Is global warming slowing down? Not exactly.

Jun 14, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Washington Post

There's a third aspect of this chart, however, that's getting a barrage of attention lately.

Comments
1 - 15 of 15 Comments Last updated Jun 18, 2013
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#1 Jun 14, 2013
Are there any objections these points?

1) Global warming is still very much with us.

2) One theory is that the oceans are responsible for the recent warming slowdown.

3) Even if you place a lot of weight on the recent slowdown, it doesn’t change projections of future warming all that much.

4) We’re still on pace to blow past that 2°C climate target.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#2 Jun 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Are there any objections these points?
1) Global warming is still very much with us.
Absolutely. The forcing from greenhouse gases has not changed and the physics behind it is fundamentally sound. The thermal energy has to increase to force the 'balancing outflow' to equal the influx.
SpaceBlues wrote:
2) One theory is that the oceans are responsible for the recent warming slowdown.
Responsible?? Physics is not people.
AGW is the warming of the SURFACE, which is 97% land and ocean (150 meters on land, 700 meters on ocean). The temperature of the AIR at two meters is just a useful PROXY for AGW. Subject to 'noise' from processes such as ENSO (i.e. LA NINA and the large cold upwelling). Useful as a general trend if filtered to remove these 'climate oscillations' but not definitive of AGW.
Note: WE are responsible if anyone, since we know the damage we are doing yet continue to do it.
SpaceBlues wrote:
3) Even if you place a lot of weight on the recent slowdown, it doesn’t change projections of future warming all that much.
There is no 'slowdown' if you understand what AGW is defined as.
SpaceBlues wrote:
4) We’re still on pace to blow past that 2°C climate target.
No question.
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

#3 Jun 15, 2013
Wow, it looks like when the 'reanalyzed' the data they managed to find another divergence problem.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...

I wonder if they used 'Mike's trick'?
No Warming

Waverly, OH

#4 Jun 15, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
Wow, it looks like when the 'reanalyzed' the data they managed to find another divergence problem.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...
I wonder if they used 'Mike's trick'?
They've got graphs more scary than that, I think they're holding out on us.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#5 Jun 16, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
Wow, it looks like when the 'reanalyzed' the data they managed to find another divergence problem.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...
There is no divergence. The graph illustrates that deeper waters are getting more warming than previously expected. This has to do with 'mixing mechanisms' which are poorly researched at this time. But then, we expect the unexpected when dealing with complex reality.
Fun Facts wrote:
I wonder if they used 'Mike's trick'?
Non-sequitur. The substitution of higher quality (lower error bars) data from other sources for areas of faulty or invalid analysis in a specific methodology is nowhere implicated here. The graphs are entirely consistent with the ARGOS data.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#6 Jun 16, 2013
and the Argo bouys have been deployed since?

Adding an additional data set or ending one data set and beginning another data set on the same graph isn't borrowing from 'mike'?

I think it is.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#7 Jun 16, 2013
lol, ff has comments on science and bouys[sic]. hahaha

ff thinks 'wrong' again!

Who's "mike?" Professor Dr Michael Mann, Nobel Laurate.

Graphs are the tools of the analysts, not commenters'.
litesong

Everett, WA

#8 Jun 16, 2013
From the article:
Recent work by Magdalena Balmaseda, Kevin Trenberth, and Erland Källén has suggested that the warming of the oceans has accelerated in the past 15 years — and that the “missing heat” may be lurking in the deep layers, 700 meters below the surface:
//////////
The information is good on the Ocean depth warming.

On top of that, is the specific extra warming occurring in the Arctic as the Ice Caps are reduced from global warming:

A fairly long-term secondary AGW feedback in Arctic Scandinavian & northwestern Russian waters has solar energy being absorbed by Arctic waters, NOT now covered by sea ice, long before summer begins. AND, even a more wide ranging secondary AGW feedback has been discovered, in which solar energy is being absorbed..... through ever thinning Arctic sea ices...... again, well before summer begins & before spring begins! These secondary AGW feedbacks lead directly to extra AGW feedbacks, in which the sun's angular height in the sky, not in late summer low sun, but in springtime high sun, absorbs ever more solar energy. More AGW feedbacks occur when absorbed solar energy, in both clear waters(previously iced over) AND thin ices, happens over downwellings. Solar energy is then transported directly to continental ice shelves & even deeper to Arctic Ocean & sea depths.

These AGW feedbacks, piled one, two & three types, on top of each other, are dramatically warming the Arctic, out of all proportion to the rest of the Earth's AGW warming.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#9 Jun 16, 2013
FF aka Fossil Fuels wrote:
and the Argo bouys have been deployed since?
Adding an additional data set or ending one data set and beginning another data set on the same graph isn't borrowing from 'mike'?
I think it is.
The point was that there was no area of inconsistent data analysis due to changes that the methodology could not handle. Proxy analysis is not the same as instrument records of the oceans. Proxy analysis may need 'Mikes Trick' if you have problems in a specific methodology that show a diversion from the truth. Scientific analysis is not universally applicable. Usually they have specific time and/or regions for which they are valid.

But instruments that measure temperature directly are much more robust. Even with instruments, you must validate that they are working correctly. See ARGOS for early problems detected in SOME of the buoys that had to be fixed.
No Warming

Waverly, OH

#10 Jun 17, 2013
FF aka Fossil Fuels wrote:
and the Argo bouys have been deployed since?
Adding an additional data set or ending one data set and beginning another data set on the same graph isn't borrowing from 'mike'?
I think it is.
Myself, I figure there's no point in going thru this one FF. If the honorable James Hansen says the heat isn't in the oceans yet the angry mob says it is let them have this one. The deep ocean was the only place they could hide it but not for long !

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#11 Jun 17, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
The point was that there was no area of inconsistent data analysis due to changes that the methodology could not handle. Proxy analysis is not the same as instrument records of the oceans. Proxy analysis may need 'Mikes Trick' if you have problems in a specific methodology that show a diversion from the truth. Scientific analysis is not universally applicable. Usually they have specific time and/or regions for which they are valid.
But instruments that measure temperature directly are much more robust. Even with instruments, you must validate that they are working correctly. See ARGOS for early problems detected in SOME of the buoys that had to be fixed.
Say what?!

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12 Jun 17, 2013
No Warming wrote:
<quoted text>
Myself, I figure there's no point in going thru this one FF. If the honorable James Hansen says the heat isn't in the oceans yet the angry mob says it is let them have this one. The deep ocean was the only place they could hide it but not for long !
Got it. I'm amused, I have been posting about the ocean's heat absorption, oscillations and distribution for a while now. I'm pretty excited our climate scientists have decided to take a look at how our oceans impact climate. But we'll have to wait to 2015 to see how the IPCC plans to tax us for that.

Won't change the predictions of lower solar activity. And won't change the oscillations' phase shift cycle lengths, so I still think cooler temps.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#13 Jun 17, 2013
No Warming wrote:
<quoted text>
Myself, I figure there's no point in going thru this one FF. If the honorable James Hansen says the heat isn't in the oceans yet the angry mob says it is let them have this one. The deep ocean was the only place they could hide it but not for long !
You got caught again lying, no warning.

We know that rising greenhouse gas emissions must result in more warming - "That carbon dioxide warms the climate is not in doubt."

So if there's more carbon dioxide, and the warming isn't staying in the atmosphere, where is it going?

Surface temperature is only a small (but important) part of the climate system. In fact, most of the extra heat the planet absorbs goes into the oceans, climate scientist at the University of Reading Dr Richard Allan tells us:

"The vast ocean has a huge capacity to store heat … To balance the books you need to be measuring the energy coming in at the top of the atmosphere and all the places where it's going to really understand how the climate is heating."

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/05/doubl...
No Warming

Waverly, OH

#14 Jun 17, 2013
FF aka Fossil Fuels wrote:
<quoted text>
Got it. I'm amused, I have been posting about the ocean's heat absorption, oscillations and distribution for a while now. I'm pretty excited our climate scientists have decided to take a look at how our oceans impact climate. But we'll have to wait to 2015 to see how the IPCC plans to tax us for that.
Won't change the predictions of lower solar activity. And won't change the oscillations' phase shift cycle lengths, so I still think cooler temps.
I agree with the potential for a period of cooling just hope it doesn't develop into something extreme, your neighborhood could become very crowded. As for the U.N., I trust our congress to keep things in check.
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

#16 Jun 18, 2013
No Warming wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with the potential for a period of cooling just hope it doesn't develop into something extreme, your neighborhood could become very crowded. As for the U.N., I trust our congress to keep things in check.
Only those without the knowledge of history would move to my area under these conditions. The same conditions caused the decline and dispersal of the anazasi during the time period of the wolfe minimum.

When we go into these conditions there is no water here. I have a tree ring study from the organs moutains that i can see from the front yard that extends back to the time period of the MWP/LIA transition. It gets bad here.

One reason I am concerned that we are addressing the climate change that is most likely to occur. If history does repeat itself, we are in for some challenging times.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Business News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
King Cobra Muffler Centers Motivational Quote o... 2 hr King Cobra Muffler 1
Wholesale Promotional Pens & Personalized Logo ... (Mar '10) 5 hr Jesie 5
Estates Development 5 hr Nana Akua 1
King Cobra Muffler- Business Tip of Day: 5 hr King Cobra Muffler 1
How does the currency exchange rate work? 6 hr landfx 1
What are the good qualities of forex broker? 7 hr returnpip 1
King Cobra Muffler Trivia Quiz 8 hr King Cobra Muffler 1
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Business News People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••