the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Mean sea level and tidal change in Ireland since 1842: a case study of Cork
David T. Pugh
Edmund Bridge
Robin Edwards
Peter Hogarth
Guy Westbrook
Philip L. Woodworth
Gerard D. McCarthy
Download
- Final revised paper (published on 11 Nov 2021)
- Preprint (discussion started on 17 Jun 2021)
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on os-2021-49', Marta Marcos, 12 Jul 2021
This manuscript succeeds in providing information on long term changes on tides and mean sea levels at Cork using only a short set of data recovered from historical archives in combination with modern sea level observations. Many details are provided on the data collection and on the corrections applied to make old and new data comparable. This is the core of the paper. Once this is achieved and the remaining uncertainties are estimated, the analyses of tidal changes and mean sea level trends are straightforward. Results are consistent with other works that point at only small (and local) changes in tides over the past 200 years and with earlier estimates of mean sea level trends in the region. I think this work deserves publication and I am looking forward to seeing the comprehensive study that the authors are planning to carry out at many more sites around Ireland.
I provide below a list of questions and suggestions, followed by some typos:
- Sections 1, 2: I think it would be useful for the reader to summarise the information on stations and periods to facilitate the reading, together with Figure 1. It is easy to get lost in the text otherwise.
- Lines 134-135: how are 5-min readings converted into hourly? one value every hour has been kept and the other 5-min values disregarded, or have they been averaged?
- Page 6, 1st: if sea level is measured using a pressure gauge, then atmospheric pressure is probably also recorded. Air pressure observations are then mentioned in line 295.
- Section 4.1.1: Figure 4 shows, according to the caption, the seasonal cycle of the M2 modulation due to MA2 and MB2, but the text (line 190) refers to non-astronomical effects, which is contradictory.
- Line 216: estimation of the magnitude of the nodal modulation of M2 based on other sites. Are these listed somewhere?
- Line 233: what are these uncertainties ? according to the text after them, seems to refer to interannual variability, but is it not specified.
- Line 295: see my comment above on the air pressures…
- Lines 476-478: this seems a bit speculative since the 27 cm are an averaged value. It would make more sense to compare with closest stations (averaged or not)
Typos:
- Line 147: is this reference to figure mistaken? Maybe figure 3…
- Line 231: “we to look”
- Lines 429-430: these two sentences are repetitive
- Lines 473-475: please use the same number of digits, for consistency.
- Line 476: 40.2 cm
- Reference Dwyer is incomplete
- Reference Hogarth (2021) is already published
- Reference Horsburgh (2020) doi is missing
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-2021-49-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Gerard McCarthy, 12 Aug 2021
Response to Review by Dr Martha Marcos
Responses in italics
This manuscript succeeds in providing information on long term changes on tides and mean sea levels at Cork using only a short set of data recovered from historical archives in combination with modern sea level observations. Many details are provided on the data collection and on the corrections applied to make old and new data comparable. This is the core of the paper. Once this is achieved and the remaining uncertainties are estimated, the analyses of tidal changes and mean sea level trends are straightforward. Results are consistent with other works that point at only small (and local) changes in tides over the past 200 years and with earlier estimates of mean sea level trends in the region. I think this work deserves publication and I am looking forward to seeing the comprehensive study that the authors are planning to carry out at many more sites around Ireland.
We would like to thank Dr Marcos for the review of our manuscript and encouragement for the wider project.
I provide below a list of questions and suggestions, followed by some typos:
Sections 1, 2: I think it would be useful for the reader to summarise the information on stations and periods to facilitate the reading, together with Figure 1. It is easy to get lost in the text otherwise.
We have added some annotation to the map caption: Passage West (June-Aug 1842, June–July 2019), Roberts Cove (Jan–June 1973), Ballycotton (Oct 2010–present), Cobh (1906), Currach Club (Jun 2019–present), Ringaskiddy (Jan 2012–present). This information is repeated in Table 3.
Lines 134-135: how are 5-min readings converted into hourly? one value every hour has been kept and the other 5-min values disregarded, or have they been averaged?
We have rewritten line 135 to clarify:” We have digitised the hand-written ledgers, taking only values on the hour, which is adequate resolution for tidal work, and then made an analysis using software which can work with 19th century data.”
Page 6, 1st: if sea level is measured using a pressure gauge, then atmospheric pressure is probably also recorded. Air pressure observations are then mentioned in line 295.
Atmospheric pressure is implicity recorded as part of the pressure data (there was no explicit second measurement of air pressure). None of these air pressure variations are significant at these latitudes at tidal frequencies, they do not affect the astronomical tidal analysesSection 4.1.1: Figure 4 shows, according to the caption, the seasonal cycle of the M2 modulation due to MA2 and MB2, but the text (line 190) refers to non-astronomical effects, which is contradictory.
The reviewer comments about astronomical and non-astronomical parts of ~MA~2 and MB2 are correct and the text is muddled. We have removed “astronomic” in line 181, and “non-astronomical” in line 192.
Line 216: estimation of the magnitude of the nodal modulation of M2 based on other sites. Are these listed somewhere?
They are listed in line 205. In line 218 “…sites (Woodworth et al, 1991; Araujo 2005). We have repeated the references for clarity.Line 233: what are these uncertainties ? according to the text after them, seems to refer to interannual variability, but is it not specified.
Yes, interannual variability considered here. We have clarified with “In assessing the tidal uncertainties, any tidal value measured over a short period may differ from the longer-term average because of real variations, such as natural interannual variability, and measurement errors. To consider interannual variability, we to look at Ringaskiddy 2012-2019”.
Line 295: see my comment above on the air pressures...
Dealt with above.Lines 476-478: this seems a bit speculative since the 27 cm are an averaged value. It would make more sense to compare with closest stations (averaged or not)
Unfortunately, no analysis of Irish stations exist over the relevant time period so we believe that the Hogarth et al. number from Britain is the best to compare with.Typos:
Line 147: is this reference to figure mistaken? Maybe figure 3...
Line 231: “we to look”
Lines 429-430: these two sentences are repetitive
Lines 473-475: please use the same number of digits, for consistency. Line 476: 40.2 cm
Reference Dwyer is incomplete
Reference Hogarth (2021) is already published Reference Horsburgh (2020) doi is missing
We would like to thank Dr Marcos for these typos and reference issues, all of which have been corrected in the revised version.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-2021-49-AC1
-
RC2: 'Comment on os-2021-49', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Jul 2021
Review of ‘Mean Sea Level and Tidal Change in Ireland since 1842: A case study of Cork’
In this paper, the authors present the results from a tide-gauge data digitization effort in Cork, Ireland: data from a large field campaign in 1842 is digitized, and a levelling campaign has been undertaken to compare the historical measurements with present-day observations. The authors find a sea-level rise of about 40 cm over 177 years and a small but significant change in the amplitude and phase of the semi-diurnal tide.
I have enjoyed reading the paper, and the manuscript has taught me a lot on all the processes and uncertainties that are involved in tide-gauge data rescue efforts. I recommend publication in Ocean Sciences, and I’m convinced that the digitized records will have many use cases in the oceanic and geophysical community.
I have some (very) minor comments:
L41: The word ‘Marigraphs’, which I think refers to automatic tide gauges, might need a quick explainer.
L420ff: an alternative to estimating the range of inter-annual variability could be to exploit the coherent interannual and decadal variability around the British Isles, as shown in Hogarth et al. 2021. The surveying period might have been during a period of below-average MSL values around the British Isles, or the other way round. Not sure how large this effect is though.
L474: GIA uncertainty might be large in this region. For example, the GIA model from Caron et al.(2018) predicts a relative sea-level rise of 0.6 mm/yr for the region around Cork. This model is far from optimized for this region, as it’s not using a sophisticated local deglaciation history, but the GIA signal might be a major reason for the difference between the rate from Hogarth et al. 2021 and the number found here.
Figures 1 and 6: R. Lee, does that refer to the river Lee?
Finally, I’d encourage the authors to deposit the digitized time series and levelling information in a public repository, for example PSMSL or Zenodo.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-2021-49-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Gerard McCarthy, 02 Sep 2021
-
CC1: 'Comment on os-2021-49', J. Brian MATTHEWS, 11 Aug 2021
https://os.copernicus.org/preprints/os-2021-49/
Mean Sea Level and Tidal Change in Ireland since 1842: A case study of Cork
David T. Pugh et al. status: open (until 12 Aug 2021)
Review of ‘Mean Sea Level and Tidal Change in Ireland since 1842: A case study of Cork’
This paper aims to show century-long changes in mean sea level from tidal records inform to climate change adaptation. It is a fatally flawed attempt to combine disciplines based on solar harmonics and statistical analysis.
Precisely accurate astronomical processes should never be judged on statistics.
I suggest it be split into two papers each with two authors.
When I was Professor of Geophysics and Marine Science to get away from publish-or-perish evaluations we gave 1 point to a single author publication, half each to two authors and zero to all others.
This way we detected real innovative contributions and those that made them. Many much-lauded multi publication authors were quickly revealed for their true worth. This is especially important now that IPCC and UN committees are driven by powerful fossil interests intent on gaming consensus evaluations in their own interests with complete disregard to the factual common sense of ordinary scientists and laymen.
There are therefore two conflicting theories competing in this paper.
I suggest it be broken into two with only one or two authors; one on tidal harmonic analysis and the other on Irish Climate model verification from in situ data on time series of surface and near surface temperature salinity, pH and other bio parameters along with standard meteorological observations.
1 Solar 11-year harmonic cycles and climate change
Sea level rise, greenhouse gas concentrations, polar ice melt, global tides and many climate patterns are linked to solar cycles (IPPC report Economist 2021). Media hailed it as the last red alert for humanity. Accurate long-term sea level records tied to fixed datums using century long tidal records is vital to establishing accurate trends in sea level rise over different 11-year solar periods. Harmonic analysis not statistics is the obvious approach
Sunspot cycles are known with great accuracy and stability over millions of years. The 11-year sunspot cycle was shown over 79 years from tree rings in a German Permian fossil forest from 290m years ago (Luthardt and Rössler 2017). Indeed, the Antikythera Mechanism found in 200 BC but probably centuries or millennia older, is an astronomical clock to forecast solar and planetary times. It could forecast the colour of lunar eclipses 78 years ahead! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSh551cdIEY). This suggests ancient solar knowledge of orbits well before the last ice age. The many dials included ones for the 4-year Olympic and Corinthian Games. It must have been developed over many years for long ocean voyages long before the Harrison Clock to determine longitude.
Babylonians and residents of ancient Sippar wrote cuneiform tablets explaining conic sections, spherical geometry of 360 degrees. They used the 2x3x4x5 duodecimal system which USA and UK used in the Pounds Shillings and Pence currency and feet and inches measurements. The pound was a weight and currency. A standard set of measures in the British Museum are a set of smooth egg shaped weights ground smooth from metallic meteorites. The craftsmanship on this Bureau of Standard set would challenge modern metal smiths and are clear evidence of a highly skilled metalworking and engineering.
I discussed this with Irving Finkel, British Museum Cuneiform archaeologist and historian. We support the idea that a very advanced civilization must have existed long before the biblical flood. Graham Hancock has meticulously researched this concept in his books (Hancock, 1995, 2019
Climate and Sea level from Pre-industrial pre Ice ages
The 1513 Ptolemaeus Argentinae map shows Antarctica attached to South America and a large Island off Western Ireland called Brazil. This is highly significant for Ireland since it was above water for 130,000 years before the 12,800 year old flood ended the last ice age. This is of significance to the Irish authors with a substantial island just off shore for at least 130,000 years.
This puts into perspective the significance the 244m (800ft) Ptolemy Tower (55.02°N, 7.43 W) Grianan of Aileach hill fort. It is shown on the 140AD map of Greek Astronomer and geographer Ptolemy of Alexandria. It may data as far back of 1700BC.
To an oceanographer it is highly significant since it gives commanding views down Lough Swilly and Lough Foyle. The walls of the restored fort 4.5m (15ft thick) and 5m (16ft thick). It has three terraces linked by steps and two long passages within. It would be ideal for spotting invaders or traders from the North.
The last ice age melting was from the north. Alaska never had an ice age when Ireland and Isle of Man had at least a km of ice. It is clear that civilisation re-established from the North including Shetland, Hebrides, Ireland, Isle of Man. It is entirely appropriate that Irish researchers should investigate just how important the paleo climate and people were in re-establishing civilisation after the Ice Age.
Sea levels averaged 50m below present. Carbon dioxide varied between 180 and 280 ppm. 25,000 years ago large continents, Beringia, Australasia, Sundaland, were highly productive trapped CO2 in tropical forests and boreal plains and shallow seas. This reduced CO2 to 180ppm. Somehow our ancestors survived very rapid sea level rise from -114m 25.6kyBC to +14.5m in 3.2kyBC. It is therefore important to establish secure datums to correct for rebound after the land ice melted. The authors are on the right track in doing this.
Chris Rapley in his 2017 lecture to Irish IPA reported that communicating climate impact of exponential induced greenhouse gas global warming processes is hard to get across to people who do not want to believe (Rapley 2017). He noted that troposphere/stratosphere greenhouse gas layer become opaque in thermal infrared in 2010.
Chris, now retired, was struggling to get across the dangers of sea level rise to the Thames Barrier while he was Chair of the supervisory committee. The Thames Barrier is operated by the world’s first operational tide and storm surge computer program developed by Norman Heaps and his team at the now defunct Proudman University of Liverpool Bidston Tidal Institute. It is a remarkable model that coordinates protection of the Thames, Netherlands Deltaworks and Rhine, and German Elbe and Hamburg. It was here that Tidal Harmonic Analysis was developed by Arthur Doodson. The Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level included global earth and ocean tidal analysis was developed by Geoff Lennon. PSMSL moved to Flinders University with Geoff where he trained students who developed global tidal range maps at the Australian Meteorological Bureau (Matthews and Matthews 2014). The return of PSML to remnants of Proudman coastal modeling Laboratory would suggest this is the ideal place to do comprehensive harmonic analysis trends over several multiples and fractions of solar 11 year periods.
The PSMSL IPCC data in the last analysis only goes to 2013. It shows 1.7±0.2 mm/yr 110 years, 3.2±0.4 mm/year in 17 years (www.climatechange2013.org).
Given the proven doubling in halving time intervals shown in greenhouse gas insulating blankets and relatively steady solar insulation we would expect similar results from tide gauge records. 1.7±0.2 mm/yr 110 years, 3.4±0.2 mm/yr 55 years, 6.8±0.2 mm/yr 22 years, 13.6±0.4 mm/yr 11 years, and 27.2±0.4 mm/yr 6 years.
This latter 2.7cm or about 1 inch per year is consistent with the meltwater observations at the Galapagos that show a fall of -1.1°C per year from 2015-2020.
I know what is involved in harmonic analysis from experience. For fifty years 1967-2017, we produced a tidal calendar used to determine fish and ecosystem response to tidal cycles (Matthews, J. B., S. R. Browning, and D. A. Thompson, 1967). The analysis should be an easy and very valuable contribution
Please could a pair from PSMSL see if this is in fact the case. We regularly see seals on garden walls and kayaks in the high street during Spring Tides on Isle of Man. Rising tides float all boats. David Pugh's splendid book (online Soton) on Tides and Storm Surges played a major part in determining wind drift at 3% of wind speed and 3-4 degrees to the right in the Ebbesmeyer-Ingraham fully verified model of 11 surface gyres. They clearly have the necessary skills. The final figure in the present paper hints at a steep rise towards the end of the record. The suggested analysis will determing the truth.
What are the accurately datum- and atmospheric-corrected values for UK ports especially over the last 6 years?
Sensitivity Theory and Evaporation
Meteorological climate models ignore ocean surface dynamics and still use the completely discredited Lindzen Sensitivity Theory. Climate Sensitivity claims the CO2 Greenhouse Gas doubling CO2 blankets produces negligible global warming. Climate models still use sensitivity theory to forecast potential global warming (Matthews 2017).
Sensitivity is now widely condemned but still does not recognise Earth can only loose heat as a black body radiator with an effective constant temperature of -21°C (Matthews 2017). Greenhouse gas blankets reached 395 parts per thousand when they became opaque as Chris Rapley reported. The astonishingly rapid destruction of a rich kelp forest to an unproductive lawn in NW Australia is a sign of just how rapid this change can be off our own kelp forests (Matthews 2017). These are already much changed since I dived on them in the 1950s. The cooking of mussels during spring tides near San Francisco appear to have gone un-noticed. Warm subsurface salty water from the south stressed the mussels then those exposed at low tide were cooked in strong sunlight. If this were in Lough Foyle or in Menai Strait it would be a major disaster. Californians prefer pizzas and hamburgers to mussels. Our kelp forests, mussel and oyster beds at under serious threat from rising ocean surface temperatures. This needs urgent confirmation.
Since the Paris Accord despite agreement to reduce fossil emissions the have gone up every year. As we stated when you have too many blankets and overheat in bed it is not sufficient to stop adding blankets. You have to take them off (Matthews 2017). That means reversal of all fossil emission immediatly. This will not happen. so mitigation and preparation is the only way.
Ironically Richard Lindzen in May 2017, retired MIT Meteorology Prof and renowned climate denier gave a lecture to the Irish Science Forum in Dublin in a private meeting (https://www.desmog.uk/2017/05/05/new-climate-science-denial-group-launches-ireland). It was the same year as Rapley’s dire warning. Richard has now retired but always threaten anyone who denied his assertians with libel lawsuits. Scientists always wonder if they are right and generally back off under such threats.
Carbon dioxide, he told the audience, is a plant fertilizer, and the Earth was lush 600 million years ago when atmospheric CO2 levels were far higher than today. He described any climate change that has occurred to date as “miniscule”, calling it all for the good.
The Climate pair, I suggest would conduct a simple test of actual evaporation from a standard meteorological evaporation pan. I cannot find any experimental work that shows it does not depend on relative humidity and wind speed but simply on Stephan’s law - proportional to the fourth power of the absolute temperature.
This is what we found in the Central Pacific after repeated testing and correlation runs. If it were dependent on windspeed and relative humidity, evaporation would be higher at midnight off Labrador in strong winds than at the Equator under calm conditions! We need simple experimental data from Met Office Evaporation Pans to determine Stephan's Law evaporation from well-designed experiment. My PhD supervisor Sir John Mason was Director of the Met Office. He would have been appalled that the Met Office has been sold to a Swiss commercial company. Moreover commercial publisher have taken our papers and demand fees to read his and my papers that we paid to publish for free for perpetuity. So much for intellectual property rrights. I use ResearchGate for free discussions but even this is now taken over by Google..
This evasporation experiment would be of enormous help in killing the totally wrong concept of the Ocean Conveyer and Gulf Stream cutoff that modellers so hope is true.
We attempted to present our startling experimental results in Ocean Sciences and Ocean Science Discussions earlier. But the editors were unreceptive to experimental results that conflicted with standard unverified models. (Matthews and Matthews, 2012, 2013). A reviewer later wrote privately to apologise but the damage was done to an early day scientist. He has recovered and playing an important role with IPCC.
We hope the current Editors can deal with experimental verification of model theories in our highly endangered ecosystem collapse.
We hope too the authors will take this constructive criticism as a boost to their careers and a real contribution to understanding and mitigating the existential threat to humanity.
References
Economist 2021, https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2021/08/09/the-ipcc-delivers-its-starkest-warning-about-the-worlds-climate
Hancock, Graham, 1995, Fingerprints of the Gods, Crown, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wJw1DcI2e4.
Hancock, Graham, 2019, America Before, St Martin’s Press, ISBN 978-1-250-15374
Luthardt, L., and Ronny Rössler, R., 2017, Fossil forest reveals sunspot activity in the early Permian, Geology, Geology, G38669.1, doi: 10:1130/G38669.1.
Matthews J B., 1968, The Tides of Puerto Peñasco, Gulf of California , J Arizona Acad. Sci., 5(2), (Oct 1968), 131-4, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024617
Matthews, J. B., S. R. Browning, and D. A. Thompson, 1967, Tide Calendar for Puerto Peñasco, Sonora Mexico, University of Arizona Press, 14pp
Matthews, J Brian, and Matthews, J. B. Robin, 2014, Physics of Climate Change: Harmonic and exponential processes from in situ ocean timeseries observations show rapid asymmetric warming, Journal Of Advances In Physics, 6(2), 1135-1171, https://cirworld.com/index.php/jap/article/view/1798 , https://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1415.1843, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275347673.
Matthews, J. B. R. and Matthews, J. B., 2012, Comparing historical and modern methods of Sea Surface Temperature measurement – Part 2: Field comparison in the Central Tropical Pacific, Ocean Sci. Discuss., 9, 2975-3019, https://dx.doi.org/10.5194/osd-9-2975-2012, http://www.ocean-sci-discuss.net/11/47/2014/osd-11-47-2014-print.pdf
Matthews, J. B. R., and Matthews, J. B., 2013, Comparing historical and modern methods of Sea Surface Temperature measurement – Part 1: Review of methods, field comparisons and dataset adjustments, Ocean Sci. 9, 683-694, http://www.ocean-sci.net/9/683/2013/, doi:10.5194/os-9-683-2013.
Matthews, J. B. R., 2013, Comparing historical and modern methods of Sea Surface Temperature measurement – Part 1: Review of methods, field comparisons and dataset adjustments, Ocean Sci. 9, 683-694, http://www.ocean-sci.net/9/683/2013/, doi:10.5194/os-9-683-2013.
Matthews, J. B., 2017, Fossil carbon dioxide drove Planet Ocean temperatures and ecosystem collapse sharply upwards post-2010 after cycling naturally for millennia, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313376975, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16471.88489.
Rapley, Chris, 2017, Communicating Climate Change - Why So Difficult? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veguKfSxYUE.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-2021-49-CC1 -
AC3: 'Reply on CC1', Gerard McCarthy, 02 Sep 2021
We would like to thank Professor Matthews for his comments on the paper and would like to take the opportunity to respond to the scientific critiques contained therein.
There are therefore two conflicting theories competing in this paper.
We disagree that there are two competing theories in the paper. The paper presents a consistent analysis of tides and mean sea level in Cork. There is no model verification in the paper and Ph etc. are not the subject of this paper.
Solar 11-year harmonic cycles and climate change
The influence of the 11 year harmonic cycle is an interesting query. Our co-author Philip Woodworth has previously published on this topic in 1985. Firstly, we note that the amplitude that was found in this study of 10–15 mm is much smaller than the 40 cm of mean sea level rise that we have observed. Secondly, 1842 was 4 years post peak solar cycle and 2019 was 5 years post peak solar cycle so our interval occurs at approx. the same point in the solar cycle and therefore little effect would be expected (maybe 20% of 10–15 mm).
Woodworth, P.L. 1985. A worldwide search for the 11-yr solar cycle in mean sea-level records. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 80, 743-755.
Climate and Sea level from Pre-industrial pre Ice ages
We have made note of large changes in sea level in the past in the paper but this timescale of change is not pertinent to the present study.
Sensitivity Theory and Evaporation
This study does not address climate sensitivity.
Regards, Gerard McCarthy (on behalf of all co-authors)
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-2021-49-AC3
-
AC3: 'Reply on CC1', Gerard McCarthy, 02 Sep 2021