@metal-brain said
Modeling isn't needed to see sea level rise
Right, but IS needed, as they DID in your link, to interpret what it means.
They used a model to make an interpretation thus they did modelling.
And that link you showed judged temperature rise NOT by the actual temperature measurements but rather by sea level measurements and they used the now proven faulty part of their model that ASSUMES sea level is an accurate measure of temperature (part of their model) and then concluded that showed the rate of temperature increase 'probably' didn't go up in the last half of that century but THEN that model was later proven false because the ACTUAL temperature measurements which I showed you in my link clearly proved that the rate of temperature increase DID go up in the last half of that century hence proving not only their conclusion wrong but part of their model they based that conclusion on was also wrong thus they inadvertently used a false premise that lead them to that false conclusion.
I already previously explained that latter part of the above (but using completely different words) to you but I guess you either cannot read or are just hoping nobody here would notice so you can pretend not to have been already proven wrong and science right.
Here is just part of what I said in that post;
"....if you look at the TEMPERATURE data, not to be confused with sea level rise, you will see that the rate of increase in warming of the oceans has itself been increasing in the last half of that same time period. Just look at the actual TEMPERATURE data here;
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature
..."
And, if you just LOOK at that ACTUAL temperature data displayed on those graphs, it is clearly that, contrary to what you and your link implied, the rate of temperature increase DID go up in the last half of that century hence proving the premise of your (and their) conclusion that CO2 doesn't cause warming, simply false.
I don't deny the sea level data and NEVER HAVE DONE. Do you deny the temperature data? If not, than, given the temparture data CLEARLY seems to show that rate of temperature increase going up, how does that temperature data NOT show that rate of temperature increase going up? If it proves the rate of temperature increase IS going up, how does that NOT prove their (and thus your) whole premise wrong?