On the graph of changes in air temperature, one can see that after an increase in air temperature by about 1 degree since 1997 and a decrease in air temperature in 1999, the temperature trend has changed. Trend changes were recorded immediately after El Niño in 1998. This is logical, since El Niño affects the planet's climate. But the level changes in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans after the rise and fall of the sea level during El Niño in 1998, the level change trend has continued. The trend change occurred with a delay of several years, around 2004. Graphs taken from the Internet in the public domain.
For the World Ocean, changes in level changes coincide with changes in the air temperature trend, but only in temperate latitudes of the northern and southern hemispheres. Attached charts. In the equatorial and tropical zones of the world ocean, sea level trends are similar to those in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Attached the chart. Graphs taken from the Internet in the public domain.
There is a causal relationship between changes in the angular velocity of the Earth's rotation and the shape of the geoid. We know little about these phenomena. I don't even know what is the cause and what is the effect. With an increase in the speed of rotation, the ellipsoid changes shape to a spheroid. And when the shape of a rotating body changes, its angular velocity of rotation changes. Both of these could be the cause.
It is generally believed that the shape of the geoid coincides with the shape of the ocean surface. But one can find publications stating that the planet's outer shells can have their own shape. Look at the picture from the article by A. Cherevko, A. P. Chupakhin, "Shallow water equations on a rotating attracting sphere...".
Even here there is no general understanding of the process. Graphs of changes in the world ocean level show that in both hemispheres of the Earth in latitude zones from 25 to 50 degrees, the level quickly rose by 2-3 cm and since 1999 has remained stable. At this time, the ocean level in the equatorial zone decreased by 1-1.5 cm.
This is clear. When the ellipsoid of revolution transforms into a spheroid in the subpolar latitudinal zones, the level rises.
In the southern hemisphere, the level has risen higher, but the radius of the geoid in this hemisphere is also larger. In this case, the shape of the Earth changed first, and only then did the angular velocity of rotation adjust to the new shape (to the spheroid). What's not clear? It is not clear why in the Southern Hemisphere of the Earth the process of changing the shape of the Earth began half a year earlier?
But it is not clear why after 2001, with a stable level in subpolar latitudes, an increase in the level of the ocean at the equator began. Does this mean that the volume of water in the world's oceans has increased?
First, "graphs obtained from internet in the public domain" is not a valid reference. Cite your sources! Otherwise, you're just posting garbage. Here is the link to the actual HadCRUT website and the temperature graph. You'll see that their data look rather different. https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
Dear W. Meier. You are leading the discussion in an unacceptably aggressive tone. The sea level charts that I showed are used in our monograph "Modern changes in the level of the Black Sea as the basis for the strategy of construction development of the coasts". After the scandals you know about falsifying ocean level data by making unreasonable corrections to satellite altimetry data, you should be more restrained. Now you need to take steps to ensure that your graphs can be trusted more than those given in my 2010 monograph. I attended the satellite altimetry section of the European Geoscience Union General Assembly in Nice in 2004. The main problem there was the discussion of data obtained over 12 years. What was the main question? We know that as a result of global warming, the amount of liquid water in the ocean has increased. But according to satellite measurements, ocean level changes do not show this. I don't think you're interested in continuing... I'm very informed on this matter. Distortion of satellite measurement data is an artificial obstacle in understanding the most important issues of civilizational importance. Changes in the shape of the Earth's geoid for natural reasons are more dangerous than changes in sea level and air temperature under the influence of anthropogenic factors. I think this is clear to everyone. Sincerely, Boris.
The problem is indeed quite complicated because of the numerous factors influencing the bottom of the ocean shape including the post glacial rebound. This issue was discussed over twenty years ago and we have currently several good references, please kindly consult Long et al. (2006): Post Glacial Rebound Models and Relative Sea-level Observations from East Greenland; the paper is available on the RG platform.
Hello Boris. Sorry for sounding aggressive. But I get annoyed when someone posts unscientifically (e.g., posting an image without sourcing) in a scientific forum. In terms of your assertions, citing a meeting in 2004 is rather out of date. There is a lot more data since then. We now have 30 years of satellite altimetry data (on top of historical gauge data). The trend is quite clear. As far as falsifying ocean data, your assertion is not supported. Here is a sea level website showing the long-term sea level rise: https://sealevel.colorado.edu.
Dear W. Meier. You have provided a link to the site. I copied the chart. Now a question for you. What's on the chart. Option 1. This is indeed the original ocean level measurement data using satellite altimetry in the WGS-84 geocentric geodetic system. Option 2: This is satellite altimeter ocean level measurements that the University of Colorado has altered on a whim. Sincerely, Boris.
You say "altered on a whim", but you provide no evidence and there is no credibility to that assertion. These data have been published in peer-reviewed journals. If there is any evidence that corrections were made to the data that are not scientifically valid. As I assume you know, all data needs quality control and adjustments to account for different sensors are necessary for satellite data. Raw satellite data is generally not very useful.
Dear W. Meier. You have not selected an option. Choose an option and I will continue the discussion. Is it really that difficult for you. You know the truth. Sincerely, Boris.
Neither Option 1 or Option 2. I thought I was pretty clear in my answer. I go with Option 3: It is satellite altimeter ocean level measures that the University of Colorado has processed based on a detailed understanding of the data and sensor properties as well as other relevant information (e.g., GIA) so as to create a consistent time series that can be used for scientific analysis.
Dear W. Meier. Quote: "Satellite altimeter ocean level measurements that the University of Colorado has processed from a detailed understanding of sensor data and properties, and other relevant information (eg GIA) to create consistent time series that can be used for scientific analysis." I'm sure everyone understood that you chose option 2. Now we have evening. Tomorrow I will continue the discussion, as promised. Sincerely, Boris.
Dear W. Meier. When evaluating your answer to my test, I allowed voluntarism. Please excuse me. I have given you a choice of one or two. You have been given two mutually exclusive answers. That is, I conditionally asked you to choose between black and white. Your answer was three. Science rests on the laws of logic. One of these laws is the law of the excluded middle, which is formulated as follows: two contradictory propositions cannot be false at the same time. Either the statement of a fact is true, or its negation. There is no third. It is impossible to have a discussion if the opponent breaks the laws of logic? Your answer contains additional contradictions. I will answer them separately. Sincerely, Boris.