Sea level views from SEPP (190309) too superficial to be useful, say experts

This is a critique by Professor Nils-Axel Mörner and two colleagues of a recent article discussing problems with IPCC sea level claims.

The original article by Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) starts:

Rising Seas – At Sea, or Shore? The latest Summary for Policymakers of its full Assessment Report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC, AR-5, SPM, 2014) declared that sea level rise is accelerating.

Numerous studies have come out in support of that view. As shown in the 2008 report of the Nongovernment International Panel for Climate Change (NIPCC, 2008), with the ending of the last Ice Age about 18,000 to 20,000 years ago, sea levels have risen about 400 feet (120 meters).

At first, the rise was slow, then rapid, then for the past several thousand years slowing to about 7 to 8 inches (18 to 20 cm) per century. There is some question about the variation during the Little Ice Age and the period following it called the industrial period since 1850.

AR-5 claimed a strong relationship between carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and surface temperatures with increasing emissions are causing a significant rise in surface temperatures.

The implied relationship is not found in 40 years of comprehensive satellite measurements of temperature trend estimates in atmosphere where greenhouse gases cause warming. As suggested by William Happer in 2011, a doubling of CO2 may cause a warming of one-degree C (2F), far less than the three-degrees C, or more, claimed by the IPCC.

The IPCC report predicted / projected an increase in sea level rise of 0.2 meters to 0.95 meters by 2100 (8 to 37 inches), depending on CO2 emissions. This is a jump of five times the rate of increase for several thousand years.

Since the IPCC prediction / projection, a great deal of effort has been made in discovering an acceleration in sea level rise. One of the more promising method has been using satellite measurements of sea levels.

However, these measurements have several significant issues.
. . .
Continued, with comments by N.-A. Mörner, T. Wysmuller & A. Parker – here [pdf]