From the James Hansen said the oceans would boil and the Tabloid Climatology™ department…
As a long-suffering member of the television news media, some-days, I just want to find the reporter and slap him upside the head and tell him to do some basic science research before making wild claims on national TV. This is one of those days. The graphic below says it all.
From the Business and Media Institute comes this howler from CBS News about the latest IPCC report.
“[CBS] Evening News” took a different tack, airing a story about oyster farming and complaints that climate change is ruining a man’s business. But in Ben Tracy’s story, which mentioned the IPCC’s latest report, he said that oceans have absorbed much of the heat caused by CO2 and that ocean temperatures have risen only slightly. Then he made a claim that Principal Research Scientist Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama in Huntsville called “totally misleading and irresponsible.”
Here’s what the reporter said, after telling us most of the heat went into the oceans:
“Had all that heat gone into the atmosphere, air temperatures could have risen by more than 200 degrees [showed 212 degrees onscreen],” Tracy warned.
Watch the video here, be sure to leave a comment for CBS News.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57605102/oyster-is-a-canary-in-a-coal-mine-as-oceans-warm/
Spencer told the MRC’s Business and Media Institute,
“The oceans have warmed by an average of less than 0.1 deg. C (only the SURFACE by about 0.5 deg.) since the 1950s, and since that is so much water mass, the absorbed heat equivalent to 0.1 deg. IF RELEASED ALL AT ONCE IN THE ATMOSPHERE [it] would, indeed, be hundreds of degrees. But this is physically impossible. It is a meaningless statistic. The heat actually had to go through the atmosphere before it reached the ocean.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Jimbo says:
October 2, 2013 at 3:50 pm
That is a very impressive list there, Jimbo. Thanks.
Jimbo says:
October 2, 2013 at 3:50 pm
“Oyster is a canary in a coal mine as oceans warm”
“Almost everything is the canary in a coal mine of global warming climate bad behaviour.”
……
You’re spot on. I hope you’re keeping an archive of all the new ‘Canary meme’s. The great grandchildren will marvel at the stupidity.
“Had all that heat gone into the atmosphere, air temperatures could have risen by more than 200 degrees [showed 212 degrees onscreen],” Tracy warned.
What if all the ignorance and stupidity in the MSM were released into the atmosphere at once? Air temperatures would rise by billions and billions of degrees.
Davidmhoffer says:
“To anyone with even a basic grounding in physics, this is beyond absurd. I’m looking for a half decent analogy suitable for someone who doesn’t even have the basics, and I’ve got nothing. Looking for suggestions. Also need suggestions on how to deliver the line without intense and insulting sarcasm.”
Maybe saying that would be like all the heat that was dissipated through your radiator coming back and blowing your engine.
CC Squid says:
October 2, 2013 at 4:11 pm
I would like to draw your attention to the following article:
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/10/2/a-report-from-the-royal.html
======
thanks for that!
Oysters are turning into canaries?
We’re doomed!
Feel free to post this chart to any message board that talks about ocean temperatures. I can guarantee you, the marine life at 1000 metres down is not going to notice anything in 100 years, neither are the fish at the surface since the temps change by more than this in any few month period.
The actual trends in ocean temperatures.
http://s21.postimg.org/6h0l0crzr/IPCC_Prediction_and_Ocean_Temps_L_2100.png
Jimbo says:
October 2, 2013 at 3:50 pm Re: “canary in the coal mine” meme.
Thank you for that compendium of the ridiculous. If the Obama & the EPA get their way, a whole generation of children won’t know what a coal mine is.
The coal mine used to be one of the neatest exhibits at the Chicago Museum of Science & Industry. No doubt if I go back there now there will be warning signs that coal is a weapon of mass destruction.
Clearly Global Warming is stressing the world’s most vulnerable metaphors to the breaking point. Urgent action is required now ….
This stupidity is a result of a sticky labor market where every laborer expects job security after FUBARs like that.
Realistically, people should lose their jobs over stuff like that… a public firing and the media organization apologizing for hiring suck a hack.
Maybe the alarmists planned to demonstrate this factoid using the same magic heat pump which generates their ridiculous back radiation numbers…
“… CAGW religion is like a {plastic} parrot in a birdcage.” (Bruce Cobb’s great 4:45pm quote edited — like your metaphor — AGW never got off the ground, no real thinking, just parroting programmers’ inane syntax… probably more analogies, too — but, it was never real, thus, the alternative version)
*********************************
@ur momisugly David Hoffer, lol, some analogies for the type of mind you refer to: “What if all the calories stored in the fat cells of your body suddenly reached a tipping point and you EXPLODED?”
“What if all the neurons in your brain, weakened gradually over the years from all the beer you ever drank, reached a tipping point and your brain IMPLODED?”
“What if all the people you have ever cut off on the freeway all took down your license plate were so mad that they were past their tipping point, figured out where you live, and came over to your house and threw rotten pumpkins in your windows?”
Okay, I’ll quit before the WUWT bloggers reach a tipping point.
Bill Illis says:
October 2, 2013 at 5:24 pm
Thank you!
1. Please check the +1.5 label on the middle extrapolated line (remember, Terry Oldberg says we can never make “predictions” or “projections” into the future!). Seems like it would +1.3, if you are starting at -0.2 at 1950. Even less if you intend to show an increase from 1970’s 0.0 point.
2. Why two projections for the Argo buoy data? Atlantic and Pacific data series? Or north and south Pacific data series?
We all have our tipping points, here’s James Hansen reaching his (for the first time ……. today — he calls himself “Homer” because he thinks it means the same as “Homie” and he thinks that could be cool to be named that):
The easier research gets, the more handicapped journalists get. Either that, or just more stupid people are going into the business.
If the rest mass of the entire ocean were released in 1/100,000th of a second, the rent in space-time would probably cause a vacuum energy collapse. Then, things would get really, really, bad.
Shenanigans, lol — fun analogy — That would work. How about this version, too: “Yeah, buddy, you know all the heat your radiator absorbs off your engine block? Heh. It’s allllll collecting in there…… next time you turn on the ignition —– KAPOW! Better sell me that nice ’69 Camaro of yours I’ve been after you for 10 years; you, uh, you wouldn’t want to become, er, a statistic.”
Scientific ignorance is endemic in the press. The Houston Chronicle ran an article about the falling interest in oil shale, conflating it with shale oil. Oil shale is a hard hydrocarbon (very little hydrogen) bound in a rocky formation. It is processed by grinding the rock and then reacting it with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst. Very expensive. Shale oil is regular crude oil and associated gas and natural gas liquids that have plenty of hydrogen that is recovered from a shale environment by drilling and fracking. Expensive, but not nearly as expensive a recovering synthetic crude from oil shale. Written by a product of our higher education system.
Phil Jourdan, I think you’re onto something. Also, news isn’t selling like it used to. Journalists like the one above likely fall under: You Get What You Pay For.
@Janice Moore – we are getting robbed at any price considering the incompetence of the press.
davidmhoffer says:
To anyone with even a basic grounding in physics, this is beyond absurd. I’m looking for a half decent analogy suitable for someone who doesn’t even have the basics, and I’ve got nothing. Looking for suggestions. Also need suggestions on how to deliver the line without intense and insulting sarcasm.
—
An analogy huh? David, maybe try this for those that don’t have a foggy of physics. Tell them to look at their home in the winter. The walls are cold, the air in your house is cold, your cold, so you flick on the heat. The central heater is as the sun, has concentrated energy and the temperature is very hot at that point, some hundreds of a degrees. It heats (warms) the air that passes though the furnace and warms the air in all of your rooms. Get it real toasty. You turn the heat off. After a while the air feels cold again. Your cold. Where did all of that energy go to? Most think it has all escaped to outdoors, it’s gone, but it has not, not most of it, it went to warm the sheet rock and wood and everything in your house that has mass but that is a lot of mass so the increase in temperature is smaller than the air. Feel the walls, they are a bit warmer than before (the oceans). Now, ask the walls, the sheet rock and wood containing all of that energy to warm up your rooms with that stored energy it contains. Well…. good luck! Will never happen. It is called thermal degradation and the entropy has increased and you will never be able to re-concentrate that energy again to raise it’s own temperature or to raise the temperature of anything else (the air in your home) that is at the same temperature (a bit higher that before but never really feeling warmer to you, you are cold again but a small degree warmer, you just can’t “feel” it).
I learned to use the very same principles of large mass to keep my house cool in the summer and warm in the winter with diurnal temperature variances and is why my gas and electric bills are always about half of all of my neighbors, you do have to open the windows at the right time. Most people do not really understand energy, temperature, thermal heat and entropy and the transfer between, even in their own local environment (their home). They could save a bundle if they would just learn a bit and learn how to think about it. Call it using the inverse of the “Trenberth fallacy principle”.
So, this exactly why Trenberth’s “hidden heat” in the oceans will never magically re-appear to “heat” the Earth. Ever. It’s gone to the thermal grave and along the way it would have warmed the oceans a few hundredths or thousandths of a degree, it’s too small too measure and he can’t find it, bless his little soul. Now it will also, with the same energy input, also have made the air above a few hundredths or thousandths of a degree warmer in the near future. It just can never re-concentrate and noticeably “warm” anything, except in a way, the void of space which is that low-grade thermal energy’s destiny. (you really can’t “warm” the void of space, call it the microwave background at about minus 454.8°F being the temperature of space)
Al Gore — American Bloviator
Forever, forever, its all Al Gore
Now, in the future and always before
Spinning himself with the words he can whirl
The earth is his oyster, he is its pearl
Whatever he says he truly believes
First, before others, himself he deceives
So sure of his “facts” and sure of their worth
Like God by the Word — HE CREATES THE EARTH!
Just submitted this article to Drudge. Could be fun if they pick up on it.
AFA canaries in coal mines; what else would birdbrains use for comparison?
What does a 200 lb. canary say?
Here kitty kitty kitty.
Wayne, your wonderful explanation for a non-physics person is probably what David Hoffer meant. Reading your “straight” response to D.H., I realize that I should add to my reductio ad absurdum type responses:
Non-scientist: But, that’s ridiculous!
You: That’s right. Get it?
jones says:
October 2, 2013 at 2:38 pm
What would happen if the sun was to release all of the energy it will release over the next 4 billion years but over the next 3 seconds?
I wonder…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It is called a super nova and we get fried but don’t tell the idiot reporters or they will have it as the next screaming headline.
Lexington Green — ” I am more than a little skeptical. Anyone else have comments on this aspect of the story?”
The key consideration isn’t acidification as such. Which Chad Wozniak has the right of, and every aquarium hobbiest can attest to. The issue is that for a given region there will be a buffer of mollusk shell detritus. And it will be dissolved to offset any acidification from CO2. To hit a threshhold condition in which you have naked mollusks, the constant introduction of *new* CO2 giving rise to acidic conditions must be sufficient to strip off the same depth of substrate over the entire area in question at a greater or equal rate at which each mollusk produces their shell.
But the weasel word of interest is ‘inhibit.’ The only sane neutral point, against which everything is an ‘encourages’ or ‘inhibits’ is the neutral PH with respect to the chemical itself. But if we set that, then a completely non-anthropogenic Earth would still ‘inhibit’ shell formation in mollusks. That’s a simple fact of life about life and the PH of the oceans.