2011-05-31 09:04:23The Great Sea-Level Humbug (Morner)
oslo

borchinfolab@gmail...
90.149.33.182

SPPI has provided a reprint (Friday, 27 May 2011) of Nils Axel Mörners paper:

The Great Sea-Level Humbug - There Is No Alarming Sea Level Rise!
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/the_great_sealevel_humbug.html

This guy never gives up it seems.

How can these people be so ####### stupid!?!?

2011-05-31 09:41:45Morner
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.31.47

SkS never has directly addressed Morner's claims - would be good to have a definitive rebuttal so when he rears his ugly head, people can point to our page.

2011-05-31 14:57:55
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.97.203

Well, we did do that one where Morner and Monckton just rotated the sea level rise figure in the monthly SPPI report.  I think it was Monckton Myth #16.  But it didn't go into a lot of detail.

2011-05-31 18:08:16
Dikran Marsupial
Gavin Cawley
gcc@cmp.uea.ac...
88.108.197.100

Havin had a quick look through the article, I see he is still peddling the same old nonsense.  IIRC I posted some research into morners papers on the Monckton thread that debunk a lot of it (actually the comments papers follwing Morners article did it for me).  Essentially the modifications to the satelite data were all published in the litterature and Morner didn't cite any of them.  One wonders how it made it through peer review.

2011-05-31 18:18:59
Dikran Marsupial
Gavin Cawley
gcc@cmp.uea.ac...
88.108.197.100

 

 

The useful material is here

 

Now that the MEDIAS figure that he uses for evidence that the true satelite data shows no trend is available on-line, he is dead in the water, as the original has a non-zero trend line on it and a trend given in the caption (IIRC)!

2011-05-31 19:03:37
oslo

borchinfolab@gmail...
90.149.33.182

My understanding is that he don't understand for some reason that satellites need calibration for drift. As he dosn't like what he have been told, he privately desides he can ignore drift corrections and uses raw satellite data instead.

The tide gauge mesurements he references is local data, definitely not global - so poor coverage leads to sceewed results (I believe stockholm or there about is the place with most land rising after ice age in scandinavia).

Earlier papers by Morner have been discussed in Church and White, 2007 (IIRC).