This is a little long, and only for those who want to learn a little more about global sea level rise. I have long contended that the "man-made climate change" propaganda is easily busted when viewing global sea-level rise. If there was a significant increase in the rate of global warming, presumably due to human activities, there would be a corresponding increase in the rate of global sea level rise. There has not been such an increase, UNLESS you use the satellite data that has only been collected for the past 30 years or so. The text below is my discussion with the chatGPT AI on this discrepancy.
Comments (6)
sorted by:
Using ChatGPT is literally feeding the troll
what was the mean global rate of sea level rise between 1970 and 2020 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Between 1970 and 2020, the mean global rate of sea-level rise was approximately 3.3 millimeters per year. This rate has been derived from satellite measurements and tide gauge data, and it reflects a steady increase due to melting ice sheets, glaciers, and the thermal expansion of seawater as it warms.
To put it into context:
From 1901 to 2020, sea levels rose by about 8–9 inches (21–24 centimeters) globally. The rate of sea-level rise has accelerated in recent decades, with the 3.3 mm/year average rate in the latter part of the 20th century being faster than earlier periods. Sea-level rise is driven by two main processes:
Thermal expansion: As ocean water warms, it expands. Ice melting: The melting of glaciers and ice sheets contributes additional water to the oceans.
You said: what was the mean global rate of sea-level rise between 1920 and 1970 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Between 1920 and 1970, the mean global rate of sea-level rise was approximately 1.2 to 1.4 millimeters per year. This period saw a slower rate of sea-level rise compared to the rates observed in the latter part of the 20th century, reflecting changes in climate and ice melt processes over time.
Context: Prior to 1970, the rate of sea-level rise was relatively steady but lower than the 3.3 mm/year observed between 1970 and 2020. This slower rate was primarily driven by slower rates of ice melting and a smaller amount of thermal expansion. The acceleration of sea-level rise in the latter half of the 20th century is largely attributed to the increased rate of ice melt from glaciers and ice sheets and the warming of ocean waters due to global warming.
You said: what was the mean global rate of sea-level rise between 1870 and 1920 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Between 1870 and 1920, the mean global rate of sea-level rise was approximately 0.5 to 0.8 millimeters per year. This period corresponds to the early stages of industrialization and the beginning of noticeable global warming trends, though the rate was much slower compared to later decades.
Context: Sea-level rise during this period was primarily influenced by thermal expansion as oceans began to absorb heat from rising global temperatures and by small amounts of glacier melting. The rate remained relatively stable and low compared to the accelerated sea-level rise observed from the mid-20th century onward. These estimates are based on tide gauge data and provide a baseline for comparing changes in sea-level rise rates as global warming has intensified over time.
You said: how do you explain the higher than present sea levels during the mid-Holocene period? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT During the mid-Holocene period (approximately 6,000 to 9,000 years ago), sea levels were higher than present-day levels by about 1 to 2 meters. This can be explained by a combination of factors related to Earth's climate, ice sheet dynamics, and geological processes at the time:
You said: Since you clarified that the higher sea levels during the mid-Holocene period were caused by natural factors, why do you believe any present increase in the rate of global sea level rise is caused by human activities? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT That's an excellent question and highlights an important distinction between natural processes and anthropogenic (human-induced) influences on sea-level rise. While natural factors like orbital changes, glacial melting, and thermal expansion have influenced sea levels throughout Earth's history (such as during the mid-Holocene), the rapid acceleration of sea-level rise observed in recent decades is primarily attributed to human activities. Here's why:
The scientific consensus is that the recent, accelerated sea-level rise is largely anthropogenic because it coincides with rapid industrialization and its environmental effects, not natural climate cycles alone. The data from satellite observations, tide gauges, and climate models all support this conclusion.
You said: if the present rate of global sea level rise is significantly higher than throughout the 20th century, why would the areas of islands increase, as documented in https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/17538947.2024.2329816 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The observation that island areas are increasing in some cases despite the present rate of sea-level rise being higher than throughout much of the 20th century can be explained by a combination of natural processes and sediment dynamics. This phenomenon has been documented in studies like the one you referenced, and it reveals that local processes can counteract the effects of global sea-level rise in specific regions. Here’s why this might occur:
The observed growth in island area in specific locations should therefore be understood within this context: it is a localized phenomenon driven by sediment dynamics and natural processes, not a counter to the global trend of sea-level rise.
You said: if only the global network of tide gages are used for data analysis, what is the rate of global sea level rise during the past fifty years ChatGPT said: ChatGPT When analyzing sea-level data using only tide gauges, the rate of global sea-level rise over the past 50 years (from approximately 1970 to 2020) is estimated to be around 1.5 to 2 mm per year.
Comparison to Satellite Data: Tide gauge data alone tend to show slightly lower rates of sea-level rise compared to satellite altimetry measure
if only the global network of tide gages are used for data analysis, what is the rate of global sea level rise during the past fifty years ChatGPT said: ChatGPT When analyzing sea-level data using only tide gauges, the rate of global sea-level rise over the past 50 years (from approximately 1970 to 2020) is estimated to be around 1.5 to 2 mm per year.
Comparison to Satellite Data: Tide gauge data alone tend to show slightly lower rates of sea-level rise compared to satellite altimetry measurements, which indicate a rate of about 3.3 mm per year over the same period. This discrepancy occurs because tide gauges are limited by their spatial distribution and only measure changes at specific coastal locations rather than offering comprehensive global coverage. Reasons for Differences: Geographic Coverage: Tide gauges are mostly concentrated near coastal areas and may miss regional ocean dynamics that affect global averages. Ocean Currents & Regional Variability: Local processes such as ocean circulation patterns, land subsidence, or glacial adjustments may affect tide gauge readings. Instrumental Gaps: Tide gauges have a smaller observational network and lack the comprehensive global coverage that satellites provide. Conclusion: Using only tide gauges, the global sea-level rise rate over the past 50 years is roughly 1.5–2 mm/year, whereas satellite observations show a faster rate of 3.3 mm/year due to the broader spatial range and sensitivity of satellite measurements.
You said: Satellite altimeter data is not reliable for any measurement less than 5 cm. How can instruments accurate to only 5cm be used to measure processes that can only be measured in millimeters. ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Your observation about the limitations of satellite altimetry is accurate—satellite altimeters have a vertical measurement accuracy of a few centimeters, typically 2–5 cm, which can raise concerns when interpreting very small changes like millimeters of sea-level rise. However, satellite altimeters are still highly reliable for monitoring sea-level trends over time and large spatial scales because they measure global patterns and temporal changes rather than small, localized variations.
Here’s how satellite altimeter data can be used to infer millimeter-scale processes over time:
You said: Don't you think the reason for switching from tide gages to satellite measurements is because the satellite data appears to support the man-made global warming theory, whereas the long-term tide gage data does not? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT You raise an interesting perspective that touches on the debate surrounding climate science, data interpretation, and historical measurements. However, the shift from tide gauges to satellite altimetry for global sea-level monitoring is primarily driven by the limitations of tide gauges in terms of spatial coverage and comprehensiveness, not political or theoretical motivations.
Reasons for the Shift from Tide Gauges to Satellite Measurements: Limited Geographic Coverage of Tide Gauges:
Tide gauges are distributed unevenly around the world, with denser networks in certain regions (e.g., near urbanized coastlines) and sparse networks in others, such as parts of the Southern Hemisphere and remote areas. This uneven distribution made it difficult to achieve global sea-level trends with tide gauges alone. Satellite Altimetry Provides Comprehensive Global Coverage:
Satellites can observe global sea-level patterns across oceans, even in regions where tide gauges are absent. A satellite can measure the sea surface height across the entire globe consistently, while tide gauges are limited to specific points. Higher Temporal Resolution with Satellites:
Tide gauges can have data gaps or inconsistencies due to equipment maintenance, sea-level anomalies at localized sites, or subsidence. Satellite measurements provide continuous, reliable observations over time, improving the consistency of long-term trends. Improved Technological Capacity:
Satellite altimeters have evolved to provide highly accurate and repeatable observations over time. Though their vertical precision is in the range of centimeters (rather than millimeters in single measurements), the statistical strength of repeated satellite measurements over large spatial scales makes them more powerful for identifying trends over decades. Addressing the Idea of Supporting Theories: It is true that human-induced climate change theories predict rising sea levels due to greenhouse gas emissions, melting ice, and ocean warming. However:
Tide gauge data, when analyzed over long periods, also shows sea-level rise, although at a somewhat slower rate than satellite data suggests due to the limitations of localized measurements. The historical record from tide gauges (dating back more than a century) has consistently indicated sea-level changes, consistent with the understanding that sea-level rise is a response to long-term climate changes.
The differences between satellite observations and tide gauge measurements can be attributed to factors like thermal expansion effects, glacial melting contributions, regional variability, and changes in oceanic processes, rather than any manipulation of data or intentional bias.
Satellite data aligns with established climate models based on physical science principles such as global warming's effect on ice sheets, thermal expansion of seawater, and other factors, not because the data was chosen or manipulated to support a hypothesis.
Science and its Self-Checking Mechanisms: Climate science, like all scientific fields, uses multiple independent lines of evidence to verify conclusions:
Satellite data provides global, high-resolution monitoring. Tide gauge observations offer localized, historical insights. Climate models, ice core data, geological evidence, and paleoclimate studies provide additional support to the understanding of sea-level changes over geological timescales. When all these sources align and point toward rising sea levels due to a mix of natural processes and anthropogenic contributions, it strengthens the scientific consensus—not because the data was forced to match a narrative but because independent evidence supports these findings.
Final Thoughts: The transition to satellite altimetry was driven by scientific needs for spatial coverage, temporal consistency, and technological advances, not political motives. While you bring up a valid point about skepticism in science (a healthy part of scientific inquiry!), the use of satellite altimetry is grounded in improving observational capabilities rather than supporting a specific theory.
Both tide gauge data and satellite observations, when carefully analyzed, tell a consistent story of global sea-level rise, driven by natural processes and human-induced warming. The scientific discussion focuses on understanding the rates, causes, and impacts—not on proving a predetermined theory through data manipulation.
You said: If the global rate of sea-level rise is increasing, as determined by the satellite data, why don't tide gages show the same rate of sea-level rise? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT That's a thoughtful and well-informed question! The discrepancy between satellite measurements of global sea-level rise and tide gauge observations arises primarily from spatial variability, regional effects, and the differing nature of these data networks. Let's break this down:
Tide gauges, however, are localized measurements at specific coastal points. They do not provide a global, uniform view of sea-level changes.
Tide gauges are often clustered in certain regions (near urbanized coastlines or shipping routes) and absent in others. These uneven distributions can lead to regional biases that affect average trends.
Satellite data, by contrast, samples the entire global ocean and thus offers a more uniform global trend.
Satellite altimeters, on the other hand, started their global measurements in the late 20th century (from the 1990s onward), focusing on recent trends.
A mismatch in time periods between tide gauges and satellite observations can sometimes lead to observed differences.
A mismatch in time periods between tide gauges and satellite observations can sometimes lead to observed differences.
Broader global spatial sampling by satellites compared to the local nature of tide gauges. Regional oceanic and climatic variability that affects localized observations but averages out on a global scale. Geological effects, such as subsidence and isostatic rebound, impacting localized tide gauge measurements. Differences in time periods between the start of satellite altimetry observations and the long-term records of tide gauges. Localized human impacts and engineering efforts. Key Point While tide gauge data may show slower rates of sea-level change in certain regions or fail to capture rapid global trends, this doesn't disprove the satellite-based global observations. Instead, satellite altimeters provide a more comprehensive, unbiased global average, while tide gauges give insight into regional patterns and long-term localized trends.
The combination of these two approaches—tide gauge data for historical context and satellite measurements for global trends—provides a more complete picture of global sea-level rise and its complex regional variations.
Anyone that's ever tried to remove dents from their 2-stroke exhaust pipes knows that filling them with water and throwing them in an ice chest that water expands when frozen,q causing the water to expand and push the dents outwardly. Water then contracts again at higher temps and expands again when boiled.. If the ice caps melt then wouldn't we have lower sea levels? I mean the sea's would have to be boiling for them to expand/rise sea levels
It lost the debate when it was pointed out that you can’t measure 1-2 mm’s of change using a measuring instrument with accuracy of 5-7 cm. It would be like a machinist using a wood yard stick to measure thousandths of an inch on a part he’s making on the lathe. And they call themselves scientists.
If the satellite "data" didn't support the fraud, it wouldn't be used.
?