Climate Scientist Warns Sea Levels Are Rising Faster Than We Thought

[jc456]

No one will deny that it seems odd that different locations on the planet would see what seems like different behavior from their local oceans, but it's a fact.

I got an offer for you Frank. You keep asking question you know are dumb. That would be something like rhetorical questions but not quite. You ask us for information and then tell us that we couldn't be right. I've got a better idea, Frank. YOU go look up the information. You go find out what the world's experts (not right wing bloggers or TV weatherman, but the actual experts) think the world's oceans are doing. Okay? There's a boy. And you make sure you come back here and tell us who said what, ok? Ok.

Your experts are fakes, phonies and frauds.

No, Frank, they're not. We're talking thousands of PhD scientists, actively researching these topics and publishing their results in peer reviewed journals. The idea that they are ALL fakes, phonies and frauds -- the idea that ANY significant number of them are frauds -- is simply unsupportable. It's not a realistic contention Frank. Not at all. Do you believe every priest in the Catholic church is a child molester? Do you believe every police officer in this country is a racist bigot? Do you believe every school teacher is incompetent? Do you believe every Muslim on the planet is a murderous terrorist? Do you believe no US soldier, sailor, airman or marine has ever done anything wrong? Do you believe every communist hates us and wants to destroy us?

The larger a generalization, relatively speaking, the more likely (ignoring a thousand other reasons) it is to be false. The idea that a group of extremely well educated people, spread all over the world, from every different nation on the planet, have all somehow participated in some vast conspiracy whereby they've all produced coherent data that all supports the same theory and has never been refuted or falsified... it simply ridiculous.

Your experts adjust data rather than adjusting their theory.

All the adjustment you talk about are justified in an effort to make the data more accurate. When the scientists who USE that data start griping about the adjustments, I'll listen. Till then it simply sounds exactly as if this is just the latest desperation move passed down to you by the fossil fuel industry's disinformation campaign. The organizations making those adjustment have been consistently explaining why they are doing what they are doing and you and yours have YET to produce a single case refuting those justifications. Just saying it - and that's all you people have ever done - doesn't make it so.

I've seen and read what your experts have to say

I'm sorry Frank, but I don't believe that to be the truth. I think you have read very, very little of it because you lack the scientific knowledge to make heads nor tails of most of it.

and you should pray that the real scientists stay docile, non confrontational and uninterested in your fraud.

And you should stop making serious accusations for which you have no evidence outside your fevered imagination.

If the AGWCult were a private company, you'd have adjoining cells with Bernie Madoff who would be high-fiving you for stealing so much for so long.

Just like Bernie Madoff, you need to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, the only crime that seems to have been committed around here would be the indecent assault implicit in your mental shortcomings attempting to deal with basic science.

I read the papers that made up AR5

I call bullshit on that claim three ways from Sunday. AR5 is not "made up" of papers. It does, however, cite 9,200 scientific publications. Are you claiming to have read them all Frank? Really? AR5 itself is over 2,000 pages and I'd be surprised to hear you've read a HUNDREDTH of it. Statements like that don't do much for our view of YOUR honesty Frank.

and I haven't a shred of doubt your scam just got bolder and now is totally unwilling to subject itself to any testing or verification.

Those 9,200 reference publications were ALL subject to testing, all made their data public and all passed peer review. Is that what you get from Monckton? Watts? McIntyre?

2 decades, no warming. So you went and added in the imaginary warming from the oceans

Frank, when are you going to catch on here? READ THIS FRANK AND PAY ATTENTION. The recent paper, Karl et al 2015, "Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus" is NOT based on the common comment that the oceans absorb over 90% of the Earth's excess heat. You have conflated two unrelated ideas: one old, one new. Karl et al's claim is that due to errors in the treatment of sea surface temperature measurements and poorly sampled Arctic surface readings, the global surface temperature was badly computed. The comment that the oceans absorb 90% of incoming heat is based on simple physics and has been an established observation for over a century.

ahem..........................let's see your list of thousands! For the umpteenth time. We have a list of 30k. So please explain your member list.

 

[jc456]

Crick, what is "excess heat"?

Can you please explain what it is.

It is thermal energy in excess of the amount being radiated away from the Earth and thus causing the temperature of the Earth to increase.

Surely that had occurred to you.

That makes no sense, you're claiming that the energy Earth receives from the Sun is excess heat

dude, that's another great post. OMG, that's a knee slapper. Of course it was crikster so sort of expected.

 

[jc456]

No one will deny that it seems odd that different locations on the planet would see what seems like different behavior from their local oceans, but it's a fact.

I got an offer for you Frank. You keep asking question you know are dumb. That would be something like rhetorical questions but not quite. You ask us for information and then tell us that we couldn't be right. I've got a better idea, Frank. YOU go look up the information. You go find out what the world's experts (not right wing bloggers or TV weatherman, but the actual experts) think the world's oceans are doing. Okay? There's a boy. And you make sure you come back here and tell us who said what, ok? Ok.

It doesn't "seem odd" it seems like a fraud

that's because when you heat a cup of water, you actually get two cups of water. It has to be to get to the stupid figures they get to. Now, take a cup of water and put it in a microwave for thirty seconds and you know what it comes out as a cup of water. I don't get that magic two cups. I'm being cheated by my water.

 

[jc456]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Matt, you've lied in other threads, you have no reputation to post such things against frank.

 

[ScienceRocks]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Matt, you've lied in other threads, you have no reputation to post such things against frank.

You either and prove what I said is a lie. You're the liar that thinks our oceans don't hold more energy then the air over the land. Water takes 4 times as much energy to warm it as frank says and it takes a lot longer too cool. So the fact that our oceans are warming as they're should concern the entire world.

 

[jc456]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Matt, you've lied in other threads, you have no reputation to post such things against frank.

You either and prove what I said is a lie. You're the liar that thinks our oceans don't hold more energy then the air over the land. Water takes 4 times as much energy to warm it as frank says and it takes a lot longer too cool. So the fact that our oceans are warming as they're should concern the entire world.

but s0n what warms the water? You know the answer, let's see you give it.

 

[jc456]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Matt, you've lied in other threads, you have no reputation to post such things against frank.

You either and prove what I said is a lie. You're the liar that thinks our oceans don't hold more energy then the air over the land. Water takes 4 times as much energy to warm it as frank says and it takes a lot longer too cool. So the fact that our oceans are warming as they're should concern the entire world.

BTW, I proved you lied about Germany and coal was dead. Now, you sir either prove Germany doesn't buy coal today or you are still a liar or admit you errored.

 

[Crick]

Making an error is not the same thing as telling a lie.

 

[jc456]

Making an error is not the same thing as telling a lie.

it is if you don't acknowledge it as such. Don't you think?

Will you say that coal is dead, and especially in Germany?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Yes Matty the AGWCult guaranteed themselves a ticket to the curb next to Ghostbusters with that one.

Where did this "excess heat" come from? From a wisp of CO2?

 

[Crick]

Is that a scientific term Frank? "A wisp of CO2? Are there milliwisps and Megawisps, kilowisps and atawisps. Have you worked out the feels like warming per wisp by long time?

You realize you're trying to reject hundred year old science. Your man Koch found tiny wisps of CO2 absorbed IR very efficiently. You're not throwing out Koch and Angstrom are you?

 

[ScienceRocks]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Yes Matty the AGWCult guaranteed themselves a ticket to the curb next to Ghostbusters with that one.

Where did this "excess heat" come from? From a wisp of CO2?

1. Does water hold more energy then the atmosphere? Takes more energy to break the atomic bonds to move to the next energy level of "gas".
2. Is co2 a green house gas?

 

[jc456]

just saw this information while looking at the Hockey Schtick. From a tweet to the hockey schtick from the hockey schtick:

hockey schtick on Twitter New paper shows sea levels higher than modern levels 0 on graph during past 8 interglacials http t.co BGSUfN9WpV http t.co HRoM3NBWVT

 

[jc456]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Yes Matty the AGWCult guaranteed themselves a ticket to the curb next to Ghostbusters with that one.

Where did this "excess heat" come from? From a wisp of CO2?

1. Does water hold more energy then the atmosphere? Takes more energy to break the atomic bonds to move to the next energy level of "gas".
2. Is co2 a green house gas?

2. Is co2 a green house gas?

What do you believe the CO2 does with IR waves? how warm is 10 PPM of CO2?

 

[Old Rocks]

jc, have you ever considered taking even a 100 level science class? You are one of the most ignorant posters on this board.

CO2 does what any molecule does with absorbed energy. It moves an electron with that energy, then the electron moves back to where it was, in one or more steps, and emits energy equal to that absorbed. Perhaps you really should start at grade school level science, on second thought.

 

[jc456]

jc, have you ever considered taking even a 100 level science class? You are one of the most ignorant posters on this board.

CO2 does what any molecule does with absorbed energy. It moves an electron with that energy, then the electron moves back to where it was, in one or more steps, and emits energy equal to that absorbed. Perhaps you really should start at grade school level science, on second thought.

so in other words, jc, I have no fricken idea how warm 10 PPM of CO2 is. Can't you just say that?

 

[skookerasbil]

nobody cares about the sea level rise except the OCD environmental nutters who get hysterical over EVERYTHING.

Lets face it........we all know people like this. Overprotective k00k mothers come to mind......you just have some people who live life hypersensitive to most anything they come across. The antithesis of the risk takers. This is the life mindset of these people...........the world is a tragic place and they spend their entire lives falling all over themselves to try and control it!! HOLY FUCK.....what a way to live!!!

Thats the general dynamic you have going on here.........a small % of the population that connect the dots in a different way from the rest of us ( and thank God for that!!). Imagine if a majority of the population thought like that? We'd be back to pony express and sitting around in candlelight at night frying our assess off with no air conditioning in summer.


Yep./....it'd be awesome!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Is that a scientific term Frank? "A wisp of CO2? Are there milliwisps and Megawisps, kilowisps and atawisps. Have you worked out the feels like warming per wisp by long time?

You realize you're trying to reject hundred year old science. Your man Koch found tiny wisps of CO2 absorbed IR very efficiently. You're not throwing out Koch and Angstrom are you?

A wisp of CO2 is causing excess heat that is absorbed by the oceans.

Uh huh

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Excess" Heat, um it's like heat, but it's extra, yeah. It's the imaginary heat cause by the GHG's, right? and it's gets devoured by the oceans

The simply fact that the ocean can take in more energy is why it devours it. The enso, pdo, etc cycles release it causing a spike in global temperatures.

Yes Matty the AGWCult guaranteed themselves a ticket to the curb next to Ghostbusters with that one.

Where did this "excess heat" come from? From a wisp of CO2?

1. Does water hold more energy then the atmosphere? Takes more energy to break the atomic bonds to move to the next energy level of "gas".
2. Is co2 a green house gas?

It takes far more energy to warm water than air. Where was this imaginary "Excess heat" prior to warming the ocean?
How did this magical excess heat warm the oceans down to 3,000 meters?
Why does the AGWCult lie, shuck and jive 24/7?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

jc, have you ever considered taking even a 100 level science class? You are one of the most ignorant posters on this board.

CO2 does what any molecule does with absorbed energy. It moves an electron with that energy, then the electron moves back to where it was, in one or more steps, and emits energy equal to that absorbed. Perhaps you really should start at grade school level science, on second thought.

Translation: I got nothing but insults