Uh, oh: Looks like Lewandowsky and Oreskes will be going after the AGU now for admitting the 'hiatus' exists

Given Lew and Oreskes latest admonition to scientists who use the word “pause” or “hiatus” it looks like they’ll be applying the “D” word to the entire AGU community of scientists any minute now. From the AGU website, EOS:

Tracking the Missing Heat from the Global Warming Hiatus

Illustration of increased trade winds in the Pacific and Indian Oceans during the recent warming hiatus, which enhanced the flow of ocean water through the Indonesian archipelago. This resulted in an abrupt increase of Indian Ocean heat content. Credit: Sang-Ki Lee
Illustration of increased trade winds in the Pacific and Indian Oceans during the recent warming hiatus, which enhanced the flow of ocean water through the Indonesian archipelago. This resulted in an abrupt increase of Indian Ocean heat content. Credit: Sang-Ki Lee

Despite indications that the Pacific Ocean is helping to take up the world’s missing surface heat, the heat doesn’t linger; oceanographers now find that heat has moved over to the Indian Ocean.

Illustration of increased trade winds in the Pacific and Indian Oceans during the recent warming hiatus, which enhanced the flow of ocean water through the Indonesian archipelago. This resulted in an abrupt increase of Indian Ocean heat content. Credit: Sang-Ki Lee

By Christina Reed 21 May 2015

At the end of the 20th century, climate scientists noticed what they thought at first was an anomaly: a slowdown in the pace of global warming in the lower atmosphere. Today, it is a recognized trend that has lasted more than 15 years. Perplexed, oceanographers are on a hunt to find where this missing heat has gone.

In the latest report out of Nature Geoscience this week, University of Miami physical oceanographer Sang-Ki Lee and colleagues may have found some of this missing heat: The Pacific Ocean is keeping its cool by sending heat over to the Indian Ocean. This heat redistribution, the researchers say, could play a role in regulating the rate of global warming.

Oceans: A Complex Buffer

Rather than showing any signs of storing heat, as is the case in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean has actually cooled over the last decade.Why the global warming hiatus has happened and how long it will last is a mystery. However, scientists do know that the ocean has recently helped to buffer what was otherwise an accelerated surface warming, one that has not yet stopped. Warming in the upper atmosphere continues to show that the planet is undergoing a radiation imbalance.

However, rather than showing any signs of storing heat, as is the case in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean has actually cooled over the last decade.

“When I noticed from the hydrographic data that the Pacific Ocean heat content has been decreasing since 2003 or so, I was very surprised and puzzled,” Lee told Eos. “And when I found a large heat increase in the Indian Ocean, I was almost convinced that there was something wrong with the hydrographic data.”

How Does Heat Escape to the Indian Ocean?

Lee ran a computer model simulation and found that he could explain the difference if a massive amount of heat from the Pacific flowed through Indonesia’s archipelago into the Indian Ocean. However, how best to move the heat?

Warm water, like warm air, rises—or, rather, stays at the surface when nothing else is disturbing it. This is why, in a lake, the upper layer is warmer than the bottom layer.

To get warm surface water from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean requires wind—and not just any wind. The trade winds need to be strong enough to push water from the eastern Pacific all the way across the ocean basin to the west, where it piles up and creates a region of above-average sea surface height.

Warm surface water can then flow like a river down around the Indonesian archipelago to the Indian Ocean. A difference in height of less than a dozen centimeters is enough to get the heat moving.

Full story here: https://eos.org/articles/tracking-the-missing-heat-from-the-global-warming-hiatus

Citation: Reed, C. (2015), Tracking the missing heat from the global warming hiatus, Eos, 96, doi:10.1029/2015EO029947. Published on 21 May 2015.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
243 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 22, 2015 9:26 am

Do the drifting Argo Buoys confirm this flow? I can’t remember where the Argo tracking page is.

Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
May 22, 2015 10:46 am

One would expect some of the buoys to drift along with the warm water.

richard verney
Reply to  Slywolfe
May 23, 2015 3:29 am

If so, what bias does this create in the ARGO data?
I frequently point out that due to the free floating nature of the ARGO buoys, that get swept along with curreents that are themselves density/temperature dependant, may well lead to bias, and yet no evaluation of the ARGO data has been undertaken to establish whether there is such bias, nor to estimate the scale of any such inhernet bias in the temperature data set.

David A
Reply to  Slywolfe
May 23, 2015 4:03 am

R.V. says…”I frequently point out that due to the free floating nature of the ARGO buoys, that get swept along with currents that are themselves density/temperature dependent, may well lead to bias, and yet no evaluation of the ARGO data has been undertaken to establish whether there is such bias, nor to estimate the scale of any such inherent bias in the temperature data set.”
==================================================
Yes!. I usually hear crickets when this is brought up. Imagine if land based stations simply drifted hundreds of miles. (Of course due to changing data bases and homogenization, in affect they do.)

BruceC
Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
May 22, 2015 7:31 pm
David A
Reply to  BruceC
May 23, 2015 4:04 am

It tells current location, not changes.

Reply to  BruceC
May 23, 2015 2:32 pm

Not really each of those dots would have be hundreds of miles in circumference if this was to scale.

tty
Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
May 23, 2015 5:27 am

Actually no. There is virtually no Argo coverage in the Indonesian archipelago, the water is mostly too shallow for the Argo byoys.

May 22, 2015 9:33 am

It was just a few years ago that many main stream scientists were still denying the pause, or ta least refusing to talk about it. Of course Trenberth has been searching for the missing heat for a decade or more now, but that must have been some other kind of missing heat as far as the pause deniers were concerned.
Funny how suddenly things sometimes turn around. The Atlantic, a liberal publication, printed an article on the missing heat, and suddenly the pause was real, except for Lewandowsky and Orestes of course. It’s really pretty entertaining to watch the zealots hopelessly marginalizing themselves by refusing to accept reality.
(aka pokerguy)

Reply to  aneipris
May 22, 2015 11:02 am

“and suddenly the pause was real”
Not only real, but according to the data from the NOAA itself, the PAUSE is going to turn into a slow decline!
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/MTC.htm
It appears they a bit reluctant to look at their own data files.

ren
Reply to  vukcevic
May 23, 2015 1:37 am

Strong secondary galactic radiation changes the chemistry of the atmosphere (for example, increasing the production of NO and 14CO2) to the same surface of the Earth. GCR is modulated by the magnetic field of the Earth, both as regards force and the area of action. This will cause interference polar vortex, especially in winter.

Reply to  aneipris
May 22, 2015 11:08 am

The Atlantic also had something on the American Gestapo and AMTRAK.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  aneipris
May 22, 2015 1:01 pm

*snicker*
It’s Oreskes .NOT. Orestes. However, Mourning does become Lewandowsky.

MRW
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
May 22, 2015 1:09 pm

;>)

RH
May 22, 2015 9:34 am

This is confirmation bias on steroids.

Brute
Reply to  RH
May 22, 2015 1:02 pm

Meaning? Please explain.

May 22, 2015 9:41 am

All this is aggravating my hiatus hernia.

Jon Lonergan
Reply to  Tim Ball
May 22, 2015 3:58 pm

You need to re-model that Tim to remove the aggravation.

Two Labs
May 22, 2015 9:43 am

“The Hardy Boys and the Case of the Missing Heat”
So, we built a model to show how the dastardly heat escaped us, yet again, and we proved it because the model showed it!!!
Good thing real detectivework doesn’t work tlike this…

Reply to  Two Labs
May 22, 2015 9:46 am

But… but… climate change is real!

Reply to  dbstealey
May 22, 2015 9:51 am
harkin
Reply to  Two Labs
May 27, 2015 9:22 am

Nice – I’d love to see the cover to that HB installment

May 22, 2015 9:48 am

“….Will the letter “D”
Be used to signify
That you’ve dangerous free opinions,
That you still won’t comply?
A “D” daubed on your house,
A “D” badge on your coat,
No employment available,
Not allowed to vote….”
Read more: http://wp.me/p3KQlH-Mz (From Environmental Nazis)

Reply to  rhymeafterrhyme
May 22, 2015 10:43 am

I love it!
I’m sure your poetry will be on the top of the burning pile…

Proud Skeptic
Reply to  rhymeafterrhyme
May 22, 2015 12:22 pm

Would you deny it in a boat?
Would you deny it with a goat?

Tom J
Reply to  Proud Skeptic
May 22, 2015 12:57 pm

Will a goat float.
You realize you guys are creating a Frankenstein.

Reply to  Proud Skeptic
May 22, 2015 4:29 pm

I would deny it with a GOAT

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
Reply to  Proud Skeptic
May 22, 2015 4:43 pm

How many boats would the Stoat goat float if the Stoat goat could float boats?

MarkW
Reply to  Proud Skeptic
May 22, 2015 9:50 pm

“Will a goat float.”
Only with lots of ice cream.

Reply to  rhymeafterrhyme
May 22, 2015 6:33 pm

rhymeafterrhyme,
I always enjoy your poems 🙂
Incidentally, you might appreciate this … I took an excellent and highly enjoyable poetry class as an undergrad (to have a bit of contrast to all the math and physics stuff), but the part about the various meters was not opaque, but … ummm … not entirely transparent — or maybe put another way, not entirely ‘natural.’
Subsequently I took drumming lessons for a number of years from Pete Magadini, who dominates the published books on drumming meters and poly-rhythms. I had a blast, practiced long and hard, and now I have a huge rhythmic vocabulary thoroughly integrated into my viscera.
Well I got a pleasant shock a number of years back when I revisited poetry meter and discovered that now it is all crystal clear! So much so that it would be trivial for me to transcribe poetry meter to drumming notation. (And yes, to many people’s surprise, drumming does have written music; after all, the X axis of the great staff is time!)
Anyway, keep up the good work. You add to the color of this already colorful site.

Reality Observer
Reply to  rhymeafterrhyme
May 23, 2015 8:18 am

If “D” was for “Democrat” – I might go along with that…

TRM
Reply to  Salvatore Del Prete
May 22, 2015 11:23 am

“Perplexed, oceanographers are on a hunt to find where this missing heat has gone.”
Space. The final frontier!

Reply to  TRM
May 22, 2015 4:41 pm

To quote Gene Roddenberry about Mr. Spock – he should be alien with three ears. A left ear, a right ear and a final front ear. It all got a bit garbled by the time it made it through post production.
Pointman

Brian H
Reply to  Salvatore Del Prete
May 22, 2015 1:49 pm

OLR does in fact increase when temperature increases. There is no need to look for hidey-holes.

Louis Hunt
May 22, 2015 9:54 am

For those like me who don’t have every acronym memorized, AGU stands for “American Geophysical Union” and EOS appears to be the name of the Greek goddess of the dawn, although their web page is headlined as “Earth & Space Science News.”

Christopher Paino
Reply to  Louis Hunt
May 22, 2015 10:18 am

Thank you VERY much for bringing this up. It is a very common practice to spell out an acronym the first time it is used in an article (yes, in each and every article), like this: “American Geophysical Union (AGU)”. Then you can use the acronym freely throughout the rest of the article.
Slacking in this area is more annoying to me than misspelling and misusage.

Jake J
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 22, 2015 11:19 am

I agree! Acronyms are frustrating enough without having them go undefined.

TRM
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 22, 2015 11:25 am

ROTFLMAO, AFAIK 🙂

ShrNfr
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 22, 2015 11:29 am

WTFDIK?

1saveenergy
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 22, 2015 12:08 pm

AARF (Acronyms are really frustrating)

Steve Case
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 22, 2015 5:18 pm

Yes, I spend way too much time looking up acronyms posted by people who think it makes them look smart.

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 22, 2015 11:35 pm

Christopher Paino
Out of curiosity is — AGU (American Geophysical Union) acceptable for first usage in an article? For some reason I generally do it that way. Never thought about it before. Is this in the style handbook?
Eugene WR Gallun

Frank Lee MeiDere
Reply to  Eugene WR Gallun
May 23, 2015 12:02 am

I believe the more accepted form is: “The American Geophysical Union (AGU) … ” with subsequent references being “AGU.” I’ve always taken exception to this, feeling that it should be the other way around, as in your example. My reasoning is that things in parentheses are parenthetical, and since you’re going to be using the initials from that point on, it’s the full name that should be put in the brackets.
But nobody consulted me when they made up the style books.

meltemian
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 23, 2015 12:22 am

OK, but I did have to look up BOHICA…..:>)))

richard verney
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 23, 2015 3:38 am

If a lawyer was drafting the article they would have stated something along these lines:
American Geophysical Union (hereinafter reffered to as “AGU”).
I guess that sufficiently defines the term, and what the acronym represents/stands for and how it is being used in the remainder of the text/document.

Steve Reddish
Reply to  Christopher Paino
May 25, 2015 9:41 am

If people are concerned about accuracy, they would not refer to “AGU” as an acronym, as “acronym” only refers to initials that form a pronounceable word. NASA is an acronym because it is pronounced “nahsa”. For “AGU” to be an acronym, it would need to be pronounced “ahgoo”.
SR

Reply to  Louis Hunt
May 22, 2015 2:34 pm

Our engineering report consultant used to tell us that use of acronyms was lazy writing. Plus, while we knew what all the acronyms meant as we used them every day, many of our clients weren’t as familiar with the acronyms. Surveys told us they got frustrated at having to go back to find the first occurrence in order to find the definition. Solution: We wrote our draft reports using acronyms, then did a search and replace to put all the spelled out in full versions into the reports.
For technical clients that were used to the acronyms, we ASKED before we finalized the report. If the report was to be used internally, then they were fine with the acronyms. If it was going on to others who weren’t used to the acronyms then we replaced them with the full version depending on what the client wanted.
The client knows best … IMHO 😉

Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
May 22, 2015 2:40 pm

Wayne,
WTF?? LOL!
I have 3 olive-drab Army green t-shirts that say: SNAFU, FUBAR, and BOHICA. I wear ’em all.
Handy reference.

James Bull
Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
May 22, 2015 10:09 pm

I was once asked by my manager to read some bit of bumf produced by my employer (I think it had something to do with employee performance reviews) I dully wadded though it all and when at the end it asked me what I thought of it all I put the comment. Too many unexplained three and four letter acronyms, my boss started to go through some of them but gave up when I asked what they meant and what they did.
I take the view “Do I do and know my job do I get payed”…..Good enough drop the jargon but I suppose it keeps the office wallahs out of mischief.
As for for this “study” I think they may need to get out a bit more.
It’s looking to be a nice day here so I may be out in the garden later.
James Bull

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
May 23, 2015 1:00 pm

It’s typical to include a list of acronyms and abbreviations following/as part of the table of contents (TOC) 🙂

Henry Bowman
Reply to  Louis Hunt
May 22, 2015 2:40 pm

If one doesn’t know what “AGU” stands for, then perhaps one needs further education. Do you know what “APS” or AAAS” stands for? I certainly hope so.
Seriously, one should know what Anthony Watts is talking about. If you don’t, get educated—these are major scientific organizations.

Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 22, 2015 2:44 pm

Henry,
WUWT <—[there’s another one!] has a good glossary page [in the References tab up top].

Steve Case
Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 22, 2015 5:20 pm

Snob

Menicholas
Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 22, 2015 6:52 pm

I have a very extensive education. I did not, however, take any classes on the topic of decoding acronyms… past, present or future ones.
As Steve Martin said: Well, Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 22, 2015 7:22 pm

Henry – APS stands for Alimentation Par Sol, the French invented arrangment for power supply to trams, streetcars and light rail vehicles (three names for the one vehicle) using a switched third rail between the running rails. Very expensive but it works.

Jtom
Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 22, 2015 7:52 pm

If you were to read a headline, “Climate gets heated in APS debate,” in the local paper here, the story could well be about the troubled Atlanta Public School system.
Also, I’ve read too many articles in which the author wrote Mw when the proper unit was mw (and if you hold that the proper unit should have been obvious, then why bother showing it at all?). It’s easy to make a HUGE mistake. Spell it out, spell it out, spell it out.

TYoke
Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 22, 2015 8:38 pm

As usual, Henry Mencken nailed it:
“The professor must be an obscurantist or he is nothing; he has a special and unmatchable talent for dullness, his central aim is not to expose the truth clearly, but to exhibit his profundity, his esotericity – in brief to stagger sophomores and other professors.”
Here is Feynman:
“You never really know a subject unless you can prepare a freshman lecture on it.”
Here is Einstein:
“You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.”

david smith
Reply to  Henry Bowman
May 23, 2015 3:13 am

And here in the UK the IPCC stands for the “Independent Police Complaints Comission”. This could lead to the rather bizarre headline:
“Ex Head of IPCC now appointed to lead the IPCC”
(If a rail engineer/romance novelist can head-up the IPCC, why not a copper;))

Robert of Ottawa
May 22, 2015 9:54 am

They seek them here, they seek them there, they seek them everywhere, those damned elusive calories.

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
May 22, 2015 12:09 pm

THE WHO LYRICS
“The Seeker”
I looked under chairs
I looked under tables
I’m tryin to find the key
To fifty million fables
They call me the seeker
I been searchin low and high
I wont get to get what I’m after
Till the day I die
I asked bobby dylan
I asked the beatles
I asked timothy leary
But he couldn’t help me either
They call me the seeker
I been searchin low and high
I wont get to get what I’m after
Till the day I die
People tend to hate me
Cuz I never smile
As I ransack their homes
They wanna shake my hand
Focusing on nowhere
Investigating miles
I’m a seeker I’m a really desperate man
I wont get to get what I’m after
Till the day I die
I learned to raise my voice in anger
Yeah but look at my face ain’t this a smile
I’m happy when life’s good and when its bad I cry
I got values but I don’t know how or why
I’m lookin for me
You’re lookin for you
Were lookin at each other and we don’t know what to do
They call me the seeker
I been searchin low and high
I wont get to get what I’m after
Till the day I die

James Strom
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
May 22, 2015 2:40 pm

Heh.

Monna Manhas
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
May 22, 2015 6:56 pm

Loved that movie! (The Scarlet Pimpernel, for the uninitiated)

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Monna Manhas
May 22, 2015 10:45 pm

First thing I thought of when I read the opening paragraphs.

skorrent1
May 22, 2015 9:59 am

The incredible power of the CO2 molecule is once more exposed! First we found out that, after a century of increasing atmospheric CO2 and temperature, one final CO2 molecule triggered the entire Atlantic Ocean to begin “hiding” heat deep down at the exact same rate that increasing CO2 was generating it in the atmosphere. Clever molecule!
Now we find that that same molecule cranked up the Pacific trade winds just enough to transfer the requisite heat from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean. Not just clever, but brilliant!

philincalifornia
Reply to  skorrent1
May 22, 2015 10:58 am

Is there a new concomitant theory on how it can have positive water vapor feedback in the atmosphere when it’s in the ocean … ? Calling brilliant scientists Travesty Trenberth and Lew and Naomi, hello, hello, come in.

takebackthegreen
Reply to  philincalifornia
May 22, 2015 8:06 pm

Fact check: Oreskes isn’t technically a scientist. She styles herself a “Historian of Science,” or “Science Historian,” in different contexts.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  philincalifornia
May 22, 2015 10:47 pm

Science hysterical fits better.

May 22, 2015 10:01 am

According to IPCC AR5 the additional radiative forcing due to the increased atmospheric CO2 levels between 1750 and 2011 (261 years!) is about 2 W/m^2. IPCC’s four GCMs, RCP 2.6, 4.5, 6.0, 8.5 W/m^2 are based on corresponding elevated ppm of CO2. ToA incoming power is 340 +/- 2? 5? W/m^2. 168 W/m^2 +/- 2? 5? reaches the surface.
How does anybody quantify the RF of GHGs in the huge amounts of power flowing in the atmosphere? Or determine how such a relatively trivial amount of energy flow significantly impacts the climate. IPCC acknowledges that the negative forcing of clouds is on the order of -20 W/m^2!! Ten times that of CO2.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  nickreality65
May 22, 2015 7:49 pm

Nickreality
Those numbers don’t add up. If only 168 W/m^2 reaches the ground, averaged over 24 hours, then 8 hours would be thrice that. Insolation on a solar panel is about a kW/m^2 or nearly double, and PV panels don’t work on IR or backscatter.
Is the figure 168 the average for pole to pole then? At first and second blush it seems low.

Mr Bliss
May 22, 2015 10:03 am

If the theory is that the Indonesian archipelago has such significance regarding heat flow, the scientific approach would be to try and prove it by monitoring the area with some fixed buoys and tide gaufes, and gathering some actual data.
But the preferred method of climate scientists seems to be the creation of a model and hey presto – theory proved.

Jeremy Poynton
May 22, 2015 10:07 am

I emailed Lewy to ask if he had told the Met Office that they were wrong about the pause. Oddly, he hasn’t replied

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Jeremy Poynton
May 22, 2015 10:49 pm

What did Hewy and Dewy say?

meltemian
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
May 23, 2015 12:25 am

“Quack”?

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
May 23, 2015 1:01 pm

Most apropos.

May 22, 2015 10:07 am

You say the global warming pause that has occurred is a mystery… it is not a mystery. the sun now bereft of sunspots for the first time for a hundred years and with a rapidly declining solar irradiance gives the answer. As Lockwood, Anthenur(India) and Abdussamatov(St Petersberg) have all said we are facing a new ice age. The De Vries 200 year cycle and the solar decline is proof. Humans are irrelevant.

Jim Watson
May 22, 2015 10:20 am

God is actually playing a shell game with the Warmists and they keep picking the wrong shell. Doh!
Of course, the trick is that there’s no “missing heat” under ANY of the shells!

schitzree
Reply to  Jim Watson
May 22, 2015 8:49 pm

That horrifying moment when you realize, not only does God play dice with the Universe, but they’re loaded. >¿<

Pieter F.
May 22, 2015 10:39 am

I believe those still pushing the global warming meme are resorting to Doublespeak to keep their agenda alive. “Pause” is a convenient term to suggest their models are correct and the extremes included in those results are still anticipated. “Pause” is an inversion of meaning disguising the truth (= Doublespeak). The truth is: they got it wrong.

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  Pieter F.
May 22, 2015 11:24 am

Yeah. It really needs to be called the Halt. Until it resolves into more up, or the more likely cold plunge.

Reply to  E.M.Smith
May 23, 2015 9:13 am

The 18 year long climate reversal.

Don B
May 22, 2015 10:43 am

The NY Times editors must still be in shock that they let this be written:
“There’s been a burst of worthy research aimed at figuring out what causes the stutter-steps in the process [global warming] — including the current hiatus/pause/plateau that has generated so much discussion.”
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/a-closer-look-at-turbulent-oceans-and-greenhouse-heating/

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  Don B
May 22, 2015 7:40 pm

I did like the statement by Andrew Dessler:
“Rather, I expect that the hiatus will help us understand how ocean variability interacts with the long-term warming that humans are causing. In a few years, as we get to understand this more, skeptics will move on (just like they dropped arguments about the hockey stick and about the surface station record) to their next reason not to believe climate science.”
OK, so if warmists lose the argument they just shut up for a few years, and then claim that it was lost by the sceptics. Nice going. Possibly from “How to win even though you lost the argument.”

JPeden
May 22, 2015 10:44 am

Where is the “missing heat” that’s flat-lined the GMT? Well, at some point every Religion needs a “How many Angels fit on the head of a pin?” question.

Reply to  JPeden
May 22, 2015 11:00 am

I’d like to see how many they could fit on the point.

Bruce Cobb
May 22, 2015 10:45 am

That wascally heat. Someone should put a gps tracker on it.

jim heath
May 22, 2015 10:49 am

An awful lot of time is wasted on this, when will these people get a proper job. Make something, feed somebody.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  jim heath
May 22, 2015 2:37 pm

Oh, but in the emergent agendas of the CAGW advocates, “make something” only applies to developing countries and “feed somebody” doesn’t even appear on any warmist radar. Climate Fear proponents might make some half- hearted attempt to refute those points, but the evidence against them is overwhelming. By their own words, they have condemned themselves (repeatedly.)

kentclizbe
May 22, 2015 10:53 am

“Lee told Eos. “And when I found a large heat increase in the Indian Ocean, I was almost convinced that there was something wrong with the hydrographic data.”
Then homogenize it!
Isn’t that how “climate science” is done? !

May 22, 2015 10:59 am

Why the global warming hiatus has happened and how long it will last is a mystery.
It is the sun.

Reply to  M Simon
May 22, 2015 12:18 pm

predicting cold?

DirkH
Reply to  Steven Mosher
May 22, 2015 2:07 pm

Warmunists are too smart to give absolute “Global Average Temperatures” and hide behind their anomalies and shifting baselines and historical revisionism of data (I know, Mosher, you say that all data needs to be revised, but why does it need to be revised AGAIN and AGAIN? Rethorical question, don’t answer. We know the reason for the repetitive revisions: the crave for funding.)
How would it look like if they gave absolute UNrevised temperature averages ; we’re probably already halfway into the cooling. Western Climate science is as reliable as the fraudulent unemployment statistics of the US or the GDP numbers, subject to constant history rewriting.

Alx
Reply to  Steven Mosher
May 22, 2015 6:26 pm

Predicting cold? No I think the idea is to hope it’s cold because global warming is so bad and everything.
Accordingly “Hope and Change” has been re-purposed:
http://www.dreamwitness.com/WUWT/Hope%20its%20cold%20small.jpg

Alan Robertson
Reply to  M Simon
May 22, 2015 2:41 pm

Proof?
I’d be glad to see any Solar correlation which doesn’t disappear with a modicum of scrutiny.

Eliza
May 22, 2015 11:01 am

Actually looking at World temperatures reported by Sky news and BBC every day, The temperatures at mid latitudes and subtropics seems remarkably low over the past 3 months or so has anybody noticed (ie Brisbane 24 degrees south) 22-23C nearly every day rarely 25C or so past 2 months anyway. I think the same has been observed in North America?

Reply to  Eliza
May 22, 2015 8:20 pm

I went to Melbourne – I can assure you I noticed!

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Andrew
May 23, 2015 2:42 am

a couple of mm of ice on the waterbowls outside in Victorias sw this am
first for the year 🙂
and from the feels of outside now
more overnight

bit chilly
Reply to  Eliza
May 23, 2015 2:24 am

the trees on the east coast of scotland certainly noticed , starting to green nicely now though.

Editor
May 22, 2015 11:04 am

“Missing heat”
Like one of those Monty Python skits where the guy who doesn’t get joke keeps repeating it.

Editor
Reply to  Alec Rawls
May 22, 2015 3:30 pm

Everybody on the floor laughing and he just keeps saying “missing heat.”

Brass Monkey
Reply to  Alec Rawls
May 22, 2015 5:22 pm

Missing heat! It took a hiatus when they shut down the boilers in my condo and created winter in May.

Latitude
May 22, 2015 11:06 am

Rather than showing any signs of storing heat, as is the case in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean has actually cooled………
it’s F’in magic

May 22, 2015 11:11 am

Has anyone looked at this site and its breakdown of contributing factors to GW?
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
It looks pretty good but from 2007. Is this still good info? Great if it was because it’s so simple and easy for an amateur sceptic.

Reply to  Dahlquist
May 22, 2015 11:38 am

It says that humans are responsible for only 0.28% of AGW if water vapor is taken into account. Is this info still scientifically accurate?

MikeB
Reply to  Dahlquist
May 23, 2015 1:37 am

Humans are responsible for 100% of AGW —- by Definition!

Reply to  Dahlquist
May 22, 2015 4:36 pm

In my climate pages I have links to 3 pages in the West Virginia Plant Fossils Website:
Global Warming: Introduction, A closer look at the numbers and A Chilling Perspective.
I found nothing obviously wrong and a lot of good common sense and data.

masInt branch 4 C3I in is
May 22, 2015 11:13 am

I suspect Lew and Oreskes are actually after a few million dollars, cash, from the AGU’s money laundering scheme — The Climate Scientists Legal Defense Fund — funded by membership fees and which gives hefty cash payouts to James E. Hansen and Michael E. Mann.
I.e. if the AGU does not fork over a few million in cash, Lew and Oreskes will petition to District Court #1 of the Federal Circuit about the REAL goings on at the AGU’s “Climate Scientists Legal Defense Fund”.
Nothing better than good old fashion blackmail at the feet of Her Majesty Christine McEntee.
Har har.

Gary Pearse
May 22, 2015 11:16 am

I think they’ve just discovered ENSO. Tisdale told us the trades blow the warm water westward where it piles up. I don’t believe the researcher didn’t read Bob’s stuff and then made his “discovery”. Don’t forget that these guys didn’t figure ENSO into climate until the pause sent them scurrying finding such things as El Nino, El Nina, PDO, AMO, sunspots, aerosols (oops did I spell that correctly) and they actually didn’t discover the pause until about 2009 when they read it in the Daily Mail, nor did governments learn of it until Monckton announced it at the Doha IPCC show.
I hope these guys know, too, that enthalpy changes don’t always signify temperature changes. If suddenly all the world’s winds and currents are picking up as has been reported on, where do they think the air and water get their push from? This is a cooling activity – mostly moving heat to toward the poles were it can radiate to space – they are closing in on the thermostat hypothesis! It stands to reason that, if the maximum amount the oceans’ water can be heated is to 31C and this happens only in the band around the equator, then there is a rock hard limit to temperatures in the system with a steady sun.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
May 22, 2015 4:39 pm

My feeling also. ENSO rediscovered by consensus science.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
May 23, 2015 2:21 am

Researchers have been studying these currents for many years. If you go back more than a decade or so, the problem was lack of data.
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/projects/SE_Asian_Archipelago/

bit chilly
Reply to  Gary Pearse
May 23, 2015 2:30 am

i have argued with various warmist acquaintances that any indication of “warming” at the poles is an increase in heat being lost to the atmosphere , particularly in winter time .

Ian L. McQueen
May 22, 2015 11:25 am

dbstealey wrote May 22, 2015 at 9:46 am
“But… but… climate change is real!”
The last four words led to a video. I think that the video is a spoof to mock true believers. I certainly hope so, for the poor guy seems to be deluded. We had a family expression about somebody being as happy as if they were in their right mind, and he certainly makes you wonder!
Ian M

DirkH
Reply to  Ian L. McQueen
May 22, 2015 2:16 pm

Definitely not a spoof, just a guy who wants to be a motivational speaker but has absolutely no talent for it. He might compensate for it with enough practice. Which he does not have yet.

Mike Smith
May 22, 2015 11:31 am

Citizens: DANGER
Authorities are asking citizens everywhere to be on the lookout for Missing Heat. Heat has escaped sometime in the past 18 years and despite a massive search it has continued to evade officials around the world. If you see Missing Heat, please do not approach. It is extremely dangerous causing hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, disease, famine, war, death and much, much more. Immediately call 911 and specially trained climatologists will be dispatched to safely capture Missing Heat.

Reply to  Mike Smith
May 22, 2015 4:41 pm

Ghost busters maybe?

Reply to  Mike Smith
May 23, 2015 9:19 am

Wanted: Missing Heat.
Wanted for violating the laws of Conservation of Energy.
In the real world, there can be no “missing heat.”
Can something missing if it has never existed?

CaligulaJones
May 22, 2015 11:48 am

From the same people who told us the sun wasn’t important in the first IPCC report, to admitting the sun might be somewhat important in the second, to agreeing that, yes, it is important, but not really, really important in the third, to telling us to shut up about the sun already in the fourth…

May 22, 2015 11:56 am

IPCC AR5 acknowledges the pause/hiatus.
WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL
Box 9.2 | Climate Models and the Hiatus in Global Mean Surface Warming of the Past 15 Years
“The observed global mean surface temperature (GMST) has shown a much smaller increasing linear trend over the past 15 years than over the past 30 to 60 years (Section 2.4.3, Figure 2.20, Table 2.7; Figure 9.8; Box 9.2 Figure 1a, c). Depending on the observational data set, the GMST trend over 1998–2012 is estimated to be around one-third to one-half of the trend over 1951–2012 (Section 2.4.3, Table 2.7; Box 9.2 Figure 1a, c). For example, in HadCRUT4 the trend is 0.04ºC per decade over 1998–2012, compared to 0.11ºC per decade over 1951–2012. The reduction in observed GMST trend is most marked in Northern Hemisphere winter (Section 2.4.3; Cohen et al., 2012). Even with this “hiatus” in GMST trend, the decade of the 2000s has been the warmest in the instrumental record of GMST (Section 2.4.3, Figure 2.19). Nevertheless, the occurrence of the hiatus in GMST trend during the past 15 years raises the two related questions of (1) what has caused it and (2) whether climate models are able to reproduce it.”
And two very good questions.
(1) Increased water vapor, snow albedo, -20 W/m^2 cloud negative feedback..
(2) Obviously no, no they haven’t and can’t.

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  nickreality65
May 22, 2015 7:51 pm

But the GMST trend over 1951-2012 includes the cooling from 1951 to 1975, and the plateau from 2001 to 2012. So if “the GMST trend over 1998–2012 is estimated to be around one-third to one-half of the trend over 1951–2012” what is the comparable ratio to the warming trend rate over the major period of warming from 1979 to 1999?

Stephen Richards
May 22, 2015 11:58 am

The UKMO’s Betts has found a way to measure accurately all the energy in the global system. We should ask him where the energy has gone and from that where he thinks, sorry, knows the heat is hiding.

Reply to  Stephen Richards
May 22, 2015 2:58 pm

Betts also does easy to understand decadal temperature forecasts
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/image/8/m/plumes_2012-800px.jpeg
This one has been explicitly approved by the MettOffice’s day nursery attendees.

Reply to  vukcevic
May 22, 2015 3:05 pm
Leonard Lane
Reply to  vukcevic
May 23, 2015 12:22 am

Good one Vukcevic. It was a gotcha moment.

ren
Reply to  vukcevic
May 23, 2015 1:27 am

AMO cycle is in a phase negative (for 30 years). It will bring the end of the drought in the southern United States.
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-amo/from:2010/trend/plot/esrl-amo/from:2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_multidecadal_oscillation
They use it for explaining “pause”.

Udar
Reply to  vukcevic
May 23, 2015 7:31 am
Stephen Richards
May 22, 2015 11:58 am

Come out, come out where ever you are HEAT. I can feel you!!!

Paul Westhaver
May 22, 2015 12:00 pm

“Lewandowsky and Oreskes” anagrams to:
A Dorky Swede knows a Lens.

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
May 22, 2015 4:35 pm

Ek! Wales reasoned sky down
O eke days, less wonder – a wonk
Kooky sand, we wander less
Sway land need, skew rooks

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  It doesn't add up...
May 22, 2015 4:58 pm

Rank loss. Way done? Skewed.

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  It doesn't add up...
May 22, 2015 7:34 pm

A workless Dane, Ed, saw no sky.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
May 22, 2015 6:40 pm

Seeks lewd and raw on sky.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Max Photon
May 22, 2015 11:08 pm

I’ll stick with what Lysenko Spawned.

Reply to  Max Photon
May 23, 2015 11:05 am

Wow. Good job!

May 22, 2015 12:07 pm

Pacific cooling since 2003…
Climate science discovers the PDO!
Of course a fisheries biologist already found it in the 1990s.

May 22, 2015 12:13 pm

The trend of average global temperature data before it was ‘adjusted’ has been flat since before 2001. The data are graphed at http://endofgw.blogspot.com.
Proof that CO2 has no significant effect on climate and identification of the two factors that do cause climate change (95% correlation since before 1900) are at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com

Steve Case
Reply to  Dan Pangburn
May 23, 2015 1:43 am

Upjusted

Pat
May 22, 2015 12:32 pm

But..but, they predicted not so long ago that Global-Warming was going to and was already SLOWING down the pacific trade winds!
So Global-Warming CAUSES the Pacific trade winds to slow down.
Which… accelerates the Pacific trade winds, which pause global warming?
Totally makes sense.

Slabadang
May 22, 2015 12:37 pm

They are pogroms!
A pogrom have the active support or the establishments blind eye turned toards them when they harass opposition and minorities.A pogrom is an ideologic driven totalitarian who will kill if needed the oppossiton or minority hes attacking. Desmoblog Oreskes Lewandovski Holdren Al Gore … pogroms ! The worst case is the communist and nazi jew case but it the same kind of people just a different ideology application attacking a new monority!
.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom

DirkH
Reply to  Slabadang
May 22, 2015 2:20 pm

“The worst case is the communist and nazi jew case”
The bolsheviki were all Jewish; only exception the figurehead, Lenin resp. Stalin (Lenin had one Jewish grandfather), and exterminated millions of Russian Christians. The Nazis exterminated Jews. So I don’t quite get the sentence. Do you claim that communists made pogroms against Jews?

Reply to  DirkH
May 22, 2015 5:08 pm

Pogrom is a role and funktion an actor to oppress deiscriminate and scare. When they start to kill people its the final tolitrian activist.

Udar
Reply to  DirkH
May 23, 2015 7:58 am

The Bolsheviks weren’t all Jews, although there were disproportionatly large number of Jews in communist party, just like there are disproportional number of Jews among scientists, inventors, musicians and Nobel Prize winners.
Neither Lenin nor Stalin were Jewish or figureheads and communists in the beginning were exterminating everyone equally, including religion Jews or Jews in opposition parties. They switched to regular antisemitism in about 40 years. Most of Jews in leading positions were exterminated within 30 years after revolution.
I really don’t understand what is the point of your posting, it’s even more incoherent than original you replying to.
Incidentally, Pogroms is Russian word to describe killing of Jews by Russian crowds that was instigated and sponsored by Russian government, which was extremely antisemitism and in addition to sponsoring mass killings also prevented Jews from obtaining education, living within thousands of kilometers from large cities or working at most trades.

Harry Passfield
May 22, 2015 12:46 pm

Of course, the alarmists can show this is the case because there are precedents: It’s all happened before, under similar circumstances. No? (Face-palm) I get it! There were no computers back in the day, so how could it ever have happened before?

old44
May 22, 2015 1:00 pm

With 660,000,000 cubic kilometres of Pacific Ocean trying to heat 274,000,000 cubic kilometres of Indian Ocean, Lombok Straight must have been politely boiling.

Tom J
May 22, 2015 1:00 pm

I thought the heat was now hiding in the Arctic. It sure gets around doesn’t it? Deep Pacific. Arctic. Now Indian Ocean.

Frank Lee MeiDere
Reply to  Tom J
May 22, 2015 2:01 pm

Well, now NASA is saying global warming ISN’T affecting the polar ice caps, so I guess the search for thd missing heat must carry on.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/pj-gladnick/2015/05/20/oops-updated-nasa-data-reveals-no-global-warming-polar-ice-retreat

ren
Reply to  Frank Lee MeiDere
May 23, 2015 7:19 am

Please be aware why ice is melting in west Antarctica.
Will the new volcano erupt?
“Definitely,” Lough said. “In fact, because the radar shows a mountain beneath the ice, I think it has erupted in the past, before the rumblings we recorded.”
Will the eruptions punch through a kilometer or more of ice above it?
The scientists calculated that an enormous eruption, one that released 1,000 times more energy than the typical eruption, would be necessary to breach the ice above the volcano.
On the other hand, a subglacial eruption and the accompanying heat flow will melt a lot of ice. “The volcano will create millions of gallons of water beneath the ice — many lakes full,” Wiens said.
This water will rush beneath the ice toward the sea and feed into the hydrological catchment of the MacAyeal Ice Stream, one of several major ice streams draining ice from Marie Byrd Land into the Ross Ice Shelf.
By lubricating the bedrock, it will speed the flow of the overlying ice, perhaps increasing the rate of ice-mass loss in West Antarctica.
“We weren’t expecting to find anything like this,” Wiens said.comment image
https://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/25611.aspx

Jon Lonergan
Reply to  Tom J
May 22, 2015 4:08 pm

Don’t forget, with the 11-dimension interpretation of Einstein, there are another 7 dimensions for it to hide in! Better get some funding to research that soon.

Reply to  Tom J
May 22, 2015 4:51 pm

Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transported ;-(

Wagen
May 22, 2015 1:09 pm

What’s the take-home message here? Ocean takes up more heat? Oceans spreading heat around? Ocean-Atmosphere interaction? Why would Lew and Oreske have an issue? Lot’s of questions here, sorry. I simply do not seem to get the rationale behind this post.
Instead of surface warming, there has been relatively more warming of the oceans. Article posted above says so, I think, and that it spreads.
Some talk about hiatus (surface temperatures) while the oceans warm, others say there is no hiatus since the globe warms (surface, oceans, and the rest considered at once).
??

rogerknights
Reply to  Wagen
May 23, 2015 2:14 pm

“Why would Lew and Oreske have an issue?”
Because they deny that the pause exists anywhere but in skeptics’ imaginations.

Wagen
Reply to  rogerknights
May 25, 2015 4:00 pm

“Why would Lew and Oreske have an issue?”
‘Because they deny that the pause exists anywhere but in skeptics’ imaginations.’
Heh? Evidence please. Nobody is denying relatively slow surface warming (land ice loss is continuing as is ocean warming).

Editor
May 22, 2015 1:39 pm

I’m working on a post about Lee et al.(2015). I hope to post it this weekend.
Cheers.

Pamela Gray
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
May 22, 2015 2:59 pm

The voice of scientific reason.

Reply to  Bob Tisdale
May 23, 2015 2:31 am

I had assumed that warmth in the South China Sea could impede transfer of heat to the Indian Ocean. That would have sent more of the Western Pacific heat north via the Kuroshio Current. This paper seems to suggest that was not the case?

Aaron Smith
May 22, 2015 1:51 pm

Pacific Ocean cooled…. and Indian ocean warmed….. OK… Did anyone mention the Pacific Ocean is twice the size of the Indian Ocean?

Alex
Reply to  Aaron Smith
May 22, 2015 5:27 pm

There is a special climate science law called ‘reverse entropy’. They just neglected to tell us that the heat from the Pacific concentrates at the bottleneck around Indonesia. In fact the seas nearly boil there. Then it dissipates into the Indian Ocean. They don’t make this information public because they don’t want to frighten the populace.

Frank Lee MeiDere
May 22, 2015 1:58 pm

I used to do an exercise with my classes in which I would provide them with some statistic that seemed counter-intuitive and ask them to explain it. For instance, in one chart I showed that women were far more likely get AIDS than men were and they were also more likely to suffer severe accidents at the workplace than men. Their explanations were consistently clever and always very politically correct. Common explanations for these two statistics were that women were more likely to get AIDS because men tended to have sex with more than one woman, therefore a man with AIDS would spread it among more women, and women had more accidents at the workplace because they were forced to wear innappropriate clothing, especially shoes. After allowing about 15 minutes to half an hour for the students to explain these findings I would then reveal that I had reversed the statistics – the point being that when you start with a conclusion — any conclusion, no matter how silly — you can always back-engineer a reason.
(And yes, I did often lie to my classes. My point for the course was to trust no one, but always check out the facts for themselves.)

David S
May 22, 2015 2:30 pm

I find the concept of missing heat strange . Heat is either there or not there. It’s like saying some warmists have missing intelligence. It’s either there or not there. It’s as if the world has actually warmed and somehow rather than show up in temperature data it has been somehow transferred somewhere else. How about this theory. It never existed. You are more likely to find the Loch Ness monster than the missing heat.

Glenn999
Reply to  David S
May 22, 2015 3:08 pm

Aye laddy. You’re talking about Nessie. I think you might be on to something. Perhaps the heat has chased ole Nessie deep into the freezing recesses of an ancient loch. There’s funding in this one!

Evan Jones
Editor
Reply to  Glenn999
May 22, 2015 3:38 pm

Hadn’t you heard?
Despite having hundreds of sonar contacts over the years, the trail has since gone cold and Rines believes that Nessie may be dead, a victim of global warming.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/veteran-loch-ness-monster-hunter-968694

Reply to  David S
May 22, 2015 3:42 pm

The missing heat is a needle in the oceans/clouds/ice sheets. Typically rather hard to locate.

Leonard Lane
Reply to  David S
May 23, 2015 12:29 am

David S, do you think the warmists ever heard of the heat equation and delta T?

John Stover
May 22, 2015 2:35 pm

Since I was an Army officer in a previous life I prefer to think of the current pause/halt/plateau as a harried Heat, being on the run from the pesky climastrologists, laagering up in a defense position with all defenses pointing outwards. When the situation returns to a different state it will unlaager and resume its destructive reign. Of course no one knows if Heat will be strengthened or weakened from its time spent in laager.

May 22, 2015 2:35 pm

David S says:
I find the concept of missing heat strange.
Yes! That has to be rank speculation. If the ‘missing heat’ wasn’t missing, it would be found, and then they would all jump up and down pointing to it. Since they can’t find the missing heat, they pretend to know it’s there. But they don’t know that, do they?
[BTW, you have a really excellent first name & last intitial! ☺]

Stephen Skinner
May 22, 2015 2:58 pm

How does Global Warming caused by a well dispersed heat absorbing atmospheric gas warm up only one specific area of the planet? Especially as I thought all the heat was going to the poles?

Reply to  Stephen Skinner
May 22, 2015 4:57 pm

First Global Warming transmogrifies into Climate Change, then it becomes more selective. Elementary, my dear Skinner.

Pamela Gray
May 22, 2015 3:05 pm

If we were to experience a rapidly forced and exact heat in/heat out balance (something watermelon liberals think is the ideal state), many organisms and weather systems that depend on an imbalance (the real ideal state), could possibly become so disrupted as to lead to drastic and undesirable affects. The all the cycles of life depend on imbalance to survive.

Pamela Gray
May 22, 2015 3:09 pm

The “imbalance” often referred to by climate scientists is partially modeled with a fudge factor based on what climate scientists believe “should” be happening as a result of CO2 buildup. They are so convinced of their calculated thesis that when the increasing heat phenomenon is not observed in the natural setting, they insist it is hiding somewhere, versus admitting it is just not there and they need to rethink their thesis.

Pamela Gray
Reply to  Pamela Gray
May 22, 2015 3:31 pm

The calculations. Not easy to find. Most of the time they are buried in jargon and camouflaged to look like observed data when in reality, it is calculations and models all the way down.
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/11/13421/2011/acp-11-13421-2011.pdf

Grey Lensman
Reply to  Pamela Gray
May 22, 2015 10:07 pm

Symmetry IS, Non symmetry works.
universal law

Pamela Gray
Reply to  Grey Lensman
May 23, 2015 6:46 am

Yes. Earth is in a normal state of imbalance, especially over long spans of time. The mistake climate scientists often make is to ascribe that imbalance to anthropogenic CO2 build up causing increased back radiation. But because their calculated thesis says heat should be building up everywhere in spite of the fact that atmospheric and oceanic temperatures are not observed to be doing that in the way expected, heat must be building up in some hidden way and location. That reasoning makes no sense (for the thesis to be true, heat should be building up fairly evenly and in lock step with increasing anthropogenic CO2) and more importantly, has no plausible mechanism whereby heat selectively, almost sentiently, builds up only in a certain place. This convoluted response to the “pause” exposes the biased nature of enquiry ubiquitous among climate scientists.

Reply to  Grey Lensman
May 23, 2015 9:26 am

“Slight imbalance” Is how I would say it.
This imbalance exists within the stability of our atmosphere.

KaiserDerden
May 22, 2015 3:19 pm

its not hiding … it doesn’t exist …

philincalifornia
Reply to  KaiserDerden
May 22, 2015 4:15 pm

Sssssshhhh, the kiddies might log on here, then they’ll be asking about the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus.

Arno Arrak
May 22, 2015 3:25 pm

I quote: “…Rather than showing any signs of storing heat, as is the case in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean has actually cooled over the last decade.Why the global warming hiatus has happened and how long it will last is a mystery.”
A mystery it will be and inter-ocean currents do not explain it. In addition to the current hiatus a second hiatus exists in the eighties and nineties that is covered up by fake warming from the global warming monopoly of HadCRUT, GISS, and NCDC. This cover-up has a bad odor attached to it. They have known of it at least since 2008 when I discovered it while doing research for my book [1]. ENSO had been active in the eighties and nineties and created a wave train consisting of five El Nino peaks with La Nina valleys in between. If you mark the center points of these waves they line up in a horizontal straight line, indicating no warming for 18 years. That is the same length of time the current hiatus has lasted. That wave train came to an end in 1997 when the super El Nino of 1998 arrived. It does not belong to ENSO and is a rare phenomenon. This one is the only one in the entire twentieth century. In 1999 it was followed by a short step warming that raised global temperature by a third of a degree Celsius in only three years and then stopped. It was the only warming during the satellite era that begins in 1979. It was not greenhouse warming but had an oceanic origin. Greenhouse warming is ruled out because there was no increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide when it started and also because it stopped for good in 2002. Hansen noticed the temperature rise it caused because thanks to this step warming all twenty-first century temperatures are higher than twentieth century was (except for 1998). That for him proved that it was greenhouse warming in action which is completely wrong. This error proves that once you buy into the groupthink of greenhouse warming thinking simply stops. All the attacks on hiatus have been aimed at the current hiatus so far. Anthony kept track of them until their total reached fifty and then gave up. I am waiting to see what happens when they realize there is another one for them to tackle they did not even know about. The temperature keepers have been very brazen and ignored my periodical comments about the existence of a hiatus in the eighties and nineties. On top of which they continued their fake warming into the twenty-first century and that way got 2014 declared the warmest year ever. The true history of global temperature in the satellite era beginning in 1979 consists of two hiatuses – the one in the eighties and nineties and the current one – separated by the super El Nino of 1998 and by the step warming of 1999 to 2002. It is possible that there is one more hiatus from the fifties to the seventies but I can not be sure because of the poor quality of available temperature data. The important observation is that if you compare this warming pattern to the global carbon dioxide history displayed by the Keeling curve there is no way a causal relationship between the two can exist.
[1] Arno Arrak, “What Warming? Satellite view of global temperature change” (CreateSpace, 2010)

Bruce Cobb
May 22, 2015 3:34 pm

Shouldn’t there be a hotline for the missing heat? Also, a reward wouldn’t be a bad idea.

Jon Lonergan
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
May 22, 2015 4:11 pm

But they’re already being rewarded by being paid to look for/model it!

Reg Nelson
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
May 22, 2015 4:38 pm

The face of Missing Heat should be on milk cartons, I reckon.
Poor Missing Heat, on the run and in hiding for eighteen years now. What horrible fate has caused Miss Heat to vanish?
Who abducted her? Why was she kidnapped?
Only Peer-Reviewed Detectives will able to solve this one, I’m afraid.

highflight56433
May 22, 2015 4:03 pm

“Warm water, like warm air, rises—or, rather, stays at the surface when nothing else is disturbing it. This is why, in a lake, the upper layer is warmer than the bottom layer.”
…except when colder or less warn than 4 °C (39.2 °F) occurs…that is the temperature pure water is most dense and will sink to the bottom, while cooler water remains at the surface where it can freeze and make ice roads (for the next ice age)….everybody knows that…so just for the non-science readers …. 🙂 cheers!

Reply to  highflight56433
May 22, 2015 6:31 pm

Go swimming in a high mountain lake, e.g. Jackson Hole or Estes Park. The top 2 to 3 feet might be comfortable, but go vertical and tread water, wow, shock to the system!

Pamela Gray
Reply to  nickreality65
May 23, 2015 6:51 am

Yep. Learned how to float after being tossed into Wallowa Lake. You automatically want to tuck your butt up out of that frigid layer right quick!

pat
May 22, 2015 4:17 pm

Eliza said –
“The temperatures at mid latitudes and subtropics seems remarkably low over the past 3 months or so has anybody noticed (ie Brisbane 24 degrees south) 22-23C nearly every day”
Maryborough is a 3-hour drive north of Brisbane:
22 April: Fraser Coast Chronicle: Maryborough low of 6.2 degrees is coldest April morning on record
UPDATE: Maryborough’s minimum of 6.2 degrees at 6.13am on Tuesday is the city’s lowest April temperature on record, according to the Bureau of Meteorology.”In Maryborough, we haven’t seen this occur in the last 107 years,” Bureau of Meteorology spokesman Jess Carey said.
“That’s not to say it hasn’t occurred before but certainly the time at which we’ve been taking temperature records there, since 1908, we haven’t seen a temperature this cold in April…
Mr Carey said both Maryborough and Hervey Bay were 10 degrees below their April averages…
http://www.frasercoastchronicle.com.au/news/mboro-low-62-degrees-coldest-58-years/2614706/

charles nelson
Reply to  pat
May 22, 2015 4:34 pm

There’s a lot of cold air coming up from Antarctica, much to the confusion of Australian Warmists who have been told that Antarctica has practically melted!

Reply to  pat
May 22, 2015 5:19 pm

Perth has also had a distinct lack of either drought or high temperatures this year so far. Early snow in Victoria and NSW. Not that this signifies anything special, other than an embrassment to the warmists who in previous years had pointed to hotter dryer weather as a global warming sign.

knr
May 22, 2015 4:45 pm

may have found some of this missing heat: or ran computer models designed to give the ‘right result’
and the actual physical data that proves this claim is ?
Of course the very best thing about deep oceans is that there is little know about them so you can claim much is missing in them , cities , UFO’s , heat, knowing it is unlikely people can prove your wrong , has it is so ‘deep’ and ‘unknown ‘

Pamela Gray
Reply to  knr
May 23, 2015 6:52 am

There must be a ton of mismatched socks down there.

Bruce Cobb
May 22, 2015 5:26 pm

Needless to say, COP21 and all future climate jamborees should be postponed until the missing heat is found. It would be unseemly otherwise.

George Steiner
May 22, 2015 6:04 pm

Let me see if I understand this. CO2 heats the earth surface with back radiation. CO2 has been increasing but surface temperature has not.
The back radiation has been heating the oceans. So while land surface temperature is not increasing ocean temperature is increasing.
I propose that the CO2 heating hypothesis is false. Yes I know about the photons going hither and thither but there has never been experimental verification of this mechanism for the four measly CO2 molecules in 10,000 air molecules.

Alex
Reply to  George Steiner
May 22, 2015 8:35 pm

CO2 is magic

Xyzzy
Reply to  George Steiner
May 23, 2015 12:08 am

Except that back radiation (DWLWIR) can’t actually heat the oceans, most of that radiation is absorbed in the top few microns of the water, probably causing increased evaporation and thus lowering temperatures a little due to latent heat loss.

May 22, 2015 6:38 pm

As I understand it the CO2 back radiation heats water vapor which supposedly has a positive feedback and thus heats the air, ground, ocean, etc. However, one of the properties of water vapor is to absorb/release huge amounts of heat through evaporation/condensation without changing the surrounding temperature. The psychrometric properties of moist air apply.
Heat leads to cooling by clouds (-20 W/m^2), snow albedo, precipitation, etc. Self correcting.

noloctd
May 22, 2015 7:09 pm

The heat they imagined was missing was imaginary after all it seems.

lyn roberts
May 22, 2015 7:38 pm

Must be the Chinese building all those artificial islands, on what were previously shallow reefs

SAMURAI
May 22, 2015 7:47 pm

The IPCC should put “MISSING HEAT” on milk cartons across America under the following format:
Name: MISSING HEAT
Photo:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1996.6/plot/rss/from:1996.6/trend/plot/esrl-co2/from:1996.6/normalise/trend/plot/esrl-co2/from:1996.6/normalise
Age: 19
Missing since: June, 1996
Last seen: UN Building, New York, New Yiork
Hot Line: 1-800-Save-Our-Hoax

John Smith
May 22, 2015 8:12 pm

I always miss out on stuff … not this time
My new Ferrari is missing
I never had one in the first place
but when it’s found, I expect it to be returned to me immediately
I knew climate science could change my life in a positive way
Thank you

H.R.
Reply to  John Smith
May 23, 2015 6:50 am

@John Smith
You’ve just solved a great puzzler. I just noticed that my Ferrari is missing, and my gold Rolex is missing, too.
I suspect our Ferraris will show up in our garages about the same time as the missing heat is found, so I’m rooting for Trenberth’s missing heat to be found as soon as possible.
Oh… and return the keys. My keys are missing… again, but I don’t think that has anything to do with ocean heat. More of a memory thing, I think.

gymnosperm
May 22, 2015 8:22 pm

About these supposed indications that the Pacific Ocean is eating the heat in violation of the second law of thermodynamics:comment image
This from Singh et al 2005 showing satellite derived latent and sensible heat flux from the oceans to the atmosphere from 1988-2003. As you can see they did not bother to go below zero because heat flux is ALWAYS from the ocean to the atmosphere.

Reply to  gymnosperm
May 23, 2015 3:04 am

Although the terminology (“missing heat”) derives from the CAGW hypothesis, if you assume constant solar input to an ocean and a reduced heat flux to the atmosphere, then the ocean would increase in temperature. The campaign to find the “missing heat” may have been quixotic but the mechanisms to transfer energy to and from the oceans are valid research issues. As the data improves we should be able to determine whether the oceans have, in fact, warmed slightly or whether clouds have reduced incoming solar radiation, etc.

richardscourtney
Reply to  opluso
May 23, 2015 4:25 am

opluso
You assert

Although the terminology (“missing heat”) derives from the CAGW hypothesis, if you assume constant solar input to an ocean and a reduced heat flux to the atmosphere, then the ocean would increase in temperature. The campaign to find the “missing heat” may have been quixotic but the mechanisms to transfer energy to and from the oceans are valid research issues. As the data improves we should be able to determine whether the oceans have, in fact, warmed slightly or whether clouds have reduced incoming solar radiation, etc.

NO!
The “mechanisms to transfer energy to and from the oceans” occur at the ocean surface. Therefore, the putative missing heat must first warm the ocean surface layer – n.b. NOT the ocean depths – and that heat then may transfer to the ocean depths.
There is no evidence that the ocean surface layer has been warmed by the putative missing heat.
There are two possibilities; i.e.
The ocean surface layer did not transfer heat to the ocean depths so the missing heat is not in the oceans.
OR
Temperature measurement of the ocean surface is not adequate to indicate the warming of the ocean surface layer.
In one possibility the missing heat is not in the oceans
and
in the other possibility changes to global surface temperature anomaly (GASTA) cannot be discerned because the ocean surface is most of the Earth’s surface.
Hence, the putative missing heat was not and is not a spur to research of the mechanisms to transfer energy to and from the oceans.
Richard
Declaration of possible personal interest.
I spent the first 5 years of this century living on a boat and wasting my time by researching energy interactions at sea surface. My expensive research project was a total failure induced by a previously unknown effect of ripples. The mechanisms to transfer energy to and from the oceans were the valid research issues I was investigating, but the issue of ‘missing heat’ did not then exist. RSC

Pamela Gray
Reply to  opluso
May 23, 2015 7:13 am

Visible light (the part of the spectrum that has enough energy to change the temperature of such a large volume of water) penetrates deep into the top layer. Any variations in this part of the spectrum before it gets to the ocean surface and below, will result in measurable changes in absorbed energy. Under clear skies, such as during La Nina, the ocean gets a good dose of recharging energy (measured as insolation at the ocean surface). Under cloudy skies, such as during El Nino, insolation is much less.
That visible light penetrates so deeply partially explains how heat can “hide” below the top skin and then show up somewhere else. The mechanism is well known and can be accurately modeled. As for longwave radiation somehow getting below the top skin layer, there is no plausible mechanism, so no models have been developed that pass the laugh test.
http://www.seasky.org/deep-sea/ocean-layers.html

gymnosperm
Reply to  opluso
May 23, 2015 7:22 am

Yes, we need way more data on the ocean/atmosphere interface. Satellites are great for sea surface temperature but not so much for the atmosphere immediately above. Cloud cover has been decreasing, mid latitude UV increasing. To whatever extent the atmosphere has actually been warming the efficiency of ocean/air heat exchange will be reduced. The atmosphere will react far more quickly to changes than the ocean.

Reply to  opluso
May 23, 2015 7:40 am

Pamela Gray explained what I meant in greater detail. I did not intend to suggest that energy input to the oceans was limited to the surface or to infrared radiation. Interaction with the atmosphere is limited to the ocean’s surface but solar energy penetrates beyond the surface layer. If the release of heat to the atmosphere is reduced or delayed (deep currents, sea ice, etc.) then the overall ocean would warm.

Reply to  opluso
May 23, 2015 9:36 am

Ah, The Sun’ relationship with the oceans.
3 quarters of the Earth’s surface absorbing huge amounts of solar energy.
Seems this Solar/Ocean system would be the determinant of the average global temperature.
There is no greater interaction (like CO2 and LWIR) that might affect temperatures so profoundly as the sun upon the ocean.

richardscourtney
Reply to  opluso
May 24, 2015 9:01 am

Pamela Gray
You say

Visible light (the part of the spectrum that has enough energy to change the temperature of such a large volume of water) penetrates deep into the top layer. Any variations in this part of the spectrum before it gets to the ocean surface and below, will result in measurable changes in absorbed energy. Under clear skies, such as during La Nina, the ocean gets a good dose of recharging energy (measured as insolation at the ocean surface). Under cloudy skies, such as during El Nino, insolation is much less.
That visible light penetrates so deeply partially explains how heat can “hide” below the top skin and then show up somewhere else. The mechanism is well known and can be accurately modeled. As for longwave radiation somehow getting below the top skin layer, there is no plausible mechanism, so no models have been developed that pass the laugh test.
http://www.seasky.org/deep-sea/ocean-layers.html

Almost all the visible light is absorbed in the upper ~250m of the ocean (your link says 200m). That is “deep into the top layer” but it is not deep in the ocean
Any increase to energy imparted by total radiation into ocean surface has to warm that upper layer if it is to pass into lower layers.
As you say “no models have been developed that pass the laugh test”.
Richard

gymnosperm
Reply to  opluso
May 24, 2015 11:14 pm

Much depends on whether we are talking about Trenberth’s missing heat, which was based on a decrease in ocean enthalpy in spite of increased radiation; or the missing heat from the “halt” or “crawl” in the atmosphere. The atmosphere is supposed to be the source for Trenberth’s increased radiation.
The “crawl” apologists want to transfer energy from the atmosphere to the ocean. They are not talking about visible and UV light which both seem to bottom out within the +-80m mixed layer (visible light seems to penetrate human skin deeper than UV).
Sure, maybe more vis/uv went into the ocean for lack of reflecting clouds, but the atmosphere does not resonate in this part of the incoming spectrum, so this has nothing to do with the crawl.

Pamela Gray
Reply to  gymnosperm
May 24, 2015 1:13 pm

Richard is correct. Only the top layers receive any visible light . UV penetrates much deeper but it does not have the joule energy to affect ocean temperatures in any measurable way.
http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/La-Mi/Light-Transmission-in-the-Ocean.html
What I was explaining is that people think only the top skin and a few inches below it is warmed by solar insolation. That is not true. Visible light can warm deep enough to affect below the skin currents. This energy can be stored in these layers, to rise to the surface at a later time and place.

Ed Zuiderwijk
May 22, 2015 8:30 pm

Missing heat? What missing heat? There is no missing heat at all. It’s a virtual construct. My model predicts a warmer world, but it doesn’t get warmer. There must be “missing heat”., surely? No! My model must be wrong. What’s missing is not heat but a better model.

PeterK
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
May 22, 2015 9:48 pm

Actually, there is missing heat. Spring in Saskatoon has been rather cool this year and I miss the missing heat. It should be a lot warmer now than it is. Please find the missing heat and send it to Saskatoon.
Thanks

tom s
Reply to  PeterK
May 23, 2015 11:31 am

You’re getting a little today I see. Western Canadian ridge will keep you warmer for a few days.

May 22, 2015 9:36 pm

Dark heat.

dp
May 22, 2015 10:38 pm

Water doesn’t stack like boxes. We’re told there is an increased Indonesian flowthrough warming the Indian ocean. Maybe they can tell us where the displaced cool water is going and perhaps how this movement of warm and cold water does not represent a net zero condition? I would ask them to show their work. Just right now I think they’re describing an over-unity engine where success requires a miracle or a minor adjustment to understood science – like gut everything we know about thermodynamics.

EdA the New Yorker
May 22, 2015 11:46 pm

This post actually resolves two issues.
1) Maxwell’s Demon’s whereabouts has now been constrained to the Indonesian Archipelago.
2) The physical law violations woven seamlessly into BHO’s Coast Guard graduation address seemed perfectly natural to him
from the time when he and the Demon began sharing Indonesian citizenship.

EdA the New Yorker
Reply to  EdA the New Yorker
May 22, 2015 11:57 pm

Come to think of it, this may also go a long way towards identifying Kerry’s Jakarta speechwriter.

Reply to  EdA the New Yorker
May 23, 2015 4:21 am

“Maxwell’s Demon’s whereabouts has now been constrained to the Indonesian Archipelago.”
I thought that Maxwell’s Demon was the main lead author of the IPCC’s theory of mann-made global warming. I thought the old boy was in his office at the UN building.

Bruce Cobb
May 23, 2015 3:57 am

Oh dear, it appears the Warmists have impaled themselves on the horns of a dilemma; whether to simply deny that there is a “pause” or to claim there is, but only because the heat has simply gone missing.
Such fun to watch them squirm, squawk, and squabble.

mikewaite
May 23, 2015 4:03 am

BruceC’s plot of the distribution of the Atgo floats (May 22 at 7.15pm) shows virtually none within the Indonesian archipelago. Given that the floats spend part of the time near the surface , why is the supposed flow of warm water through the archipelago not represented in the float distribution map?

mikewaite
May 23, 2015 4:04 am

Sorry typo: Argo floats not Atgo

TJA
May 23, 2015 4:18 am

“I was almost convinced that there was something wrong with the hydrographic data.”
Then I found a rationalization that would allow me not to question my assumptions…. – Just finishing his thought process.

Charlie
May 23, 2015 5:23 am

When I read or here alarmists claim the last 3 years were the warmest in history I am scratching my head. Can anybody tell me what data set they use to justify this claim? What data set is nasa using when they make these statements on press releases?

ren
Reply to  Charlie
May 23, 2015 5:40 am

Is it the average measurements of available stations?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Charlie
May 23, 2015 6:21 am

Warmunists use a special “secret sauce”, known only to them to spice up their “data”. Besides, why should they tell us since we will only find something wrong with it? It’s a red herring anyway. We say 18-year warming Halt, they say “look, squirrel!”

Charlie
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
May 23, 2015 7:04 am

So they never supply the raw data and methodology to be explain this claim? That information is not available at all?

toorightmate
May 23, 2015 5:34 am

Here’s my brand spanking new hypothesis.
The trade winds now go below the surface of the ocean.
In so doing, they have blown the heat that was being stored in the depths of the Pacific Ocean to the depths of the Indian Ocean.
There – the science is settled – again.

May 23, 2015 6:00 am

Hmmm. The AGU is beginning to crack. That’s significant.
Everywhere they look, the warmists are seeing their precious theory’s acceptance disintegrating. I think it will go like the failure of a earthen dam, first a few minor leaks that become little rivulets which turn into streams that become gushing holes. Suddenly it fails all at once and the water pours out in a huge flood. We’re at the point now where we see the AGW proponents rushing feverishly about as they attempt to patch the holes.
It won’t be long now. One or two more winters like our last one should finish off the theory.

tom s
May 23, 2015 6:39 am

“Warm water, like warm air, rises—or, rather, stays at the surface when nothing else is disturbing it. This is why, in a lake, the upper layer is warmer than the bottom layer.” B-b-b-b-ut it’s hiding in the deep oceans….all that hot water is just lurking down there below 1000ft. Obama told me so.

Harold
May 23, 2015 8:18 am

Be vewy quiet. I’m hunting warmits.

tom s
May 23, 2015 8:19 am

Well the missing heat certainly isn’t in Caribou Maine this morning….If you know how to read a METAR, take a look at this;
KCAR 231109Z AUTO 30006KT 4SM -SN BR FEW005 BKN030 OVC036 01/M01 A2996
KCAR 231105Z AUTO 30007KT 2SM -SN BR FEW005 BKN026 OVC036 01/M01 A2996
KCAR 231054Z AUTO 29006KT 1 1/4SM -SN BR FEW005 FEW010 OVC017 01/M01 A2995 RMK AO2 SLP151 P0005 T00061006
KCAR 231040Z AUTO 31006KT 1SM -SN BR FEW005 OVC011 01/M01 A2995
KCAR 231011Z AUTO 31009KT 1/2SM SN FG VV009 01/M01 A2993
KCAR 230954Z AUTO 30008KT 3/4SM -SN BR FEW005 OVC011 01/M01 A2992 RMK AO2 SLP142 P0002 T00061006
KCAR 230944Z AUTO 30008KT 3/4SM -SN BR SCT005 OVC011 01/M01 A2992
KCAR 230941Z AUTO 30008KT 1SM -SN BR BKN005 OVC011 01/M01 A2992
KCAR 230927Z AUTO VRB06KT 1 1/4SM -SN BR OVC006 01/00 A2992
KCAR 230916Z AUTO 30006KT 2 1/2SM -SN BR OVC006 01/00 A2991
Happy Summer kids!!
p.s. It does look like a good snap-back this week for the Northeast/New England though….bit of a heatwave heading your way!

Steve Allen
May 23, 2015 9:32 am

“Warming in the upper atmosphere continues to show that the planet is undergoing a radiation imbalance.”
Question: Is this a correct statement? I thought the upper atmosphere was cooling, due to added CO2, trapping heat in the lower atmosphere, that would otherwise “escape” to the TOA.

masInt branch 4 C3I in is
May 23, 2015 11:57 am

While watching Lew and Oreskes attempt a blackmail scheme on Christine McEntee and her ‘Climate Scientists Legal Defense Fund’ would be fun, 2 million is cash from AGU is small peanuts.
Rather Lew and Oreskes should set their goal higher and head to NYC and the UN where the UN ‘climate fund’ is getting set to dole out a few billion dollars since Japan made good on $1.5 Billion from their national treasury: http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/u-n-climate-fund-gears-up-to-deploy-cash-after-japan-signs-1-5-bil-pledge
All they have to do is declare themselves a third-world climate endangered country, somewhere in the southern ocean, and try to do an ‘Omar The Beggar’ for a 100 million in cash. They might just get it.
Ha ha

May 23, 2015 12:39 pm

Translation: two decades worth of global warming heat snuck from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean with no-one noticing; a computer model explains this subocean surface skulduggery.

rogerknights
May 23, 2015 1:59 pm

AGU: “Warming in the upper atmosphere continues to show that the planet is undergoing a radiation imbalance.”
Is there warming there? Is there enough? I thought there wasn’t.

Reply to  rogerknights
May 23, 2015 2:21 pm

But hang on – I thought global warming went with stratospheric cooling. Has that changed now as well?

Steve Allen
Reply to  philsalmon
May 23, 2015 2:52 pm

Yeah, that’s what I thought too. Is the upper atmosphere warming where all the missing heat has transferred?

charles nelson
May 23, 2015 3:14 pm

When arguing with Warmists I find that mentioning the ‘hiatus’ makes [them] hate us even more!

toorightmate
Reply to  charles nelson
May 23, 2015 5:20 pm

Maybe “hiatus” has a hernia?

William Astley
May 23, 2015 6:22 pm

The cult of CAGW took 18 years to respond to the plateau of no warming.
I am curious as to the time periods when the media, politicians, and scientific community will abandon the cult of CAGW when faced with significant and dangerous cooling.
Observations continue to support the assertion that the solar cycle has been interrupted.
In the 1990’s paleo climatologists discovered evidence in the first Greenland ice sheet core data that some of the periodic 200yr, 500yr, 1500yr, and 8000yr, climate changes were rapid not gradual events. For example, the Greenland ice core data shows that the Younger Dryas abrupt cooling event, 12,900 years before present at which time the planet went from interglacial warm to glacial cold with 75% of the cooling in last than a decade.
The first Greenland ice core finding was not expected (the consensus belief/paradigm in the early 1990s was that climate changes were gradual) and many specialist at first asserted that the Greenland data must be incorrect as they believed the planet’s climate could not possibly change that as rapidly at the evidence indicated it did. A second Greenland ice core was drilled to confirm the observations were correct. The second set of ice core data corroborated that the past climate changes were very, very, rapid.
The question is now not did the Rapid Climatic Change Events (RCCEs) “Rickies” occur, but rather what is causing them? What is the forcing function(s) that could possibly cause such a rapid and extreme change in the planet’s climate?
The fact that the small, medium, and large climate change events have the same periodicity and the fact that there are cosmogenic isotope changes at the rapid climate change events supports the assertion the same forcing function is causing all events. It is the sun.
An analogue of what to expect next is the 8200 years BP (before present) abrupt cooling event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.2_kiloyear_event#/media/File:Greenland_Gisp2_Temperature.svg
P.S.
The 8200 BP event was not caused by a stoppage or a slowdown of the North Atlantic drift current. The assertion that a stoppage or slowdown of the North Atlantic drift current could cause a significant drop in winter temperatures in Europe and on the Greenland Ice sheet is an urban myth.
http://sheridan.geog.kent.edu/geog41066/7-Overpeck.pdf

ABRUPT CHANGE IN EARTH’S CLIMATE SYSTEM
“The earliest Holocene abrupt climate changes occurred at 12,800, 8200, 5200, and 4200 B.P. . . .”
The 8200 B.P. event, “lasted four hundred years (6400-6000 B.C.) and, like the Younger Dryas, generated abrupt aridification and cooling in the North Atlantic and North America, Africa, and Asia (Alley et al. 1997; Barber et al. 1999; Hu et al. 1999; Street-Perrot and Perrot 1990).

According to the marine records, the Eemian interglacial (William: Last Eemain is the name of the last interglacial period) ended with a rapid cooling event about 110,000 years ago (e.g., Imbrie et al., 1984; Martinson et al., 1987), which also shows up in ice cores and pollen records from across Eurasia. From a relatively high resolution core in the North Atlantic. Adkins et al. (1997) suggested that the final cooling event took less than 400 years, and it might have been much more rapid.
The event at 8200 BP is the most striking sudden cooling event during the Holocene, giving widespread cool, dry conditions lasting perhaps 200 years before a rapid return to climates warmer and generally moister than the present. This event is clearly detectable in the Greenland ice cores, where the cooling seems to have been about half-way as severe as the Younger Dryas-to-Holocene difference (Alley et al., 1997; Mayewski et al., 1997). No detailed assessment of the speed of change involved seems to have been made within the literature (though it should be possible to make such assessments from the ice core record), but the short duration of these events at least suggests changes that took only a few decades or less to occur.
The Younger Dryas cold event at about 12,900-11,500 years ago seems to have had the general features of a Heinrich Event, and may in fact be regarded as the most recent of these (Severinghaus et al. 1998). The sudden onset and ending of the Younger Dryas has been studied in particular detail in the ice core and sediment records on land and in the sea (e.g., Bjoerck et al., 1996), and it might be representative of other Heinrich events.
http://www.geo.arizona.edu/palynology/geos462/8200yrevent.html

The 8200-year Climate Event
This figure shows snow accumulation and isotopically inferred temperature records in the Greenland GISP2 ice core and a temperature record derived from oxygen isotope measurements of fossil shells in the sediments of Lake Ammersee, southern Germany. These records all show a major climatic instability event which occurred around 8200 years ago, during the Holocene. The event was large both in magnitude, as reflected by a temperature signal in Greenland of order 5 C, and in its geographical extent, as indicated by the close correlation of the signal in these two locations. The dramatic event is also seen in the methane record from Greenland (not shown here) indicating possible major shifts in hydrology and land cover in lower latitudes. source: Von Grafenstein et al (1998) Climate Dynamics, 14, 73-81.

Kerry Bos
May 23, 2015 9:54 pm

I read the following words from the above text with interest:
“Warm water, like warm air, rises—or, rather, stays at the surface when nothing else is disturbing it. This is why, in a lake, the upper layer is warmer than the bottom layer.”
I was interested because, when I was a lad swimming in the local, rather muddy river, the top six inches or so were warm and below that the water was very cold. I always thought that weas because the sun’s rays could not penetrate the depth; but now I know better.

Pamela Gray
Reply to  Kerry Bos
May 24, 2015 1:18 pm

Particulate matter in muddy water scatters solar insolation, thus reducing the penetration depth.

Reply to  Pamela Gray
May 24, 2015 2:12 pm

What about un-muddy water? Jackson Lake and Estes Park lake were crystal clear when 1) went swimming 2) capsized the sail boat.

GregK
May 26, 2015 6:32 pm

The “discovery” that “heat” gets transferred from the Pacific through to the Indian Ocean is hardly groundbreaking news. Southern Western Australia would be a desert without the warm south-flowing Leeuwin Current driven by conditions in the Pacific.
Warmer water, greater evaporation, better rain in SW Australia. Compare with equivalent areas…..Atacama and Namib deserts that have cold currents.
eg https://blogs.csiro.au/ecos/the-good-news-el-nino-story-for-western-australias-oceans/

%d bloggers like this: