Some 3,000 scientific robots that are plying the ocean have sent home a puzzling message. These diving instruments suggest that the oceans have not warmed up at all over the past four or five years. That could mean global warming has taken a breather. Or it could mean scientists aren't quite understanding what their robots are telling them.
I just caught the end of a story the other day about these robots. I didn't catch any of the data in the report you mentioned, but it was fascinating to hear just how much data and how quickly they were getting the data.
Cold ocean researchers from all over the world met here at Memorial last year. They determined that the waters off of NL were getting colder due to the melting of the ice shield north and east of us, with more ice bergs coming our way and actually partially melting before then get close to St.John's. The result last June, when the conference was held, was the coldest June in recorded history, which goes back to 1880.
14" G4 iBook
15" MacBook Pro (July, 2009)
13" MacBooK Pro with Retina Display
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read these books." Mark Twain
It's also possible that some of the heat has gone even deeper into the ocean
connect the dots MF
The upper-ocean heat content (average temperatures in the upper 300m of the oceans between 180° - 100°W) remained below average across the equatorial Pacific during February (Fig. 3), with the largest temperature anomalies averaging -2°C to -6°C at thermocline depth (Fig. 4)[/b].
an overall colder ocean shrinks - it has not.
That becomes clear when you consider what's happening to global sea level. Sea level rises when the oceans get warm because warmer water expands. This accounts for about half of global sea level rise. So with the oceans not warming, you would expect to see less sea level rise. Instead, sea level has risen about half an inch in the past four years. That's a lot.
Would be terrific if we found a major negative feedback mechanism given all the positive feedback minefields we know about or suspect.
Would buy us time and maybe even have a positive effect on the reduction in carbon sink capacity of the upper ocean which has been impaired by approaching saturation.
I tell you tho I would really like to see if the Pacific really does have a "thermostat" to kick in - that would buy us time on the temperature front both oceanic and atmospheric and maybe even the carbon front if deep ocean comes into play more heavily.
Surface waters are hot and saturated with CO2.
A more frequently La Nina would have a lot of positive consequences for water usage, glacial rebuilding at altitude etc.
Already this La Nina has lifted Lake Superior 25 cm -
More vertical movement when the gradient steepens makes sense.
Just as with the atmosphere deep ocean has convection as the La Nina plumes show.
Increased heat loss to space would be the best of all possible outcomes on this but given the ocean volume issue I suspect that's an unlikely scenario.
In Australia and the web site is out of date.
Lots of good deals on Retinas, previous high end MacPros and current MacPro 6 core bundles in stock. [email protected]
What did I edit? I provided the actual headline and the first paragraph without comment. Even the part where they say that they may be misunderstanding robot data. You're far too suspicious.
Yes but you forgot to quote the whole article in your post, links don't suffice. You also forgot to bold and change the colours of only the information in the quote that supports your argument. That way any information that contradicts your argument gets lost within the long winded post that could have been read if the link to the article had been posted at the top of the quote instead of after. Got it?
If things were different, they wouldn't be the same.
The fact is that the global temperature of 2007 is statistically the same as 2006 as well as every year since 2001. Global warming has, temporarily or permanently, ceased. Temperatures across the world are not increasing as they should according to the fundamental theory behind global warming – the greenhouse effect. Something else is happening and it is vital that we find out what or else we may spend hundreds of billions of pounds needlessly.