Pacific Ocean waters absorbing heat 15 times faster over past 60 years than in past 1

[CrusaderFrank]

I don't give a rat's ass what happened during the MWP or the LIA or any other pre-human period. WE are the cause of the current temperature rise. All this MWP crap is 100% worthless distraction.

When dealing with a cyclical system, it helps to know what happened during previous cycles.

But thanks for proving yet again you're simply not serious about science.

We have, and there is no evidence that either the MWP or the LIA is cyclical. Next.

Sure, Jake

 

[daveman]

You realize you never addressed the point under discussion.

For the last 150 years, temperature has been following CO2.

BTW, I haven't been to Skeptical Science in weeks. Believe it or not, there are actually OTHER websites that have accurate information about climate change.

Funny how CO2 has been following temperature since the beginning of time, isn't it?

Since Man started emitting CO2, I guess it just got stronger.

If you warm the world, you'll get CO2: from melted tundra, increased anaerobic breakdown and decreased oceanic carbonate solubility. But that doesn't alter the fact that CO2 will make the world warmer.

For a good part of the Earth's history, CO2 DOES follow temperature increases caused by other means. But, as Marcott (of Marcott and Rahmstorff) found, once the process has begun, CO2 comes to lead temperature in almost every case. That is, something causes the Earth to warm: a solar maximum, an orbital variation, extreme vulcanism....the added warmth causes CO2 in the atmosphere to build up. The CO2 begins to trap solar energy and after a few hundred years pass, it is that greenhouse effect that drives the continued warming.

...except when it doesn't.

Reality steadfastly refuses to cooperate with your doomsday cult. Oh, well.

 

[daveman]

Fine by me. Have at it.

You found a picture of a sediment core. You DIDN'T prove how it fits Fla's condition: "if those 10,000 yr mud samples from the Pacific can FIND 0.18degC and do THAT with 60 years of TIME RESOLUTION ".

He seemed a bit incontinent, so I offered him an out.

So...you got nothin'.

I'd be surprised, but I know better.

 

[daveman]

I chuckle everytime I see that paper summarized as BTK 2013...

Heeeee'sss BACK !!!!! The Bind, Torture, Kill serial killer. And he's coming to a Journal near you soon.

Betcha Trenberth took second billing just to get that acronym...

Bind, Torture, Kill is what they want to do to the economies of the entire Western world..."for our own good", of course.

If you want to follow the money in your little conspiracy theory, I suggest you take a close look at what the Petro-chemical industry is spending it on. Guess what? It ain't on economic or weather-related disaster relief.

Really? Are they claiming the only thing that can save us is world socialism?

Meanwhile, follow your cult's money. Start with Hansen.

 

[daveman]

I don't give a rat's ass what happened during the MWP or the LIA or any other pre-human period. WE are the cause of the current temperature rise. All this MWP crap is 100% worthless distraction.

When dealing with a cyclical system, it helps to know what happened during previous cycles.

But thanks for proving yet again you're simply not serious about science.

We have, and there is no evidence that either the MWP or the LIA is cyclical. Next.

Yet, oddly, climate is cyclical.

Do keep up. Taking notes helps.

 

[daveman]

So where's the heat? If they are going to make such an absurd claim they really should be able to back it up with something...

The heat in the oceans is hiding as humidity.

Can't recognize mockery huh? Yeah.

 

[daveman]

Scientists typically underestimate future scenarios and predictions because they are cautious and, believe it or not, conservative in their estimates when there is a relatively high degree of uncertainty. Surely you've heard of what they call in statistics, degrees of freedom, in physics, they have what is called sigma. The first hint of the Higgs was a sigma 3. Further data took that to sigma 4. Sigma 5 is the highest degree of certainty in physics. They use these benchmarks because NOTHING is certain in science. There is nothing unusual about this, nor is there anything unusual about climate scientists qualifying their results. That's what all scientists do.

They've not been cautious nor have they been conservative. The models have vastly overestimated the amount of warming.

Global Warming Slowdown: The View from Space « Roy Spencer, PhD

The models suck.

Roy Spencer sucks. Try again.

No need. You saying Spencer sucks, no matter how hard you stamp your feet, is not a refutation.

 

[PMZ]

It is kindergarten simple. The climate scientists of the world are in agreement. AGW is happening right now and will get worse.

The politicians of the world are in total disarray. WTF? You expect us to fix that? What are you crazy? Deny, deny, deny. Kick that can down the road. Maybe future politicians will be smarter.

 

[orogenicman]

Bind, Torture, Kill is what they want to do to the economies of the entire Western world..."for our own good", of course.

If you want to follow the money in your little conspiracy theory, I suggest you take a close look at what the Petro-chemical industry is spending it on. Guess what? It ain't on economic or weather-related disaster relief.

Really? Are they claiming the only thing that can save us is world socialism?

You mean you don't know what they are claiming? Oh dear.

 

[orogenicman]

When dealing with a cyclical system, it helps to know what happened during previous cycles.

But thanks for proving yet again you're simply not serious about science.

We have, and there is no evidence that either the MWP or the LIA is cyclical. Next.

Yet, oddly, climate is cyclical.

Do keep up. Taking notes helps.

Can't keep track of the discussion, eh? Abe dismissed MWP and the LIA, and you spouted misdirection: Neither of those phenomenon are cyclical. Whether or not global climate is cyclical does not get you out of the fact that that the anthropomorphic changes happening in modern times are both unprecedented and a warning.

 

[orogenicman]

The heat in the oceans is hiding as humidity.

Can't recognize mockery huh? Yeah.

I recognize stupidity. Congratulations, you're it.

 

[orogenicman]

They've not been cautious nor have they been conservative. The models have vastly overestimated the amount of warming.

Global Warming Slowdown: The View from Space « Roy Spencer, PhD

The models suck.

Roy Spencer sucks. Try again.

No need. You saying Spencer sucks, no matter how hard you stamp your feet, is not a refutation.

Everyone knows that the models did not predict the current temporary hiatus warming OVER LAND. That Spencer cited the obvious doesn't make him special.

 

[Abraham3]

I know of no models that predicted the increase in OHC either. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

 

[IanC]

I know of no models that predicted the increase in OHC either. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

models predicted the tropical hotspot, which never appeared.

models didnt predict OHC increase, which (supposedly) did.

models predicted arctic sea ice melt, but at far lower levels than what actually happened.

models predicted antarctic sea ice melt, but instead it increased.



at every turn the models are mistaken yet a large contingient here think they are proof of an upcoming catastrope. odd, that.

 

[IanC]

as to the OP-

the proxy data are limited in resolution. you cannot splice one type of data with another of different resolution, and then conclude that the higher resolution shows 'the highest rate of change' ever. low resolution data by definition washes out the variance. try running the CET data with a hundred year filter and see how close to a straight line it is.

also, an interesting point to ponder is that apparently the OHC is lower now than it has been for most of the last 5000+ years. people think that the oceans are getting ready to boil while the proxy evidence suggests that it is very cool and has only recently started to warm up again. is that the message the media is putting out to the public?

 

[PMZ]

The energy of incoming radiation in excess of outgoing is going somewhere and will be stored in earth's systems somewhere until AGW restores balance. Every year that proceeds, in imbalance, will store more energy here and require more AGW to correct.

 

[PMZ]

There is another word for atmospheric energy.

Weather. That’s the main mechanism earth has, to deal with energy.

The recent typhoon (hurricane) in the Philippines is now expected to have killed more than 10,000 people.

Did that cure any of our energy imbalance caused by GHGs resistance to OLR? . None. It moved it through various earthly systems where it continues to reside.

Only higher climactic temperatures can correct the imbalance that fossil fuel use brought upon us.

 

[daveman]

If you want to follow the money in your little conspiracy theory, I suggest you take a close look at what the Petro-chemical industry is spending it on. Guess what? It ain't on economic or weather-related disaster relief.

Really? Are they claiming the only thing that can save us is world socialism?

You mean you don't know what they are claiming? Oh dear.

I know what they're claiming. I also know they're investing in renewables research.

And why did you snip the bit about Hansen's profiteering from AGW? Get a little to uncomfortable for you?

 

[daveman]

We have, and there is no evidence that either the MWP or the LIA is cyclical. Next.

Yet, oddly, climate is cyclical.

Do keep up. Taking notes helps.

Can't keep track of the discussion, eh? Abe dismissed MWP and the LIA, and you spouted misdirection: Neither of those phenomenon are cyclical. Whether or not global climate is cyclical does not get you out of the fact that that the anthropomorphic changes happening in modern times are both unprecedented and a warning.

I said climate is cyclical. And it is; this is not even debatable. Abe laughably tried to refute this idea by mentioning the MWP and the LIA. You backed him up.

Is the climate cyclical? NOTE: The only possible correct answer is "Yes".

 

[daveman]

Can't recognize mockery huh? Yeah.

I recognize stupidity. Congratulations, you're it.

Nothing is more curious than the almost savage hostility that humor excites in those who lack it.

-- George Saintsbury