This is junk science because…
… “the findings rise from a model (ORAS4).” Model predictions should be verified by reality. They are not standalone science.
Deep Sea News reports:
In the last half-century, as the Earth continued to warm, the oceans absorbed 90% of the heat. That remaining 10% melted sea and land ice and warmed our land and atmosphere. Just 10% did that. You can now thank the oceans for saving us from ourselves. Go ahead I’ll wait.
In 2000 something drastically changed. Ocean temperature at the sea surface stopped rising. The absorption of this thermal energy stalled while increasing greenhouse gases should increased warming. Where did this missing energy go?
New research has found this missing energy in the deep oceans. The findings rise from a model (ORAS4) tested against and based on temperature and salinity data from 1958-2009, at least a dozen different data types, and all over the worlds oceans. This is massive undertaking and represents our best estimates of changes in the ocean’s heat, i.e. thermal energy, over the last half century.
Actually Climate Models ARE stand-alone Science. They certainly are not connected to any reality WE live in!! (snicker)
DP, please stop with the facts. We don’t want to undermine Dr. M’s “best estimate (i.e., “bad guess”), now do we?
Because it’s for the children and the future and all that stuff.
The Argo probes measures the ocean’s temps at various levels. Notice that the only way to show warming is to “correct” the data sets when they do not show the results that warmest want?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_(oceanography)
We of course have seen this kind of “corrections” before…
http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/12/science-by-lubchencos-noaa-fake-global-warming-by-changing-historical-temperature-data.html
Why let the data get in the way of your narrative, just change the data.
As a former sub driver, I can tell you that the most of temperature change with depth occurs before 300m. After the thermocline layer, temperature changes very little with increaseing depth.
Then the idiot says the deep oceans are on the way to being a boiling pot of water and hopes that we have volcanos to cool things off.
“In the last half-century, as the Earth continued to warm, the oceans absorbed 90% of the heat. That remaining 10% melted sea and land ice and warmed our land and atmosphere. Just 10% did that. You can now thank the oceans for saving us from ourselves. Go ahead I’ll wait.”
Well, a dispassionate writer, this one! Long on objectivity!
I might believe in the idea that the deep oceans are warming if we had a reasonable dataset but it doesn’t sound like we do. 700m is a lot to a person or even a sub driver — most of a klick deep or around half a mile — but the ocean averages around 3000m deep and it gets a lot colder as you go deeper.
At least in the day, sub drivers would hunt for an area where there was cooler water above warmer water and use that to hide from sub hunters. That implies that you’d need a temperature gradient from surface to target depth, at intervals of say 10m or 50m or something, to evaluate gradients between surface, 300m and 700m.
Not that I am an oceanographer, but I do read a lot.
Ignorance knows no bounds….
Oh, nice. Make a model, declare victory! Isn’t science a gas?
So, let me see if I understand what they did. It looks like they took the measurements at 300m and 700m, and then projected those results to full ocean depth: the bigger the 300/700 gap, the bigger the projection to full depth. Anybody ask a sub driver what he thinks about that method?
How do people publish this stuff with a straight face?