Reactions to 'the pause': Grasping at strawmen in hidey holes

It has been quite entertaining to watch the various explanations coming out to rationalize “the pause” in surface temperatures for the last 16 years. For example, as Jerome Ravetz points out to me in email, The Times Hannah Devlin says the warming has just gone into hiding.

Times_AGW_hidden

But there is a funny thing about that deep ocean warming.

As Bob Tisdale wrote:

Ever since the NODC released their ocean heat content data for the depths of 0-2000 meters and published Levitus et al (2012), it seems that each time a skeptic writes a blog post or answers a question in an interview, in which he or she states that global surface temperatures haven’t warmed in “X” years, a global warming enthusiast will counter with something to the effect of: global warming hasn’t slowed because ocean heat content continues to show warming at depths of 0-2000 meters. Recently, those same people are linking Balmaseda et al (2013) and claiming the warming of ocean heat content data continues.

It is true that the NODC’s ARGO-era ocean heat content (0-2000 meters) continues to warm globally, but always recall that the ARGO data had to be adjusted, modified, tweaked, corrected, whatever, in order to create that warming. That is, the “raw” ocean heat content data for 0-2000 meters shows the decreased rate of warming after the ARGO floats were deployed. (See the post here.) Also, while the much-revised NODC ocean heat content data for 0-2000 meters might show warming globally, it shows very little warming for the Northern Hemisphere oceans since 2005. See Figure 1.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Can well-mixed human-created greenhouse gases pick and choose between the hemispheres, warming one but not the other? One might think that’s very unlikely.

Something else to consider: the Northern Hemisphere warming of ocean heat content for depths of 0-2000 meters occurs in only one ocean basin, and it’s not one of the big ones.

Right there is a premise falsifier. But I find this figure even more interesting:

There was a comparatively minor warming in the Northern Hemisphere at depths of 0-2000 meters from 2005 to 2012. But the upper 700 meters in the Northern Hemisphere cooled. The difference is provided to show the additional warming that occurred at depths of 700 to 2000 meters.

Figure 2

Figure 2

So the question here is simple. As Hannah Devlin writes in the Times:

The pause in global warming during the past decade is because more heat than expected is being absorbed by the deep oceans, according to scientists.

How does that heat get to the deep ocean hidey hole, down to 2000 meters, without first warming the upper 700 meters in transit? That’s some neat trick.

You can read more on how that deep ocean hidey hole doesn’t seem to hold up when the data is examined carefully here.

The claim has been made that its the sun doing it:

[Tisdale] SkepticalScience’s Rob Painting provides a reasonable explanation of the hypothetical cause of greenhouse gas-driven warming of the global oceans in the post Observed Warming in Ocean and Atmosphere is Incompatible with Natural Variation. Painting writes (my boldface):

Arguably the most significant climate-related impact of increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, is that they trap more heat in the ocean. Over the last half-century around 93% of global warming has actually gone into heating the ocean. A little-known fact is that the oceans are almost exclusively heated by sunlight (shortwave radiation) entering the surface layers.

Back in 2009 it was claimed that solar radiation changes would do just that:

Guardian_5year_warming

Well Duncan, we are still here, speaking clearly to the issue.

That article was a reaction to this Judith Lean Paper in GRL (bold mine):

=============================================================

How will Earth’s surface temperature change in future decades?

Judith L. Lean, David H. Rind Article first published online: 15 AUG 2009 DOI: 10.1029/2009GL038932

Reliable forecasts of climate change in the immediate future are difficult, especially on regional scales, where natural climate variations may amplify or mitigate anthropogenic warming in ways that numerical models capture poorly. By decomposing recent observed surface temperatures into components associated with ENSO, volcanic and solar activity, and anthropogenic influences, we anticipate global and regional changes in the next two decades. From 2009 to 2014, projected rises in anthropogenic influences and solar irradiance will increase global surface temperature 0.15 ± 0.03°C, at a rate 50% greater than predicted by IPCC. But as a result of declining solar activity in the subsequent five years, average temperature in 2019 is only 0.03 ± 0.01°C warmer than in 2014. This lack of overall warming is analogous to the period from 2002 to 2008 when decreasing solar irradiance also countered much of the anthropogenic warming. We further illustrate how a major volcanic eruption and a super ENSO would modify our global and regional temperature projections.

==================================================================

Since that obviously hasn’t happened, and “the pause” is an inconvenient truth, the cheerleaders are looking for alternate explanations. Voila! The deep ocean hidey hole.

The ocean provides the perfect cover for global warming because unlike the atmosphere, few people experience it directly. Few people go diving down to 2000 meters with thermometers and few people go swimming in the ocean  with pH meters to check the claims of “ocean acidification”.

On the other hand, virtually the whole of humanity can and has experienced “the pause” in air temperatures.

When the deep ocean hidey hole doesn’t pan out in a few years, and that stored hidden warming doesn’t spring out of the deep ocean like a caged lion, where will they put the warming next? They are running out of places.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
200 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
george e. smith
July 24, 2013 11:24 am

So why do I get the feeling that global warming has gone by the wayside, and climate change has gone into hiding (per Monckton) and unprecedented severe weather is passé, but now we have the 800# gorilla in the room.
The Deep Oceans are hiding Trenberth’s Travestonic heat, and are now awaiting further research grants, to look into the matter.

Robertv
July 24, 2013 11:25 am

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/02/co2-is-greening-the-planet-african-savannahs-getting-a-makeover-to-forests/
More forest means less sunlight reaching the ground ( in the shadow of a tree it is always cooler) The Sunlight is transformed in life. There is no missing heat , it’s absorbed by the green leaves of the forest. It has the opposite result as the urban heat effect. More CO2 is a win win situation. The Deep Ocean story is BS

July 24, 2013 11:38 am

Ronald says: the warmt wneht in to the water.
Lol, I can translate that because I think I know what’s causing it: the old trackpad caused cursor float. If you have an external mouse, is there any way you can disable the trackpad to defeat the really bothersome cursor float?

DirkH
July 24, 2013 11:39 am

george e. smith says:
July 24, 2013 at 10:52 am
“Dirk, it’s normally called “quantization noise.” That’s more accurate, since the “noise” arises from the A-D conversion process; and to be fair, the noisy part is entirely in the analog end, not in the digital. So “digital” noise would be a travesty.”
Thanks for helping out! Been a while since I last built hardware!

george e. smith
July 24, 2013 11:42 am

It seems to me, that the unbalance in the atmospheric “forcing” (I gotta use the proppa words), is very small, to quite modest. It’s not like it is anything huge.
So now we find (just now) that the missing result of that forcing (due to GHG) imbalance went and hid in the deep oceans, all the way down at 2,000 meters.
Did you ever try; even as a student prank, to fill the bathtub in the student dorm with water, using an eye dropper ??
Wow, what a chore that is !
So now just imagine what a huge effect is caused by taking all that missing atmospheric GHG forcing imbalance, and stuffing it in just the top 2,000 meters of the ocean.
Now after the oceans all circulate around, including the ins and outs from the arctic ocean, just where would be a good spot, besides, Tahiti, Bora Bora, or Hawaii, to go (on a grant) to look for that wayward forcing unbalance from the atmosphere ?? Bring snorkeling gear and some sun block.
We are being had.

george e. smith
July 24, 2013 11:52 am

Dirk H
“””””…..Thanks for helping out! Been a while since I last built hardware!…..”””””
Don’t remind me Mate; but I didn’t get sensitized to quantization noise, till I compared my first symphonic CDs to the old dusty scratchy LPs that we used to have (still do).
Last A-D s I had anything to do with were sigma delta types used in precision opto-couplers.
Those were fun times though.

Tom Stone
July 24, 2013 11:57 am

The missing heat will be found hiding behind a research grant application.

July 24, 2013 11:59 am

Jorgekafkasar
Praise the Lord, that’s the spirit!
Okay, I’ll send Christopher Monckton a note praising him.
henry says
it was not that Lord he was praising…
praise God for giving us the knowledge to discern the truth
pity nobody is reacting…..
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2013/04/29/the-climate-is-changing/

Julian in Wales
July 24, 2013 12:03 pm

This story is warmist political suicide; they have put themselves in the position of asking politicians to spend hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayers money into a plan designed to stop some of the deep ocean warming by .02c per five years.
People will look at them and think they are mad nutters, and they will be right.

Jimbo
July 24, 2013 12:05 pm

milodonharlani says:
July 24, 2013 at 11:15 am
……
How about the Antarctic ice sheets?

It’s just reached a new record high for sea ice coverage.
http://t.co/X4NCg4gefY
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/antarctic-sea-ice-area-sets-another-record-high/

Phil
July 24, 2013 12:14 pm

Village Idiot said on July 24, 2013 at 8:53 am:

So. Let me get this right.
Greenland and Antarctica are gaining ice mass. The Oceans aren’t warming. The planet hasn’t warmed in the last 20 years.
But sea level is rising?
http://www.climate4you.com/SeaTemperatures.htm#Global sea level
Must be that the data have been “adjusted, modified, tweaked, corrected, whatever, in order to create” a sea level rise (as Brother Bob puts it). Or maybe all the land is sinking.

Actually the deep ocean’s temperature is approximately 4°C. This is also the maximum density of water. Below 4°C, water starts to expand until it freezes, at which point it is less dense than the liquid phase. So what is actually happening is that the oceans are cooling, which leads to expansion and a consequential rise in sea levels. As the oceans continue to cool, the world is at risk for a catastrophic rise in sea level. The only way to avoid that catastrophic rise in sea level is to outlaw all forms of energy other than those that use fossil fuels, so that we can maximize our production of anthropogenic CO2 in the hope that the CO2 will warm up the earth enough to avoid the consequences of the current cooling. /sarc

chris y
July 24, 2013 12:47 pm

Billy Liar- you say-
“According to my [possibly incorrect] calculation, the NH 0-2000m heat content trend is just slightly less than the heat flux expected from the earth’s core.”
Interesting.
It sure would be nice if we had some actual temperature measurements below 2000 m depth.
If the volume below 2000 m has warmed faster than the volume between 700 – 2000 m, that would hint that ocean heating from the mantle has increased in the recent decade.

Golden
July 24, 2013 12:48 pm

The pause in global warming during the past decade is because more heat than expected is being absorbed by the deep oceans, according to scientists.
So the pause in global warming is now influenced by scientists’ expectations, not by changes in atmospheric or ocean conditions.

Bill Illis
July 24, 2013 12:57 pm

Golden says:
July 24, 2013 at 12:48 pm
The pause in global warming during the past decade is because more heat than expected is being absorbed by the deep oceans, according to scientists.
——————————-
The 0-2000 metre ocean is absorbing only 0.5 W/m2/year which is just 33% to 50% of that which is built into the climate models (1.0 W/m2/year to 1.5 W/m2/yr) so that statement is clearly false.
Like the title of this post, it is just Grasping at Straws.

Colin
July 24, 2013 1:02 pm

To
Dave says:
July 24, 2013 at 8:59 am
I am still waiting for my Petrochemical pay cheque. That is – assuming you were serious in your comment??

July 24, 2013 1:07 pm

@Eustace Cranch says: July 24, 2013 at 8:17 am
Sorry for the scream, but: again and again, WHAT IS THE MECHANISM? What told the heat to hide? In 50 words or less of plain English, please.
////////////////////////////////
It’s the same mechanism that caused it to hide in the troposphere. Desperation.

July 24, 2013 1:39 pm

As correctly commented above, the changes in ocean temperature required to account for the “missing heat” are very small. They are inside both stochastic and measurement error. For example, a quick look at the NOAA/CPC Pacific Basin 300-m Temperature Anomalies shows that over the last 30+ years that there has been a vanishingly small increase in temperature. A linear least-squares-fit of the data gives a positive slope of 1.28 m°C/yr over the entire time from 1979 to present. If you confine yourself to the time period since 2000 there is a ~0.15 °C initial anomaly with slight cooling trend since 2000. The problem with these numbers is that they are too small from which to draw any kind of conclusions. One-tenth °C variations are within the observed stochastic variation in the measurements (check it out) and are certainly within the absolute and relative accuracies of the fundamental measurements themselves. I conclude that the present data alone do not support nor reject the notion that there is additional stored heat in the ocean volume down to 300-m depth. I have not done the same analysis of the deep ocean data so I cannot speak to those data. I encourage everyone to download the data. One can apply various least-squares fits and/or filters to the data. I am happy to provide clean ASCII text data files. Check out the plots at
https://www.icloud.com/photostream/#A15oqs3qGcal2A
The problem with blaming the oceans for the lack of recent atmospheric heating is that there is no data to contradict you. The real issue is that if the oceans can absorb or release energy in the way that is claimed then present climate models incorrectly treat heat transport to and from the oceans. How can one believe the models at all?

RMB
Reply to  Dr. Rick B. Spielman
July 28, 2013 8:41 am

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head.
“The real issue is that if the oceans can absorb or release energy in the way that is claimed then climate models incorrectly treat heat transport to and from oceans”
These people are claiming that the ocean is absorbing heat from the atmosphere without actually checking if it is in fact possible.
I tried to heat water through the surface using a paint stripping heat gun and found that the heat was totally blocked, the water remained stone cold. This means that heat does not transfer through the surface of the water and I believe that one of the problems is that we don’t know enough about SURFACE TENSION.

Tom in Florida
July 24, 2013 1:40 pm

“When the deep ocean hidey hole doesn’t pan out in a few years, and that stored hidden warming doesn’t spring out of the deep ocean like a caged lion, where will they put the warming next? They are running out of places”
I know where we all might like them to put it, but then the question would be: “Can they sit down comfortably and talk about it?”.

July 24, 2013 1:43 pm

Again, you allege fraud where there is none… The science is valid and you are treading on thin ice.
REPLY: Yeah sure, whatever. You might want to think twice about your methane pulse posting. See most recent WUWT essay. – Anthony

July 24, 2013 1:47 pm

Ocean Heat Content and History of Measurement Systems
I took the liberty of using Figure 2 from Willis Eschenbach’s “The Layers of Meaning in Levitus” May 10, 2013
I overlaid upon that chart some temporal bands that document some of the history of deep ocean measurement. That history comes from: From Swallow floats to Argo – the development of neutrally buoyant floats (Gould 2005?) Notes below. To this, I added a temperature scale on the right side, equating the heat content scale to temperature over the 0-2000m layer.
The composite image is here: http://i41.tinypic.com/2rrwj5u.jpg
My purpose was to see if the chart of Ocean Heat Content and its reported rise is in any way related to the measurement systems in place over that history and the seams between the systems. The “Missing Heat” is hiding between the cracks.
The biggest rise in heat content on Willis’s chart is the 100-700 meter level 1995 to 2004, about 50 ZJ, or maybe 0.06 deg C for that layer. This coincides with the middle of the ALACE program through the first half of the ARGO system.
ALACE was the first(?) global, satellite tracked neutral buoyancy program, consisting of 1110 floats (1000 m depth) with a design life of 5 years over a program period of 12(?) years. So an average of 500 floats over its time. One float per 250,000 km^3. It is not clear from the history to what accuracy ALACE did temperature profiling; there is a note that ARGO was the first system primarily for temperature-depth profiling. The ARGO system is 3000+ floats, 2000 m depth.
The other points to be made from this chart is that the period of time of full ARGO (2007-present), the heat content has risen very little. When the measurements of a natural phenomena coincide with changes in the measurement system, suspect the change in the measurement system is the cause and not coincidence.
The NOAA temperature anomalies, lists the period 1960-1970 as base = 0. This is a period in which only a handful of floats were used in the entire decade and biased to the N. Atlantic. Imagine! Setting the base period to your least sampled, most biased, worst data period. Today ARGO delivers 1,000,000 profiles per year. From the history it is difficult to see how 1000 profiles per year were recorded in the 1960’s. See Decimals of Precision. for what this implies to error bars in the early years.
Here are notes of the temperature measurement history from Gould 2005. What I found most surprising was that until ARGO, the floats seem to have had a primary purpose of Ocean Circulation research, not temperature profiling.
Experimental Period, very local to the North Atlantic sub hydrophone networks.
1955: 2 float Iberian abyssal plain for 2 days.
1957: 9 floats for 5 days.
1960: Aries Program (Bermuda) floats 14 months. Discovery of mesoscale eddies
1968: 2 SOFAR floats, < 1 week.
1969: 1 SOFAR for 4 months
1973: SOFAR/MODE, 9 months, 20 floats. (Bermuda, Bahamas, Grand Turk, Puerto Rico) (2 floats lasted 2 years)
1974: MiniMODE, 52 floats, range 70 km from recording ship.
"Again, the floats could be recovered and 41 of 52 were retrieved. These floats were used at depths between 500 and 4000m and collected a total of 714 days of data over a 2 month period. This was approximately equal to the total number of ship-tracked float days accumulated during the previous 17 years!”
Late 1970s coverage extended beyond N. Atlantic to Western and Eastern Atlantic. Still restricted to U.S. MIL and Navy sub tracking hydrophones.
Mid 1980’s: 14 floats at 3700 m, Bay of Biscay, and 13 floats over 4 years at Iberia Abyssal Plain. This was to support deep sea disposal research.
Start of worldwide satellite tracked floats
1988: First ALACE float, 5 year lifetime, 1000m depth, satellite tracking. WOCE program: For ocean circulation, one float per 500 km square (250,000 km^2 !) to reduce sampling error of currents to 3 mm/sec. 1000 floats required. 1110 float deployed over 12 years. WOCE might have been supplemented by 1000 other older type floats.
ARGO: 2000m. First float in 2000, 1400 floats mid 2004,
“While the original neutrally buoyant floats were designed (primarily) to explore ocean circulation, Argo floats serve a dual purpose. Their primary contribution is the CTD [conductivity-temperature-depth]profile data…. “

Ragnaar
July 24, 2013 1:48 pm

Because the Oceans absorb heat in the form of shortwave radiation, their job is to protect us from high levels of Solar. One cause of that may be reduced Cloud Albedo levels. So if that drops, the next level of stability to overcome is the entirety of the Oceans. An above calculation puts that at Atmosphere X 1200. Storing the heat for the next Ice Age perhaps, to help Life through those periods. I think we are trying to get a handle on Cloud Albedo levels and trends. What I am seeing here is, Cloud Albedo drives Ocean Temperatures, and perhaps there are correlations there.

July 24, 2013 1:51 pm

How you describe a phenomenon can structure how you perceive it. I would not say there has been a “pause” in warming, as the word “pause” clearly implies there will be a future resumption, something which is at best an assumption at this point. I would say rather there has been an acceleration in the divergence between the climate model projections and measured temperatures. At some future point the divergence might decrease or even disappear, but the only thing we know for sure is the models will continue to project additional warming. So it’s also possible the divergence will continue to widen.
Having stated the phenomenon as a “pause in warming”, the AGW adherents are naturally inclined to look for the “missing” heat and they posit it has gone in the deep ocean. In other words, their explanation for the divergence is we’re not measuring total heat correctly.
Now the honest ones among the AGW adherents are coming to the time when they have to ask themselves some rather hard questions:
1) If we aren’t measuring total system heat correctly now, then clearly we haven’t been measuring it correctly all the times in the past which have been declared “warmest … in … “. If the deep oceans can hide extra heat, we must admit the possibility they can hide extra cold as well.
2) To be credible the hypothesis of deep ocean heat must be bolstered with an explanation of how the heat got there and this explanation must suggest an observation we could make to support it. No such explanation has been offered to my knowledge.
3) If I have to hypothesize previously unsuspected and currently unobserved and unexplained mechanisms to explain the divergence between models and measurements, what does that say about the credibility of the models in the first place? Once you’ve admitted the models are incomplete, it is not especially credible to affirm your faith in the models. Sounds like a battered wife: “yes I know he treats me horribly, but that only shows how much he loves me.”
Thus the “hiding in the deep ocean” idea does at least as much to undermine AGW theory as it does to prop it up. It really only serves to delay the day of reckoning.
Given a choice between one simple explanation and several inconsistent and complicated ones, the rational scientific choice is to prefer the simpler one: the models are wrong.
We can revisit this choice later if measured warming increases to catch up with model projections, or there is the necessary empirical support for the hiding in the deep ocean hypothesis.

RMB
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
July 28, 2013 8:14 am

The “hiding in the deep ocean” hypothesis has a major problem and that is that you cannot “heat” water through the surface. I’ve tried and the heat is totally rejected. Recommend you try it for yourself.rgds

milodonharlani
July 24, 2013 2:02 pm

Jimbo says:
July 24, 2013 at 12:05 pm
Let’s celebrate the new record! My celebration will involve ice melting in a suitable container holding a low pH solution of water & ethanol, with some suspended carbohydrates.
Without your comment, I’d have not heard of it. The silence from the media speaks loudly.

Scott
July 24, 2013 2:09 pm

I will believe the ocean is warming due to GHG when they isolate the heat generated from every undersea volcano as well as every other underwater heat source vent etc. Until then they have no argument in particular how 0-2000 can heat more than 0-700 suggests heat from below not above.

johnbuk
July 24, 2013 2:12 pm

Actually I’m disappointed in you all. if you look at the Heidi Cullen (sorry Dr Heidi Cullen) EPW Video again one can actually see the missing heat arrive and deposit itself just underneath where she’s sitting. As the Senator asks about whether she agrees about Obama’ s accelerating Global Warming comment it arrives then and there, either that or her facial expression signifies something else? 97% of her backside agrees in the CAGW meme just at that moment.