Skip to main content

HUH? There is no scientific consensus on sea levels? Comments

It's common logic that the melting of the Arctic icecaps is all the fault of developed nations that insist on air conditioning and gas-powered vehicles, right? That's what a lot of people in the media are saying. In all actuality. However, a group of scientists from the united Kingdom, the Netherlands and Germany say there is NO scientific consensus behind this theory. SAY WHAT? Continue Reading

11 - 20 of 29 Comments

  1. J. Bob
    1 year ago

    Well said Peter Anderson

    It would apear the followers of SkepticScience(?) are out in force. The site, along with RealClimate(?) is noted dumping articles which are not in line with their belief's. Seems they dislike, having a real opposing view.

    Unlike Andy Revkin's site which allows a more open discussion.
    Right asteroid minor?

    Rather then repeating the ground plowed by Peter, here are some more facts to consider.
    The only long term direct temperature in existance is the Central England data. The rest such as ice core, fossils, tree rings are proxies, which requires subjective analysis. This graph shows a gradual, & fairly consistant rise since the early 1600's. Long before CO2 became a "problem".

    Using sea levels, is a tricky thing, since it also involves geological factors ( uplift, & conditions under the sea which affects volume) & no long term available data. Hoever here is a report summarizing sea level from the early 1900's, showing a constant increase, with no acceleration.

    As far as consensus, here is a interesting take:

  2. Peter Anderson
    1 year ago

    @Mike Litt and Victor Lindsey and Valerie Russell and Melody Polson ... CO2 is not pollution, and certainly is not 'carbon' whilst CO2 is not observed was warming the planet...temperature is not following CO2 levels, there is acknowledged to be no warming now for 15 years also. There is no valid science to outline how CO2 can do as you claim, hence the effort to 'rejig' the numbers in search of the supposed effect.

    @Catherine Carroll and Ian Francisco and Melody Polson and Andrew and Bert Newton and Richard Shipease... The effort to note that of 100 'scientists' opinions 97 agreed on a point is rather silly, whilst there remains no actual Science produced by their 'collective' opinions to be observed.

    @Asteroid Miner ... You should try a wider search perhaps, the long term rise is still been 1mm to 3mm per year over centuries (since ~1700).

    @Lobo make nonsense claims. Sea level rise is showing no unnatural alterations to the gradual and long term rise displayed for centuries.

    @eddie too ... 'global warmism' is a political platform, it claims to be 'science based' but remains a thing of political process. To it 'consensus' and regulation (i.e. 'peer' review) are all that matters.

    @Joseph J. Snyder IV ... There aren't observations to support your opinion. The warming was pre-existent and little different post 1850 whilst clearly CO2 is not either responsible or 'carbon'. There is now serious doubt about the actual role of CO2, its only directly observable effect is to 'green' the planet which will lead to greater food production. We are entering the age of Gas with 1000's of billions of cubic meters available world wide (more most certainly will be found also).

    @Richard Shipease ... "Yet within the scientific community, there's overwhelming consensus that man-made global warming is happening" is still without observational foundation. That whilst consensus is being presented as an alternative to observation and it is not.

    @WeatherHead ... You seem to think that the planet must react immediately to change in Solar behaviour whilst scientists do not. There have been three observable, notated alterations to Solar activity, around 1800, 1900 and 2000 and on those three occasions alteration to the longer term, persistent warming trend did occur whilst that trend has not been observed at less than +0.5C. There is been no warming for 15 years, this is now generally accepted and this FACT makes a nonsense of your claims regardless of the links you attempt to place. Your claims of polar ice melting are also not really relevant, northern ice is highly variable whilst the Antarctic is reported as growing. There is no unnatural display in plots of polar ice showing any change in natural variation, there is no unnatural process at play regardless of your semi-hysterical display unnatural process is observed. For convenience (

  3. Jeff Green
    1 year ago

    I don't understand why this is written to begin with. Why the out and out denial of sea level rise? The pope confirms global warming, puts photovoltaic panels on the Vatican and then there is this denial of a very well measured phenomena.

    Energy enters our atmosphere from the sun and then converts all to infrared energy for its exit into space eventually. CO2 helps to hold back that infrared giving us the 10,000 year Holocene along with the earth's orbit. We change the co2 level, we change the temperature on earth. Well studied and well documented. I don't know if this is just an antiscience stance or not. To support denial like this, I can't imagine why this is in the interest of the Catholic Religion to do so.

  4. Baloo789
    1 year ago

    Burning dirty energy leads to carbon pollution, which warms the planet. This is a reality scientists have understood for decades.

  5. Mike Litt
    1 year ago

    Burning dirty energy leads to carbon pollution, which warms the planet. This is a reality scientists have understood for decades.

  6. WeatherHead
    1 year ago

    This article:
    "This was even before new studies came out reflecting the fact that global warming has been basically on hold for the last decade and more"
    All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years. Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase"
    T.C. Peterson, "State of the Climate in 2008," Special Supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, v. 90, no. 8, August 2009, pp. S17-S18.
    If all of the top 10 warmest years have been in the last 12, how is global warming "on hold"?
    This article:
    Many other scientists assess that the ice sheets are so massive that they will take centuries to respond to likely levels of warming.
    The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.
    And yes, the units are correct, tens of cubic MILES of ice going missing every year.

  7. Victor Lindsey
    1 year ago

    Burning dirty energy leads to carbon pollution, which warms the planet. This is a reality scientists have understood for decades. How many disasters will it take to sway public opinion.

  8. Catherine Carroll
    1 year ago

    97% of the top climate scientists agree that our climate is warming, and that most of the recent warming is due to carbon pollution.

  9. Ian Francisco
    1 year ago

    Climate change is real. Just ask 97% of the top climate scientists or any national science academy in the world.

  10. Asteroid Miner
    1 year ago

    Search "sea level" at

    Get a nice graph at

    Sea level is clearly rising due to Global Warming [GW]. There were 2 events of water storage on land that put temporary dents in the curve, but they are minor. We don't understand the dynamics of ice well enough, but we know that the ice is melting off of Greenland and Antarctica. The only question is when will sea level rise get to 45 feet, not whether.

    More importantly, drought and desertification will cause a global famine in the 2050s if we don't stop GW. Drought and desertification from Global Warming have already killed half a million people. This is a crime against humanity and we must stop it.

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Saint of the Day

March 2 Saint of the Day

Bl. Charles the Good
March 2: In 1086, St. Canute, King of Denmark and father of Blessed ... Read More