added and removed all the time. There is no way to measure those changes in real-time, to adjust any depth measurements.

Even high tide at the shores aren't consistent, day to day, year after year. Beach front properties would have suffered, and been torn down decades ago. In Florida, we have seawalls over a hundred years old, that still do a good job protecting properties from tide and storm surge. The aren't submerged either. Still plenty of sandy beach. The sand does need to be replace every couple years, but nothing new.

James_ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
No measurement is possible. The oceans aren't contained in a graduated cylinder on a lab bench. The water is dynamic, constantly moving. Tides, currents, waves, weather all effect sea level, all the time. Water is added and removed all the time. There is no way to measure those changes in real-time, to adjust any depth measurements.

Even high tide at the shores aren't consistent, day to day, year after year. Beach front properties would have suffered, and been torn down decades ago. In Florida, we have seawalls over a hundred years old, that still do a good job protecting properties from tide and storm surge. The aren't submerged either. Still plenty of sandy beach. The sand does need to be replace every couple years, but nothing new.

With high tides at the beach, you'll need to consider F = G(m1m2)/R2. Then you'll need to multiply that by a sinꝋ (theta). That will show how the Moon's position will cause it to have a decreased gravitational effect based on the angle to the Earth's surface.
If the Moon is orbiting the equator then the effect of its gravitational pull will decrease the further the effect is measured from the equator.
Also this increases the distance between the Earth and the Moon as well because it is the specific point on the Earth's surface that is being considered.

James_ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
No measurement is possible. The oceans aren't contained in a graduated cylinder on a lab bench. The water is dynamic, constantly moving. Tides, currents, waves, weather all effect sea level, all the time. Water is added and removed all the time. There is no way to measure those changes in real-time, to adjust any depth measurements.

Even high tide at the shores aren't consistent, day to day, year after year. Beach front properties would have suffered, and been torn down decades ago. In Florida, we have seawalls over a hundred years old, that still do a good job protecting properties from tide and storm surge. The aren't submerged either. Still plenty of sandy beach. The sand does need to be replace every couple years, but nothing new.

With high tides at the beach, you'll need to consider F = G(m1m2)/R2. Then you'll need to multiply that by a sinꝋ (theta). That will show how the Moon's position will cause it to have a decreased gravitational effect based on the angle to the Earth's surface.
If the Moon is orbiting the equator then the effect of its gravitational pull will decrease the further the effect is measured from the equator.
Also this increases the distance between the Earth and the Moon as well because it is the specific point on the Earth's surface that is being considered.

HarveyH55 wrote:
No measurement is possible. The oceans aren't contained in a graduated cylinder on a lab bench. The water is dynamic, constantly moving. Tides, currents, waves, weather all effect sea level, all the time. Water is added and removed all the time. There is no way to measure those changes in real-time, to adjust any depth measurements.

Even high tide at the shores aren't consistent, day to day, year after year. Beach front properties would have suffered, and been torn down decades ago. In Florida, we have seawalls over a hundred years old, that still do a good job protecting properties from tide and storm surge. The aren't submerged either. Still plenty of sandy beach. The sand does need to be replace every couple years, but nothing new.

jackjack53 wrote:
Your problems are compounded by your requirement to believe that this "sea level rise" is caused by "human activity" which you have been forced to embrace despite not being able to define it. You are put in a very difficult position to explain why you believe that human activity is the cause of something that isn't even happening.

Im a BM wrote:

jackjack53 wrote:
Your problems are compounded by your requirement to believe that this "sea level rise" is caused by "human activity" which you have been forced to embrace despite not being able to define it. You are put in a very difficult position to explain why you believe that human activity is the cause of something that isn't even happening.

...deleted whining...
Refusal to believe in the reality that sea level is, in fact, rising at an accelerating rate is one of the more extreme examples of anti scientific denial.

Im a BM wrote:
It's not like some theoretical physics discussion. It's something that has been measured in many places for a very long time.

Im a BM wrote:
It's not like there is some controversy, and some maverick scientist has exposed the truth about the sea level rise hoax.

Im a BM wrote:
It's not like some corrupt entity profits from influencing public opinion to support unnecessary measures to prepare infrastructure for higher sea level.

Im a BM wrote:
The US Army Corps of Engineers isn't channeling any huge kickbacks for shoring up the levees and doing the other things that any sane society does when faced with such a problem.

jackjack53 wrote:
Your problems are compounded by your requirement to believe that this "sea level rise" is caused by "human activity" which you have been forced to embrace despite not being able to define it. You are put in a very difficult position to explain why you believe that human activity is the cause of something that isn't even happening.

Im a BM wrote:
Sea Level Rise Denial in the Religious Cult of Climate Denial - Anti Science In the Name of Science

Sea level rise denial is part of the whole package,

Im a BM wrote:
if you are committed to refusal to believe in climate change. Period.

Im a BM wrote:
It takes a special kind of cognitive dissonance to exclude all evidence from the real world in the name of science.

Im a BM wrote:
There is no single gizmo that can measure global sea level with one number.

Im a BM wrote:
There are millions of places where the sea makes contact with the land and leave a high tide mark of some kind.

Im a BM wrote:
At least relative to the land surface elevation, high tides are getting higher EVERYWHERE.

Im a BM wrote:
There are also plenty of places where the sea is very shallow and it is possible to measure the distance from seafloor to water surface with high accuracy. That distance is increasing EVERYWHERE.

Im a BM wrote:
Oh, it's not just a river in Egypt.

Im a BM wrote:
There is no point trying to convince them to acknowledge that evidence exists.

Im a BM wrote:

jackjack53 wrote:
Your problems are compounded by your requirement to believe that this "sea level rise" is caused by "human activity" which you have been forced to embrace despite not being able to define it. You are put in a very difficult position to explain why you believe that human activity is the cause of something that isn't even happening.

With eight posts, jackjack53 has posted more than eight times as much as the average new member.

Im a BM wrote: It takes a special kind of cognitive dissonance to exclude all evidence from the real world in the name of science.

Im a BM wrote:There are millions of places where the sea makes contact with the land and leave a high tide mark of some kind.

At least relative to the land surface elevation, high tides are getting higher EVERYWHERE.

Im a BM wrote:There is no point trying to convince them to acknowledge that evidence exists.

jackjack53 wrote: Your problems are compounded by your requirement to believe that this "sea level rise" is caused by "human activity" which you have been forced to embrace despite not being able to define it.

Im a BM wrote: The US Army Corps of Engineers isn't channeling any huge kickbacks for shoring up the levees and doing the other things that any sane society does when faced with such a problem.

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: It takes a special kind of cognitive dissonance to exclude all evidence from the real world in the name of science.

All the existing evidence shows quite clearly that the ocean has not risen discernibly since prior to 1890. There's also no reason any rational adult should believe that the ocean has ever risen.

Im a BM wrote:There are millions of places where the sea makes contact with the land and leave a high tide mark of some kind.

At least relative to the land surface elevation, high tides are getting higher EVERYWHERE.

You have nothing to support this assertion. Everywhere to which you wish to point, the ground is sinking. Any scientist understands the unmistakable difference between the ocean rising and the ground sinking. You, on the other hand, aren't a scientist so you get a pass. In fact, you even get an invitation to participate in the upcoming Special Olympics in your area.

Im a BM wrote:There is no point trying to convince them to acknowledge that evidence exists.

I have all the evidence, and you have no wiggle room. Just get ready for your Special Olympics competition.

jackjack53 wrote: Your problems are compounded by your requirement to believe that this "sea level rise" is caused by "human activity" which you have been forced to embrace despite not being able to define it.

Nope. All the evidence is conclusive, i.e. no ocean level rise over the last century and beyond.

Im a BM wrote: The US Army Corps of Engineers isn't channeling any huge kickbacks for shoring up the levees and doing the other things that any sane society does when faced with such a problem.

The ground is sinking. The ocean is not rising.

Im a BM wrote:So what is causing the ground to sink along nearly all the world's coastlines?