Interest in pursuing the Net Zero fantasy is falling faster around the world than Dale Vince’s divorce-challenged bank account. Soon we might see an end to all the pseudoscientific fearmongering in mainstream media designed to promote the society-destroying campaign. Thankfully there is still some entertainment to be had, with Mail Online recently publishing an old favourite claiming that six-foot high sea level rises caused by “global warming” will submerge major cities such as London, Hull and Cardiff within 75 years. As regular readers will know, you can arrive at this twaddle by assuming sea levels will rise 13 times higher than current projected increases, and temperature rises will stop jogging along at around 0.1°C a decade and suddenly jump by 4°C by 2100. Just for good measure you can ignore the 2016 Dutch Deltares report that found the world has actually gained more land than was lost to water since 1985.
The science around sea level rise is a tad more complex than clickbait stories backed by attention-seeking climate scientists/activists might suggest. The Mail Online story was written by the publication’s Executive Science and Technology Editor Shivali Best, who pulled out all the stops by warning readers in the UK that one in four properties will be at risk of flooding within 25 years. Some catching up will be required then, given that in the year to March 2024 just 5,000 properties were flooded in England, similar to annual totals recorded over the last 20 years. Best has past form promoting her party piece, writing in the Mirror in 2019 that “rising sea levels could wipe out entire cities by 2050”. Countries in Asia such as Bangladesh, India and Thailand were singled out for particular concern. No doubt water-concerned citizens of Bangladesh were reassured by a recent science paper that found Bangladesh had experienced a 13.7% growth in its coasts since 1990. Overall, coastal areas across the globe had a net gain of more than 13,000 km2.
It would of course be unfair to single out Shivali Best for her services to entertainment. Matt McGrath of the BBC is another six footer and in 2019 he gave us his two metre ‘scientists say’ scare by noting, “scientists believe that global sea levels could rise far more than predicted”. This could lead to the displacement of hundreds of millions of people, he added. Where will they go, we might ask? Perhaps they could head to the coast. In 2016 the BBC noted the comment by Dr Fedor Baart on the Deltares findings when he said: “We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world.”
It is obvious that the complexities of sea level rises and falls make simplistic sci-fi stories designed to induce mass climate psychosis look rather silly. Coral islands often accrete mass with the current small rises in sea levels, while land rises and falls around the Earth due to numerous natural geological forces. Measuring the actual sea level movement is problematic. Recent satellite measurements suggest annual rises around 3 mm but there are concerns that the radar altimeter data are heavily contaminated near the shore, the very area where accuracy is required. Whenever there are uncertainties, climate models are never far from the scene to give faux ‘scientists say’ certainty to the uncertain source material. According to a recent paper published by Malaysian scientists, “in-situ sea level observations through tide gauges remain the best approach for long-term tide coastal sea level study”. These appear to provide lower sea level rises around the 2 mm mark.
Best’s latest story is based on work produced by climate academics working out of a Singaporean university. They published a “fusion of probabilistic projects” about future sea level rises using ice sheet models and what are described as “expert elicitations”. It was noted that the projection of a 1.9 metres rise by 2100, “can inform a high-end storyline, supporting decision-making for activities with low uncertainty tolerance“. Quite what this gobbledegook means is not clear, so apologies if it does not refer to pumping out stories that journalists and politicians can use to scare the living daylights out of populations that fail to grasp the importance of Net Zero.
As if this “terrifying study” was not enough, Best uses a ‘Coastal Risk Screening Tool’ supplied by the Green Blob-funded Climate Central. Set the water level at 6.2 ft and Hull, Skegness and Grimsby disappear beneath the waves. In addition, several areas of London head for a watery grave including Bermondsey, Greenwich and Chelsea, while further west the bands in Weston-Super-Mare, Newport and Cardiff are tuning up to play Nearer My God to Thee. As we have noted in past editions, Climate Central’s handy flood reckoner is in regular use and many scare stories in local media can be traced back to this source. Climate Central claims that it has “built strong relationships with thousands of trusted, mostly local messengers who deliver our content”. Best is quite a fan. In her 2019 Mirror article she reported on Climate Central’s claim that 3.5 million could be at risk of flooding in the UK within 30 years. Climate Central hopes that its findings “will encourage coastal communities to prepare themselves for the future”.
Steering clear of this unsubstantiated, sandwich-board guff might be a start.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
My son interned at the DM for a few months.
Its ‘journalism’ comprises many badly paid youngsters trawling the net for clickbait, changing a few words, then reposting to the Mail Online.
Thinking is not encouraged.
The one good thing is that many people have the chance to pass comment under the articles and tear strips of the pseudo-science phony planet saving garbage.
Reading some articles lately, where people can comment, it seems a small majority is waking up to the Agenda 2030 SDGs farce.
Thanks for this info – interesting
will submerge major cities such as London, Hull and Cardiff within 75 years
But thirty years ago the climate liars were telling us that these submergings would be in ten, twenty, thirty years time. And as we all know it didn’t happen. Now the climate liars claim the submergings will happen in 75 years time – an oh-so-conveniently long time away.
I can fairly confidently claim that in 75 years time I will be 6 feet lower than I am now!
I don’t expect to live to 137.
“fusion of probabilistic projects” and “expert elicitations” supporting “decision-making for activities with low uncertainty tolerance“.
This is surely the ramblings of a deranged pseudo-mind. This couldn’t possibly be an effort to compile a ‘research report’ by one of those clever AI thingies, could it? If 2TK is autistic, who is to say that AI programs can’t be, too?
Well some AI would prefer to blow up the World than say a racist word.
“Measuring the actual sea level movement is problematic….”
…2-3 Millimetres per year has remained the naff-all level for the millenia since the last Ice Age. What goes up in one region goes down in another, as land naturally tilts one way or the other. No big deal at all in the grand scheme of things.
The Mail needs to buck up its ideas on Metrology, the Science of Measurement…
https://www.npl.co.uk/resources/q-a/metrology-and-measurement-difference
…NPL’s Head of Metrology explains: “If philosophy is ‘thinking about thinking’, then metrology is ‘measuring measurement’.” In short, many people do measurement, but few do metrology.
Especially climatologists, epidemiologists and other vast armies of pseudoscientists indulging at the public magic-money trough.
Not sure they are bothered about accuracy, they just want ‘increase’
Current sea level rise is about 7 inches per century, and we have already had a quarter of the century so that means another 5.2 inches will be expected by 2100. —-So it is going to be 5.2 inches not 6 feet. The idea that it will be a 6 feet rise comes as usual from models full of speculations and assumptions that have been totally politicised in support of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, and this more blatant scaremongering to soften the public up for more and more interference in every aspect of their life, and to control everything people do, whether it is driving, flying, eating, or using energy to heat and light their house or to drive their vehicle. Even the IPCC itself has recently said that the worst case scenario’s from climate models are very unlikely to ever occur. —-This is a diabolical disgrace and “Official Science” ie POLITICS is hoodwinking an unsuspecting public.
Totally agree. The only good news I see is that people are becoming less hoodwinked and less unsuspecting by the day. Certainly my family and friends are waking up to what’s happening. Net zero alarmism has always been a top down movement pushed by the literally thousands of NGOs started by the Rockefellers and others, and used in support of Agenda 2030. Now that their nonsense is starting to affect people all the lies are becoming increasingly exposed, and their idiot narrative is collapsing. The BBC, who never mention that the worst case scenario’s from climate models are very unlikely to ever occur, will be the last to catch up.
Hopefully before the BBC is able to catch up, we’ll have had the common sense to scrap the TV License, move them to a self funded subscription only model, and forced to represent the views and opinions of its subscribers.
This Labour set of tw@s are talking about putting BBC funding on to general taxation so we all have to pay for it. That can’t be allowed to happen.
Sadly for them, 2030 is rapidly approaching, and we can expect a massive collision of “Scientists say” with crunching reality.
They will either have to back away their goals, targets (EV’s, Boilers, heat Pumps etc.) or face massive failure and loss of credibility.
To his credit, Sunak did at least try to move the goalposts a bit – but no other credit due.
I suspect that the goalposts get moved when there is strong opposition and only to sustain the narrative, only to pick up the pace later if they can.
Incidentally my dad always called him Rishi Kusumak. My dad did his national service in Egypt and learned a few Arabic swear words. Apparently you needed them if you were bartering in their markets. Well he thinks that play on words is funny anyway.
Off Topic — Well at least they are being honest!
Government unlikely to meet 2030 target on reducing car use, auditors warn
Why is it that every mainstream media topic, from viral pandemics to institutional racism, seems to be supported by ‘unsubstantiated, sandwich-board guff’?
What I find most entertaining (and disturbing) is how many people believe this nonsense.
At the risk of repeating myself, I was last in the Maldives, (Addu Atoll) 51 years ago. RAF Gan, now known as Gan International Airport, a tourist destination. In 1974, Gan was 6ft AMSL (above mean sea level). According to up to date aeronautical charts, it’s still precisely 6ft AMSL. Additionally, both Jeff Bezos and Barack Obama have bought multi-million dollar beachside properties on Indian Creek Island, Florida (‘Billionaire Bunker’). Bezos, paying $68 million dollars for the gaff, increasing his property portfolio there to $237 million. Indian Creek is an average of 7ft AMSL.
Always wonder are they just rich preppers, or do they have access to information that is not in the public.
What insurer would underwrite that if they believed it would be under water (literally) in a few short years.
Sure, the likes of Bezos could afford the risk, but these mega rich aren’t reckless with their money.
” Soon we might see an end to all the pseudoscientific fearmongering in mainstream media”
I wouldn’t speak too soon, just heard on the News about a successful challenge on North Sea Drilling by the climate cult. As shown with Steyn vs Mann, they don’t rely on objective science, yet they still won that case. Things might have to get tasty with these anti-human Leftists.
If this was the one in the DT so did I. I tried posting a reply to the top comment something like ‘Wake up the sheeple and turn your kettle and oven on the next time the grid is at tight capacity’. The DT removed my comment.
we are all being watched and controlled, appalling.
I’ve got this strange feeling after reading this… that’s it – it’s déja vu…
The Climate scaremongers were blaming the US Wildfires on ‘climate change’ saying how rain being 23 days later than usual, and extended dry periods caused the fires. Usual BBC fearmongering. I read how many Firefighters have been warning about the potential for Wildfires for decades!
I was most entertained by a substack article from a Californian the other day. Among the things he referenced were the banning of animals grazing under the forest canopy because of methane emissions, the animals being the best forest managers invented. The approval of billions in funding for new reservoirs, which the democrats have now been arguing for years over where it should be pork barreled, the destruction of a damn last year and another scheduled for this year, prioritising a small fish over fire resilience, which failed as the fish still insisted on dying in the wild and finally, the release of immeasurable volumes of water into the Pacific. But hey, let’s blame the fires on climate change, after two years of above average rainfall in California.
Absolute rank insanity… “methane emissions” indeed…data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8c88f/8c88fd41138b7b40886d7bfeaffba1b42e2bdd6e" alt="🤪"
Houses flood because (a) they are built on flood plains, or near rivers and (b) because water run-off has increased thanks to the loss of sinks (high forests, water meadows, canalisation etc). Of course, sea levels were considerably higher centuries ago, when my town (Rye in East Sussex) was a port, while it’s now about 2 miles from the sea. Look at maps of the coastline in Roman times. Then stop worrying!
In 1988 the noted scientist James Hansen suggested that in 40 years CO2 will have doubled and sea levels would rise so that substantial parts of Manhatten would be submerged.
Given that the weight of sky scrapers is also causing the land to sink at about 1-2mm pa, this would contribute to the “disaster”.
Here is the current sea level graph from NOAA – hardly apocalyptical.
Given the land is sinking and a total sea level rise of about 3mm, the amount that is claimed to be attributable to CO2 is between 1 and 2mm. No need to hold your breath – it will be centuries before the prediction approaches the claim.
It’s even more interesting if you cherry-pick areas where sea-level (relative to land) is falling. In particular Alaska: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=9455920
To be fair, if you refuse to look at the scale on the left, that line looks quite steep!
I thought an asteroid or bird flu was supposed to get us first? Anyway, the biggest shockwave today seems to be coming from DeepSeek, though the damage seems to be limited to AI investors.
That is the modus operandi of the Chinks, remember a Top Gear episode years ago where they found almost identical cars; only different by some Chinese badge. I remember ordering a Watch strap for my collection they being disappointed to learn I just ordered from Chy-Na!
Looking deeper, will AI be the next Mencken Imaginary Hobgoblin that the politicians will use to scare us with? Many of my friends seem to attribute to “AI” all manner of unpleasant outcomes, without actually understanding what it is. But what is it? As far as I can see, for the last century AI has always been a term used by computer programmers to mean either “we don’t know how to code this” or “the hardware is not fast enough”. Then, when we know how to code it, or the hardware gets fast enough, it’s no longer AI and simply a menu option or an irritating “assistant”. In the 1920s AI was defined by the Turing Test; in 1950s it was “chess playing computers” and “voice recognition”; in 2000 it was “image recognition”; in the 2020s it was “deep searches”, “text to pictures/videos” or “write my college assignment”. At all times it has been used by computer salesmen as a vague or even misleading term that all products need to sound cutting edge, or desirable, analogous to “organic”, “fair trade”, “environmentally friendly”. It was just a term that marketing said our products needed to be stamped with, often with a tenuous connection with the functionality.
My expectation is that politicians will introduce some legislation to “protect” us from EvilAI©, and a new industry, analogous the Anti-virus, will be launched, based on creating fear and selling or even mandating snake-oil to make gullible people feel “safer”. Comet Pills, Fallout Shelters, Vaccines, Malware Detectors, Phishing Protection… Same idea, different context.
The Chinese factor caught me unawares. What it “attacks” is not computer users but early investors in high-risk start-ups purporting to be AI-based, who wanted to profit from the new premium wonder product but now find their systems undercut by a comparable and much cheaper product (whether novel or a rip-off). I suspect there will therefore be a market in “Chinese AI Defence”, used to detect whether an “AI” product is a cheap Chinese clone of somebody else’s expensive product. The lawyers and fearmongers will certainly cash in quickly.
They were a bit quick to blow their Trumpet in the US.
“ 1920s AI was defined by the Turing Test”…….You mean 1949.
In the style of all domesday predictions past and present, this follows the tried-and-tested formula of making a prediction sufficiently far in the future (in this case roughly a human lifetime) to ensure it can never be falsified. Unless this study is filed away in the archives and it is certain that it can be retrieved in 75 years time from now, it will simply be forgotten about, and the same rabble of doom-mongers will crawl out of the woodwork and make predictions about 2175!
*If* the sea level is to rise 6ft over 75 years then each generation (roughly) should see a rise of 2ft. Has anybody around here seen that? Will the next generation see it? Are estate agents selling prospective ‘beach front’ properties several miles inland?
Well, personally I hope it does.
Even better would be 300 feet then my house would be on an island and worth 10 times as much.
You speak to working class people in Russia like bartenders and they are talking about the coming pole shift. This is what is really happening just follow the investment in terms of the replacement of the Suez Canal with an arctic trade route. Can you not see that there are indeed monumental climate changes ahead but the ones that you are being told about are the very opposite of the truth? These issues need to be looked into deeply it is absurd to apply superficial analysis.
I just find all this bollocks even more fun than chasing tennis balls and Pakistani taxi drivers.
All you need to know is that the ridiculous 2m rise comes from using the sea level rise equivalent of the bullshit RCP8.5 that is always present in every ‘we all gonna burn’ crap that comes out of the climate science fiction world.
I’ve long had a question about the relationship between global warming and rising sea levels… If it is caused by ‘melting icecaps’, why is it that my gin and tonic with plenty of ice, if left to stand (unlikely but it happens from time to time) doesn’t overflow when the ice melts?
I always start with a full glass, who doesn’t?
I read yesterday that the Mail is sacking “journalists” because of advances in AI. Since intelligence is the last quality that most of these copy and paste journalists possess or use we probably won’t notice the difference!