Same old tired names, same old tired games.
didn't bother to read any of it other than the names did you?
I did not just read the article you posted but had a quick look through the linked article.
As for Nils Morner, his work is subject to a huge amount of criticism. His criticism of the satellites makes no real sense. It amounts to tilting a graph to make it fit his world view. Studies like GRACE have shown the ice loss from Greenland while there has been a lot of work looking at the mining of aquifers that have also been adding to sea level rise.
As for looking at tide gauges alone.....
http://naturescapebroward.com/NaturalRe ... 024826.pdf
Multi-century sea-level records and climate models
indicate an acceleration of sea-level rise, but no 20th
century acceleration has previously been detected. A
reconstruction of global sea level using tide-gauge data
from 1950 to 2000 indicates a larger rate of rise after 1993
and other periods of rapid sea-level rise but no significant
acceleration over this period. Here, we extend the
reconstruction of global mean sea level back to 1870 and
find a sea-level rise from January 1870 to December 2004
of 195 mm, a 20th century rate of sea-level rise of 1.7 ±
0.3 mm yr 1 and a significant acceleration of sea-level rise
of 0.013 ± 0.006 mm yr 2. This acceleration is an important
confirmation of climate change simulations which show an
acceleration not previously observed. If this acceleration
remained constant then the 1990 to 2100 rise would range
from 280 to 340 mm, consistent with projections in the
IPCC TAR. Citation: Church, J. A., and N. J. White (2006), A
20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 33, L01602, doi:10.1029/2005GL024826.
500 odd sites. Perhaps it is wrong, but it is very well supported in the literature and with multiple independent lines of evidence that sea level rise is greater than 1mm per year, that the general mainstream view is acceptable and that by increasing the longwave radiation that is returned to the surface by the atmosphere, this will increase the surface warming and there will be more ice melting.
You want to defend that lot, fine by me. I am not averse to calling out the cranks on the global warming side.
For Morner to be right either a global conspiracy of scientists from various different agencies are colluding to fabricate data, while on the ground other scientists are fabricating tide gauges and the like.
Or a long line of unlikely mistakes on various satellite systems just happens to be the same mistakes as various readings form the surface. For example JASON-1 has two different means of calculating its altitude, GPS and surface laser altimeter.
People will jump on GPS and claim it only offers accuracy of a few meters. This is true for a single reading over minutes. But over years it can accumulate a huge number of readings and use the same algorithms make incredibly accurate readings. To be fair as the satellite moves its altitude will vary as the surface of the earth changes shape and the gravity is not consistent but they have a long time and hundreds of millions of readings to take.
So the claim is that different methodologies on different satellites over a decade and a half have coincidently brought the same error that a whole other set of methods and methodological errors have created.
Either that or Morner is a crank. I leave the reader to their opinions on the matter.