Wednesday, March 24, 2010

A Perfectly Transparent Global Warming Lie

A quick check of the news this morning found the following headline from the Indian Express:
"New Moore no more: rising sea claims island in Bay of Bengal"

And this one from the Christian Science Monitor:
"Global warming as peacemaker? Disputed island disappears under rising sea."

And even the Associated Press picked it up:

"Disputed isle in Bay of Bengal disappears into sea"

And, of course, the BBC covered it:
"Disputed Bay of Bengal island 'vanishes' say scientists"

Google news shows no less than 232 402 news articles related to this disappearing island. And pretty much every article repeats the following:
"What these two countries could not achieve from years of talking, has been resolved by global warming," said Professor Sugata Hazra of the School of Oceanographic Studies at Jadavpur University in Calcutta.

Anyone wishing to visit now, he observed, would have to think of travelling by submarine.

Professor Hazra said his studies revealed that sea levels in this part of the Bay of Bengal have risen much faster over the past decade than they had done in the previous 15 years.

And he predicts that in the coming decade other islands in the Sundarbans delta region will follow New Moore, or South Talpatti, beneath the waves.

This article, the allegations, and the press coverage on this story is remarkable. It is remarkable for a number of reasons.

Firstly.... the central "fact" of the article is amazingly and transparently false.

The "island" did not disappear due to rising sea levels. And one does not need to be a scientist to show global warming and sea level rise had nothing to do with it's disappearance.

This island was 3.5 km long and 3 km wide, and was located 2 km from the mouth of the Hariabhanga river which is part of the massive river delta system in Bangladesh, bordering on India. The island "appeared" in 1974. It is a sediment island. A big sand bar.

In the original article we read this:
The New Moore island was first noticed in 1974 in satellite images but experts claimed the island was more than 50 years old. The island surface was only two metres above the sea level.

Hazra said the island was clearly visible in satellite images until 1987 after which it started diminishing in size. And now there is no trace of the island, he said.

Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that sand bars and sediment islands are continually appearing and growing and then diminishing in size and disappearing in the massive river deltas of the world. Just like coastlines will erode in some places and grow in other places. These are the natural cycles of our planet's coastlines and deltas. Changes in water flows, sediments in the flows and oceans currents are all part of the cycles of coastlines and river deltas.

Conspicuously absent from any of these articles is any reference whatsoever to any amounts of sea levels rise at that particular location. The Professor claims that "sea levels in this part of the Bay of Bengal have risen much faster over the past decade than they had done in the previous 15 years" which may be factually correct but is statistically and scientifically suspect at best. Especially in the light of the massive fraud uncovered by the Climategate incident and numerous other scandals involving the IPCC and it's "science".

It is reported that the island/sand bar was one to two meters high. So we are expected to suspend reality and expected to believe that the ocean in that one spot rose one to two meters without rising more than a few millimeters anywhere else in the world. That is plainly absurd.

Secondly, the reports are remarkable for the sheer gall of this scientist to publicly proclaim such transparent lie. Honestly, Professor Sugata Hazra, must actually think that we are stupid enough to just take his word that alleged, but not demonstrated, sea level rise was responsible for making this sand bar disappear. It is remarkable that a scientist would vocalize such an absurd and transparent lie for all the world to see. In one fell swoop, this "scientist" has completely and publicly forsaken any semblance of credibility in any field of science. Of course, Professor Hazra depends on global warming funding for a good chunk his income. And he has a history of global warming catastrophe proclamations. The guy is not so much a scientist as he is an activist.

Thirdly, these reports are remarkable for the simple fact that no less than, so far, 232 news organizations and assorted other outlets, have actually picked up the story and published it. Apparently none of of these outlets took the time to do even a basic critical assessment. Either they ignored the obvious absurdity of it, or they couldn't be bothered to critically read the item. Either way, this demonstrates the kind of information that these media outlets blindly propagates to the masses.

This sad episode clearly shows the absolute dearth of real science that warmists have to prove their theory. Without real science, they have to use this kind of blatantly false nonsense to promote their agenda. But they persist nonetheless. Shamelessly they persist.


  1. So, no evidence of a lie at all?

    2010 - 1987 = 23 years, x 3mm a year sea level rise = 69 millimetres. A bit under three inches, plenty enough to remove a silt island.

    I guess the lie was your stating that the sea had only risen a few millimetres in all that time. ;)

  2. A sixty nine millimeter rise in sea level submerges a (reported) "rock island" that is reported to be a thousand to two thousand millimeters high above the water level. Impossible.

    Sea levels have been rising for hundreds of years, even before the age of industry and SUV's. Just like the temperatures have been naturally rising since the last ice age, 10 to 15 thousand years ago. Even if the sea levels rose that measly sixty nine millimeters, it isn't from man made global warming.

    And you do agree that it is a silt island and not a permanent (rock) island. So you must recognize that the river and delta currents formed the silt island and most likely removed the silt island. That is what happens to silt islands. Natural cycles.