- Joined
- Dec 7, 2013
- Messages
- 2,007
- Reaction score
- 1,428
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I like the graph, all data is good.
I have real questions if the satellites with their 30 mm accuracy, and questionable reference capability, can accurately record a change of few 1/10th of a mm a year?
The errors accumulate!
Let's take for example a 1 square kilometer section of ocean of know latitude and longitude.
The satellite takes a snapshot every 10 days, but the tides are not on 10 day cycles, so the phase of the tide will be different
every time the satellite passes.
For a given fixed tide station the daily tidal prediction is usually off by 10 to 20 cm, because so many factors affect the tide.
If the error for a fixed station is so great, it is unlikely our predictions for the open ocean would be better.
Data is found here:
They have seven columns of data that say:
If removal of the annual and semi-annual signals constitutes an allowance forHDR 6 GMSL (Global Isostatic Adjustment (GIA) not applied) variation (mm) with respect to TOPEX collinear mean reference
HDR 7 standard deviation of GMSL (GIA not applied) variation estimate (mm)
HDR 8 smoothed (60-day Gaussian type filter) GMSL (GIA not applied) variation (mm)
HDR 9 GMSL (Global Isostatic Adjustment (GIA) applied) variation (mm) with respect to TOPEX collinear mean reference
HDR 10 standard deviation of GMSL (GIA applied) variation estimate (mm)
HDR 11 smoothed (60-day Gaussian type filter) GMSL (GIA applied) variation (mm)
HDR 12 smoothed (60-day Gaussian type filter) GMSL (GIA applied) variation (mm); annual and semi-annual signal removed
the tide it doesn't say so. It is what it is.
Colorado University’s Sea Level Research Group hasn't updated their web page
in over a year now. If they ever do publish an update, it will be interesting to see
how much they massage the data to claim acceleration which I'm betting they will do.
Last edited: