2011-11-11 16:10:13Hiding the Incline in Sea Level
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.101.55

Basic rebuttal to 'sea level fell in 2011', using another of those fun animated GIFs.

Hiding the Incline in Sea Level

2011-11-11 16:55:05
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.199.23

Man, I love those animated GIFs. Why didn't we think of it sooner?

2011-11-12 03:27:16
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

They sure are a simple and effective tool.

2011-11-12 16:00:14
Sphaerica

Bob@Lacatena...
76.28.5.93

Looks good to me.

2011-11-12 16:08:30
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

Love the Cherry-flavored water bit.

Minor nit: change

Figure 2: change in land-based global water storage in the period March 2010 to March 2011, as observed by GRACE gravity satellites. Image from NASA JPL.

to

Figure 2: Change in land-based global water storage in the period March 2010 to March 2011, as observed by GRACE gravity satellites. Image from NASA JPL.

 

(capital C)

2011-11-13 21:10:46Word smith and animation - look like the cyborg has added two extra au routines to his toolkit
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
143.238.130.246
Thumbs up from me. What I like about this post is what you don't include... no link to Goddard! You've learnt from my mistakes :-)
2011-11-14 12:27:29
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.101.55

Hah thanks John :-)  No reason to give Goddard the pageviews!

2011-11-14 14:00:08
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12
Darn tootin. This post is a good model for how we should always aim to approach debunking. Target the myth, not the Misinformer (a bit like hate the sin, love the sinner). Sometimes we do have to directly engage but we get maximum mileage from our content if we address the myth more generally, and it also makes it easier to strike that level, dispassionate tone that makes us the reasonable one.
2011-11-15 02:01:05
Kevin C

cowtan@ysbl.york.ac...
144.32.72.165

Is the GRACE mass change available as anything other than a false-colour image? I can't really deduce anyhting about the total mass of terrestrial water storage from it (although being colour-blind doesn't help).

The thing we really need to complete the picture is a graph of terrestrial water storage over the last couple of years.

Looks like this is the data. It's in cm H2O: http://grace.jpl.nasa.gov/data/gldas/

2011-11-15 04:13:16
Andy S

skucea@telus...
66.183.185.188

Kevin, the comments to Rob P's original post has some discusion on that GRACE map and the total mass quantities involved. As far as I know, the total extra mass of water on land in the GRACE March 2010 to March 2011 map  has not been properly quantified. My hunch is that it is quite a bit smaller than what is needed. (I did a very rough calculation for Australia and that accounted for just 1mm of global sea level and it appears from eyeballing that on other continents the wet areas and dry areas appear to be in rough balance. Obviously, that's not a satisfactory critique.)