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.
I’m sold. Now to convince the millions of zombies out there who believe that every hot day is further proof of man made climate change.
When we listen to politicians on TV, many of us don’t believe a word they say. Apparently they are less trusted today than ever before. On the Economy, on Immigration, Foreign Policy, Education Policy, etc etc etc we don’t trust them and don’t believe them. Which brings me the issue of “climate change”. Almost all climate change science is funded by ———–Governments. The very same governments that we don’t trust and don’t believe. ———–Ah but people will tell you, this is all about science and governments are simply following what the science says. ——-Nope. Government dictates the science. I will quote from Michael Hart’s book “Hubris” which explains it perfectly. —-“Progressives at the United Nations and their supporters around the world had long sought a powerful narrative with which to advance their ambitious agenda of global governance. Harvesting the growing appetite among western environmentalists for a concerted campaign to halt and reverse the perceived rape of the planet could provide such a narrative. The environmental issue, particularly its climate dimension, was ideally suited to becoming the perfect organising principle of the UN’s campaign to eradicate global injustice and inequality by pursuing Sustainable Development, which argues that environmental degradation cannot be addressed without addressing the human activities that give rise to it. The solutions to these problems from the perspective of the UN and its Progressive ideas lay in Central Planning, State Control and Global Governance”———–ie.The Politics came first, and the science hijacked in support of it.
There is no Climate Crisis
Print this for your friends
“Some is caused by humans, mainly through out of control population growth and the resulting destruction of cooling forests and construction of huge concrete heat-trapping mega-cities designed to accommodate said population growth.”
I have asked you previously to provide proof for these assertions, to date you have ignored me.
Proof please.
You yourself have previously conceded there is some local weather variance due to man’s activities.
Take a look at today’s Met Office temperature map of the UK. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/maps-and-charts/temperature-map#?model=ukmo-ukv&layer=temperature&bbox=%5B%5B40.413496049701955,-46.1865234375%5D,%5B65.10914820386476,38.18847656250001%5D%5D Once again London is the warmest place. It’s the warmest place in the UK 90% of the time, day and night. It’s a concrete heat trapping mega-metropolis.
Now add the extra 2,000,000,000 people net population growth in the last 23 years. They require the equivalent of 200 Londons to accommodate them and most of them are in warm or hot climates where there will be even more of an Urban Island Heat Trapping effect.
Bear in mind that the Climate Fanatics quote tiny temperature variances of fractions of a degree as “proof” of a climate crisis. If we’re chopping down forests on a massive scale and building more heat trapping structures there is going to be some of your admitted “local weather variance” in multiple locations, sometimes on a grand scale (think destruction of 1000’s of square miles of Amazon jungle), add these together and you get a little global human-caused climate change.
You need to read the whole post and not just cherry pick. We cannot defeat the treachery that is Net Zero by denying any human caused climate variance, we must find a way of convincing people that piling our wealth into stopping beneficial CO2 emissions will end up killing billions of people. To do that we must shame the Mainstream Media into admitting these facts.
On Tuesday evening, I went along to my local council’s full meeting to ask them about Agenda 21. My first question – at the beginning of my generously permitted 3 minute speech allowance of democratic rights – was whether any of the council knew what Agenda 21 was. None of them did. I carried on with my speech somewhat astounded, as were some of my more vocal SitP compadres, veering into the area of climate change. The council chair – not even a mayor these days – was scathing in her reply. She could hardly see what this all had to do with council business. I mean why wasn’t I asking about dog litter or street lighting? I wanted to say that THIS is council business, it’s what you’re doing right now with all your sustainability reports and green action plans and what have you, but they just don’t get it. Furthermore, they don’t want to get it. She cut me off before I had the chance to finish anyway. Most of my group were outraged and we all walked out…well, I had to sheepishly return briefly as I forgot my jacket was on the back of my chair but we will demand a council debate. Councils up and down the length and breadth of the land declared Climate Emergencies in 2019: very few of them knew why apart from…IPCC, innit? Ignorance and corruption are pervasive in local councils. All the Nobel Prize winning scientists in the world could dissent with the mainstream narrative but it would make no difference to this intractable, unmovable, unimaginative lot. This is the small-minded reality of our local governments and how Agenda 21 will be slowly rolled out. I thought that tackling local government was the way to go but we have no real democracy there either. Makes me understand why every major revolt in this country came to naught. Still, we go on…
“Ignorance and corruption are pervasive in local councils. All the Nobel Prize winning scientists in the world could dissent with the mainstream narrative but it would make no difference to this intractable, unmovable, unimaginative lot. This is the small-minded reality of our local governments and how Agenda 21 will be slowly rolled out. I thought that tackling local government was the way to go but we have no real democracy there either. Makes me understand why every major revolt in this country came to naught. Still, we go on…”
I have pointed this out more than once Aethelred.
To make matters worse the group I am associated with are also largely ignorant of Agenda 21 / 30 and to make matters worse don’t want to know.
Ignoramuses fighting the grifting ignorants.
Yes, I know you have, HP, but it needs spelling out occasionally although in this echo chamber I wonder who I am spelling it out to! If your local group don’t want to know about A21 then I imagine it is the wrong group to be part of. A21 is the control plan for the world. Maybe they – your group – could be encouraged to look at Rosa Koire’s presentation to the New Hampshire legislature in 2011. It’s in 4 30 minute parts on youtube and is very enlightening. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8-bcAwc28s&t=49s
Thanks Aethelred.
The lock step behaviour of our woke local councils is indeed very depressing. Probably many councillors are thrilled to conform to the brainwashed ideology that they have sucked up over the last 30 years and now think that they are saving the planet with their flower boxes. Money is also behind these illogical , disastrous policies, from the Government (taxpayers) and probably elsewhere?Corruption is everywhere.
My local paper reads like a Party Political Broadcast for the Green Party. But actuall all parties are Green now aren’t they. As you say, many of these low quality council people are only follwing the top down narrative and have little clue as to what the are actually talking about. They would have great difficulty explaining anything about energy or climate to a five year old, yet our standard of living and well being, our access to affordable energy etc is in the hands of these imbeciles. ——-Grant Schapps who is currently the Net Zero and Energy Security Minister was asked about a month ago on GB News if heat pumps are any good —–His absurd reply was —-“I don’t know, but I am having one fitted so I will find out!——-WHAT? What a blithering idiot.——-Him and his silly government want to rip out our fantastic gas central heating and give us all a stupid heat pump and he doesn’t know if they are any good? In Scotland the SNP are threatening to not let you sell your house unless you install a heat pump at huge expense……We are actually on Agenda 2030 now, which is why you will see all of these changes like no petrol or diesel cars and other green initiatives all given the date of 2030, which all emanates from the UN and filters its way all the way down to the numbskulls in local government
Very interesting article by Dr Harris, however, there are a number of errors that indicate that the paper has not been reviewed.
For example, referencing world population he states that “According to the UN, this is expected to increase to 11–15 million people by the end of this century”, should be billions, and “Neanderthal man had become extinct in Europe by c.1200 B.C”, more like 40,000 BC, and some of the citations do not link to the appropriate article.
This is a pity as it undermines confidence in the quality of the other information presented.
11 to 15 million may be correct if the globalist de-population measures run out of control.
Sounds like Ellis and Palmer
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674987116300305
co2 bottoms around 180 ppm in coldest times. Grasslands/tundra die off. Winds whip up dust which lands on ice sheets, raising albedo to help melt them during next Milankovitch warm period. CO2 rises with a bit of a lag until it runs out of puff around 280 ppm. Natural variation.
Whilst we all love a bit of Vitamin D. The look of utter forlorn despair on the faces of the BBC weather forecasters is a joy. They are desperate to frighten us with red maps and an uncontrollable nature is laughing at them. It’s a look that reminds me of Dimblebys face when we voted for Brexit. Delicious
I just discovered ‘Milankovitch cycles’ is the new trigger term for the ‘fact’ checkers.
Another brilliant article, Chris. It’s well worth taking the time to read through the whole paper published by Dr Harris. No great surprise to note he received zero funding for it, and is himself now retired. He’s got nothing to lose by telling the truth.
I would like to know what “carbon dioxide traps heat” means and how it is achieved. It is utter drivel. Heat cannot be trapped because it is defined as thermal energy transferring from one location to another. Thermal energy could be trapped, and a thermos flask is an example of the best we can do, but it should be obvious that the thermal energy that is trapped cannot cause any heating elsewhere. Trapped energy in the natural world, particularly the atmosphere and oceans is impossible. The only example in nature of trapped energy is fossil fuels and as we all know they have to be burned to release the energy. The supposed science of global warming is a creation of idiots who want to destroy civilisation.
Many news websites censor comments if you mention dissenting opinions to the ‘settled science’ idea that current climate change is anthropogenic caused.