Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Media Ignore Study Finding Ocean Warming 15 Times Faster Than In Past 10,000 Years
TV Media Neglect To Cover Evidence Explaining The "Pause" They Amplified
Warming ocean surface temperatures brought on by climate change prompt coral bleaching events and alter ocean chemistry via Duke University
A new study found that over the last 60 years the intermediate depths of the Pacific Ocean have warmed 15 times faster than in the past 10,000 years, providing more evidence that the "slowdown" in atmospheric temperature warming over the last 15 years may simply be due to the oceans storing more heat. However, this study was neglected by the same TV outlets who hyped the "slowdown" or "pause," sometimes without including this crucial context.
The study, published in Science on November 1, shows the enormous potential for oceans to act a "storehouse for heat and energy," providing support for the notion that a recent speed bump in atmospheric temperature rise in the past 15 years can be explained by excess heat from global warming being absorbed by the oceans. Study coauthor and Columbia University climate scientist Braddock Linsley explained, "We're experimenting by putting all this heat in the ocean without quite knowing how it's going to come back out and affect climate."
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/11/05/after-overhyping-global-warming-pause-media-ign/196747
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
it's the Earth System that is being effected, which includes the oceans... the oceans also interact with the atmosphere. Eventually the oceans will dump energy back into the atmosphere and we'll have more atmospheric heating . . .
Maybe, but it's also possible that the oceans will simply convey the additional heat to the earth's core!
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Ninety percent of the radiant energy earth stores is in the ocean
There are multiple oceanic oscilla tions ,or turnovers if you will, that periodically have positive phases when they release radiant energy (heat) into the atmosphere and negative phases when they absorb radiant energy from the atmosphere. The positive phases of both the PDO and AMO happened to coincide with a solar grand maximum in the latter 20th century, hence most of the modest heating of that period was from this coincidence. A smaller proportion, probably less than 25 percent was due to a grab bag of anthro causation including elevated co2 which can be partially attributed to man, but it's larger proportion is from oceanic and terrestrial outgassing due to elevated temps. CAGW is a crock of shet. We are now entering a pronounced solar minimum coinciding with negative oceanic cycles and this should produce readily testable results including modest reduction of both atmospheric and oceanic temps and a gradual slight reduction in atmospheric CO2.
|
|
juneclimber
Sport climber
june lake, ca
|
|
rick sumner
Nov 5, 2013 - 03:42pm PT
Ninety percent of the radiant energy earth stores is in the ocean
Good point.
The heat capacity of the ocean is 1000 times that of the atmosphere.
The ocean controls the "temperature" of the atmosphere, not the other way around.
The ocean is heated by the sun.
Funny how atmospheric temperatures stop rising so they start talking about extreme weather, LOL. Now they are focusing on OHC. Only how are the oceans supposed to be heating, when neither the atmosphere nor ocean surface are heating?? Talk about a fairy tale. Even if it were possible, it would falsify CAGW.
Not to mention, recent studies of actual DATA, not models, show OHC also reversing after 2002. Note, the error bars.
http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/papers/KD_InPress_final.pdf
This paper cites many other papers, and the they take their data straight from Willis and ARGO.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Douglass and Knox, 2012
A recent paper by Douglass and Knox (hereafter DK12) states that the global flux imbalance between 2002 and 2008 was approximately -0.03 ± 0.06 W/m2, from which they concluded the CO2 forcing feedback is negative. However, DK12 only consider the ocean heat content (OHC) increase from 0 to 700 meters, neglecting the OHC increase at greater depths. Here we include OHC data to a depth of 2,000 meters and demonstrate this data explains the majority of the discrepancies between DK12 and previous works, and that the current global flux imbalance is consistent with continued anthropogenic climate change.
|
|
command error
Trad climber
Colorado
|
|
translated that means exactly no climate change.
The climate has not warmed in 15 years” despite rising atmospheric CO2
concentrations. The temperature hockey stick is not just broken
it never existed.
|
|
command error
Trad climber
Colorado
|
|
So we don't forget.
Sept 2013 had 65% more Arctic sea ice area, a record high sea ice area
around Antarctica, a record low tornado season, record late start start
hurricane season, 15 years of no global warming, a cooling tropical Pacific
and a “strongly cooling Southern Ocean”.
Pro GW climate science has been proved embarrassingly wrong.
The study that blames a cooling tropical Pacific for the stall in global
warming is hitting the climate science community like a ELE meteor.
And now Climate Scientists Hopelessly Stumped By Present Ocean Cooling,
Still Insist They Are Certain About The Future!
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Is the data wrong, Chief?
Sucks so much for you when peer-reviewed scientists explain the science so well, you have to put up gibberish.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
That graph would be easy for you disprove, Chief. The data is easily available.
Hop on it.
On the other hand, you don't even know how trend lines are calculated.
I sense we are about to see The Chiefs toilet again.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Anthony Watts got some credit on a peer-reviewed paper, Chief.
Unfortunately for you, Chief, he helped prove that the US temp record is correct.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Do ya think Cook is the only scientist associated with Skeptical Science Chief?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Gotta love Chief Moobs.
Doesn't know sh#t about the math but hey, that's not gonna stop him from opining on it. LOL.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Here ya go Chief, disprove the graph. The arctic data is available.
Here's your chance to take down Skeptical Science and back up your mouth.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
LOL, Spencer is a Creationist.
Did God make him do it too, Chief?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Good for you Chief. Whenever you see a graph from Skeptical Science, you can say they are religiously motivated.
Care to back up your mouth, Chief? Why is the graph wrong?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Ed, the variation in the TSI over the era of modern measurements is, as you say miniscule,. However the variation over a series of minumum cycles to maximum cycles is more pronounced, by some estimates better than one percent. With that amount of variation over a period of decades it adds up,. We shouls be quite glad to have our huge oceanic volume as a modulator. This TSI value of variation does not take into account the specifics of variation in the UV spectrum, solar wind speeds, solar magnetic variations, mass ejections etc. These individual variations can be quite pronounced and there effects on our atmosphere, oceans, and biota are still to be fully worked out. It amazes me that there is still at least as much to learn about solar, earth and total system dynamics than is presently known. The values being entered in these hugely expensive and wasteful attempts at modeling are at best uninformed guesstimates
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!