Critics of climate change often claim that warming has stopped since the late 1990s. While this is categorically false (the last decade was the warmest on record and 2005 and 2010 are generally considered tied for the warmest year), scientists do admit that warming hasn’t occurred over land as rapidly as predicted in the last ten years, especially given continually rising greenhouse gas emissions. But a recent study in Geophysical Research Letters has found this so-called missing heat: 700 meters below the surface of the ocean.
“Increasingly in the past decade, more of that heat has been dumped at levels below 700 meters, where most previous analyses stop. About 30 percent has gone below 700 meters in depth,” explains co-author Kevin Trenberth with the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research. “This is fairly new, it is not there throughout the record.”
Scientists have long known that around 90 percent of the heat from climate change ends up in the oceans and they suspected that this was where the ‘missing heat’ would be found. The study find that climate change has revved up worldwide, instead of stopping.
“This signals the beginning of the most sustained warming trend in this record of [ocean heat content],” the scientists write in the paper. “Indeed, recent warming rates of the waters below 700 meters appear to be unprecedented.”
Humans are stupider than bacteria. And we all know how the classic Bacteria Growth Experiment ends in a Petrie Dish.
Spoiler alert: The population grows exponentially until they all die off, drowning in their own excrement.
You see yourself as being dumber than bacteria? Humanity will survive…unless we are killed off by bacteria.
The increasing heat in the ocean depths is caused by God stoking up the furnace in Hell, preparing for the coming masses of liberals he needs to punish for their godless disobedience and arrogance. Repent now or suffer the consequences!
On a sad note, Jesus arose from his tomb this morning and saw his shadow, so we’ll be in for six more weeks of the Kardashians. I’m sorry it couldn’t be a happier Easter for us, but maybe next year…
This is all fine with me. I like my sushi cook anyhow.
Ever cook your salmon in acid? You know, a nice lemon based marinade? Sadly, when the ocean will do it for us, there will have been no fish at all in the ocean for some time.
aka: bad things will happen way before the worst things happen. A cascading cluster f*ck of environmental collapse goes that way.
Have you ever had ceviche? Most places cook the fish first but if you can find a real mexican joint that just uses lemon juice and raw fish, it’s delicious.
I’ve had it several times. Not my favorite but hunger is a powerful spice whereas too much wine makes you oblivious.
Tappa bars in Madrid. Had some nice marinated mushrooms too with those little mini pizzas.
Coupling this story with the fact that the ocean’s pH is the lowest (most acidic) it has been in eons doesn’t bode well for ocean ecosystems.
An ocean full of ceviche!! Might as well enjoy it!
The ocean is not acidic, it is slightly basic.
Yes. But it is becoming more acidic than it usually is. ( The pH is dropping.) This will effect coral reefs and the capacity for a body of water to absorb additional levels of CO2.
A couple things wrong with this. First, I seriously doubt there are any long term records of what the oceans temps are, that deep. You can bet Ben Franklin didn’t measure it, on any of his sea voyages across the Atlantic. And they may not have thought to check that deep, until only recently. So how can they say what is unprecedented?
And second, heat generally rises. Even in water. So wouldn’t the source of the heat, 700 feet down, be from underwater fissures and volcanoes? And not some freak underwater vortex current effect, that was just happened upon. Such a current, if it exists, wouldn’t represent the entire ocean or oceans temperature, at 700 feet. Just inside the current. Just as high speed winds inside the Jetstream, don’t represent the wind speed of the entire earth’s atmosphere. So how are they accounting for both warm and cold ocean currents? Averaging? Or just ignoring the cold currents, as they only complicate the propaganda? The seas are a lot more complicated than just having one temperature, world wide, at any depth. But it seems the pro-GW scientists have simplified it, again. In order to get their “truth” across.
Amusing……. No? //// And the answer is: No.
Ha, ha.
Glenn—how secure are you about your question/challenge being “a winner” vs just revealing how much you don’t know?
Know what I mean?
Ego. All is vanity.
There ya go again being the troll.
It would be great if you faced down any point he made like you are wont to point out others should do when they respond as you just did.
Do you get paid for this? You wouldn’t tell the truth if you did, so never mind.
“Ego. All is vanity.”
“Know what I mean?”
Nope. I don’t know what you mean. I can “make” what you say otherwise make sense….but that doesn’t mean I know what you mean.
What do you mean???
I often say its not enough to disagree. You need to say why and as missing here: bonus for showing how to properly do it.
Up to the task?
Gawd, you’re more annoying than the eczema on my arm that keeps coming back. A self-declared intellectual elitist blathering away with more obtuse talking points than Rachael Ray or Maury Povich.
“…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.
Read more at http://news.mongabay.com/2013/0328-hance-climate-missing-heat.html#gZuVE1WtPcvpFSkU.99 …”
At 700 meters there exists the deep sea channel or SOFAR channel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOFAR_channel
The boundaries of this channel are a well-researched phenomenon that was discovered decades ago and contributed greatly to the understanding of underwater acoustics.
Sublime Article.
“Real Scientists” knowing so much more than we casual pop readers ever really accept. Looking worse than foolish when we repeat a talking points bumper sticker criticism. Here we have a testable thesis/assumption about the world and it is modeled. The real world reveals the model is wrong, investigation is made, and the model/thesis/understanding/science advances/moves along/understands more.
Ain’t that great?
So, the ocean, the wide, wide ((and deep)) ocean is a bigger heat sink than we thought? The saved heat creating a feed back loop that will continue its roll out long after we recognize the truth of Global Warming and try to do anything about it.
Is earth and we hoomans on it like a petri dish with its bacteria: exponential growth until collapse. Regardless, are there any differences we can make a religion out of? Earth is an open system not closed, introducing many more variables, but how they apply to AGW is beyond me. I can only rely on the qualified scientists to tell me.
I CAN ONLY RELY ON THE QUALIFIED SCIENTISTS TO TELL ME. Just like the rest of you schmoes, in denial or not. Ha, ha—submitting to God or Big Oil, but no other Authority??
Ain’t that the way?
I’m a schmoe—so I’m only guessing, wrapped in my own limitations===>but the hair on the back of my neck is telling me I/WE will see some dramatic effect of Global Warming WAY BEFORE the ocean rise that continues regularly apace. Evidently, the lies from out mass media and silence of the government doesn’t stop water from seeking its own level.
What more evidence do you need? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise
Amusing…….. No?
Ignorance blinded by stupidity on the hoof: “The seas are a lot more complicated than just having one temperature, world wide, at any depth. But it seems the pro-GW scientists have simplified it, again.” /// Just what the link said.
I read once that “real scientists” can tell the source of co2.
1. from burning terrestrial living plants
2. from burning sequestered carbons
3. from volcanoes.
Something about the structure of the carbon, but the SCIENCE is way beyond me. Other than the heat from out central core being somewhat of a constant, I don’t know how they might rule out unseen unevidenced increased heat from underwater volcanoes being the source of the additional heat below 700 feet. Quite religiou==making the unseen the unevidenced the imaginary the opposition to sound science.
Cant be much more stupid than that.
And btw, the GW-CC scientists have yet to prove any of this is caused by human activity. Or that it can be reversed by any human intervention. So the whole argument is rather moot. If nothing can be done, because it’s a natural phenomenon of earth. Like sun spots and solar winds. Spending billions on ineffective bandage fix solutions, will only serve to cripple already strained economies. And only improve the lives of those, who poised themselves to take advantage of the scare tactics.
We’re already doing quite a lot to improve or save the environment. But the way these scientists go on and on. It’s obvious that it’s never enough for them. So what would be? Reducing the world population by 10%, 20%, 30%? Destroying world democracy? Bring back the medieval times or dark ages? What’s their ultimate plan or solution, they’ve not got the guts to reveal? I mean they’re so smart, they must have some idea. So they should spell it all out now. Rather than trying to implement it one tiny piece at a time. So we’ll get use to sacrificing more and more, without noticing it. While those top 1%ers sacrifice nothing. And become far richer by comparison.
A Goldfinger-like plan, for increasing wealth and power. Poison the economic milk, everyone else depends on. When there’s no more “up” to reach for. Lower the bottom, for everyone else. I suspect that’s what all this economical sacrificing for the sake of mother earth, is really all about. And a pyramid scheme of elites, running the whole scam.
What is it about the bacteria in a petri dish do you not understand?
What a dolt.
I challenge you: take your “best” ((cough!!)) single argument against the FACT of ABW and post it. You have such a pile of BS already, I would like your stupidity to be displayed on point.
Go!
Unfortunately, the Chyners and the Hinders will negate any climate-positive effects we may attempt to bring about.
Just to help you out Glenn—two of your arguments so far that maybe you want to pass over for your deeper insights:
((btw–when will Church let out so your fellow anti-science buffoons can help you out?))
1. First, I seriously doubt there are any long term records of what the oceans temps are, that deep. /// Google (measure deep ocean temperature) and you will find:
http://scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=135-years-of-records-reveals-deep-o-12-04-01 /// 1872 is first deep temp measurement. Single sample event not regularly kept until 2004, so I agree, does seem subject to error===BUT ITS THE BEST IF NOT THE ONLY EVIDENCE WE HAVE. What you gonna do?
2. And second, heat generally rises. Even in water. So wouldn’t the source of the heat, 700 feet down, be from underwater fissures and volcanoes? //// Whaaaa? Can’t even RTFA? Stronger trade winds have stirred the ocean more than before. …. And yeah, that heat will eventually rise….. as in real bad for us when it does increasing those tradewinds even more, stronger hurricanes and so forth.
Silly Hoomans.
An article on AGW 12 comments so far, half of them doolings by bobbo. Yeah this is running about average.
Ha, ha. Yes and as usual, YOU have nothing of substance to offer.
Why is that???
Can’t even form a yea or nay opinion???? On global warming that is. I know that any contributor that offers facts, analysis, and links is beneath your respect.
Care for another mud pie boopsie?
OTOH–I do recognize my snark goes to Maximum Level when science deniers offer up their stupidity. Its not like most other issues of the day. Gun control, Gold Standard, Abortion etc==all more questions of opinion or values.
Straight on science is not like that. If you don’t like Science and all that it means to mankind, you should at least adopt a middle/ignorant/fearful/no nothing position. I could let that go.
But to be ANTI-SCIENCE…. when google is at your fingertips????
Tell me it ain’t so.
Silly Hoomans.
Nothing of substance? I observed that as usual when ever the subject of AGW is posted you can’t contain your erection over your need to spew effluvia.
Speaking of weather…. climate……No-weather: here is a video of the largest storm some weather folks have ever seen over the Atlantic right now…. while the write up supporting it says we have 2-3 of these every year. I guess colors and moving pictures just aren’t impactful enough.
http://weather.com/news/massive-atlantic-storm-20130329
The salts in my stash of Yugoslavian ammo will help it survive your humid weather! Fail Bobbo!
Once again…. I don’t know what you mean. This time, can’t make up any sense for it either.
The storm video is hardly about “humidity” at all.
So what do you mean?????
Troll: someone who posts “just” to piss other people off.===not me. First few posts are usually ok, funny, or whatever. Bet boring on repetition.
Noise: people who post that don’t make any sense. One post is too many.
Just Simply the Very Best: People whose posts you can agree or disagree with as may be your own personal position. Just can’t post often enough.
Know what I mean? ((even though tag lines can get annoying.))
Has Trenberth found the ‘missing’ heat?
http://tinyurl.com/cjuf7pb
Some interesting comments on this paper and the “Science” behind it.
Those are worth a read. I have the impression that while science deniers may be easy to spot, other examples of nay-sayers can be quite difficult. Perhaps even as fine as atmosphere weather experts to ocean temperature gradient weather experts each having their grants to secure?
The slow arc of science bending towards truth.
Judith Curry acts as a jilted scientist, the worst kind.
Why do you say that?
The guy that wrote the article appears to be some sort of green activist with nothing to suggest he knows more about climate than the average guy on the street.
Where did the chart ultimately come from? Yeah, it got published by somebody as a _letter_ which would appear to mean that it wasn’t peer reviewed but where did this person or group get their data?
My own data suggests that anyone who creates a chart like that claiming to cover the oceans is not credible. The data required to create such a chart, that is even remotely valid, extending back into my young adulthood absolutely doesn’t exist. You could, maybe, do it for a few selected locations near major research institutions but water temps are kind of like air temps. They can fluctuate a lot and not be in step with the ocean at large.
The lack of data/measurements on this topic has been noted elsewhere on numerous occasions as one of the holes in trying to understand climate changes. Unfortunately making it up, in my view, is not a valid solution to the problem.
You guys have fun.
30 years ago Scientists were so very sure we were facing a pending Ice Age.
http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm
20 years ago Scientists were so very sure we were facing a pending melt down due to Global Warming
10 years Scientists were having trouble proving their Hockey Stick dogma.
5 years ago Scientists fudged their own figures – remember Climategate?
Now, the scientists are so very sure the heat build up is located a half mile below the surface of the oceans. Didn’t the same scientists say that hot water rises?
Which set of scientists are you going to believe?
JB–as your link reveals, there was no common agreement among qualified scientists about what was happening back then.
Now there is.
Try to keep up will ya?
I’m thinking bobbo is personally hoarding about half of the global heat.
I suppose any analogy can be made to fit any precedent… all depending on the engine of transposition?
Stay thirsty my friends.
Meanwhile, back in Real World news:
Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) first observed about a decade ago, is now back with a vengeance.
Comforting to know that world leaders and scientists are on top of the global climate change issue.
It doesn’t bother me that Honey Booboo Teapublicans are unconvinced because it snowed the other day in Jacksonville, Florida.
So basically the models aren’t matching reality, and the scientists decided that the models are correct and the data are wrong. So they then point to a place with the weakest measurement, not just the regular ocean which shows a similar pause in temperatures, but the deep ocean. That’s where all the heat is!
This site has showed the flaws in Mr Trenberth and Mr Rahmstorf’s papers in the past.
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/kevin-trenberths-real-travesty/
Steve McIntyre destroyed another attempt to resurrect the hockey stick.
20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions.
http://climateaudit.org/2013/03/31/the-marcott-filibuster/
It’s at least good that they are looking at ocean heat as a measurement of global warming. The ocean heat capacity is much higher than the atmosphere.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/energy-content-the-heat-is-on-atmosphere-vs-ocean/
Of course they are only doing this as the atmospheric numbers stagnate, and as the skeptics start to look at the code and data behind the calculations of atmospheric temperatures. NASA keeps changing the temperature values for the past and present, even decades ago.
That’s the difference between science and dogma; science is subject to being updated as new facts emerge.
Dogma cements itself into the brains of those with the lowest IQ’s and stays there.
Mr Trenberth suggests all the heat from CO2 is going to the deep ocean, but the shallow ocean is showing no such heat rise, with a stall similar to surface temperatures. For this the scientists suggest, why the heat is going straight to the deep ocean, and is merely just passing through the upper layer. And we’re absolutely certain we’ve got the deep ocean measured accurately to the hundredths of a degree required to show the heating that we claim to have found!
So Mickey—where do you think all the heat has gone???
Do you actually KNOW how the deep ocean temps have been measured over the years, or is this complaint totally out of your ass?
Do you accept the idea that of the known traditional climate variables (solar output, distance from the sun) the Earth should be cooling but we are heating up….. how come???
What do you think the effect of pumping co2 into our atmosphere “should be?”
Do you believe in Magic Mickey????
Do you?
Why should the Earth be cooling, because we are overdue for an ice age? The Earth has been warming for a few centuries.
The effect of CO2 in the atmosphere would be higher temperatures, by about 1-1.5 degree Celsius. This would then be moderated by negative feedbacks within the climate system, so essentially not noticeable.
Yes I do believe in Magic Mickey as well as Epic Mickey.
http://oceans.pmel.noaa.gov/
Note the chart on ocean heat content.
The missing heat is in the models, ie not missing if you start with the presumption that what you are seeing is reality, and maybe the models are what have something missing, like a negative feedback.
Even Michael Mann has said he thinks there is a missing negative feedback, and that climate models vastly overstate warming. I was so surprised I didn’t even ask the questions I was planning to ask.
Michael Mann? You mean the one with the PhD’s in climatology, chemistry and physics? No? Oh, you mean the Michael Mann who invented wearing white sports jackets with your shirt unbuttoned to the navel.
At least you didn’t claim he had a Nobel Prize like the Mann himself did in court when he tried to sue National Review.
Hi Mike
Who are you working for? The Koch Bros?
Why, do they pay well?
No, they don’t.
“Hey Rover look, SQUIRREL!”
… And your point would be??? Stop sucking up fossil fuels?!
If so, then would you care to offer a REASONABLE alternative there Chicken Little?
I already know “the sky is falling” but you genius atmospheric scientists don’t seem to be able to FOCUS on how to stop it. You just waste more money on these studies as if THAT’S going to help. No suggestions to even do the small things like TURN YOUR F**ING COMPUTER (server) OFF!
So again. Your point here is what? That the sky is blue? Or maybe that water – even warm water – is wet. DUH!
There is no stopping it. The Chinese and the rest of the developing world have seen to that.
scandihoovian seemingly trying to see how many errors and mischaracterizations can be packed into one sentence says:
4/1/2013 at 7:18 am
Gawd, you’re more annoying than the eczema on my arm that keeps coming back. /// Well, I guess I have to give you annoying…. unless you seek the truth?
A self-declared intellectual elitist /// I have ncver declared either of those characterizations===and I have declared quite a lot in my nom de flames. Why do you think that is?
blathering away /// fair enough
with more obtuse talking points /// obtuse?? What is less obtuse than pointing out someone raises a question that is directly answered in the linked articles provided to us by our Good Editors? Taling Points?===This is why I post. All my crap are belong to me. If I lift a point from some other source, I try to link or give credit. Not 100%, but that is my nature.
than Rachael Ray or Maury Povich. /// Ahhh—I see the problem. You think those two raise obtuse points? Whats a matter Scandy?==Don’t know who your father is?
Ha, ha. I dither. I mostly post to wonder how the comment thread would work out if we all posted only as a sequential number or anonymous??? I could easily post without my catchy intros and tag lines. Wouldn’t be as much fun for me but SUBSTANTIVELY–what does anyone want here? Mindless agreement, patty cake, or pointed engagement?
I know. Why can’t everyone just honestly agree with me and think my shit is ice cream? Isn’t that what god wants?
I’m sure he does.
Just let the burn sink in, son. It won’t start to heal until you stop picking at it.
Scandy—did you really miss it so completely?
I DON’T CARE what you think of “me”—and neither should you.
Ideas.
Argument.
Confrontation.
Engagement.
Learning.
Change.
……. not patty cakes.
See the difference?
Green Gobblin in a paroxysm of pointless agression says:
4/1/2013 at 9:03 am
“Hey Rover look, SQUIRREL!” /// I do like squirrels. Can I has a home video please?
… And your point would be??? Stop sucking up fossil fuels?! /// Yep, thats the objectively obvious point that even you see and yet rail against. Weirdly self destructive lack of insight.
If so, then would you care to offer a REASONABLE alternative there Chicken Little? /// Green/renewable fuels. A “moon shot” energy program to get off sequestered carbon burning. We ARE KILLING OUTSELVES. Why do that when science does offer alternatives???? What are YOU——-pause——-no need to answer really.
I already know “the sky is falling” but you genius atmospheric scientists don’t seem to be able to FOCUS on how to stop it. /// Stated above. Let’s get off burning what we find in the ground.
You just waste more money on these studies as if THAT’S going to help. /// Well since so many (Americans) have no opinion or have wrong opinions on what burning fossil fuels really means to their kiddies lives 25-50-100 years hence its the ONLY THING THAT WILL HELP. In similar, but not the same, vein==what do you think science/society/those in the know should do as an alternative to giving the people the information they need to make their lives better? Hmmmm?
No suggestions to even do the small things like TURN YOUR F**ING COMPUTER (server) OFF! /// Stopping vampire electrical waste is mentioned in practically every article. Thats why you mention it here. See how information works?
So again. Your point here is what? /// Lets Make GREEN the next world Religion.
That the sky is blue? /// That is no one’s point.
Or maybe that water – even warm water – is wet. DUH! /// You make no sense whatsoever.
Typical.
……….and just as I hit send, I remember Perkel’s name.
Rats.
The final batch of ClimateGate e-mails were released, but not publicly. A select group of climate skeptic bloggers were given the password to 220,000 e-mails, so as to avoid releasing personal info. The highlight to date is
2) No justification for regional reconstructions rather than what Mann et al did (I don’t think we can say we didn’t do Mann et al because we think it is crap!)
On accusations that the whole thing is a Big Oil conspiracy, the hacker FOIA replies:
I wasn’t aware of the arrangement but warmly welcome their decision to support my project. For that end I opened a bitcoin address: 1HHQ36qbsgGZWLPmiUjYHxQUPJ6EQXVJFS
Well, let’s roll up Mickey and put his BS to rest?
1. So basically the models aren’t matching reality, and the scientists decided that the models are correct and the data are wrong. /// Just the opposite Einstein. The models were WRONG as they predicted the atmospheric temps should be higher. You can see it in the frickin Title of this thread: WHERE HAS ALL THE HEAT GONE? Jesus Christ man==your head could not be farther up your ass.
So they then point to a place with the weakest measurement, /// Thats right. When you have looked everywhere you think something lost should be, don’t find it, you start to look where you thought it would not be. Have you never lost anything??? What an idiot.
not just the regular ocean which shows a similar pause in temperatures, but the deep ocean. That’s where all the heat is! /// Did they say “all.” Is but a quibble. So like any other science denier. You want all the information right now. You want expressions of certainty, without doubt, no changes from the first utterance.
What a religious thinking like type fool you are. No tolerance for ambiguity, lack of information, best efforts at all.
Just how Catholic are you?
Ha, ha. Anti-Science idiot or in the pay of the Cock Brothers? Who can tell?
Scientists who disagree with the climate ‘consensus’ are under pressure to keep quiet. They want to maintain a public face that is at odds with what they say amongst themselves. In the first ClimateGate release, we see Briffa say I realize there is a desire to show a nice tidy story.
James Annan, definitely not a climate skeptic, recently posted
one of them stated quite openly in a meeting I attended a few years ago that he deliberately lied in these sort of elicitation exercises (i.e. exaggerating the probability of high sensitivity) in order to help motivate political action.
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-sensitive-matter.html
So how does Kevin Trenberth fit in?
Another ClimateGate e-mail from Phil Jones:
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
So papers at odds with the consensus will be kept out by the Lead Authors.
Spencer and Braswell published a paper in Remote Sensing that showed a lower climate sensitivity than what the ‘consensus’ position claimed, based on observations of the climate rather than models. Kevin Trenberth was not happy with this state of affairs, and published his own letter attacking Mr Spencer. He then got the editor to resign from the journal with a statement that the paper should not have been accepted, as well as a personal letter of apology to Kevin Trenberth. Might this have been because Mr Trenberth has influence over some major funding source of the editor, Wolfgang Wagner? No, no, perish the thought!
Mickey the “Climate Truther.”
So much BS, it can’t be kept up with….. so I offer you the same challenge I did to whats his name: pick your best argument and post it with links.
I am not a scientist, just a reader of pop culture but “most of” the crap you post is just that. Stuff that has been proven or judged false multiple times over but you put it out there again for the uninformed, innocent, and believing to trip over again.
So prove me wrong. Pick your best argument.
Go.
Oh my, if you must,
Did Michael Mann use data upside-down in his paper Mann et al 2008 PNAS, and again in Mann et al 2009 Science?
http://climateaudit.org/2008/10/02/its-saturday-night-live/
http://amac1.blogspot.com/
Your best argument is to ask another question based on what a single researcher published 5 years ago in a non peer reviewed non scientific blog?
Tell me you aren’t so stupid?
Try again.
Is that a yes or a no?
This site seems to have some tech people on it. Unlike some other climate science papers, Mann’s data and code are available for review for this paper. It should be straightforward for people to look at the Matlab code, and see if he used data upside-down as accused.
Its like dark matter: dark heat!
Ha, ha. Well said.
MikeN in a fair response says:
4/1/2013 at 9:47 am
Why should the Earth be cooling, because we are overdue for an ice age? /// Like EVERYTHING to do with Climate Science, I read that along the way to this forum.
The Earth has been warming for a few centuries. /// Yes, why is that? At least you don’t deny that. What????? Just wait until the Cock Brothers find out you are far from the fold?
The effect of CO2 in the atmosphere would be higher temperatures, by about 1-1.5 degree Celsius. /// What makes you think that? Science? From the IPCC model???? How do you pick and choose the science you accept from that which you reject?
This would then be moderated by negative feedbacks within the climate system, so essentially not noticeable. /// Based on … what??? Would not heat stored someplace not modeled also have the same effect? There may indeed be some other negative feedback loops—but deep ocean temps going up is NOW part of the picture/model as well. See how science progresses??
Yes I do believe in Magic Mickey as well as Epic Mickey. /// Magic is Obvious, Epic is a stretch goal. Its good to stretch.
http://oceans.pmel.noaa.gov/
Note the chart on ocean heat content.
The missing heat is in the models, ie not missing if you start with the presumption that what you are seeing is reality, and maybe the models are what have something missing, like a negative feedback. /// Oh C’mon Mickey====if Deep Ocean Temps ARE NOT IN THE MODELS—-then they aren’t in the models. You know computer climate modelling has a restriction that the computing power is limited. The models have to be limited to that which is felt/come to be known is relevant so the models can be run at all. Real world limitations on our ability to understand. Your flat denial of what is clearly said is ……. not magical…… not epic…… no word really captures how dysfunctional that is as I assume you do it mostly unconsciously. Could it be ADD?==see the next thread. There may be a pill or series of pills that could help you.
Even Michael Mann has said he thinks there is a missing negative feedback, and that climate models vastly overstate warming. /// Again, just the opposite. I’m sure, or can accept there are missing elements to any model===like deep ocean temps. BUT the fact has been reported that global warming is proceeding faster than originally predicted. Silly to be so ass backwards. Are you stupid or paid?
I was so surprised I didn’t even ask the questions I was planning to ask. /// Why don’t you answer a few instead?
Lies, Damn Lies, and Anti-Science Stupidity.
And the Oceans keep rising: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise