There is a lot of wailing an gnashing of teeth today over this Associated Press story title:
Please take a moment to read that story above as I can’t post it here. AP has declared war on bloggers.
First a few caveats:
- Yes (as mentioned about the northeast USA beach water temperatures in the AP article) we have some very warm sea surface temperatures this summer, we also had the coolest summer surface temperatures on record in many places in the USA.
- The AP story is written by Seth Borenstein. Seth tends to report the warmest side of things in the worst way, so take the story with a grain of salt. For example, Portland Maine also set a new record low for July Temperatures, see here. I don’t think Seth covered that one nor the -50°F all time statewide Maine record low on January 16th, 2009 seen here. One should also note that NOAA reported “July Temperature Below-Average for the U.S.” How quickly we forget. I’m not trying to pick a weather -vs- climate food fight, but simply pointing this out for balance. We’ve had some cold events this year also.
- Sea temperature spikes like this have have happened before. More on that later.
In the story Seth says: “The result has meant lots of swimming at beaches in Maine with pleasant 72-degree water.”
To check that out, I utilized the Rutgers SST satellite page here. This image showing coastal Maine from NOAA-15 on August 18th seemed fairly representative and was one of the few that was almost completely filled with SST data. As you can see on this summary page, there is a lot of missing data. With this much missing data, one wonders if SST data averages are accurate.
I’ve annotated the image to give you landmarks and cities. Our warmer buddy “Tamino” lives in Portland, I wonder if he’s taking a dip. As you can see, indeed there is some 72 degree water around Portland. But up in the Bay of Fundy and tip of Nova Scotia, there’s some pretty cold water also, and it is in the 45 to 55 degree range.
A wider view SST of the northeastern US shows the reason for this juxtaposing of opposite ends of the sensing range:
I’ve also annotated this image to give you landmarks and cities.
Note the prominent tongue of warm water and the eddies and swirls. That is the warm water of the Gulf Stream mixing with the cold water of the north. In the middle mix, pleasant swimming temperatures. The earth is doing what is has always done, transporting warm water northward via the Gulf Stream. Yes it is a little stronger this year and maybe a little closer to the coast than usual.
Here’s a view of the source in the Gulf of Mexico, Oh…wait…I had to use a different source since the NOAA/Rutgers imagery was missing so much data in the Gulf – see for yourself here
This Weather Underground plot of buoy based sea temperature measurements shows that indeed the Gulf is warm and around the 90 degrees indicated in the article.
But the question is: is this warmth an event to be concerned about? From the Rutgers map above, it appears that the Gulf Stream has come closer to shore than it normally does, which of course makes it more noticeable to people recreating in the water.This of course generates attention, and reporters naturally pick up on these things. The question is: weather or climate?
Here’s a NOAA Ocean Explorer SST image from a 2005 article that shows how the Gulf Stream tends to hang off the coast a bit more.
And of course, we have an El Nino going on, so a warmer Pacific is certainly not unexpected.
Note the the temperatures above are anomalies, not absolute measurements.
As the AP article mentions, the last time we saw ocean temperature this high was in 1998 during the super El Nino.
What I find most interesting though is this NOAA Hovmoller graph as pointed out by Paul Vaughn in Bob Tisdale’s thread:
Hovmollering the SST: T-shirt tie-dye design or climate science?
Just looking at the 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 SST spikes, it does seem like we are due for another at the bottom doesn’t it?
The point I’m making here. Yes the ocean is warm, it has gotten warm before. Should we panic? No.
A couple of closing points. The AP article that I referenced at the beginning of this post makes no references as to sources other than generally mentioning NCDC.
However I did find a more in depth NPR/AP article that did reference the NCDC sources which you can read here.
The two sources listed were:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?reportglobal&year2009&month7
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/all.html
But there is no mention of this on either source:
“The average water temperature worldwide was 62.6 degrees, according to the National Climatic Data Center”
The latest summary NCDC offers ( which AP referenced: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?reportglobal&year2009&month7 ) is for July 2009 where they say this:
The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest on record, 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F). This broke the previous July record set in 1998. The July ocean surface temperature departure from the long-term average equals June 2009 value, which was also a record.
So that makes me wonder, did NCDC give Seth Borenstein some inside information for the middle of August that the rest of us aren’t privy to? Or, could it be a misprint or C to F conversion error?
I simply don’t know, but I do find it odd that I can’t find a NOAA or NCDC press release or data table that has that 62.6 degrees mentioned in it. If anyone knows where that figure came from, please post it in comments. Google is saturated with so many news stories with the keyword combination of NCDC and 62.6 that I’m unable to locate the original source. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, but if it does, I’m sure our WUWT readers will find it.
The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest on record since 1998.
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadsst2/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/monthly
2009/06 0.5
1998/03 0.512
2009/07 0.512
1998/06 0.519
1998/04 0.527
1998/05 0.53
1998/07 0.554
1998/08 0.555
We find that only the period 1998/04 to 1998/08 had higher sea surface temperatures than now.
Ocean heat is the most important measure for global changes in temperature. This is obvious because more than 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by oceans, seas, and lakes.
See:
http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/coast_sea/todays-sea-surface-temperature/sea-surface-temperature-global-ocean
P.S.: Changes can happen quickly. In May 1999, the anomaly has dropped to 0.192!
Adam Grey (22:32:35) :
“A handful of regional weather events, hot or cold, tells you nothing about the global average. When will people learn?
If you think you’re balancing a perceived bias, it’s hardly a good demonstration to repeat the fault.”
This is a comment/reproach by alarmists that is repeated ad nauseam but it never seems to register with them that the skeptics’ balancing act is an attempt to demonstrate the absurdity of the warm bias in the media.
“Philip_B (21:50:36) :
SST measure the rate at which the oceans release heat to the atmosphere. Once the heat is in the atmosphere it is lost to space fairly quickly.
As almost all the heat in the Earth’s climate system is in the oceans, warmer SST mean the Earth’s climate is cooling, because the basic climate cycle of ocean heat to atmosphere to space has increased.
As Anthony suggests, this is likely due to ocean current variations or cycles.
Note the ocean is heated directly by sunshine”
Near enough but the most important relationship is between the amount of solar radiation reaching the sea surface and the speed of energy release by the oceans which varies according to the global average phase state.
Then there is this mechanism which I mentioned elsewhere:
“The oceans change their net energy release and net energy absorption characteristics at 25 to 30 year intervals quite independently of anything the sun does.
Increasing the rate of energy flow from ocean to the air reflects an increase in the rate of energy flow through the oceans. The ocean energy content falls but the air warms.
Decreasing the rate of energy flow to the air reflects a reduction in the rate of energy flow through the oceans. The ocean energy content rises but the air cools.
All the while the sun varies independently, different in both timing and scale which is why I say the net energy budget outcome is a consequence of the interplay of the two processes sometimes supplementing and sometimes offsetting one another.
I don’t know why the oceans do as they do but we see it. My best guess for the reason is the idea of an oscillation set up between the variability of solar input such as it is and variations within the oceans arising from changing density, temperature and movements.
Slower passage of solar energy through the oceans generates more heat energy within the oceans than can be explained by solar changes alone. Just like an electrical resistor a slower passage of energy reduces voltage but increases the heat energy generated.
The increase in wavelength as the Earth converts incoming solar radiation to outgoing longwave is the equivalent of the reduction in voltage. In both cases additional heat energy is produced within the system independently of anything that the source of energy does
I ran a search to see if that assertion stacked up. I didn’t experiment with with search terms, just ran with the first one and and changed one variable, keeping it US-centric in line with the main agenda of the post and assuming that this is the bulk of your media watching.
“news america july 2009 temperature cool weather” – 75 million hits.
“news america july 2009 temperature warm weather” – 15 million hits.
Now I’ll try ‘hot’ and ‘cold’ instead of ‘warm’ and ‘cool’
“news america july 2009 temperature cold weather” – 17 million hits
news america july 2009 temperature hot weather” – 10 million hits
I didn’t expect such a big discrepancy. But the bias, if any, is the other way you’re suggesting.
Indeed it does. It says that the consequence of warm SSTs globally is felt in local SSTs in some places around the US. That’s not quite the conflation you were making, but neither is it great reporting. That does not excuse anyone else of speciously conflating information, and in your case, you went further by conflating (local) land surface weather with ocean temps.
I’m not trying to resurrect the AP report, I’m commenting on your post, which further muddies an issue muddily reported by the AP, and which you call ‘balanced’ – and which is part of a long-term, ubiquitous project to address a perceived media bias that doesn’t exist.
REPLY: Your methodology of complaint is lame. Borenstein cites some beach water temps, and I respond to those specifically, and geographically with some SST maps to show reasons why. Then you complain that I “make the same error”. Well, that claim is rubbish. Making counterpoints on issues raised is not the same as making the points in the first place. Your spin simply doesn’t work.
Further, you say “conflate” as if I don’t know the difference between local, regional, and global, which is further rubbish.
If I had written an article on SST’s where I used a few points of beach temperature on the globe to bolster an argument, you’d have an issue worth arguing about. But responding to points in the original article is different. For example, in a court of law, erroneous points that may lend credence to a case might be brought up by the defense and then attacked by the prosecutor. Happens all the time. Does that make the prosecutor guilty of bringing up misleading information in an effort to score points with the jury? Of course it doesn’t.
As for your Google search skills, you’ll see below that other commenters have taken you to task for it. There is indeed a real media bias when it comes to global warming stories. As a member of the media myself for 25 years, I can speak with some authority on his issue.
“If it bleeds it leads” is a common catchphrase for news. The same thing has been regularly applied to global warming articles. Your own bias prevents you from seeing it. – Anthony
Adam Grey:
Maybe there was a lot of cold weather in July.
The remarks were:
————–
Fluffy Clouds (Tim L) (22:37:28) :
The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 ((WAS ?)) the warmest on record, 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F). This broke the previous July record set in 1998.
BUT HOW DOES CO2 WARM THE OCEAN ?????????????
[—snip rest—]
————–
In all of this it bears keeping in mind that just because ~some~ ocean areas got warmer, it does =not= mean that ALL areas got warmer.
.
I have a great degree of disdain for the term ‘global average,’ inasmuch that it is so misleading that it gives rise to false prognostications.
.
There are so very many variables to consider when remarking of what appears to be an ‘anomaly,’ that merely talking about the anomalies —in a general way— tends to be very misleading otherwise.
.
As with the land, the oceans are affected by the jet stream and the weather patterns which it generates.
.
Further to that is the Sun itself which radiates across a wide energy spectrum, not all of which is measured and quantified.
.
The gist of this whole ‘news story’ then, is just this: Hype happens.
.
You know: If it bleeds, it reads. If the waters were colder this year, would the same degree of hoopla have been expended for a story?
.
Therein lay the rub.
.
The sky is falling!!! No wait: It’s raising!
.
Oh, sorry: It’s just moving around … Just as it has always.
.
In conclusion then, I offer this bit of wisdom from a past wise old man:
————–
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”
H.L. Menchen
————–
And there you have it!
Cooler, hotter….. as far as I am concerned, It’s all Natural variation.
Also, I would like to know the process which allows a warmer Ocean to be heated by a cooler atmosphere??? As far as I am concerned it is mainly direct sunlight that heats the ocean surface.
The AGW hypothesis certainly has some funny bits in it…. apart for the bits that are just plain absurd.
And Crosspatch is right. Higher SST’s would mean calmer seas.
As with surface temperatures we need to step back and
a) wonder at the practicality of a global temperature
b) Look back in time to ascertain how temperatures respond over a long period.
Last year I wrote a series of short pieces on ‘Fish as a temperature proxy’ which traced back the change from warm, to mid, to cold water fish around the south west coast of Britain. We can trace these from actual records of catches back to around the 13th Century and which also live on in place names such as the Pilchard Inn.
This extract from the University of Plymouth gives us some idea that -like surface temperatures- sea temperatures are constantly fluctuating (Also note that historic records are being constantly ‘adjusted.’ See the CA debate on ‘buckets.’)
“Detection of environmental change in a marine ecosystem—evidence from the western English Channel
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Stephen J. Hawkins, , Alan J. Southward and Martin J. Genner
Marine Biological Association of the UK, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth PL1 2PB, UK
Received 28 January 2002; revised 1 November 2002; accepted 25 November 2002. ; Available online 4 February 2003.
Abstract
To separate human-induced changes from natural fluctuations in marine life requires long-term research. The western English Channel has been investigated from Plymouth for over 100 years. The abundance of marine life has been recorded and related to physical changes in the environment. By comparing different parts of the ecosystem we can demonstrate historic natural fluctuations, allowing prediction of effects of future global change. From the 1920s to the 1950s there was a period of warming of the sea, with increases in abundance of species of fish, plankton and intertidal organisms that are typically common in warmer waters to the south of Britain. After 1962 the sea cooled down and northern cold-water species became more abundant. Since the 1980s regional sea surface temperature has increased again and warm-water species are once more becoming abundant.”
This is part of an aeons old natural cycle-unless someone can demonstrate that Man has interfered with that cycle?
Tonyb
Cassandra radiation don’t work that way. The reason the buoys are set at that depth is because of radiation factors top down. It is reasonable that radiation top down cannot penenetrate that far, Hot is lighter than cold.
Think about it this way, when you heat water for your coffee where is the heat applied.
There are other factors the earth itself has equilbirum points based on radiation over time and distance from the sun. Water temperature is dependendent on deptg to a cut off point diminishing returns.
Side note: Anthony “bugger off”, surely a little bit of latin would surely be less emotive but the media, heavyweights are pissed really pissed their business models are not making the cut.
Oops no merminks must piss off.
No mystery to that AP silly story.
Hurricane season off to a slow start – TS Ana sputtered on & off, Claudette was a slight TS but dissipated quickly upon landfall, and Bill looks like it’ll miss most land areas until reaching Canada’s maritime provinces. No story here.
Arctic sea ice melt has slowed and looks like it won’t hit a record. Possibly will have more ice in area, extent, & volume than last year. No story here.
Ahh, but sea temps – now there’s a summer slant they can use. Don’t mention variations in ocean currents and eddies. It’s all spin, spin, spin.
And the clowns wonder why the major media is dying on the vine. People read the spin and press releases that pass for journalism these days and have decided to look elsewhere for facts.
I have to question the AP report on the Arctic temperatures being “as much as 10 degrees above average”, the ice extrent is currently not much below the 10 year average, which, considering that most melting come from below rather than above, impiles average sea temperatures. All the blogs I have read from the various yachts trying to get through the North West Passage suggest the sea temperatures are currently about 34F. So how could the seas have been on average 10 degrees colder than they are now? Closer to home, it is true that sea temperatures around Scotland have been warmer than average in recent years, but I spoke to some divers a few week ago who reported that the temperatures off Oban were extremely chilly earlier this year. This report reeks of warmist spin and propaganda.
“And you are worried about my one article not covering everything to your satisfaction in the face of overwhelming media bias towards warmist stories? Bugger off!”
Priceless!
but at least you offer polite and reasonable advice when he refuses to stay down – all credit to you:
“If you are unhappy with WUWT my advice is this: get your own blog and you can run it any way you wish. So far I’ve had great success with what I write about and the style I use. Feel free to try a challenge on your terms with your own blog.”
Jim: I can at least answer your question 5. This opposition between hot-and-thus-less-dense and salty-then-heavier is well known in oceanic mixing – there’s a sort of competition arising between these two opposite effects and everything will depend on the ration between the alt and temperature diffusivities. This process is hence known as “double diffusion”. I even think it is one of the reasons why hot water can accumulate beneath colder water during la ninas and then “suddenly” emerge during el ninos.
Antony:
Is the Sea Surface Temperature quoted mesured from satellites using infraread remote sensing methoology, that only measures the top skin of the water, that is less than the top 1 mm (probably more like the top 1/100 mm)?
How does this compare with the ARGO buyos that measure down to 2000 meters? Is the Argo data also “warmest on record”?
Regards
Agust Bjarnason
Hmm I hadn’t considered that enough evaporation could cause extra salinity/density in warm water so that it sank into colder water. It is not safe to assume that warm water rises in the oceans.
Chris Thorne (23:55:20): The SST increase should not affect ocean volume (or sea level) because it is a very small part of the overall ocean. I think your general point is good though, we should be more afraid of volume stopping its increase which would mean we are entering overall global cooling.
actually I think the argo floats monitor temp and salinity to 2000 m deep, the 750 m is about where the thermocline is and deep ocean water is underneath at very low temps, down to 2 to 4 degc. There seems to be boundary layers of salinity which defines deep ocean waters.
Argo results seem to show the ocean currents are somewhat more complex than expected.
Rather OT, but check out the nonsensical 5th paragraph in this contribution to The Times by Oliver Kann. It certainly generated some comment from our side that I doubt he expected.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6804456.ece
UAH graph for July Ocean Globe.
http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt74/MartinGAtkins/Ocean-Globe-July.jpg
And July Ocean Arctic.
http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt74/MartinGAtkins/Arctic-ocean-July.jpg
What about the lack of Tropical Storms in the Atlantic? They transfer heat energy from the Sea Surface to the upper atmosphere. This has been a very slow year for Tropical Storms. Fewer Tropical Storms could mean that less heat is transported out of the Ocean to the Stratosphere. That might explain a higher SST.
Temperature. Heat. They are NOT the same thing.
What does Argo say about the heat content of the oceans this summer? You know, since that is the actual metric used to determine if the oceans are actually getting warmer…..
to : anthony . Why does Spaceweather(dot)com make an announcement today, posting about how the sun is on the verge of breaking a record of 52 spotless days back in jul.aug.sept 2008? I ask this, because, I thought that NOAA and the NGDC on Sept 2 of 2008 agreed with the SIDC about a sunspot occuring august 22 of that same year . I don’t get it. Why would NOAA make such a claim or S.W. for that matter. To make that claim, wouldn’t they have to concede that august 08 was actually the first spotless month since 1913. You know, the whole thing is becoming obsurd. How can anyone rely on these govt agencies anymore to inform the public. – David Alan –
Anthony, is this what you are looking for?
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090814_julyglobalstats.html
“The world’s oceans this summer are the warmest on record.
The National Climatic Data Center, the government agency that keeps weather records, says the average global ocean temperature in July was 62.6 degrees…”
Borenstein is talking about ocean temperature while his data is only related to surface temperatures. he either doesn’t understand the difference or deliberately falsifies the argos data of the recent years.
The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest on record, 1.06 degrees F (0.59 degree C) above the 20th century average of 61.5 degrees F
Add 1.06 to 61.5 and you get 62.56 and I bet he rounded up.. yup I think that link in my former post is the one you are lookin for
Totally OT Anthony but Space Weather.com is reporting the following
“QUIET SUN: According to NOAA sunspot counts, the longest stretch of spotless suns during the current solar minimum was 52 days in July, August and Sept. of 2008. The current spate of blank suns is putting that record in jeopardy. There have been no sunspots for almost 42 days and there are none in the offing. Deep solar minimum continues.”
I don’t recall this being reported last year, in fact I specifically recall a controversial decision by NASA to back up 2 weeks and count a sunspeck as a sunspot retroactively last August, spoiling the first calendar month without a sunspot (something that looks to be happening this August perhaps).