Recent Rapid SST Rise

[Crick]

Was Penn State more diligent investigating Dr. Mann than it had been investigating Jerry Sandusky ... just curious is all ... this is why you reject SB? ...

You've got a real obsession with SB, don't you. How much math education do you think it takes to handle working an equation whose trickiest function is an exponent?

 

[ReinyDays]

And what will higher temperatures do to the Oceans? Even without a drop of ice melt, and aside from any other environmental impacts, It will make the volume of the oceans bigger.

Indeed ... it is generally believed most of sea level rise is due to thermal expansion ... and of course melting sea ice doesn't change sea level at all ...

The question is how far down the water column will the energy reach ... if it's only the top 100 meters, then there will be very little sea level rise ... whereas if these temperature increases reach all the way down to the ocean floor, we'll see tremendous sea level rise ... widespread convection is completely inhibited in our oceans ... we heat the water on top of the column, buoyancy forces keep it there ...

Energy can travel through water as radiation ... a little ways ... but not if there's biology in the way ... and oceans are full of biology, and have been for the past 4 billion years ...

That leaves conduction ... and that's real damn slow ...

One two three ... that's all the ways we have to change temperature ... at least using natural forces ... things like hockey sticks and hypercanes rely on magical forces, so maybe there's a different understanding from the Alchemists ...

 

[ReinyDays]

You've got a real obsession with SB, don't you. How much math education do you think it takes to handle working an equation whose trickiest function is an exponent?

This is how actual climatologists model the atmosphere ... Stefan-Boltzmann's Law ... obviously this is fundamental to all things temperature ... and by extension, all things GW ...

The exponent isn't tricky ... simply stated it's the opposite of a hockey stick ... stupid ... why do you deny this? ...

SB is the "settled science" when folks talk about settled science ... the math is the succinct way to say so ...

ETA: Are you avoiding making comment about Jerry Sandusky's behaviors? ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Was Penn State more diligent investigating Dr. Mann than it had been investigating Jerry Sandusky ... just curious is all ... this is why you reject SB? ...

Whatever you do, don't say that Michael molested the data.

 

[Crick]

Indeed ... it is generally believed most of sea level rise is due to thermal expansion ... and of course melting sea ice doesn't change sea level at all ...

Perhaps slightly more than half is due to thermal expansion.

The question is how far down the water column will the energy reach ... if it's only the top 100 meters, then there will be very little sea level rise ... whereas if these temperature increases reach all the way down to the ocean floor, we'll see tremendous sea level rise ... widespread convection is completely inhibited in our oceans ... we heat the water on top of the column, buoyancy forces keep it there ...

The water at the ocean floor is there because it was chilled to 4C by the atmosphere at the poles. Additional energy that water had was given up to the poles.

Energy can travel through water as radiation ... a little ways ... but not if there's biology in the way ... and oceans are full of biology, and have been for the past 4 billion years ...

That leaves conduction ... and that's real damn slow ...

One two three ... that's all the ways we have to change temperature ... at least using natural forces ... things like hockey sticks and hypercanes rely on magical forces, so maybe there's a different understanding from the Alchemists ...

Missed convection.

There was some significant excitement a few years back when data from the ARGO floats found there to be significant increase in heat content down to 2,000 meters, far below any radiative heating.

 

[EMH]

So, tell me, is that global warming hoax a Jewish hoax? Is that what you're saying?

LOL!!!

All of the frauds with MEDIA BACKING have Zionist Fascism behind them...

 

[EMH]

Indeed ... it is generally believed most of sea level rise is due to thermal expansion ... and of course melting sea ice doesn't change sea level at all ...

The question is how far down the water column will the energy reach ... if it's only the top 100 meters, then there will be very little sea level rise ... whereas if these temperature increases reach all the way down to the ocean floor, we'll see tremendous sea level rise ... widespread convection is completely inhibited in our oceans ... we heat the water on top of the column, buoyancy forces keep it there ...

Energy can travel through water as radiation ... a little ways ... but not if there's biology in the way ... and oceans are full of biology, and have been for the past 4 billion years ...

That leaves conduction ... and that's real damn slow ...

One two three ... that's all the ways we have to change temperature ... at least using natural forces ... things like hockey sticks and hypercanes rely on magical forces, so maybe there's a different understanding from the Alchemists ...

So WARMING and ICE MELT are causing all this ocean rise..


SHOW US ONE SINGLE PHOTO OF A LANDMARK SINKING

Statute of Liberty = nope
Venice = nope
Hawaii 5-0 beach = nope


NO WARMING and NO OCEAN RISE explains NO BREAKOUT in CANES and NO PHOTOS of anything sinking

 

[ReinyDays]

So WARMING and ICE MELT are causing all this ocean rise..


SHOW US ONE SINGLE PHOTO OF A LANDMARK SINKING

Statute of Liberty = nope
Venice = nope
Hawaii 5-0 beach = nope


NO WARMING and NO OCEAN RISE explains NO BREAKOUT in CANES and NO PHOTOS of anything sinking

Port of Stockholm, Sweden, is rising up out of the ocean ... due to isostatic rebound ... does that count? ... this is well documented with tidal gauges in the area ... I don't know if it's a catastrophe, but it sure would be inconvenient ... a blue-water port going dry and all ...

 

[Crick]

Temperatures in the Gulf of Maine are warming three times faster than global rates and warming in the 20th century there has reversed 900 years of cooling.

Rising Sea Temps Are Pushing Oceans Beyond The Level Of Habitability - CleanTechnica

Habitability -- the degree to which species within an ecosystem thrive -- is under threat in the world's oceans due rising sea temperatures.

cleantechnica.com

 

[EMH]

Port of Stockholm, Sweden, is rising up out of the ocean ... due to isostatic rebound ... does that count? ... this is well documented with tidal gauges in the area ... I don't know if it's a catastrophe, but it sure would be inconvenient ... a blue-water port going dry and all ...

The top of Mt Everest is filled with 90 million year old clam fossils.

When interacting with tectonic plates, land can go up or down. The Marshall Islands are sinking because they are attached to a plate that is going under...

But for the 99% of land not doing that, there is PRECISELY NO EVIDENCE of any ocean rise at all, none.

 

[ReinyDays]

The top of Mt Everest is filled with 90 million year old clam fossils.

When interacting with tectonic plates, land can go up or down. The Marshall Islands are sinking because they are attached to a plate that is going under...

But for the 99% of land not doing that, there is PRECISELY NO EVIDENCE of any ocean rise at all, none.

There's this ...

 

[jc456]

Perhaps slightly more than half is due to thermal expansion.

still awaiting the link that shows such a thing. Please, still haven't seen one sign of any such sea rise. No where. All over the globe. mystery makers making fake news.

 

[jc456]

Temperatures in the Gulf of Maine are warming three times faster than global rates and warming in the 20th century there has reversed 900 years of cooling.

Rising Sea Temps Are Pushing Oceans Beyond The Level Of Habitability - CleanTechnica

Habitability -- the degree to which species within an ecosystem thrive -- is under threat in the world's oceans due rising sea temperatures.

cleantechnica.com

Why Marine Life Is so Diverse in the Gulf of Maine

The Gulf of Maine is a section of the North Atlantic Ocean that supports a huge variety of marine life.

www.thoughtco.com

The Gulf of Maine is a semi-enclosed sea that covers 36,000 square miles of ocean and runs along 7,500 miles of coastline, from Nova Scotia, Canada, to Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The Gulf is bordered by three New England states (Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine) and two Canadian provinces (New Brunswick and Nova Scotia). Water depths in the Gulf of Maine range from zero feet to several hundred feet. The deepest spot is 1,200 feet and is found in the Georges Basin. The Gulf of Maine has many dramatic underwater features, which were carved out by glaciers 10,000 to 20,000 years ago.
The area has been warming over 20,000 years. And Fishermen, still fish it's waters. And tides? haahahhahaahahahahaha. All normal!!!!! all normal.

Tides​

The Gulf of Maine has some of the greatest tide ranges in the world. In the southern Gulf of Maine, including the area around Cape Cod, the range between high tide and low tide may be as low as four feet. But the Bay of Fundy, which borders the northern Gulf of Maine, has the highest tides in the world. Here, the range between low and high tide can be as great as 50 feet.

 

[ReinyDays]

still awaiting the link that shows such a thing. Please, still haven't seen one sign of any such sea rise. No where. All over the globe. mystery makers making fake news.

I always keep multi-million dollar satellites in my back pocket for just such emergencies ... I recently visited the beach I grew up on and it's still 30 feet below the roadway ... in spite the 6 inches of seal level rise over 50 years ... [yawn] ... wake me in 3,000 years ...

 

[ReinyDays]

You've got a real obsession with SB, don't you. How much math education do you think it takes to handle working an equation whose trickiest function is an exponent?

This is how actual climatologists model the atmosphere ... Stefan-Boltzmann's Law ... obviously this is fundamental to all things temperature ... and by extension, all things GW ...

I'm not asking you to support Jerry Sandusky ... just answer me why the exponent confuses you so ... fourth root, c'mon, it's not that difficult ...

 

[ReinyDays]

... widespread convection is completely inhibited in our oceans ...

Missed convection.

Damn you're a stupid ************ ...

 

[Crick]

Damn you're a stupid ************ ...

I'll admit I missed that sentence, But have you never heard of an overturning current? How do you think animals in the deep ocean breathe?

 

[ReinyDays]

I'll admit I missed that sentence, But have you never heard of an overturning current? How do you think animals in the deep ocean breathe?

Yes ... these deep water currents have 0.5% the velocity of surface wind currents ... and my claim was "widespread convection is completely inhibited in our oceans" ... you're completely ignorant of atmospheric convection, so why should we expect you to understand the lack of such circulation in the oceans ...

Hey STUPID ... if it's 4ºC on the ocean bottom, and 14ºC at the surface ... which direction is the buoyancy force pointed? ... oh wait, you don't know what a vector is ... some-a-***** ... because my next question was which way are your magical forces pointed, but you won't know ... [sigh] ... so much for addition then ...

I had to look this up, so don't act surprised at this information ... ha ha ... 14ºC at the bottom of the air column and -58ºC at 36,000 ft (226 mb) is in thermodynamic equilibrium ... strange but true, air is compressible where water isn't (much) ... we also don't condense water in water ... two areas your knowledge base is severely lacking ...

Your science is as bad as my Englishing ...

 

[Crick]

Yes ... these deep water currents have 0.5% the velocity of surface wind currents ... and my claim was "widespread convection is completely inhibited in our oceans" ... you're completely ignorant of atmospheric convection, so why should we expect you to understand the lack of such circulation in the oceans ...

Because I think that having taken 15 semester hours of oceanographic topics on my way to a BSc in Ocean Engineering and having worked my entire professional life in the field, there's an excellent chance I know oceanographic topics far better than do you.

Hey STUPID ... if it's 4ºC on the ocean bottom, and 14ºC at the surface ... which direction is the buoyancy force pointed? ... oh wait, you don't know what a vector is ... some-a-***** ... because my next question was which way are your magical forces pointed, but you won't know ... [sigh] ... so much for addition then ...

At what temperature does water achieve maximum density? How did that 4C water get to the bottom? What happens at the equator?

A while back, in attempting to explain why you spoke to me without hostility on a post in your own thread, you claimed that you judged these things on a case by case basis of some sort. But given your frequent insults of my intelligence - as you have done here - with no cause whatsoever, the claim that you are making any sort of fact-based judgement simply fails.

I had to look this up, so don't act surprised at this information ... ha ha ... 14ºC at the bottom of the air column and -58ºC at 36,000 ft (226 mb) is in thermodynamic equilibrium ... strange but true, air is compressible where water isn't (much) ... we also don't condense water in water ... two areas your knowledge base is severely lacking ...

Your science is as bad as my Englishing ...

So, your conclusion, that of someone who feels they have sufficient expertise in science that folks should listen to what you have to say, is that the greenhous effect has very little effect on ocean heat content. Is that correct?

 

[ReinyDays]

Because I think that having taken 15 semester hours of oceanographic topics on my way to a BSc in Ocean Engineering ...

I was right ... I have 12 semester hours of college written Englishation ... damn ... her science really is as bad as my Englishing .. at least as uneducated ...