tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post3112611230026816319..comments2024-03-11T04:54:26.827-07:00Comments on THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: New paper finds sea level rise has decelerated 44% since 2004 to only 7 inches per centuryUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-14198830706342359762014-05-27T14:37:03.465-07:002014-05-27T14:37:03.465-07:00no change in steric sea level from thermal expansi...no change in steric sea level from thermal expansion since the ARGO system was deployed<br /><br />http://s1114.photobucket.com/user/Chief_Hydrologist/media/ARGOGRACE_Leuliette2012_zps9386d419.png.html?sort=3&o=6MShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-10008078438221626432013-12-01T23:09:49.639-08:002013-12-01T23:09:49.639-08:00The Achilles heel of climate models is over focus ...The Achilles heel of climate models is over focus on CO2 and under focus on snow, ice, cloud, land, and water Albedo (reflectivity).<br /><br />No real problem surfaces in understanding water vapor, CO2, methane, and other GHGs ability to re-radiate heat. But add (70% reflecting) ice to the Antarctic sea-ice doughnut surrounding Antarctica, while covering (80% absorbing) ocean with the addition, and consequences are obvious.<br /><br />Same holds for Asian and NH snowcover. Albedo from snow, ice, cloud, etc., pierces CO2 at wavelengths it does not re-radiate. These consequences too, are obvious.<br /><br />The relentless but small (from a percentage standpoint), CO2 rise has been overtaken by a substantial albedo increase planet-wide, including the equatorial Pacific. I need not spell out that the temperature standstill consequences are obvious - - and have been observed!!!tomwyshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06571765939953102837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-72398673563564368122013-11-19T10:49:52.320-08:002013-11-19T10:49:52.320-08:00Vince Causey says:
November 14, 2013 at 12:41 pm
...Vince Causey says:<br />November 14, 2013 at 12:41 pm<br /><br />The important point is that the heat, once diffused to a lower temperature, can never result in a subsequent rise in temperature, which would be contrary to the first law. Therefore, any heat, once sequestered by the oceans, can never reverse its thermodynamic pathway, and reheat the atmosphere to the temperatures that caused it to be absorbed in the first place.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-68146269419091316632013-11-15T07:55:37.607-08:002013-11-15T07:55:37.607-08:00Thanks
Post on the JM Gregory paper:
http://hock...Thanks<br /><br />Post on the JM Gregory paper:<br /><br />http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/12/new-paper-finds-no-evidence-of-human.htmlMShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-48093566609618587962013-11-15T00:36:10.367-08:002013-11-15T00:36:10.367-08:00Although the Gregory et al paper was accepted in 2...Although the Gregory et al paper was accepted in 2012, it was finally published in 2013 (see http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00319.1 ). This paper is important as two of the authors are lead contributing IPCC authors for sea level chapters. The whole paper is worth reading but the abstract contains the key point - "The reconstructions account for the observation that the rate of GMSLR was not much larger during the last 50 years than during the twentieth century as a whole, despite the increasing anthropogenic forcing". So, no acceleration in sea level rise, despite all the claims by some parties. <br /><br />GeoffAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-73202934491316202502013-11-14T22:49:07.120-08:002013-11-14T22:49:07.120-08:00http://joannenova.com.au/2013/11/sea-level-rise-sl...http://joannenova.com.au/2013/11/sea-level-rise-slowed-from-2004-deceleration-not-acceleration-as-co2-rises/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-53242639751822539352013-11-14T19:47:58.369-08:002013-11-14T19:47:58.369-08:00http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/09/inconven...http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/09/inconvenient-truth-sea-level-rise-has.htmlMShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-83863030513667468672013-11-14T08:03:49.511-08:002013-11-14T08:03:49.511-08:00From a related thread at WUWT:
Louis Hooffstetter...From a related thread at WUWT:<br /><br />Louis Hooffstetter says:<br />November 13, 2013 at 10:00 am<br /><br />Stephan Rahmstorf’s ‘rising sea level’ papers are based on models that use output from climate models as input. It doesn’t get any more “Garbage-In, Garbage-Out” than that. And how sad is it that a climatololgist with a Ph.D apparently can’t tell or doesn’t know the difference between actual sea level rise and land subsidence?<br /><br />This latest paper appears to be another Rahmstorf classic: conclusions based on garbage ocean temperature data and faulty assumptions. His former professors must cringe when they read this stuff. If anyone can point me to a paper by Stephan Rahmstorf that makes sense, please do so. I no longer waste my time reading his drivel.<br /><br />http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/13/comments-on-stefan-rahmstorfs-post-at-realclimate-what-ocean-heating-reveals-about-global-warming/#comment-1474279Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com