Sea Level Rise Hoax Exposed: The Disappearing Islands That Refuse To Disappear

[rangerrebew]

Sea Level Rise Hoax Exposed: The Disappearing Islands That Refuse To Disappear
By P Gosselin on 4. October 2025

Germany’s Klimanachrichten here publishes an article titled “The Disappearing Islands (That Don’t Want to Disappear)” summarizes findings suggesting that the widespread assumption about low-lying islands inevitably sinking due to rising sea levels is too simplistic and detached from reality.

Earlier, the media often tried to scoff at and discredit findings from inconvenient sea level experts, like Axel Mörner:



Undeniable science: Mörner et all, 2011

But today, climate alarmist media are forced to concede things are not as dire as they once believed.

74 of 101 islands are growing


The Klimanachrichten article references a ZDF documentary by journalist Johannes Hano, which notes that locals in Tuvalu aren’t fearful of climate change. A 2018 study (Paul Kench, University of Auckland) found that 74 out of 101 of Tuvalu’s islands have remained stable or have actually grown in size, despite an approximate 15 cm rise in sea level over recent decades. This is attributed to coral-derived sediments being washed onto the islands by currents and storms, increasing their area.

https://notrickszone.com/2025/10/04/sea-level-rise-hoax-exposed-the-disappearing-islands-that-refuse-to-disappear/

[rangerrebew]

Wasn't NYC supposed to be under water now?  Would someone call Michael Moore to find out?

[Smokin Joe]

WaPo came out with a story documenting sea level rise from Boston to the Gulf of America, and along the Gulf Coast, the rise was indicated to be between six and seven inches, while in New England it was only an inch or two  (a year or two ago).

Water seeks its own level.
I can see more subsidence along the Gulf Goast where sediments underlying the surface are relatively recent and soft, versus the older igneous and metamorphic rock under the northeast. 

But I just shook my head at the whole article...

[Free Vulcan]

The more geology and tectonic knowledgeable here can educate me, but the whole 'sea level rise' claim is a two way street that can either be due to actual rising water, or sinking land masses.

Like most material substances, heating or cooling can cause expansion or contraction of that substance, so it would seem on a planetary scale the same thing would apply. Less solar energy, the Earth contracts, more and it expands.

Maybe that's bull doody because it's too simple, but if true you notice they never even try to conceive it, because everything must be steered to global warming.

[DefiantMassRINO]

Sea Level is about to rise in Boston ... it's the King Tides ... higher than "average" tides that occur due to lunar cycles.

So, this week, you might see some reporters, in the usual locations that flood during King Tides, calling out Global Climate Change.  Nope.  It's just the moon being the moon.

[Smokin Joe]

The more geology and tectonic knowledgeable here can educate me, but the whole 'sea level rise' claim is a two way street that can either be due to actual rising water, or sinking land masses.

Like most material substances, heating or cooling can cause expansion or contraction of that substance, so it would seem on a planetary scale the same thing would apply. Less solar energy, the Earth contracts, more and it expands.

Maybe that's bull doody because it's too simple, but if true you notice they never even try to conceive it, because everything must be steered to global warming.

In a way, warming has created what seems to be expansion. Think of the continents as lighter rock floating on the highly viscous Mantle. When the Laurentide Glaciation ice sheets melted off, a tremendous weight was removed from the Continents, which went into Isostatic Rebound--that is they floated higher on the mantle, like a barge would after its cargo had been removed. Sea level rose faster, because of the tremendous amount of ice that melted.
No small amount of fracturing of crystalline (deep igneous rock like granite) rock has occurred in areas that were under the ice sheet (like the Canadian Shield).

On the other hand, rocks like granite are pretty stable dimensionally, at least at temperatures we would consider survivable for life.

[Free Vulcan]

In a way, warming has created what seems to be expansion. Think of the continents as lighter rock floating on the highly viscous Mantle. When the Laurentide Glaciation ice sheets melted off, a tremendous weight was removed from the Continents, which went into Isostatic Rebound--that is they floated higher on the mantle, like a barge would after its cargo had been removed. Sea level rose faster, because of the tremendous amount of ice that melted.
No small amount of fracturing of crystalline (deep igneous rock like granite) rock has occurred in areas that were under the ice sheet (like the Canadian Shield).

On the other hand, rocks like granite are pretty stable dimensionally, at least at temperatures we would consider survivable for life.

I wonder if they've even tried to measure it. Probably not because they can sensationalize it for the agenda.

With such large land masses a contraction or expansion due to natural heating or cooling of the Earth might mean significant water rising or lowering might have big effects coastal areas but be really small in the big picture.

[Smokin Joe]

I wonder if they've even tried to measure it. Probably not because they can sensationalize it for the agenda.

With such large land masses a contraction or expansion due to natural heating or cooling of the Earth might mean significant water rising or lowering might have big effects coastal areas but be really small in the big picture.

Isostatic rebound is ongoing, and varies, depending on the thickness of the continental plate at any given location, and the amount of ice that was on it. The Central Canadian Shield, for instance had some 4 kilometers (about 2 1/2 miles thick) of ice piled on top of it. and has risen some 5,000 ft. in places (It's still rising). Areas near the edges of the continental plate have risen less, because the rock is thinner (so it 'floats' lower on the mantle) and the ice sheets were thinner there or partly supported by floating on the ocean. Lots of variables.

[Free Vulcan]

Isostatic rebound is ongoing, and varies, depending on the thickness of the continental plate at any given location, and the amount of ice that was on it. The Central Canadian Shield, for instance had some 4 kilometers (about 2 1/2 miles thick) of ice piled on top of it. and has risen some 5,000 ft. in places (It's still rising). Areas near the edges of the continental plate have risen less, because the rock is thinner (so it 'floats' lower on the mantle) and the ice sheets were thinner there or partly supported by floating on the ocean. Lots of variables.

Would natural heating and cooling of the Sun have an effect on expansion and contraction of land masses? Enough to be measured at least.

[Smokin Joe]

Would natural heating and cooling of the Sun have an effect on expansion and contraction of land masses? Enough to be measured at least.

I can't answer that one. Too many variables, including foliage, surface sediments which would shift independently of underlying rock and provide insulation, reflection from and cooling by evaporation of bodies of water, and the albedo (reflectivity) of the surface.

That said, it is likely there would be some expansion, but considering granite (for instance) would expand by a factor of 0.000043 to 0.000065 per degree celsius, it would be fairly small. A one thousand mile (5,280,000 ft.) block of granite, evenly heated one degree C would expand between 227 and 342 feet, depending on the mineral content.