Survival Update

The world is yours

Faked Sea Level Data: Another Nail In The Global Warming Coffin

Global warming alarmists have been caught red-handed tampering with raw scientific sea level data to push their crazy fake theory that humans using fossil fuels are upsetting our planet’s ancient and little-understood climate cycles and driving us all to premature extinction.

Information collected from three Indian Ocean gauges at Aden, Karachi, and Mumbai showed very gentle rises, falls, and periods of little change over the past 140 years. But after pseudo-scientists at the global databank Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) tweaked the data, they “proved” a sharp, dramatic increase in the tidal records that simply isn’t there.

Since it was established in 1933, PSMSL has been responsible for the collection, publication, analysis, and interpretation of sea level data from the global network of tide gauges. The organization is based in Liverpool at the National Oceanography Center (NOC).

PSMSL receives monthly and annual mean values of sea level from almost 200 national authorities, distributed around the world, responsible for sea-level monitoring in each country or region. The organization says that the monthly and annual means (mathematical averages) have to be reduced to a common “datum” to construct time series of sea level measurements at each station. Data from about two-thirds of the international stations has been reduced to form the “Revised Local Reference” or RLR.

For reasons unknown, these  tide level gatekeepers maintain that their averaged data is better than the raw “metric” data before they tweak it:

“For scientific purposes, the RLR dataset is normally superior to the ‘METRIC,’ although the latter, which contains the total PSMSL data holdings, can also be analyzed, bearing in mind the above datum continuity considerations.”

Australian scientists Dr. Albert Parker and Dr. Clifford Ollier did just that and called Shenanigans on the PSMSL Indian Ocean findings in a 2017 paper titled “Is the Sea Level Stable at Aden, Yemen?” published in Earth Systems and Environment.

The research duo from the Land Down Under attributed sea-level oscillations to local factors (such as subsidence or uplift) as well as global factors (such as mass addition and thermal expansion of the oceans). After analyzing the available metric (raw) data, the Aussies found:

“Analysis of the tide gauge data of Aden, Yemen shows that without arbitrary alignment of data, Aden exhibits very stable sea-level conditions like those in Mumbai, India and Karachi, Pakistan, without any significant sea level trend.”

The two Aussies concluded:

“The sea levels have been stable since the start of the twentieth century in Aden similar to Karachi and Mumbai.”

Kenneth Richard reviewed the Australians’ analysis and agreed that the truth about rapidly-rising sea levels in Asia had been distorted:

“The metric (raw) data showed misaligned results…What are more dangerous are the corrections recently introduced to the past to magnify the sea-level trend or the acceleration…[T]he adjustments introduced by PSMSL to make the RLR are arbitrary in Aden, Karachi, and Mumbai.”

Richard pointed out that “the alignments made to produce the RLR are very likely wrong because they are inconsistent with the individual measurement components, none of which shows any sign of increasing sea levels, and because the adjustments are always in the direction to produce a large rise in sea level.”

In statistics, this is called skewing the data and it is a practice much frowned upon by serious scientists. Fudging (the less formal term for skewing) the numbers is a ploy often used to “prove” a foregone conclusion, often for political reasons.

Here’s what the PSMSL climate alarmists did, according to Richard:

“The data adjusters take misaligned and incomplete sea level data from tide gauges that show no sea level rise (or even a falling trend). Then, they subjectively and arbitrarily cobble them together or realign them.”

The adjusted data lowered the earlier misaligned rates and increased the more recent measurements in each examined case. According to Richard, this bad science is patently misleading and the opposite of what is true:

“By doing so, they concoct a new linearly-rising trend.”

Mike Adams the Health Ranger has been instrumental in exposing the alarmingly bad science being used to support the United Nations’ totalitarian “sustainability goals” as outlined in its evolution of bullying climate-control agendas.

For example, Adams revealed that recent research has shown that “human activity can account for no more than a .01°C rise in global temperatures, meaning that all the human activity targeted by radical climate change alarmists — combustion engines, airplane flights, diesel tractors — has virtually no measurable impact on the temperature of the planet.”

Ethan Huff stated in an article that was featured in Adams’ Natural News that the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has know since 1958 “that changes in the solar orbit of the earth, along with alterations to the earth’s axial tilt, are both responsible for what climate scientists today have dubbed as ‘warming’ (or ‘cooling,’ depending on their agenda).”

To understand why American space scientists are supporting the global climate alarmists’ dirty tricks one needs only read these 1966 documents that unveil “a network of government agencies in perpetual and secret collaboration and the military to Modify the Global climate.”

The set of documents proves that, for more than 50 years, an inter­agency culture of secrecy has made controversial issues such as covert aerosol geoengineering (chemtrails) and other climate-related topic taboo while applying the curiously derogatory label of “conspiracy theorist” to anyone who dares tell the truth:

Global warming is unproven and therefore has no place in formulating international policies and practices. Because the insidious UN lie is becoming increasingly unsustainable for sensible countries to support, this writer joins them and other clear thinkers in telling the climate alarmists what we think of their bone-headed, dictatorial ideas: