Get your imaginary 'pause' off me, you damn delusional deniers

[RollingThunder]

The real issue that the fossil fuel industry propagandists want everybody to ignore is the fact that the Earth's oceans are absorbing over 90% of the extra heat that the increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is retaining. The Earth has not stopped warming...just the opposite actually...global warming has, in fact, been still accelerating. The oceans have always been absorbing most of the excess heat the elevated CO2 has been retaining but in the last decade or so, even more of the excess heat has gone into the oceans than has gone into the atmosphere due to prolonged and repeated La Nina events in the Pacific that pull colder water to the surface and transfer warmer water to the ocean depths.

Here is an excellent article, written by one of the foremost climate scientists and published on one of the premier science based climate info websites that is written by actual climate scientists, describing what is happening now.

What ocean heating reveals about global warming
by Stefan Rahmstorf - physicist, oceanographer, climate scientist
RealClimate
25 September 2013
(excerpts)
The heat content of the oceans is growing and growing. That means that the greenhouse effect has not taken a pause and the cold sun is not noticeably slowing global warming. NOAA posts regularly updated measurements of the amount of heat stored in the bulk of the oceans. For the upper 2000 m (deeper than that not much happens) it looks like this:

Change in the heat content in the upper 2000 m of the world’s oceans. Source: NOAA

The amount of heat stored in the oceans is one of the most important diagnostics for global warming, because about 90% of the additional heat is stored there (you can read more about this in the last IPCC report from 2007). The atmosphere stores only about 2% because of its small heat capacity. The surface (including the continental ice masses) can only absorb heat slowly because it is a poor heat conductor. Thus, heat absorbed by the oceans accounts for almost all of the planet’s radiative imbalance. If the oceans are warming up, this implies that the Earth must absorb more solar energy than it emits longwave radiation into space. This is the only possible heat source. That’s simply the first law of thermodynamics, conservation of energy. This conservation law is why physicists are so interested in looking at the energy balance of anything. Because we understand the energy balance of our Earth, we also know that global warming is caused by greenhouse gases – which have caused the largest imbalance in the radiative energy budget over the last century. If the greenhouse effect (that checks the exit of longwave radiation from Earth into space) or the amount of absorbed sunlight diminished, one would see a slowing in the heat uptake of the oceans. The measurements show that this is not the case. The increase in the amount of heat in the oceans amounts to 17 x 1022 Joules over the last 30 years. The data in the graphs comes from the World Ocean Database. The data set includes nine million measured temperature profiles from all of the world’s oceans.

 

[flacaltenn]

None of that OHeating ALONE would be a solid excuse for a surface temp pause.. Because anyone can clearly see that the RATE OF UPTAKE by the oceans (according to that method) is almost completely the SAME for the past 40 yrs or so...

Don't google, Dont wiki, and definately dont skepticalscience this.. Tell me (in your words) how a sudden pause in surface temp warming SUDDENLY POPS up after 40+ yrs of CONSTANT Ocean "warming"...

And BTW -- the land surface MAY BE a poor conductor of heat, but the Oceans are DEFINITELY a POOR ABSORBER of the LongWave radiation from increased CO2.. I'd call that even. IF the oceans are absorbing heat at that rate -- it's more likely from Direct solar insolation and surface effects of mixing...

Give ya a clue -- UV direct radiation HAS INCREASED greatly over the past couple decades.. But that's a clue waaaaay beyond your paygrade and your playmates at SkS....

 

[RollingThunder]

None of that OHeating ALONE would be a solid excuse for a surface temp pause..

There has been no "pause" in surface air temperature warming (see the OP). Because you get the basics wrong, fecalhead, everything you say that is based on your misunderstandings of science and the misinformation that you embrace, is complete nonsense.

 

[Politico]

What kind of retard would think nature could pause Rollingthunder? Ooops.....

 

[Kosh]

None of that OHeating ALONE would be a solid excuse for a surface temp pause..

There has been no "pause" in surface air temperature warming (see the OP). Because you get the basics wrong, fecalhead, everything you say that is based on your misunderstandings of science and the misinformation that you embrace, is complete nonsense.

De Nile is not just a river in Egypt.

 

[flacaltenn]

None of that OHeating ALONE would be a solid excuse for a surface temp pause..

There has been no "pause" in surface air temperature warming (see the OP). Because you get the basics wrong, fecalhead, everything you say that is based on your misunderstandings of science and the misinformation that you embrace, is complete nonsense.

You go back to the DEAD AND BURIED OP ???

It's dishonest and wrong.. Proven.. End of discussion.. The rate of surface warming is in the second digit right of the decimal point.. If THAT'S what you're relying on --- you deserve extra-special mocking..

This whole thread is a series of monumental excuse fails..

How come you couldn't INTERPRET that linear ocean warming for me?
You dive for cover if anyone asks you to actually THINK and INTERPRET the gigantic dumps you post here..

Go back and try again.. Because I need corroboration that you don't understand a nit about the stuff you post.. Answer the damn questions...

 

[flacaltenn]

Post 102 TinkerBelle.. Answer the questions...

 

[RollingThunder]

Here's some good relevant information on this topic.

Ocean Heat Content as an Indicator of Global Warming
AccuWeather
September 09, 2013
(excerpts)
Global warming does not just take into account the land-surface temperature changes, but also the ocean temperature changes. The ratio of global heating going into the oceans versus the land, atmosphere and ice has steadily increased over the past 40 years.

Image below courtesy of Church et al. (2011)

Keep in mind, the oceans make up 71 percent of the Earth's surface and a vast majority of the recent warming has been going into the oceans.

Image below courtesy of Climate.gov.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=047vmL6Q_4g]No Slowdown in Global Warming - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Kosh]

AGW church propaganda is all they have.

 

[RollingThunder]

AGW church propaganda is all they have.

In the real world, it is called 'scientific research', Klod, but unfortunately you are just way too retarded to understand what that means.

 

[gnarlylove]

First let me make one "relevant comment" so what's his name will get off my back. People seem to have trouble with it becoming cold when "global warming" is allegedly real.

The trouble is equivocation--basically means there are two types of global warming: the science version and the version as you understand it. The latter tacitly says global warming is a prediction that every single day will be warmer than it was on that day one year ago. This is obviously false.

Can there be cold weather with "global warming?" There can be cold days, colder than usual even, because global warming predicts a disruption in normal climate patterns. So more erratic weather with cold snaps with quick warming and returning to cold again is undeniably a matter of global climate change. Now why would that be? Mostly because coal oil and gas undeniably release verifiable trillions of tons of CO2 which is a molecule known to prevent sun rays from exiting the atmosphere, which in turn has the obviously effect of retaining sunlight within the atmosphere. Which does what kids? That's right....on average temperatures rise by a few degrees which is small to our narrow minds but given the delicate balance of earth it turns out to have real world consequences: it undeniably melts ice, sea levels rise and millions are displaced while also acidifying the oceans killing a quarter of all marine life--I can hear you know "So what?" Well if you can't see the value in life then this world is not for you: you want heaven. Among 1400 glaciers studied around the world, all but 4 have either retreated or disappeared. This is undeniably a result of warming temperatures...it's just unfortunate you cannot get past the two simple words that incite so much rage within you: global warming. ('Chasing Ice' Review: A Stunning Visual Truth of Glacial Retreat - Yahoo Voices - voices.yahoo.com)

Another undiscussed relevant point is: Don't forget, it's summer in half the world right now! Australia has had 120 degree days while we had 0 and -20 degree days. Global warming in Australia is evidently quite "real" using this impoverished logic scribbled about this forum.

During the winter, global warming predicts more precipitation than usual. Global warming claims that on average the world is warming by only a couple degrees Celsius or 4.x-5 degrees F. So any week long cold spells surely cannot tip the scales of the other 50 weeks that were invariably warmer ON AVERAGE than years prior like in the 1970s 80s and 90s.

Only someone who doesn't belong NEAR a science oriented forum would expell that many useless thoughts and words in order to AVOID stating a single cogent TOPICAL fact.. But hey,, that's only slightly worse than the MAJORITY of warmers in this forum that rely on a pseudo-science website with multiple FELONY data manipulation convictions for THEIR opinions.
They could not post without it..

Maybe you really aren't into this topic.. Go choose another.. Or try to sell your psychoanalysis skills in the Politics forum eh???

I'll give you a cogent fact --- go look up "psychological projection" .. It's an actual disease.. Seek treatment..

Thank you for diagnosing me over the internet and being clearly convinced you're right and that you have all the relevant data. I know you'd put money on how ill I am. My obvious retardation prevented me from noticing I had no interest in addressing the topic. I attempted my best effort at addressing the original post but my diseases (and there are hundreds) had decieved me into writing about what I had read over the last few weeks on this site and prompted by SJ. It was a fluke I quoted a relevant example because my model was blindly typed out. Gosh! I am such a piece of shit. I apologize. Let me take my meds cause I have 88 to take and have been avoiding them.

I considered posting it as a new thread but didn't think it would do any good. I know it wouldn't get through to any thick skulled people but was hoping for some laughs or something...who knew what I was really asking for was a quaint diagnosis at no charge. It is HIGHLY appreciated and I welcome you to inform me more about myself.

No, posting on here does about as much good as starving a pitbull and teasing it with a steak does. The messages people have written serve one unified purpose: incite anger in one another because the vast majority of posts are mano y mano name calling replies with a few shakes of piss on the real topic.

Now if all you can see is rage against people who do not share your views then it makes sense you would flip out and become spuriously "concerned" for my mental well being. You lept at the opportunity to tell me how irrelevant my post was. Funny, I thought it was clear I was making no effort to spin myself in circles like is going on here. Yet when I try to post something different instead of "no you're wrong you dumb ass mother fucker. you're facts are wrong and mine are right" you go so far as to give me a prognosis: get help.

Why would you want me to get help though? I don't understand why would you care about my well being? If all you have to say is an ad hominem against me, which does not discredit my model, then I will pray to your god for you.

Now where should I go see my mental health doctor?

 

[freedombecki]

Get your imaginary 'pause' off me, you damn delusional deniers
(Slight homage to 'The Planet of the Apes')

After further scientific study, it turns out that there has been no "pause" or "hiatus" or "flattening" in the rising temperature trend known as global warming. In fact, global warming is still accelerating in response to the rapidly rising CO2 levels. The apparent 'pause' in the rate of increase in (just) surface air temperatures, that the deniers and some of the media have tried to turn into a refutation of anthropogenic global warming, has been debunked before in several different ways, such as:
* pointing out the statistical deceit of cherry-picking the unusually hot, super-El Niño year of 1998 as a start point for a trend analysis.
* pointing out that satellite and ground based instrumentation show that the Earth is still receiving more energy from the sun than is being radiated away into space so that extra heat energy is warming something up somewhere on Earth.
* pointing out the fact that surface air temperatures only represent about 3% of the energy the Earth receives from the Sun and the oceans have always been absorbing at least 90% of the extra heat energy the Earth is retaining.
* citing research showing that the oceans have been warming faster and at greater depths in the last decade or two.
* showing that after the strongest El Niño on record in 1998, which pulled a lot of warmer water to the surface, the Pacific has been dominated by La Niña events that pull cooler water to the surface and transfer warmer water to the depths. There have been no really strong El Niño events since 1998.
* the warming trend was slightly offset by a prolonged solar minimum that reduced the amount of solar heating the Earth was receiving.
* warming was also slightly reduced by increased volcanic and industrial particulate emissions in the stratosphere that reflect incoming solar energy back into space and produce a cooling effect.

Now some new recently published research indicates that even the apparent slowdown in surface air temperatures, that was suggested by the existing surface air temperature records, is just a result of a lack of data about the sharp increase in temperatures in the Arctic where temperatures have been going up faster than anyplace else on Earth. New analysis of temperature increases in the Arctic and other places combined with existing satellite temperature records shows that the rate of even the surface air temperature part of the overall global warming has continued at about the same rate over the last 16 years as it had been in the previous two decades. At the same time, there has been an increase in the rate of warming of the oceans, which have always been absorbing about 90% of the extra heat energy that the Earth has been retaining due to the increased CO2 levels mankind has produced in the atmosphere. Now this extra heat has penetrated the deeper ocean waters. The oceans are warming, the land is warming, the air is warming, the polar ice and mountain glaciers are melting, the permafrost is melting, climate patterns are changing - global warming continues unabated, and will inevitably only get worse in the years (and decades and centuries) to come. There is, however, still a chance to mitigate the severity of some of the eventual negative effects of AGW/CC if the world quickly takes the necessary steps to restrict carbon emissions, and then works hard at figuring out cheap ways to draw down atmospheric CO2 levels to something livable.

Global warming since 1997 more than twice as fast as previously estimated, new study shows
A new study fills in the gaps missed by the Met Office, and finds the warming 'pause' is barely a speed bump
The Guardian
Dana Nuccitelli
13 November 2013
(excerpts)
A new paper published in The Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society fills in the gaps in the UK Met Office HadCRUT4 surface temperature data set, and finds that the global surface warming since 1997 has happened more than twice as fast as the HadCRUT4 estimate. The study, authored by Kevin Cowtan from the University of York and Robert Way from the University of Ottawa, notes that the Met Office data set only covers about 84 percent of the Earth's surface. There are large gaps in its coverage, mainly in the Arctic, Antarctica, and Africa, where temperature monitoring stations are relatively scarce. In their paper, Cowtan & Way apply a statistical method known as "kriging" to fill in the gaps between surface measurements, but they do so for both land and oceans. In a second approach, they also take advantage of the near-global coverage of satellite observations, combining the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH) satellite temperature measurements with the available surface data to fill in the gaps with a 'hybrid' temperature data set. Both of their new surface temperature data sets show significantly more warming over the past 16 years than HadCRUT4. This is mainly due to HadCRUT4 missing accelerated Arctic warming, especially since 1997.

Cowtan & Way investigate the claim of a global surface warming 'pause' over the past 16 years by examining the trends from 1997 through 2012. While HadCRUT4 only estimates the surface warming trend at 0.046°C per decade during that time, and NASA puts it at 0.080°C per decade, the new kriging and hybrid data sets estimate the trend during this time at 0.11 and 0.12°C per decade, respectively. These results indicate that the slowed warming of average global surface temperature is not as significant as previously believed. Surface warming has slowed somewhat, in large part due to more overall global warming being transferred to the oceans over the past decade. However, these sorts of temporary surface warming slowdowns (and speed-ups) occur on a regular basis due to short-term natural influences. The results of this study also have bearing on some recent research. For example, correcting for the recent cool bias indicates that global surface temperatures are not as far from the average of climate model projections as we previously thought, and certainly fall within the range of individual climate model temperature simulations. The perceived recent slowdown of global surface temperatures remains an interesting scientific question. It appears to be due to some combination of internal factors (more global warming going into the oceans), external factors (relatively low solar activity and high volcanic activity), and an underestimate of the actual global surface warming. How much each factor is contributing is being investigated by extensive scientific research, but the Cowtan & Way paper suggests the latter explanation is a significant contributor.

© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

Chill, baby, chill!

[ame="http://youtu.be/J5iPbihuzPc"]Lake Michigan has turned into a sea of ice balls in Glen Arbor - YouTube[/ame]

 

[gnarlylove]

Give ya a clue -- UV direct radiation HAS INCREASED greatly over the past couple decades.. But that's a clue waaaaay beyond your paygrade and your playmates at SkS....

I know, way above anyone's paygrade: how did you even get this sort of impossible to acquire info.

"Reductions in stratospheric ozone levels will lead to higher levels of UVB reaching the Earth's surface. The sun's output of UVB does not change; rather, less ozone means less protection, and hence more UVB reaches the Earth. Studies have shown that in the Antarctic, the amount of UVB measured at the surface can double during the annual ozone hole. Another study confirmed the relationship between reduced ozone and increased UVB levels in Canada during the past several years."

Scientists have demonstrated a direct reduction in phytoplankton production due to ozone depletion-related increases in UVB. One study has indicated a 6-12% reduction in the marginal ice zone.

Solar UVB radiation has been found to cause damage to early developmental stages of fish, shrimp, crab, amphibians and other animals. The most severe effects are decreased reproductive capacity and impaired larval development. Even at current levels, solar UVB radiation is a limiting factor, and small increases in UVB exposure could result in significant reduction in the size of the population of animals that eat these smaller creatures."

From Health and Environmental Effects of Ozone Layer Depletion | Science | Ozone Layer Protection | US EPA

Even the EPA notes how this is damaging the environment and the EPA does not do there job at all! They are constantly attacked by big business and so choose to fall in line instead of report violations and fines (of course not all the time but often). Example: they still don't think fracking contaminates water supplies so you know this report is legit and has passed the rigors of big business' approval. So the fact is extra UV is causing depletions in not just far off marine life but life that we eat and use to sustain us. So as we continue to watch UV increase we will also see harm in the oceans causing us to pay higher prices for the tasty morsels some of us crave.

Oh that's right, any person who disagrees with you falls under your paygrade so let me assure you oh wise master of truth, you are deceiving yourself if you believe your own words

You're obvious concern is with how superior you are to us so go ahead and indulge. Go ahead and suck my teats. They will provide you with the feeling of superiority you seek. That's it precious baby, suck it hard and feel better. You are better than me in every way. I'm glad because that's the real goal of discussion and debate. Forget reaching mutually agreeable conclusions and compromises--that's for thinking idiots--and who has time to think and research when you can intuit?

You are a god who acts and says things based on your infallible instincts. I mean to question you is like questioning god AND the pope. Somebody is deluded. Hint: it's you (and if you can't admit you deceive yourself, than you are way too high in the sky to care about what I'm trying to discuss with you. As for me I know I have deceived myself many times and realizing it helps me to get rid of shitty ideas. No one is perfect but I know you cannot admit you are deceiving yourself because you don't even know how not to deceive yourself. I'm not saying this discredits your views, I'm merely bringing your attention to it for otherwise its a logical fallacy which you cannot seem to understand.

Either way take your pick: call me stupid or stop revealing your poverty of debate and words by discussing an idea without calling attention the person's stupidity or paygrade. Stick to the idea! I bet you cannot.

 

[RollingThunder]

First let me make one "relevant comment" so what's his name will get off my back. People seem to have trouble with it becoming cold when "global warming" is allegedly real.

The trouble is equivocation--basically means there are two types of global warming: the science version and the version as you understand it. The latter tacitly says global warming is a prediction that every single day will be warmer than it was on that day one year ago. This is obviously false.

Can there be cold weather with "global warming?" There can be cold days, colder than usual even, because global warming predicts a disruption in normal climate patterns. So more erratic weather with cold snaps with quick warming and returning to cold again is undeniably a matter of global climate change. Now why would that be? Mostly because coal oil and gas undeniably release verifiable trillions of tons of CO2 which is a molecule known to prevent sun rays from exiting the atmosphere, which in turn has the obviously effect of retaining sunlight within the atmosphere. Which does what kids? That's right....on average temperatures rise by a few degrees which is small to our narrow minds but given the delicate balance of earth it turns out to have real world consequences: it undeniably melts ice, sea levels rise and millions are displaced while also acidifying the oceans killing a quarter of all marine life--I can hear you know "So what?" Well if you can't see the value in life then this world is not for you: you want heaven. Among 1400 glaciers studied around the world, all but 4 have either retreated or disappeared. This is undeniably a result of warming temperatures...it's just unfortunate you cannot get past the two simple words that incite so much rage within you: global warming. ('Chasing Ice' Review: A Stunning Visual Truth of Glacial Retreat - Yahoo Voices - voices.yahoo.com)

Another undiscussed relevant point is: Don't forget, it's summer in half the world right now! Australia has had 120 degree days while we had 0 and -20 degree days. Global warming in Australia is evidently quite "real" using this impoverished logic scribbled about this forum.

During the winter, global warming predicts more precipitation than usual. Global warming claims that on average the world is warming by only a couple degrees Celsius or 4.x-5 degrees F. So any week long cold spells surely cannot tip the scales of the other 50 weeks that were invariably warmer ON AVERAGE than years prior like in the 1970s 80s and 90s.

Only someone who doesn't belong NEAR a science oriented forum would expell that many useless thoughts and words in order to AVOID stating a single cogent TOPICAL fact.. But hey,, that's only slightly worse than the MAJORITY of warmers in this forum that rely on a pseudo-science website with multiple FELONY data manipulation convictions for THEIR opinions.
They could not post without it..

Maybe you really aren't into this topic.. Go choose another.. Or try to sell your psychoanalysis skills in the Politics forum eh???

I'll give you a cogent fact --- go look up "psychological projection" .. It's an actual disease.. Seek treatment..

Thank you for diagnosing me over the internet and being clearly convinced you're right and that you have all the relevant data. I know you'd put money on how ill I am. My obvious retardation prevented me from noticing I had no interest in addressing the topic. I attempted my best effort at addressing the original post but my diseases (and there are hundreds) had decieved me into writing about what I had read over the last few weeks on this site and prompted by SJ. It was a fluke I quoted a relevant example because my model was blindly typed out. Gosh! I am such a piece of shit. I apologize. Let me take my meds cause I have 88 to take and have been avoiding them.

I considered posting it as a new thread but didn't think it would do any good. I know it wouldn't get through to any thick skulled people but was hoping for some laughs or something...who knew what I was really asking for was a quaint diagnosis at no charge. It is HIGHLY appreciated and I welcome you to inform me more about myself.

No, posting on here does about as much good as starving a pitbull and teasing it with a steak does. The messages people have written serve one unified purpose: incite anger in one another because the vast majority of posts are mano y mano name calling replies with a few shakes of piss on the real topic.

Now if all you can see is rage against people who do not share your views then it makes sense you would flip out and become spuriously "concerned" for my mental well being. You lept at the opportunity to tell me how irrelevant my post was. Funny, I thought it was clear I was making no effort to spin myself in circles like is going on here. Yet when I try to post something different instead of "no you're wrong you dumb ass mother fucker. you're facts are wrong and mine are right" you go so far as to give me a prognosis: get help.

Why would you want me to get help though? I don't understand why would you care about my well being? If all you have to say is an ad hominem against me, which does not discredit my model, then I will pray to your god for you.

Now where should I go see my mental health doctor?

Actually, gnarly, your original post (#88) was right on. The denier cultists just have a very low tolerance for that kind of accurate diagnosis of their mental deficiencies. The moronic attacks are to be expected.

I would caution you though against using a lot of sarcasm in your responses to them. Most of them really are too stupid to 'get it'.

 

[SwimExpert]

Why is it that the climate alarmists can never argue a point directly? All they ever do is jump up and down over things that are tangentially related to their core assertions, or say things like "EVERYBODYKNOWSITGODDAMMIT!" but never do they get to the fucking point. Ask them for even one specific thing, and they say "Oh, it doesn't matter." I'm really starting to understand why some people are calling this whole thing a religion. Because these guys are fanatical to the extreme. It reeks of Scientology.

 

[RollingThunder]

Why is it that the climate alarmists can never argue a point directly?

That's your own retarded delusion that has nothing to do with reality, SwineExlax, as anyone who follows these debates knows full well.

Perhaps you get confused because so many of the "points" raised by you deranged denier cultists are actually vacuous nonsense?

 

[gnarlylove]

Actually, gnarly, your original post (#88) was right on. The denier cultists just have a very low tolerance for that kind of accurate diagnosis of their mental deficiencies. The moronic attacks are to be expected.

I would caution you though against using a lot of sarcasm in your responses to them. Most of them really are too stupid to 'get it'.

Thank you. I wondered about it but you confirm that the wiz kids on here are actually educated up till about the 5th grade and so can't understand my finer points. Figures cause damn have I waded through some crazy replies like RGR being concerned with how I plan to deal with CO2 expelled by humans! Uh..idk muzzle every human?

The bit (long-bit) about sarcasm may not be understood but hopefully helps them take their views to their logical breaking point: argumentum ad absurdum...cause dear lord cue me in, is it worth spending any time here or should I just forget it and cash in my chips and remain sane? Are there any real discussions going on...if so let me know where to go...

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's some good relevant information on this topic.

Ocean Heat Content as an Indicator of Global Warming
AccuWeather
September 09, 2013
(excerpts)
Global warming does not just take into account the land-surface temperature changes, but also the ocean temperature changes. The ratio of global heating going into the oceans versus the land, atmosphere and ice has steadily increased over the past 40 years.

Image below courtesy of Church et al. (2011)

Keep in mind, the oceans make up 71 percent of the Earth's surface and a vast majority of the recent warming has been going into the oceans.

Image below courtesy of Climate.gov.

Not even CLOSE to answering the question.. I suppose its because you don't understand the problem.. You only parrot convienient information that LOOKS good to you..

The question is --- those charts of OHeating that you're posting show a CONSISTENT LINEAR INCREASE in Ocean Heat since the 50s or 60s --- yet this concept of Ocean Storage was trotted only recently to explain why the surface temp record has virtually stalled out for 15 years.. If the Ocean Heating is the same amount of heat going into storage per year NOW as compared to say 1965, why wasn't there a REDUCTION in the surface heating in the 1980s and 1990s???

You don't even have the option of postulating that that amount of heat going into Davy Jones has INCREASED per year since that's not what your data is showing.. Same volume of water, same amount of yearly heat content increase = linear increase in Joules..

Got an explanation??

 

[CrusaderFrank]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2QX7GZJRpE]Led Zeppelin - The Ocean (Live in New York 1973) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[flacaltenn]

First let me make one "relevant comment" so what's his name will get off my back. People seem to have trouble with it becoming cold when "global warming" is allegedly real.

The trouble is equivocation--basically means there are two types of global warming: the science version and the version as you understand it. The latter tacitly says global warming is a prediction that every single day will be warmer than it was on that day one year ago. This is obviously false.

Obviously you are stereotyping since that's not my take on the AGW scam and I have a zillion better reasons to be skeptical. You seem to want to generalize and stereotype which isn't gonna get you very far in a diverse public community of posters.

Can there be cold weather with "global warming?" There can be cold days, colder than usual even, because global warming predicts a disruption in normal climate patterns. So more erratic weather with cold snaps with quick warming and returning to cold again is undeniably a matter of global climate change. Now why would that be? Mostly because coal oil and gas undeniably release verifiable trillions of tons of CO2 which is a molecule known to prevent sun rays from exiting the atmosphere, which in turn has the obviously effect of retaining sunlight within the atmosphere. Which does what kids? That's right....on average temperatures rise by a few degrees which is small to our narrow minds but given the delicate balance of earth it turns out to have real world consequences: it undeniably melts ice, sea levels rise and millions are displaced while also acidifying the oceans killing a quarter of all marine life--I can hear you know "So what?" Well if you can't see the value in life then this world is not for you: you want heaven. Among 1400 glaciers studied around the world, all but 4 have either retreated or disappeared. This is undeniably a result of warming temperatures...it's just unfortunate you cannot get past the two simple words that incite so much rage within you: global warming. ('Chasing Ice' Review: A Stunning Visual Truth of Glacial Retreat - Yahoo Voices - voices.yahoo.com)

Much more wasted breath since I've already told you that I'm waaaaayy ahead of you on all that. And your views of WHY FOLKS ARE SKEPTICAL about AGW are quite juvenile.. You would do well to monitor the forum for awhile and debate SPECIFIC points -- rather than TELLING us what "we all believe".. In particular --- I've spent MUCH TIME discussing my issues with the immature science of GW and IN PARTICULAR the weakest point of AGW theory which is your "fragile earth" observation. Because the core disagreement I have with AGW science is the concept that a 2 or 3 degC "trigger" caused by CO2 will incite your fragile earth to commit planetcide and runaway warming and all the doom will befall us. CO2 ALONE is not sufficient to bring about the doom --- AGW had to invent numerous positive feedback loops and Magic Multipliers in order to bring that about.. In a complex system like the Earth's climate --- if the system WAS THAT UNSTABLE -- we wouldn't have made in and out multiple glaciations and 7 to 10degC changes in temperature with any atmosphere left to speak of..

Then there's issues like "turning the oceans acidic" which is at best --- a mixed message in terms of the science. Since the physics says that warmer waters absorb LESS CO2 and the natural UPTAKE of CO2 by the oceans will CEASE with any amount of warming. Yet -- the acidification horror story depends on CONTINUING and INCREASED uptake of CO2 in order to bring death and destruction.. Furthermore -- I've been thru lists of the "evidence" that warmers provide about the bio-carnage that they forecast and MOST OF THEM admit that knowledge of eco-system response to acidification is pretty rare right now.. The NATURAL daily/monthly/yearly change in LOCAL bio-systems pH is FAR higher than the immediately projected changes due to Atmos.. CO2 concentrations..

Only someone who doesn't belong NEAR a science oriented forum would expell that many useless thoughts and words in order to AVOID stating a single cogent TOPICAL fact.. But hey,, that's only slightly worse than the MAJORITY of warmers in this forum that rely on a pseudo-science website with multiple FELONY data manipulation convictions for THEIR opinions.
They could not post without it..

Maybe you really aren't into this topic.. Go choose another.. Or try to sell your psychoanalysis skills in the Politics forum eh???

I'll give you a cogent fact --- go look up "psychological projection" .. It's an actual disease.. Seek treatment..

You continue....

Thank you for diagnosing me over the internet and being clearly convinced you're right and that you have all the relevant data. I know you'd put money on how ill I am. My obvious retardation prevented me from noticing I had no interest in addressing the topic. I attempted my best effort at addressing the original post but my diseases (and there are hundreds) had decieved me into writing about what I had read over the last few weeks on this site and prompted by SJ. It was a fluke I quoted a relevant example because my model was blindly typed out. Gosh! I am such a piece of shit. I apologize. Let me take my meds cause I have 88 to take and have been avoiding them.

Only returning the favor -- since you weren't very accurate in what I believed, my best guess is that you were very insecure in you confidence about AGW and PROJECTION was a likely possibility..

I considered posting it as a new thread but didn't think it would do any good. I know it
wouldn't get through to any thick skulled people but was hoping for some laughs or something...who knew what I was really asking for was a quaint diagnosis at no charge. It is HIGHLY appreciated and I welcome you to inform me more about myself.

No, posting on here does about as much good as starving a pitbull and teasing it with a steak does. The messages people have written serve one unified purpose: incite anger in one another because the vast majority of posts are mano y mano name calling replies with a few shakes of piss on the real topic.

Now if all you can see is rage against people who do not share your views then it makes sense you would flip out and become spuriously "concerned" for my mental well being. You lept at the opportunity to tell me how irrelevant my post was. Funny, I thought it was clear I was making no effort to spin myself in circles like is going on here. Yet when I try to post something different instead of "no you're wrong you dumb ass mother fucker. you're facts are wrong and mine are right" you go so far as to give me a prognosis: get help.

Why would you want me to get help though? I don't understand why would you care about my well being? If all you have to say is an ad hominem against me, which does not discredit my model, then I will pray to your god for you.

Now where should I go see my mental health doctor?

Of course I care about you.. I grieve for all the casualties of message boards. Don't want to see you become another statistic.
Seriously man --- ME PERSONALLY --- I avoid the takedown and the kill.. I just like the chase and tormenting.

Don't know where you should go.. You should definitely look up that projection diagnosis for what its worth. And taking complex issues and topics "SLOWER" and with more deliberation would be good. When you KNOW where each of us stands on the issue and we know each other a bit better --- perhaps the technical part of all this will go smoother.. ------ OR ------- maybe not..