Sea rise scare monger Jan Wright needs to be held accountable for discredited BS

post-glacial-sea-level-rise According to Radio NZ, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has told MPs New Zealanders can’t bury their heads in the sand over rising sea levels – even at the risk of driving down coastal property prices. The report was issued on 19th Feb this year. It goes on-

In 2014, Commissioner Jan Wright found that New Zealand would be hit by more frequent coastal flooding in the future as sea levels rise. Today, Dr Wright told the Local Government and Environment Select Committee that she would be releasing a follow-up report identifying infrastructure and property at high risk from rising seas.

But committee chairman Scott Simpson was worried about the impact the report could have.

Jan Wright

Jan Wright

“My concern both as a member of this committee and as a local constituent MP is that the report has significant potential to have a detrimental financial impact on property owners of coastal property,” he said.

Dr Wright replied that rising seas levels would hit coastal property owners in the pocket regardless.

“People will find themselves unable to insure their properties and I think the idea is to protect as many people from that situation as possible.

“This is not easy for anyone but sometimes we have to have these hard conversations, and the insurance industry is right onto this – they’re not going to be soft about it,” she said.

Scott Simpson is right to be worried for this report is BS and people who own seaside property should sue Jan Wright for her careless and damaging Marxist political propaganda. Here are some quotes from just one scientific source bringing us the objective truth on this politically driven scam.

Since the end of the last glacial epoch, global sea level has risen 120 meters (393 feet), about one meter per century. Most of that was the result of melting of continental ice sheets between 18,000 and 8,000 years ago. The rate of sea level rise has leveled off to about 1- to 3 millimeters per year, about the thickness of two pennies. Several recent studies show what is happening now: Larsen and Clark (2006) studied the rate of sea level rise for the past 6,000 years, based on geologic evidence and the historic record. The researchers found that there has been no acceleration of sea level rise in response to increased temperature or CO2 levels.

Holgate (2007), using data from worldwide coastal tidal gauge records, shows that the rate of sea level rise is cyclical, but decreasing over the period studied. Specifically, the mean rate of global sea level rise was “larger in the early part of the last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904-1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954-2003).”

In other words, the slow rise of 1- to 2 mm per year in global sea level is an artifact of our current interglacial period. Local sea level rise or fall depends on local geology and the cyclic weather patterns. It has nothing to do with carbon dioxide emissions.


Why isn’t someone taking legal action against these taxpayer funded myth makers and political tools of the Global Marxist cadre pushing the scam of global warming and rising sea levels? They need to be held accountable for lies that falsely devalue people’s assets.

5 thoughts on “Sea rise scare monger Jan Wright needs to be held accountable for discredited BS

  1. There needs to be a website documenting the claims from all of these people.
    A lasting memory to shame them, not that they have any shame to start with.


  2. Looks like a fairly regular cycle of rising and falling. If ‘millimetre’ becomes ‘metre’ (a factor increase of 1,000) I *might* get concerned. But only if humanity might be the cause. And the outcome then depends on whether trying to reverse the trend (by costly economic changes) is preferable to adapting to the changing environment – likely to be far less costly.
    There’s a lot of ‘ifs’. I’m not losing any sleep.


  3. So what if she’s right? We have paid an ETS for 6 years. A tax on electricity use. We were promised it would grow trees. But we weren’t told it would all go overseas to grow their trees. Despite paying this tax, we still have environmental problems. Can someone point out to these people their solutions aren’t solving anything?


Comments are closed.