Demonstrably false information, serious science errors, and continuing misinformation.
Yes, we are talking about another Seattle Times ClimateLab article. ClimateLab is sponsored journalism, whereby advocacy groups pay for "journalism", which coincidentally supports the group's positions.
The story is about flooding in the South Park neighborhood of Seattle, a community built on the floodplain of the Duwamish River. An area that has flooded regularly for millennia.
The Seattle Times makes the unfounded claim that human-caused global warming is a major driver of the flooding....suggesting that the major flood of December 17, 2022, demonstrates that this neighborhood is "on the front lines of climate change".
The article states that South Park has to "brace for climate change" and by mid-century (2050) that the water level should rise by another foot.
As I will prove below, the Seattle Times claims are clearly contradicted by clear scientific evidence.
Go back to the 1890s, and the South Park area was a mud flat the frequently flooded (see map from 1894 below.
As one would expect of the flood plain of the Duwammish, this area has flooded many times during the past 130 years-- hardly requiring global warming, which only became significant in the 1970s and 1980s.
The recent Times article highlighted the major South Park flood of December 27, 2022. This event brought flooding to the South Park area as water levels rose to 15 feet MLLW, the mean lower low water level, which represents the average of the lowest low water for each day, calculated over a 19-year period.
The water was very high because of several factors occurring simultaneously: a very large astronomical King Tide associated with the moon and sun being aligned during a favorable time of the year, very low and unusual atmospherc pressure (which caused water levels to rise), and heavy prior rain, that revved up the Dumaamish River.
None of these were associated with global warming.
The Seattle Times seems to think that the key element of the local sea level rise is a warming world.
Don't get me wrong. Global warming HAS caused water levels to rise very slowly, but so slowly that its effects are essentially in the noise level for big events like the flood in question..
Let me prove this to you. Below is the sea level trend at Seattle starting in 1900. Note that sea level has been going up for a long time--- including earlier periods (before 1970) when human-caused warming would be very small.
On average, Seattle's sea level has risen about 2.09 mm (.08 inches) per year. So over the past fifty years, a period where rising CO2 levels and associated warming became significant, the sea level in Seattle rose about 4 inches.
That is TWO PERCENT. I repeat 2%. So why in the world is the Seattle Times ClimateLab pointing its finger at global warming? Such claims are contrary to data.
I think you know why.
But it is worse than that. Considering the sea level was rising before human CO2 emissions were significant, how do we know that some of the recent rise was not natural? In fact, that seems more likely than not.
And to add to the climate change hype, the Seattle Times suggests that Seattle's sea level will rise another foot by 2050....25 years from now. This is silly.
Since there appears to be no acceleration of the sea level rise in Seattle during he past decades, let's extrapolate the historical rate for 25 years. You get 2 inches. Still very small.
Go crazy, double that amount. Still very small compared to astronomical and meteorological factors that are independent of global warming.
The Seattle Times climate for sponsored journalism is going through a sea-level change.
ReplyDeleteSponsored journalism helps sustain the newspaper, or its finances would be under water.
DeleteSponsored journalism is not journalism, it's fraud, and when people believe it, it can do a lot of serious damage. The sooner the ST goes out of business the better for everyone.
Delete"OK, now go stand next to that bench over there. That's it. Put your left hand on the bench, good, now gaze out over the water and put on the most concerned-looking expression you can give us. Good, that's it. See, we want our readers to see a concerned person and get them as scared as we can. You know, we're trying to sell our fake, bird-liner papers here."
ReplyDeleteCliff.... Still selling the "Kool Aid" denial beverage.... Your science is very much in line with the current administration's admission of not being aware that the US has an actual "Hurricane season".... Can you justify such a statement, or do you agree with it?
ReplyDeleteYour name calling is not a good look. And when you bring in "denial" and the the current administration, you are clearly more interested in calling names and politicizing the issue, rather than determining the truth. So you believe that if the Trump administration is uneducated it is ok for the Seattle Times to be the same? Makes no sense.
DeleteBut I do believe that the Trump administration is willfully uneducated.
DeleteData is data. Ron has no data so he descends to name calling. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, so Trump happens to be mostly right on climate and energy.
DeleteI can't read the article so I don't know what the folks at the Climate Lab think I or anyone else should do about the issue of flooding in South Park. Perhaps any place that was damaged in the 2022 flood should be abandoned and returned to nature. This would prevent the anguish of (now gone) residents while animals would prosper. Win-Win.
ReplyDelete[This from the perspective of an elevation 2,240 feet.]
I agree with premise. However, I hate the thought of all people in America living in few city/urban environments. I don't have flood threat where I live, I do have fire threat. I accept that risk. Evacuated and was only spot left with sagebrush from cold springs fire. Planners failed people or people failed themselves. Waterfront property is risky as water levels change, so for those that are buying waterfront should know, especially now that banks require flood insurance in areas in flood plain. They have no one to blame but themselves. Same with people that buy in wildland urban or wildland fire prone areas, we pay higher taxes and insurance for same risk reason. People need to be aware, not fed a line of BS that this is because of global warming, they've always been at risk, they've just failed to see it. It's called being responsible for ones self. I shouldn't suffer for a choice you didn't understand, care to understand, or ignored.
DeleteI appreciate you calling out the pseudoscience that dominates climate lab! The Seattle Times permanently banned me from posting due to climate misinformation. I had peer reviewed citations for all of my claims but they refused to accept those.
ReplyDeleteDid the strong south wind on that day also contribute to the flooding?
ReplyDeletePer Lavin and others (2019) the area is in a location of subsidence - that is the land surface in this area is going down at a rate estimated at 4 inches +/- 2 inches/century. Hence, relative sea-level rise at the location you are discussing will be greater.
ReplyDeleteI do not know the deatils of flood control measures at South Park. A typical approach would be to have dikes and drain pipes designed for a 100-year flood event. If the land is subsiding, that will result in water levels during storm surge events being above the designed flood control infrastucture. Add local relative sea leve rise and the few inch difference can result in an increase frequency of flooding.
Storm surge tide levels in Seattle are on the order of 2 to 2.5 feet. If the infrastucture was designed for a 2.5-foot storm surge, realtive sea level rise of a 2 to 4 inches can make a big difference and the flooding may be worse if the infrastucture did not account for large storm surge events (a common problem in a number of communities).
The area around the Duwamish tide flats was filled and raised during the second Denny Regrade in the 1920’s. Before that, it was lower. So flooding in that area in the 1890’s doesn't tell us much about today’s sea levels. The tide flats were filled in the 1920's because they flooded a lot. Today, with rising sea levels, they may need even more filling. That's a climate change impact and it isn't trivial.
ReplyDeleteAlso, "King tide" and "rising sea levels" are not alternative, mutually exclusive explanations for flooding problems. They are in fact synergistic with each other.
however you analyze it, sea level rise is a very small contributor to recent flooding events. They would have happened anyway...cliff
Delete