As the paper notes, this is a reversal from the deep ocean warming from the 1990's to 2005, which led to a sea level rise of +0.11 mm/yr during that period, but has reversed since 2005 to deep ocean cooling and a negative contribution to sea levels. Thus, there is no evidence of the AGW "missing heat" hiding in the deep oceans as many warmists have claimed.
Even though the heat content of the upper oceans has slightly warmed 0.09C over the past 55 years [Levitus et al 2012], this is also not nearly enough to explain the alleged AGW "missing heat." Therefore, the "missing heat" is missing from both the upper and lower oceans.
Thirdly, since there has been no statistically-significant warming of the atmosphere [troposphere] over the past 18-26 years during the so-called "pause" or "hiatus", the AGW "missing heat" is missing from the atmosphere as well.
There is one inescapable conclusion: The "missing heat" is nowhere to be found in Earth's atmosphere or oceans, and has escaped to space, or never existed in the first place [except in computer models]. Indeed, measurements of outgoing longwave radiation to space [infrared from greenhouse gases] have increased over the past 62 years, not decreased as predicted by models from the rise in greenhouse gases.
"It's a travesty!"
|Accompanying editorial in Nature Climate Change [excerpt]|
Deep-ocean contribution to sea level and energy budget not detectable over the past decade
- Nature Climate Change
- Published online
As the dominant reservoir of heat uptake in the climate system, the world’s oceans provide a critical measure of global climate change. Here, we infer deep-ocean warming in the context of global sea-level rise and Earth’s energy budget between January 2005 and December 2013. Direct measurements of ocean warming above 2,000 m depth explain about 32% of the observed annual rate of global mean sea-level rise. Over the entire water column, independent estimates of ocean warming yield a contribution of 0.77 ± 0.28 mm yr−1 in sea-level rise and agree with the upper-ocean estimate to within the estimated uncertainties. Accounting for additional possible systematic uncertainties, the deep ocean (below 2,000 m) contributes −0.13 ± 0.72 mm yr−1 to global sea-level rise and −0.08 ± 0.43 W m−2 to Earth’s energy balance. The net warming of the ocean implies an energy imbalance for the Earth of 0.64 ± 0.44 W m−2 from 2005 to 2013.
|Deep ocean contribution to sea levels shown in bottom graph has declined -0.13 mm/yr since 2005|
Game over for CAGW: Deep oceans COOLING & atmospheric heat LOSS INCREASING for a decade+ http://t.co/HEMSj8bhJX pic.twitter.com/SvLPeaTInm
— hockey schtick (@hockeyschtick1) October 5, 2014
Well thats good, Made my day!ReplyDelete
Deep water below 2000 meters cooled. Really? This web page on Marine ScienceReplyDelete
"Deep (or bottom) water is always one cold temperature ranging between -2 to +5 degrees C. It is below the main thermocline (at the bottom of the thermocline there is no longer a decrease in water temperature with depth ... it is all one cold temperature). It is not affected by the seasons. This layer has most of the seawater and comprises close to 80 percent of all ocean water by volume. It is under the tropical areas, most temperate areas when there is a main thermocline, and is all the way to the surface in the polar areas (where there is no thermocline)."
Here's the graphic:
Does anyone who claims to know anything about ocean temperature study oceanography or limnology in thier academic careers?
By the way, I see Josh Willis in the author list. Maybe he's looking to jump ship. He was the one who adjusted the ARGO data upwards a few years back.
Josh Willis is an oceanographer & he is the one who threw out the "cold" ARGO float data.Delete
I doubt he's jumping ship though. I had a long conversation with him at a JPL climate "meeting" a couple years ago - he's very much on the CAGW bandwagon.
C'mon guys ... don't you all realize by now that this just-recognized ocean cooling is a result of the computer modeled Mann made globull warming? We are right now working on our excuses - whoops, meant to say peer-reviewed analysis - to explain this to you neandrathols.ReplyDelete
Pretty intellectually dishonest to ignore the companion study, which shared one of the co-authors of this study. which showed that previous estimates of warming of the surface water in the southern ocean had been underestimated.ReplyDelete
The cited study is in no way a "huge blow" to anthropogenic warming.
Yes it a huge blow, and because it is based on observations, NOT modelsDelete
The study you cite is based on falsified MODELS and Roger Pielke has already debunked that study in the post immediately preceding this one:
I feel relieved. I thought the whacko Left was going to put me in jail or kill me for disagreeing with their religion.ReplyDelete
There is no missing heat. It never existed. Trenberth's energy budget is based on fantasy physics. Half up, half down -- get serious.ReplyDelete