What hiatus?

[Abraham3]

This is the abstract of "A review of global ocean temperature observations: Implications for ocean heat content estimates and climate change"

by J. P. Abraham, M. Baringer, N. L. Bindoff, T. Boyer, L. J. Cheng, J. A. Church, J. L. Conroy, C. M. Domingues, J. T. Fasullo, J. Gilson, G. Goni, S. A. Good, J. M. Gorman, V. Gouretski, M. Ishii, G. C. Johnson, S. Kizu, J. M. Lyman, A. M. Macdonald, W. J. Minkowycz, S. E. Moffitt, M. D. Palmer, A. R. Piola, F. Reseghetti, K. Schuckmann, K. E. Trenberth, I. Velicogna and J. K. Willis

published in Reviews of Geophysics, Volume 51, Issue 3, pages 450–483, 3rd Quarter 2013

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rog.20022/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rog.v51.3/issuetoc

Abstract
[1] The evolution of ocean temperature measurement systems is presented with a focus on the development and accuracy of two critical devices in use today (expendable bathythermographs and conductivity-temperature-depth instruments used on Argo floats). A detailed discussion of the accuracy of these devices and a projection of the future of ocean temperature measurements are provided. The accuracy of ocean temperature measurements is discussed in detail in the context of ocean heat content, Earth's energy imbalance, and thermosteric sea level rise. Up-to-date estimates are provided for these three important quantities. The total energy imbalance at the top of atmosphere is best assessed by taking an inventory of changes in energy storage. The main storage is in the ocean, the latest values of which are presented. Furthermore, despite differences in measurement methods and analysis techniques, multiple studies show that there has been a multidecadal increase in the heat content of both the upper and deep ocean regions, which reflects the impact of anthropogenic warming. With respect to sea level rise, mutually reinforcing information from tide gauges and radar altimetry shows that presently, sea level is rising at approximately 3 mm yr^−1 with contributions from both thermal expansion and mass accumulation from ice melt. The latest data for thermal expansion sea level rise are included here and analyzed.
**********************************************************************
I was going to start this thread with the abstract from Murphy 2009 that I just cited to Westwall, but it doesn't seem to have much (as far as can be told from the abstract) beyond 2000. Murphy does give a heating rate of 1.1 Wm^-2 that closely matches the satellite info that Mamooth has put up repeatedly.

So, as I stated several times: the FACT that direct measurements show the Earth is accumulating solar energy at an increasing fact should REALLY mark the complete end of these IDIOTIC attempts to claim that global warming isn't taking place.

The only real question all along has been "Where is the heat going?" Since even before 1998, more than 90% of the trapped energy was going in to the oceans, it was always a prime candidate. Now loads of data from multiple studies show the heat that had been warming the surface at a good clip is very likely to be getting stashed in the deep oceans due to changes in ENSO circulation patterns.

 

[flacaltenn]

If all this heat has been going into oceans at a fairly CONSTANT rate since the 60s ---- what does that have to do with the temperature stalling circa 2000? We've seen this movie before MULTIPLE TIMES and none of the questions get answered, BTK still doesnt have a MECHANISM for long wave absorption to suddenly show up at depth, and theres STILL no sign of a grownup full journal article on their "findings".



YAWN.......... Zzzzzz-Zzzzzzzzz

 

[Abraham3]

The rate of heat content buildup increased dramatically in 1998, just when surface heating slowed. The contention here is that as warmed surface waters were subducted they were replaced by colder water from below that lowered the Earth's average surface temperature.

And why would you characterize Reviews of Geophysics as not a "grownup full journal"?

I just realized I had not posted a link to that abstract. While I was at it, I posted a link to the Reviews of Geophysics issue where it was published. Have a look so you can better detail to us the journal's failings.

 

[flacaltenn]

The rate of heat content buildup increased dramatically in 1998, just when surface heating slowed. The contention here is that as warmed surface waters were subducted they were replaced by colder water from below that lowered the Earth's average surface temperature.

Nope.. no dramatic increase in the rate of storage after 2000 or 1998. Where did you get that fable??? Another graph reading problem?

 

[Abraham3]

The Annual Cycle of the Energy Budget. Part II: Meridional Structures and Poleward Transports

John T. Fasullo and Kevin E. Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

American Meteorological Society, Journal of Climate,
Volume 21 Issue 10
(May 2008)

Abstract
Meridional structure and transports of energy in the atmosphere, ocean, and land are evaluated holistically for the mean and annual cycle zonal averages over the ocean, land, and global domains, with discussion and assessment of uncertainty. At the top of the atmosphere (TOA), adjusted radiances from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE) and Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) are used along with estimates of energy storage and transport from two global reanalysis datasets for the atmosphere. Three ocean temperature datasets are used to assess changes in the ocean heat content (OE) and their relationship to the net upward surface energy flux over ocean (FoS), which is derived from the residual of the TOA and atmospheric energy budgets. The surface flux over land is from a stand-alone simulation of the Community Land Model forced by observed fields.

In the extratropics, absorbed solar radiation (ASR) achieves a maximum in summer with peak values near the solstices. Outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) maxima also occur in summer but lag ASR by 1&#8211;2 months, consistent with temperature maxima over land. In the tropics, however, OLR relates to high cloud variations and peaks late in the dry monsoon season, while the OLR minima in summer coincide with deep convection in the monsoon trough at the height of the rainy season. Most of the difference between the TOA radiation and atmospheric energy storage tendency is made up by a large heat flux into the ocean in summer and out of the ocean in winter. In the Northern Hemisphere, the transport of energy from ocean to land regions is substantial in winter, and modest in summer. In the Southern Hemisphere extratropics, land &#8722; ocean differences play only a small role and the main energy transport by the atmosphere and ocean is poleward. There is reasonably good agreement between FoS and observed changes in OE, except for south of 40°S, where differences among several ocean datasets point to that region as the main source of errors in achieving an overall energy balance. The winter hemisphere atmospheric circulation is the dominant contributor to poleward energy transports outside of the tropics [6&#8211;7 PW (1 petawatt = 1015 W)], with summer transports being relatively weak (3 PW)&#8212;slightly more in the Southern Hemisphere and slightly less in the Northern Hemisphere. Ocean transports outside of the tropics are found to be small (<2 PW) for all months. Strong cross-equatorial heat transports in the ocean of up to 5 PW exhibit a large annual cycle in phase with poleward atmospheric transports of the winter hemisphere.

The entire article is available.

 

[flacaltenn]

The rate of heat content buildup increased dramatically in 1998, just when surface heating slowed. The contention here is that as warmed surface waters were subducted they were replaced by colder water from below that lowered the Earth's average surface temperature.

And why would you characterize Reviews of Geophysics as not a "grownup full journal"?

I just realized I had not posted a link to that abstract. While I was at it, I posted a link to the Reviews of Geophysics issue where it was published. Have a look so you can better detail to us the journal's failings.

We have had the dance about the difference between a Letter and a full scale journal article before. You have the memory of a marmot. Its all stale bread and youre not following the trail of crumbs at all........

 

[Abraham3]

The rate of heat content buildup increased dramatically in 1998, just when surface heating slowed. The contention here is that as warmed surface waters were subducted they were replaced by colder water from below that lowered the Earth's average surface temperature.

Nope.. no dramatic increase in the rate of storage after 2000 or 1998. Where did you get that fable??? Another graph reading problem?

Rate of storage. You really like that term, don't you. We have repeatedly discussed Trenberth's work. You started up a thread solely to attempt to discredit it ("When reanalysis isn't"). Remember?

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/website-archive/trenberth.papers-moved/OHC_2013GL055587_article_14March2013_ss_wFigs_wAux.pdf

Note the divergence between upper 300 and upper 700 beginning about 1998.

 

[Dot Com]

The rate of heat content buildup increased dramatically in 1998, just when surface heating slowed. The contention here is that as warmed surface waters were subducted they were replaced by colder water from below that lowered the Earth's average surface temperature.

And why would you characterize Reviews of Geophysics as not a "grownup full journal"?

I just realized I had not posted a link to that abstract. While I was at it, I posted a link to the Reviews of Geophysics issue where it was published. Have a look so you can better detail to us the journal's failings.

 

[flacaltenn]

Been here --- done this...

NOAA assessment of Ocean Heat Storage --- with REAL DATA.. Notice no volcanic signatures??
(last time we did this you SWORE you saw them.. But that was before we confirmed you can't read a graph).. Ground Hog Day...

Your move... If you want to play out the same game you lost last time..

 

[elektra]

Definitions.

Abstract; A press release

Abstracts are not science.

 

[SSDD]

Abrahan, here are a few questions regarding the undeniable pause that will be put to the alarmist at the APS in their public review of their position on AGW. A panel of 6...3 well known and respected alarmists and 3 eminent skeptics are going to conduct what amounts to a public debate regarding the APS position on AGW. The answers are going to be run by not only the membership of the APS, but they will be made public for examination and review by the rest of us.

You have been playing scientist for lo all this time now...telling us that you are well versed in the "science" of global warming, and that you are up on all the latest in the field. Give us an indication of how those alarmist scientists are going to answer these questions regarding the undeniable pause:

Regarding the "pause"


While the Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) rose strongly from 1980-98, it has shown no significant rise for the past 15 years&#8230;[The APS notes that neither the 4th nor 5th IPCC report modeling suggested any stasis would occur, and then asks] &#8230;

1. To what would you attribute the stasis?
   
   
2. If non-anthropogenic influences are strong enough to counteract the expected effects of increased CO2, why wouldn&#8217;t they be strong enough to sometimes enhance warming trends, and in so doing lead to an over-estimate of CO2 influence?
   
   
3. What are the implications of this stasis for confidence in the models and their projections?
   
   
4. What do you see as the likelihood of solar influences beyond TSI (total solar irradiance)? Is it coincidence that the statis has occurred during the weakest solar cycle (ie sunspot activity) in about a century?
   
   
5. Some have suggested that the &#8216;missing heat&#8217; is going into the deep ocean&#8230;
   
   
6. Are deep ocean observations sufficient in coverage and precision to bear on this hypothesis quantitatively?
   
   
7. Why would the heat sequestration have &#8216;turned on&#8217; at the turn of this century?
   
   
8. What could make it &#8216;turn off&#8217; and when might that occur?
   
   
9. Is there any mechanism that would allow the added heat in the deep ocean to reappear in the atmosphere?
   
   
10. IPCC suggests that the stasis can be attributed in part to &#8216;internal variability&#8217;. Yet climate models imply that a 15-year stasis is very rare and models cannot reproduce the observed Global Mean Surface Temperature even with the observed radiative forcing.
    
    
11. What is the definition of &#8216;internal variability&#8217;? Is it poorly defined initial conditions in the models or an intrinsically chaotic nature of the climate system? If the latter, what features of the climate system ARE predictable?
    
    
12. How would the models underestimate of internal variability impact detection and attribution?
    
    
13. How long must the statis persist before there would be a firm declaration of a problem with the models? If that occurs, would the fix entail: A retuning of model parameters? A modification of ocean conditions? A re-examination of fundamental assumptions?

 

[Abraham3]

Been here --- done this...

NOAA assessment of Ocean Heat Storage --- with REAL DATA.. Notice no volcanic signatures??
(last time we did this you SWORE you saw them.. But that was before we confirmed you can't read a graph).. Ground Hog Day...

Your move... If you want to play out the same game you lost last time..

You're expecting to see volcanic signatures on a five year average? That's going to have to be a hell of a volcano. I said they are visible - and clearly marked - on the Trenberth ocean heat content plot I put up for (for the tenth time) last night. If the times were noted on your plot, their may well be coincident dips. Let's see.

1992, Pinatubo. Well, bless my soul, if your graph doesn't have a dip in 1992.

1983, El Chichon. Hmm.. there's a bit of a dip there as well. How about that.

Whaddyaknow! You're WRONG. Who'd a thunk it?

 

[SSDD]

Shuck and jive...dodge and weave...duck and cover. Answer the questions above that the political head of the APS are going to be asked about the pause. You claim to be the smartest guy in the room and have cherry picked answers for everything....give us a preview of how the IPCC is going to answer the questions above.

 

[flacaltenn]

Been here --- done this...

NOAA assessment of Ocean Heat Storage --- with REAL DATA.. Notice no volcanic signatures??
(last time we did this you SWORE you saw them.. But that was before we confirmed you can't read a graph).. Ground Hog Day...

Your move... If you want to play out the same game you lost last time..

You're expecting to see volcanic signatures on a five year average? That's going to have to be a hell of a volcano. I said they are visible - and clearly marked - on the Trenberth ocean heat content plot I put up for (for the tenth time) last night. If the times were noted on your plot, their may well be coincident dips. Let's see.

1992, Pinatubo. Well, bless my soul, if your graph doesn't have a dip in 1992.

1983, El Chichon. Hmm.. there's a bit of a dip there as well. How about that.

Whaddyaknow! You're WRONG. Who'd a thunk it?

Unlike you ---- I'm hardly ever wrong on reading graphs.. And I didn't "expect" to see volcanic events in their FULL impact on a 5 yr average.. HOWEVER -- Since I've seen the UNFILTERED versions of these graphs -- I knew it was not there either...

The MODELED results of BTK VASTLY overestimate the ACTUAL effect of volcanic activity on temperature at depth.. FACT !!!!
MANY papers go on record as skeptical of detecting volcanic events at 1000meters depth.

Back to the original issue -- Where is the ACCELERATED warming that was stolen from the surface in the period of 2000 --- 2012 ???
In fact -- the NOAA PLOTS of the REAL DATA show a DECELERATION of heat storage during that period....

 

[jc456]

This is the abstract of "A review of global ocean temperature observations: Implications for ocean heat content estimates and climate change"

by J. P. Abraham, M. Baringer, N. L. Bindoff, T. Boyer, L. J. Cheng, J. A. Church, J. L. Conroy, C. M. Domingues, J. T. Fasullo, J. Gilson, G. Goni, S. A. Good, J. M. Gorman, V. Gouretski, M. Ishii, G. C. Johnson, S. Kizu, J. M. Lyman, A. M. Macdonald, W. J. Minkowycz, S. E. Moffitt, M. D. Palmer, A. R. Piola, F. Reseghetti, K. Schuckmann, K. E. Trenberth, I. Velicogna and J. K. Willis

published in Reviews of Geophysics, Volume 51, Issue 3, pages 450–483, 3rd Quarter 2013

A review of global ocean temperature observations: Implications for ocean heat content estimates and climate change - Abraham - 2013 - Reviews of Geophysics - Wiley Online Library

Reviews of Geophysics - Volume 51, Issue 3 - 3rd Quarter 2013 - Wiley Online Library

Abstract
[1] The evolution of ocean temperature measurement systems is presented with a focus on the development and accuracy of two critical devices in use today (expendable bathythermographs and conductivity-temperature-depth instruments used on Argo floats). A detailed discussion of the accuracy of these devices and a projection of the future of ocean temperature measurements are provided. The accuracy of ocean temperature measurements is discussed in detail in the context of ocean heat content, Earth's energy imbalance, and thermosteric sea level rise. Up-to-date estimates are provided for these three important quantities. The total energy imbalance at the top of atmosphere is best assessed by taking an inventory of changes in energy storage. The main storage is in the ocean, the latest values of which are presented. Furthermore, despite differences in measurement methods and analysis techniques, multiple studies show that there has been a multidecadal increase in the heat content of both the upper and deep ocean regions, which reflects the impact of anthropogenic warming. With respect to sea level rise, mutually reinforcing information from tide gauges and radar altimetry shows that presently, sea level is rising at approximately 3&#8201;mm&#8201;yr^&#8722;1 with contributions from both thermal expansion and mass accumulation from ice melt. The latest data for thermal expansion sea level rise are included here and analyzed.
**********************************************************************
I was going to start this thread with the abstract from Murphy 2009 that I just cited to Westwall, but it doesn't seem to have much (as far as can be told from the abstract) beyond 2000. Murphy does give a heating rate of 1.1 Wm^-2 that closely matches the satellite info that Mamooth has put up repeatedly.

So, as I stated several times: the FACT that direct measurements show the Earth is accumulating solar energy at an increasing fact should REALLY mark the complete end of these IDIOTIC attempts to claim that global warming isn't taking place.

The only real question all along has been "Where is the heat going?" Since even before 1998, more than 90% of the trapped energy was going in to the oceans, it was always a prime candidate. Now loads of data from multiple studies show the heat that had been warming the surface at a good clip is very likely to be getting stashed in the deep oceans due to changes in ENSO circulation patterns.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[ScienceRocks]

Been here --- done this...

NOAA assessment of Ocean Heat Storage --- with REAL DATA.. Notice no volcanic signatures??
(last time we did this you SWORE you saw them.. But that was before we confirmed you can't read a graph).. Ground Hog Day...

Your move... If you want to play out the same game you lost last time..

You're expecting to see volcanic signatures on a five year average? That's going to have to be a hell of a volcano. I said they are visible - and clearly marked - on the Trenberth ocean heat content plot I put up for (for the tenth time) last night. If the times were noted on your plot, their may well be coincident dips. Let's see.

1992, Pinatubo. Well, bless my soul, if your graph doesn't have a dip in 1992.

1983, El Chichon. Hmm.. there's a bit of a dip there as well. How about that.

Whaddyaknow! You're WRONG. Who'd a thunk it?

Unlike you ---- I'm hardly ever wrong on reading graphs.. And I didn't "expect" to see volcanic events in their FULL impact on a 5 yr average.. HOWEVER -- Since I've seen the UNFILTERED versions of these graphs -- I knew it was not there either...

The MODELED results of BTK VASTLY overestimate the ACTUAL effect of volcanic activity on temperature at depth.. FACT !!!!
MANY papers go on record as skeptical of detecting volcanic events at 1000meters depth.

Back to the original issue -- Where is the ACCELERATED warming that was stolen from the surface in the period of 2000 --- 2012 ???
In fact -- the NOAA PLOTS of the REAL DATA show a DECELERATION of heat storage during that period....

This is why I believe aerosols or the entire theory needs to be rethought. If it is rethought the public trust in science is going to be damaged greatly.

 

[Abraham3]

Recall that what BTK found was that heat was moving into the deep ocean and by deep ocean he meant below 700 meters. Read it yourself. Distinctive climate signals in reanalysis of global ocean heat content - Balmaseda - 2013 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library. In fact, he notes an observation of an unprecedented heat exchange between water above and below 700 meters.

 

[flacaltenn]

Nope.. Not hiding in deeper waters.. Because the NOAA data shows it SLOWING there for 2000 - 2012 as well.. IN FACT --- The brand new Government WHITEHOUSE climate data is already rising to the top of Google search.. Don't ask me where Barack got this graph -- but it ALSO shows a SLOWING of the heat storage during "the hiatus"....

ALL HAIL CLIMATE.GOV !!!!!!!


Wouldn't know how we could survive for all these years without it..

 

[ScienceRocks]

Nope.. Not hiding in deeper waters.. Because the NOAA data shows it SLOWING there for 2000 - 2012 as well.. IN FACT --- The brand new Government WHITEHOUSE climate data is already rising to the top of Google search.. Don't ask me where Barack got this graph -- but it ALSO shows a SLOWING of the heat storage during "the hiatus"....

ALL HAIL CLIMATE.GOV !!!!!!!


Wouldn't know how we could survive for all these years without it..

You're totally right about the 300 and 700 meter. The graph does show something different when you deal with(assuming) the purple line of the entire ocean column. I am assuming that is mostly deeper then 700 meters on down to 2,000 meters.

I glad for the research done but I want honesty and debate. Get politics out of it!

 

[Abraham3]

Nope.. Not hiding in deeper waters.. Because the NOAA data shows it SLOWING there for 2000 - 2012 as well.. IN FACT --- The brand new Government WHITEHOUSE climate data is already rising to the top of Google search.. Don't ask me where Barack got this graph -- but it ALSO shows a SLOWING of the heat storage during "the hiatus"....

ALL HAIL CLIMATE.GOV !!!!!!!


Wouldn't know how we could survive for all these years without it..

WTF are you talking about? The rise at 2000 is clear, as is the increasing spread indicating the higher warming in the deeper water.

So, what slowing are you talking about?