Is More Global Warming Hiding in the ...

Is More Global Warming Hiding in the Oceans?

There are 40 comments on the US News & World Report story from May 29, 2013, titled Is More Global Warming Hiding in the Oceans?. In it, US News & World Report reports that:

A man enjoys the ocean after sunset in 2012 on Ngapali Beach, Myanmar, located on the shores of the Andaman Sea.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at US News & World Report.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#1 May 30, 2013
From the article:

"Trenberth and some of his colleagues recently published a new analysis of their own which shows that, in the past decade, roughly 30 percent of global warming heat may be hiding below 2,000 feet in the world's oceans – essentially, in the bottom half of most of the oceans where very little observational research has been done. That's a significant analysis – because there has been virtually no research on missing heat at the deepest depths of the world's oceans (below 700 meters)."

Re-read the above. What it says, the scientists can't find 30% of the 'missing heat'. Since they haven't done research at the 'deepest depths' they think the heat they have lost is 'below 700 meters'.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#2 May 30, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
From the article:
"Trenberth and some of his colleagues recently published a new analysis of their own which shows that, in the past decade, roughly 30 percent of global warming heat may be hiding below 2,000 feet in the world's oceans – essentially, in the bottom half of most of the oceans where very little observational research has been done. That's a significant analysis – because there has been virtually no research on missing heat at the deepest depths of the world's oceans (below 700 meters)."
Re-read the above. What it says, the scientists can't find 30% of the 'missing heat'. Since they haven't done research at the 'deepest depths' they think the heat they have lost is 'below 700 meters'.
fun farts lies as usual.

[1] The elusive nature of the post-2004 upper ocean warming has exposed uncertainties in the ocean's role in the Earth's energy budget and transient climate sensitivity. Here we present the time evolution of the global ocean heat content for 1958 through 2009 from a new observation-based reanalysis of the ocean. Volcanic eruptions and El Niño events are identified as sharp cooling events punctuating a long-term ocean warming trend, while heating continues during the recent upper-ocean-warming hiatus, but the heat is absorbed in the deeper ocean. In the last decade, about 30% of the warming has occurred below 700 m, contributing significantly to an acceleration of the warming trend. The warming below 700 m remains even when the Argo observing system is withdrawn although the trends are reduced. Sensitivity experiments illustrate that surface wind variability is largely responsible for the changing ocean heat vertical distribution.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gr...
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#3 May 30, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
fun farts lies as usual.
[1] The elusive nature of the post-2004 upper ocean warming has exposed uncertainties in the ocean's role in the Earth's energy budget and transient climate sensitivity. Here we present the time evolution of the global ocean heat content for 1958 through 2009 from a new observation-based reanalysis of the ocean. Volcanic eruptions and El Niño events are identified as sharp cooling events punctuating a long-term ocean warming trend, while heating continues during the recent upper-ocean-warming hiatus, but the heat is absorbed in the deeper ocean. In the last decade, about 30% of the warming has occurred below 700 m, contributing significantly to an acceleration of the warming trend. The warming below 700 m remains even when the Argo observing system is withdrawn although the trends are reduced. Sensitivity experiments illustrate that surface wind variability is largely responsible for the changing ocean heat vertical distribution.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gr...
"...– because there has been virtually no research on missing heat at the deepest depths of the world's oceans (below 700 meters)."

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#4 May 30, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
"...– because there has been virtually no research on missing heat at the deepest depths of the world's oceans (below 700 meters)."
I just posted the abstract of some research on that very subject.

The conclusion of that research is very clear: 30% of the heat is no longer missing.

You believed Trenberth when he said it was missing; why don't you believe him when he says it's found?

Probably because it wasn't in a stolen email.
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#5 May 30, 2013
Simply believe the computer models... they all predicted the heat would be found in the deep ocean.
Problem solved.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#6 May 30, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Simply believe the computer models... they all predicted the heat would be found in the deep ocean.
Problem solved.
Not true.

The heat was found in the observations, and the models explained how it got there.
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#7 May 30, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true.
The heat was found in the observations, and the models explained how it got there.
Really, it wasn't a mystery. It wasn't hidden. One just had to look for the thermal energy in the TOTAL of the surface mass, instead of trying to exaggerate the importance of air temps.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#8 May 31, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
I just posted the abstract of some research on that very subject.
The conclusion of that research is very clear: 30% of the heat is no longer missing.
You believed Trenberth when he said it was missing; why don't you believe him when he says it's found?
Probably because it wasn't in a stolen email.
So what is a

"time evolution of the global ocean heat content for 1958 through 2009 from a new observation-based reanalysis of the ocean"?

Do you have any idea? Can you say computer model? What factors did they load into the computer model? When were the Argo buoys deployed? How were they factored into the computer model simulation starting in 1958?

Please do not cut and paste from skeptical science. A parrot can talk.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#9 May 31, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true.
The heat was found in the observations, and the models explained how it got there.
What was 'observed' and how was it measured?
SpaceBlues

United States

#10 May 31, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
So what is a
"time evolution of the global ocean heat content for 1958 through 2009 from a new observation-based reanalysis of the ocean"?
Do you have any idea?
LOL. We know you have no idea.

Why judge scientists when you are sans science?

<simple greed>
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#11 May 31, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL. We know you have no idea.
Why judge scientists when you are sans science?
<simple greed>
Magdalena A. Balmaseda has publishd two papers on the reanalysis of ocean heat content in addition to the current paper.

Can you tell us what was measured and how?
litesong

Camano Island, WA

#12 May 31, 2013
From several of my posts in other toxic topix AGW threads:

Many northlands are above thawing, with extreme northwest Russia, continuing very warm. Presently, Murmansk, Russia, bordering an Arctic sea, is 28degC.(82degF). The Arctic sea ice never formed in that region this winter, so shows no effect on receding Arctic sea ice.
//////////
However, a fairly long-term secondary AGW feedback in that region has solar energy being absorbed by Arctic waters, NOT covered by sea ice, long before for 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 & even during & 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, over both clear waters(previously iced over) AND thin ices, happens over downwellings. Solar energy is then transported directly to continental ice shelfs & 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.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#13 May 31, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
What was 'observed' and how was it measured?
Temperature.

With a thermometer.
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#14 May 31, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Magdalena A. Balmaseda has publishd two papers on the reanalysis of ocean heat content in addition to the current paper.
Can you tell us what was measured and how?
What was measured. Ocean temperatures to 1000 meters or so.

How it was measured.. Check out ARGO's which now provides a significant coverage of oceans from independent free floating sensors.

Now shut up you moron. Try to LEARN something instead of focusing on kibitzing and heckling. You are just showing how ignorant you are.

tinyurl.com/cfsubxn

"But the fact that so much heat is ending up in the deep ocean has surprised scientists, since warm waters should rise to the surface.

"The cause of the change is a particular change in winds, especially in the Pacific Ocean where the subtropical trade winds have become noticeably stronger, thereby increasing the subtropical overturning in the ocean and providing a mechanism for heat to be carried down into the ocean," says Trenberth. "
No Warming

Van Wert, OH

#15 May 31, 2013
This study says 16% of ocean surface heat is taken up by the deep ocean. Whether that's significant or not it should be factored into climate models, not used as an excuse for the failure of climate models.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/2010...
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#16 May 31, 2013
No Warming wrote:
This study says 16% of ocean surface heat is taken up by the deep ocean. Whether that's significant or not it should be factored into climate models, not used as an excuse for the failure of climate models.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/2010...
Models are off by SOME factor most of the time. They must be used carefully to avoid conclusions based on faulty operation. And as more data comes from the real world to base a 'ground truth' on, the models are improved to more closely match the 'real world' behavior. They can never be PERFECT because there just isn't that much computer power but they are very useful, even when they show a mismatch which is a key to finding out what was missed.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#17 Jun 1, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Temperature.
With a thermometer.
Are you sure?
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#18 Jun 1, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
What was measured. Ocean temperatures to 1000 meters or so.
How it was measured.. Check out ARGO's which now provides a significant coverage of oceans from independent free floating sensors.
Now shut up you moron. Try to LEARN something instead of focusing on kibitzing and heckling. You are just showing how ignorant you are.
tinyurl.com/cfsubxn
"But the fact that so much heat is ending up in the deep ocean has surprised scientists, since warm waters should rise to the surface.
"The cause of the change is a particular change in winds, especially in the Pacific Ocean where the subtropical trade winds have become noticeably stronger, thereby increasing the subtropical overturning in the ocean and providing a mechanism for heat to be carried down into the ocean," says Trenberth. "
The study is from 1958. The Argo buoys have been deployed since?

So what was measured and how? Where was it measured?

You can't answer the questions, you haven't read the paper unless you've purchased it. If you have then please let us know the answers to my questions.

If you discovered that the temps were taken from limited locations without the ability to measure depths, would it impact how you read the abstract.

We won't know what this paper says until we read it. We won't know what data was input to the computer model until we see it.

What did they 'reanalyze' we don't even know that, unless you've read the two previous papers by the same author.

You are what we call a 'low information voter'. Headlines satisfy your curiosity. 20 second bites provide your data.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#19 Jun 1, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>

Now shut up you moron.
At least you're not using the race card this time, calling me a 'marooon' on the other thread was just uncalled for.

LOL

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#20 Jun 1, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you sure?
Yes.

I'm also sure that as you've been denying the thermometers say about surface temperatures for year, we can also expect you to deny what the thermometers say about ocean temperatures for years to come.

Any answer to this question?
Fair Game wrote:
You believed Trenberth when he said it was missing; why don't you believe him when he says it's found?
You conspiracy nuts believe scientists are fiddling the data again over ocean temperatures.

Why didn't they simply fiddle them from the beginning so there wasn't any missing heat?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Global Warming Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News EPA to ease emission restrictions on coal-fired... 31 min RIP 314
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 3 hr Big Al 37,744
News White House will override Obama's climate plan 3 hr Trump is a joke 2,578
News Trump pulls US from global warming accord, to a... (Jun '17) 6 hr Trump is a joke 186
News Clean Energy Might Reduce Global Warming, But W... 22 hr Poster Child for ... 1
News It is abnormally cold in the United States. Tha... 22 hr Nancy 471
News Al Gore warns that Trump is ignoring weather ap... (Jun '17) Tue Into The Night 345
More from around the web