Today’s sea-level rise is BELOW normal

Today’s sea-level rise is BELOW normal

This talk of unprecedented rising sea levels is complete nonsense.

Today’s sea-level rise is BELOW normal

By Robert Felix

During the last ice age most of Canada, along with parts of Europe and Asia, were buried beneath one to two miles of ice. At the same time, sea levels stood 350 to 400 feet lower than today.

Sea levels were so low that the entire continental shelf, at least in eastern North America, was above water. Many states on the eastern seaboard were twice as big as today. New Jersey’s shoreline, for example, was 60 to 100 miles east of its present location.

Same in the west.

The land between Alaska and Asia rose out of the sea like a bridge (or rather, the sea dropped away from the land), and the Bering Strait, which today is only 18 stories deep at its deepest point, was above water. Sarah Palin could have walked to Siberia. (The word bridge is misleading. The land connection between Alaska and Siberia was almost as wide as Alaska itself.)

Why were sea levels so low? Because that’s where the water came from to create those huge ice sheets. Literally millions of cubic miles of water had turned to ice.

Then, about 10,000 years ago, the ice began to melt and sea levels began to rise.

Here’s a sea-level graph from Nobel Laureate Ivar Giaever.


If you run the numbers* you’ll find that sea levels have been rising an average of .42 to .48 inches (just under half-an-inch) per year for the past 10,000 years. Rising sea levels have been the norm, in other words, for 10,000 years.

And that brings us to today. What are sea levels doing right now?

According to NASA, sea levels are rising 3.24 mm (about 1/8th of an inch) per year. That’s about the thickness of two nickels stacked on top of each other. Not the diameter, the thickness, which means that sea levels are rising slower than normal.

And that doesn’t even take into account that sea levels declined in both 2010 and 2011. Yes, no matter how assiduously the media tries to ignore it, sea levels actually declined in both of those years.

Where is the water going?

It’s being locked up on land as snow and ice. That’s how ice ages begin.

If we keep getting record snowfall as we have during the past few years, sea levels will begin falling and won’t begin rising again until the end of the next ice age.

This talk of unprecedented rising sea levels and catastrophic global warming is complete nonsense. It is just simply not true.

It’s not rocket science. Try it yourself. Multiply 400 by 12 and you get 4,800. That’s how many inches in 400 feet. Now divide 4,800 by 10,000, and you get .48, just under ½ inch. That’s how much sea levels have been rising per year for the past 10,000 years. Today, sea levels are rising only 1/8 of an inch per year.

And we’re supposed to throw billions if not trillions of dollars at it?______________________________________________________________
Robert Felix is author of Not by Fire but by Ice, in which he maintains that the next ice age could begin any day.

55 thoughts on “Today’s sea-level rise is BELOW normal

    • You will just have to keep buy ing the new foreshore to keep place with the fall in sea level. With a 1 meter drop in level over 60 years that should ammount to around 800 meters of extra garden.

  1. Well Greenland and Antarctica *are* gaining mass, so it is no wonder that the sea level rise is slowing down.

    If it gets negative that will make the Warmists lose their shits. I wonder what convolution they will forge to say that “sea level is going down because the planet is warming” with a straight face.

    • Easy – they’ve already stated that warming makes more snow and ice.

      Increased evaporation don’tcha know.

      Easy to shift that BS to decreasing sea levels !

      They’ve got it covered all ways !

      If climate alarm theory were a sale able product it would make a motza.

      It is everything to every true believer !

    • Hi Lucius,

      You heard it from me first but I wouldn’t be surprised if they say that the sea levels are falling because the intense warming is expanding the metal in the earths crust and so the surface area of the planet is increasing exponentially thus giving an apparent sea level fall as the water re-distributes itself.

      Just you wait for a similar level of BS.

          • Of what I would ask, that climate change has been happening for the last 3.85 billion years?
            That Carl Sagan’s comments regarding the run away Green House effect on Venus which in fact may be the results of large ELE impact on Venus which has resulted in a Magma resurfacing of the entire planet.
            With the Green Terrorists then using the GH theory to force a complete UN redistribution of wealth and resources from western people who have worked for it, to the dictators and criminals of the third world who wont work, and more likely, store the wealth in Swiss bank accounts to the detriment of the people of the countries they are supposed to be working for.
            Or, in your case, an exercise in trollism.

    • I think there was an “r” missing in Shits.
      Although the later spelling seems appropriate as they are fraudulent shits.

  2. All true, but the warmists may have a point if the tidal gauge chart from 1870 to 2000 is accurate, showing a rise of only about 198 mm in 130 years, or an average annual rise of only 1.52 mm, though there is no apparent acceleration in recent years on that (non-logarithmic) chart. From the satellite data chart, it appears that the rise since 2000 has been from about 17 mm on that chart to 66.91, or about 50 mm in 15 years, or 3.33 mm a year on average, which would indicate a recent acceleration since 2000, more than doubling (or 3.24 mm from 1993).

    Presumably, most of the sea level rise since the last ice age occurred in the rapid initial melting of the massive ice sheets, so the 10,000 year average of about .45 inches (11.43 mm) may be skewed by the initial melt.

    Too bad there is almost no overlap between the ground and satellite data charts, or a longer coverage period for the satellite data, to see if the charts are congruent where they overlap, and to see if the rate of increase has in fact suddenly doubled since 1993 or 2000.

    One has to wonder if the old tidal gauge data have been “adjusted” like temperature data, to paint the desired picture, especially in light of the steady growth of land ice in Antarctica every year and recent growth of Greenland glaciers, which together make up something like 98% of all land ice.

    That water has to come from somewhere, although expansion of the ocean water due to warming obviously would skew the numbers, to an unknown extent. Perhaps the ocean warming is accounting for all, or MORE than 100% of the sea level rise recently? Also, it would be easy for NASA to cherry-pick the tidal gauge data from some place that is experiencing glacial rebound, with little apparent rise in sea level relative to the land. (In Scandinavia, I believe sea level is actually “falling” due to rebound.)

  3. Thanks for that analysis Robert. It also makes sense that the rate of sea level rise would be far less at the end of an interglacial period than at the beginning. Therefore, for a rate of one-eighth inch per year of sea level rise for now, is what we should be expecting for this interglacial is coming to end – and maybe sooner than we think.


    How Ironic that this story appears at the same time as CNN releases a story about sea rise over the next 85 years!
    The News man claims the MET office in Great Britton predicts with current record heating and rising CO2 levels the seas will rise 1 meter (3ft.) in the next 85 years. He also uses the dramatic pictures of major city’s going under with water rise!

    • The UK Met office models don’t accept that the Sun is now in a solar minimum condition. This neatly avoids having to accept that av. tempretures will drop over 1C over the next 45 years, that sea level will also drop by over 1 Meter in the same time scale.
      In other words the UK Met office expected 1 meter rise in sea level will take it back to well under where it is now.
      Given that the difference between being in a warm period and in a glaciation period is about -2.5 C drop from current tempetures, the expected drop is cutting it very fine.
      What I hadnt realised untill now is that SC25 will have a deep AMP event as well as SC24, with even lower output than SC24.
      The following two cycles SC26 and SC27 are forcast to have the same solar output values as SC20, untill 2056 when a more normal pair of Solar cycles is expected, similar to SC21 and SC22.
      On this basis I am begining to disagree with Geof Sharp, this solar minimun will be deeper than Dalton, but not as deep as Maunder in climate terms.

  5. Pitifully simple arithmetic “gives the lie” to AGW squawking about sea-level inundations.

    The sea level obviously rose 300 feet (or, say, 100 meters) in the past 10K years (the very approximate time since the end of the last Ice Age). This means any *steady* rate of increase would have been ONE METER PER CENTURY, equal to more than half a meter in my own lifetime.

    Since nothing even close to that has happened, ever since the simplest record-keeping of shoreline levels began, there is no current sea level rise. It stopped “rising” long ago. SIMPLE ARITHMETIC. Did they never memorize the multiplication tables? Or count by tens, or by hundreds?

  6. Not sure if this has been presented here or not – you get mixed up after running down and reading a myriad of articles over time – but it is worth a look anyway.

    I find it hilarious that when someone qualified categorically states something inconvenient to climate alarm all the unqualified liars such as SkepticalScience emerge to defend a ridiculous notion that we should be alarmed by sea level rise of 3.2 mm per year or about a foot over a century.

    There simply isn’t enough energy available under even their most apocalyptic scenarios to melt sufficient land based ice to cause the alarmist claimed significant sea level rises in the remaining 85 years of this century.

    Obviously it can happen but there is no way known it can happen in the immediate future.

    If mankind cannot deal with a few feet of sea level rise in hundreds of years then we all deserve to drown.

  7. On the subject of sea level rise: I have been wanting to make my own plots from the non-adjusted satellite sea level data. CSV formats of the data is available at the link at the end of this post.

    However, I am not sure what units the numbers are in. 1/1000 of a millimeter rise over the previous reading? If anyone here knows, please reply.

    My interest is in it because tide gauges are showing about 1.8 to 2 mm rise (when you take out the effects of land rising / sinking). The satellite raw data is supposed to be much lower than the reported rate of 3.3mm per year.

  8. Quote:
    And that doesn’t even take into account that sea levels declined in both 2010 and 2011. Yes, no matter how assiduously the media tries to ignore it, sea levels actually declined in both of those years.
    Sea levels did drop in those years but not because of Snow and Ice, but because of meridional jet streams pushing tropical rain fall into, for example the arid centre of Australia. Similar rains are now pushing into North Africa well below the Atlas Mountain range which ends up in the artesian structures in the south of Libya.
    Over the last few years Snow and Ice has started to make a difference, but you have to take into account the rain fall into temperate arid area with no outlet to the sea. For example the levels of the Aral and Caspian area starting to rise again.

  9. I read “The battle against global warming: an absurd,costly and pointless crusade” found at

    On page 73 of the paper is a small chapter which presents an interesting argument about how buoyancy impacts perceived sea level rise. I had never considered this or come across it before.

    But the scientific explanation for buoyancy has been known since Archimedes discovered the principle 2300+ years ago.

    Anyway, the gist of it is that the crust of the Earth is essentially “floating” on a very hot viscous “fluid”. The laws of physics apply to this “fluid”, including buoyancy.

    Ocean basins consist of large volumes of water which contain less mass than an equivalent land volume – 1000 kg/cubic metre versus 1600+ kg/ cubic metre.

    Further continents have significant mass above average sea levels in the form of mountainous areas etc.

    The natural tendency for the heavier mass to sink while the lighter mass rises to balance buoyancy is a scientific certainty. The viscous nature of the “fluid” slows this process over geologic time.

    But the net effect is an attempt to establish an equilibrium position and this results in a FALSE perception of sea level rise.

    Note the paper in no way seeks to deny the obvious sea level rises due to ice mass changes – formation or melting.

    It simply says that tectonic movements will always give rise to some underlying perceived sea level changes which can be explained by something which has absolutely nothing to do with man or global warming !

    Whilst these changes will be experienced at the edge of continents the Oceanic islands will not be sinking as they are rising with the ocean basin – The Maldives may be safe after all – bummer for them if they’re expecting largesse from Paris.

    This may explain how these islands survive despite all the alarm – as if th world couldn’t evacuate the inhabitants IF it becomes necessary anyway.

    • Many oceanic islands (and I believe this includes the maldives) are sinking and have been for hundreds of thousands of years. This is demonstrated by the fact that coral reefs go down thousands of feet around the islands when corals only grow close to the surface.

      I also believe that the warmist model of sea level rise includes their “fact” that all the ocean basins are growing in size to they have to multiply the actual rise by a factor of ten to account for the supposedly bigger basins. Don’t quote me on this though…

  10. How much of sea level increase is made by sediments? Aren’t rivers just taking soil from dry land and storing it on seabed? If you take 1km3 of soil and throw to sea, sea will rise of 1km3 equivalent of water.
    So some sea rising is natural, because it is just apparent rising caused by average lowering of dry land and rising of sea bed. It is even possible that amount of water in oceans is decreasing and amount of ice increasing, but we still see apparent sea rise because of sediments.

  11. NO way this must be wrong 98% of the brain dead agree that the sea level is rising and we will be heading up the closest mountain

  12. Seems to me that lowering sea levels means that more H2O is being transformed into ice. But I’m sure the AGW crowd will counter that a warming atmosphere is absorbing more water vapor.

  13. Local BC city government, which I work for, is developing a billion dollar plan based on 4 times the observed sea level rise. The report justifying this actually had a graph of sea level rise vs atmospheric CO2 concentrations. I almost puked.

  14. Could the “warm blob” have some relevance ? According to Wikipedia the “warm blob” was 1000 miles long and 1000 miles wide and 300 feet deep in June of 2014. wiki/The_Blob_%28Pacific_Ocean%29
    That is 62,563,311,360,000,000 cubic feet of water.
    According to the same Wikipedia article the temperature was ~2.5 degrees C above normal.
    Ocean water temperature varies, but 65 degrees F or 18.33 degrees C is generally about the middle of the temperature range for the California coast.
    According to this nice chart at Simetric in the UK
    the density of pure water at the warmer temperature of the blob (20.8) is .998035 and at normal temperature (18.3) is .998539 for a difference of .000504 or .05 % . Applied to the large volume of the blob we would then have 31,578,044,448,379 cubic feet or just over 214 CUBIC MILES of extra water just from the thermal expansion. Hmmmmmmmm

    • @Arlo:

      Check your temps. Water off California is quite cold. We’re talking 45 F kind of cold. Yes, I’ve swum in it alot. Been bright red and shivering for hours. Deep chiiled in a wet suit with purpling lips.

      65 F it isn’t. ..

  15. Sea level rising in the Pacific!

    I have the data which proves it is happening!!

    When Australian Labor Party leaders visit places like Kiribati sea levels immediately rise in direct proportion to the climate change $$$$ on offer in Australian taxpayer climate scam funds.

    Reduce the $$$$ incentives and sea rise levels will immediately decrease!

  16. Iv’e been to the Oregon beach (Pacific ocean) every year since I was a kid, I’m 48 years old now, and I haven’t noticed any difference to the ocean level.

  17. do you take into account that over the eons the land lifted giving the appearance that the sea levels were lower in the past.

      • Actually that is an interesting point, and does contribute to a significant part of the “rise in sea level” When the ice flow was on the continent it was on the center, which depressed the center of the continent causing it to sink. The edges relative to the center actually rose. It is similar to holding a piece of paper between two fingers (about 5 inches apart and have someone drop a penny in the center, you will see the center drop but the edges rise.

        • To complete the thought. Now that the ice is gone, the center is rising and the sides are lowering as the stress is relieved from the continent.

  18. “This talk of unprecedented rising sea levels is complete nonsense” because we cannot accurately measure it. Satellites are hailed as the best but they are 100,000,000mm above the Earth and are trying to read a moving surface below them to within one mm.
    The Sun and Moon act upon the waters to give tides and they also flex the crust but we don’t really know by how much.
    The matter is complicated by isostatic rebound of the Canadian shield country and if it is rising, other regions have to sink because the Earth is like a fluid filled ball of constant volume. We have no idea what is going on with the deep abysal plains. Are they rising or sinking ?
    I’ve only been around for half a century but London is still there despite it gradually settling into the clay it is built upon. If thermal expansion of the oceans really is happening we’ll have to adapt cos there’s nothing we can do about it.
    By the year 3000 we will probably be in another glacial phase and the British Isles will be part of Europe again and the UK nation will have ceased to exist long before that. Digital memoirs will laugh at the silly little people of long ago who wet them selves over a few millimetres rise in sea-level back in the reign of Queen Elizabeth 2nd.

      When warming of the Southern Ocean occurred 135,000 years ago, the Earth was experiencing a sharper rise in Northern Hemisphere solar radiation than at the end of the last ice age, Marino said. This caused the dramatic collapse of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheet and climate change across the planet. When the Earth emerged from the last ice age, however, rapid northern ice collapse and climate change occurred at different times, which produced less warming in Antarctica and prevented sea levels from rising as much as the previous time.

      Perhaps we have finally eliminated humans from the equation?

  19. It ain’t a good scare story if it doesn’t use the word “unprecedented”. In fact when I see “unprecedented” I generally stop reading, because I know the following will be B/S.

  20. meanwhile councils have resumed land on 99yr leases on rivers and beaches in Aus, and are making any construction in those area massively burdened with restrictions on whats built and enforced standards to cope with the supposed rising sea levels
    so when it all falls over, the govt will have control to resell land to OS investors for ghastly hi rise apartments or richmans mansions.
    with all the massive profit in rates and land taxes they benefit from then as well.
    agnda 21 is now agenda 2050 and its savage.

  21. A long time ago, in the ’70’s when we thought there was another ice age coming, I took an astronomy class in college. The Professor said that about 40 -50 times per year the earth is “hit” with a 50 – 100 ton ice ball from space. They just melt away with the friction against the atmosphere, and become water vapor that eventually precipitates out in rain, but he said it was estimated that it contributed to 2mm of sea level rise over each 100 year period. That’s about 66 feet each million years. I’ve never seen any other information on water coming from space, or its contribution to sea level. Realizing that Saturn’s rings are mostly ice, it’s not that far fetched.

  22. Lots of global submarine volcanic magma would ofcourse increase ocean levels somewhat.
    And what about the enormous landrise in the ocean near Indonesia, hundreds of meters rise! That must have had produced a substantial sealevel rise I would think.
    I’ve not heard of the oceanbottom having lowered substantially at other locations.
    On the other hand, warmer oceanwater produces more watervapour in the atmosphere, so more atmospheric held watercontent than before. irrespective of increased precipitation over landareas.
    And ofcourse any amount of decreased axial rotation, would seriously cause coastal flooding in areas away from the Equatorial Bulge, but I suppose axial rotational speed has always been steady for thousands of years, or does it vary slightly from time to time ?

    • Don’t forget global erosion. There is a 9,000 foot deep fissure where Baja California is splitting off of North America. It is FULL of the Grand Canyon (debris).

      Repeat for things like the giant mountain range that was the east coast mountain range and for all the other eroded mountains. Much of the Gulf Of Mexico is full of The Midwest. ..

    When warming of the Southern Ocean occurred 135,000 years ago, the Earth was experiencing a sharper rise in Northern Hemisphere solar radiation than at the end of the last ice age, Marino said. This caused the dramatic collapse of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheet and climate change across the planet. When the Earth emerged from the last ice age, however, rapid northern ice collapse and climate change occurred at different times, which produced less warming in Antarctica and prevented sea levels from rising as much as the previous time.

    Perhaps we have eliminated humans from the equation finally?

  24. The place to check the level of the Atlantic Ocean over hundreds of years is ST MARK’S SQUARE IN VENICE !
    That is many centuries old.
    Obviously the Atlantic spills into the Mediterranean Sea and Adriatic, so if the Atlantic was rising, so would sea level in Venice, Italy.
    So what are the sea level readings at St Mark’s Square?

  25. Of course ,there are other ancient harbour walls all around Europe.

    There is another factor. Since the melting of the heavy ice sheets of the last Ice Age, some of the Earth’s surface is still slowly RISING, whilst other parts are naturally sinking.

    After all, the Earth’s surface is merely a CRUST FLOATING ON MOLTEN MAGMA , is it not?

  26. with all of the discussion about rising / falling sea levels, I am reminded of an old episode of Gilligan’s Island. there was a stick out in the lagoon. the Professor noticed it and used it to take sightings (like a tide gauge. then he noticed , over a period of several days, that the water was coming up higher on the stick. turned out that Gilligan was using the stick to anchor a fish line. point to this story ….. when using a tide gauge, make sure something isn’t causing it to move.

  27. And we’re supposed to throw billions if not trillions of dollars at it?

    That is like King Canute of England ordering the tide not to rise.
    Somethings like climate change can not be stopped no matter what is said or done.

  28. Robert,

    You might want to take all this data, polish it up a bit and run it as a separate Article.

    There is too much data for a comment and it really blows one of the biggest scare tactics of the Warmists out of the water.

    First TEN PEER-REVIEWED PAPERS PROVING SEA LEVEL IS NOT RISING (This has a more detailed synopsis of each study.)

    And then a second more recent comment specifically aimed at that graph you are displaying. Please note that graph is using ADJUSTED VALUES! Also note the red cross to the far right and above the pack that changes the sea level from falling to rising. This comment explains why that is incorrectly placed. Once it is repositioned correctly the sea level is FALLING not rising long term.

    Last there is other historic evidence given here:
    The area where Roman sea ports are inland is tectonically stable according to NASA.
    List of Roman Sea Ports found inland
    (Has great pictures and maps.)

    For the areas occupied by the Romans it was pretty close to zero or actually sinking! “..the pivot point is rather abrupt; Scotland is still rising due to the rebound effect which is correspondingly sinking England 2 millimetres into the North Sea each year.”

    A NASA model of current surface elevation change due to post-glacial rebound and the reloading of sea basins with water. Canada, Northern Europe, and Antarctica are all currently rebounding at a rate of a few millimetres per year. More water in the oceans as a result of ice sheet melting is slowly depressing sea basins. Satellites are used to observe differences over time.

  29. If there were going to be dramatic anthropogenic sea level rise, it would have happened already. Countries with the highest populations have now industrialized, there’s no one left to contribute. Why would there suddenly be 100 feet of water when more than a century has added a few millimeters?

Comments are closed.