This is quite an exciting observation on my part, but it requires work to develop, and I don't do work. With all kiddies home, they have to submit papers to pass, and there is a lot to do.
I have noticed that tide gauge trends are correlated within a given ocean basin, but the opposite between basins.
So, you put on a long filter (decade) and cross-correlate. Don't make any broad conclusions on 'rising sea levels', your warmie teacher will kill you.
Convection in the atmosphere
All warmies agree that there is convection, but that radiation heat loss dominates. You can get a lot of weather balloon data, and analyse it. If radiation dominates, then the balloon data goes one way, and if convection, then another. Don't make any mention of the carbon warming hypothesis, sure to get you killed. Just analyse data.
You can go further by looking up the data for 'clear air convection', one of the great mysteries of the world. They used to do a lot on it, then stopped.
Slightly dangerous - the freon reaction
You can accept the reaction of freon breaking down and then destroying ozone, but what is the reaction rate? You can do a lot on this and just mention that work needs to be done on the reaction rate in real-life conditions. No grand conclusions, like nusa is an idiot.
There is a paper that says the jet stream and 'polar vortex' don't have the energy to move weather around. Follow their procedure and do a big thing on atmospheric tropical 'rivers'. This is very trendy.
Find out how they process the ocean current maps, and do the same. Look for historical patterns.
Digital elevation maps
These are fun. Reprocess yourself with different 'lighting' and elevation amplification. Do it on earthquake zones. Repeat my Hamilton, Ontario results.
ps. epidemiology - play with the exponentials, of infection rate. Look at past epidemics.
finite differences - use the Impact finite diff program. Repeat my earthquake shaking results.