Claim: Marine heatwaves are human made

UNIVERSITY OF BERN

Research News

IMAGE
IMAGE: THIS DATA IMAGE SHOWS THE MONTHLY AVERAGE SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE FOR MAY 2015. BETWEEN 2013 AND 2016, A LARGE MASS OF UNUSUALLY WARM OCEAN WATER – NICKNAMED THE BLOB -… view more CREDIT: COURTESY NASA PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY DISTRIBUTED ACTIVE ARCHIVE CENTER

A marine heatwave (ocean heatwave) is an extended period of time in which the water temperature in a particular ocean region is abnormally high. In recent years, heatwaves of this kind have caused considerable changes to the ecosystems in the open seas and at the coast. Their list of negative effects is long: Marine heatwaves can lead to increased mortality among birds, fish and marine mammals, they can trigger harmful algal blooms, and greatly reduce the supply of nutrients in the ocean. Heatwaves also lead to coral bleaching, trigger movements of fish communities to colder waters, and may contribute to the sharp decline of the polar icecaps.

Researchers led by Bern-based marine scientist Charlotte Laufkötter have been investigating the question of how anthropogenic climate change has been affecting major marine heatwaves in recent decades. In a study recently published in the well-known scientific journal Science, Charlotte Laufkötter, Jakob Zscheischler and Thomas Frölicher concluded that the probability of such events has increased massively as a result of global warming. The analysis has shown that in the past 40 years, marine heatwaves have become considerably longer and more pronounced in all of the world’s oceans. “The recent heatwaves have had a serious impact on marine ecosystems, which need a long time to recover afterwards – if they ever fully recover,” explains Charlotte Laufkötter.A huge increase since the 1980s

In its investigations, the Bern team studied satellite measurements of the sea surface temperature between 1981 and 2017. It was found that in the first decade of the study period, 27 major heatwaves occurred which lasted 32 days on average. They reached maximum temperatures of 4.8 degrees Celsius above the long-term average temperature. In the most recent decade to be analyzed, however, 172 major events occurred, lasting an average of 48 days and reaching peaks of 5.5 degrees above the long-term average temperature. The temperatures in the sea usually fluctuate only slightly. Week-long deviations of 5.5 degrees over an area of 1.5 million square kilometers – an area 35 times the size of Switzerland – present an extraordinary change to the living conditions of marine organisms.Statistical analyses demonstrate human influence

For the seven marine heatwaves with the greatest impact, researchers at the University of Bern carried out what is referred to as attribution studies. Statistical analyses and climate simulations are used to assess the extent to which anthropogenic climate change is responsible for the occurrence of individual extremes in the weather conditions or the climate. Attribution studies typically demonstrate how the frequency of the extremes has changed through human influence.Without ambitious climate goals, marine ecosystems might disappear

According to the findings of the attribution studies, major marine heatwaves have become more than 20 times more frequent due to human influence. While they occurred every hundred or thousand years in the pre-industrial age, depending on the progress of global warming, in the future they are set to become the norm. If we are able to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, heatwaves will occur once every decade or century. If temperatures rise by 3 degrees, however, extreme situations can be expected to occur in the world’s oceans once per year or decade. “Ambitious climate goals are an absolute necessity for reducing the risk of unprecedented marine heatwaves,” emphasizes Charlotte Laufkötter. “They are the only way to prevent the irreversible loss of some of the most valuable marine ecosystems.”

###

From EurekAlert!

0 0 votes
Article Rating
133 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:25 am

No no, its geothermal or solar or the PDO or El Nino or sunspots or just the end of the LIA or lying scientists or a socialist takeover or a plot to steal the election from Trump or, or….poley bears or Al Gore’s fault.
ANYTHING BUT CO2

Thats what “Claim…” means to Anthony Watts. Afterall what could the actual scientists know?

A C Osborn
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:39 am

Actually NASA says that it is the changes in cloud cover, but don’t let facts get in the way of your elusions.

Loydo
Reply to  A C Osborn
September 26, 2020 4:33 am

Where does NASA say that?

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:19 am

Gees, I thought a climate guru like you would know that.

(Snipped the rest of your off topic baseless personal attack, calm down Andy….) SUNMOD

Reply to  fred250
September 26, 2020 12:05 pm

Actually, we are discussing a totally fake image made with a virtual fish-eye lens. Try to get that perspective in Google Earth (Globe View).

Mickey Reno
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 7:39 am

For that matter, where does someone, anyone, Beuhler, say how these alleged statistical proofs are clearly and unambiguously proving human influence on marine temperatures? I suppose NASA could pull such an hypothesis out of the same ass from which it pulled the climate models of Gavin Schmidt and his mentor James Hanson. I think I’ll call that particular sphincter, the GISShole.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  A C Osborn
September 26, 2020 7:14 am

Cloud cover does control the planet’s temperature by reflecting sunlight back to outer space. And cloud cover (a day or two later and a few hundred miles away) is controlled by sea surface temperature and it’s 7% increase in water vapour per degree.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  DMacKenzie
September 26, 2020 7:20 am

Oh yeah… evaporation and precipitation are another significant automatic control on the Earth’s temperature, also a result of the 7% water vapor increase per degree of ocean surface warming.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  DMacKenzie
September 26, 2020 12:05 pm

In retrospect, I think 2015 was the year when on our annual salmon fishing trip to west side vancouver island there were schools of makarel in our camp inlet, we had a blast yanking them out with pole line and hook
Oily and smelly, they made great halibut bait, after you chop them into chunks.

We were told the water was warmer omg omg

Not been seen since
Crisis averted

Earthling2
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:47 am

So, according to your logic Loydo, then all additional warming is due to CO2. You believe that CO2 and methane are the control knob for the climate. But you fail to explain why Antartica doesn’t experience the same level of warming as the NH. There should be some significant measurable warming in Antartica if your hypothesis is correct, since CO2 is well distributed throughout the global atmosphere.

lee
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:47 am

Maybe they know ocean temperatures back further than the 1980’s, so they can do a comparison. Of course not it has to be “unprecedented”. 😉

Damiel kampo
Reply to  lee
September 26, 2020 6:14 pm

Bravo

Alex
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:54 am

Can you explain why all the heat in the atmosphere decided to concentrate itself in one spot in the Ocean? I’d be fascinated to know the process.

fred250
Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2020 5:14 am

Loy -doh yet again get sucked in by fantasy non-science propaganda pap. !

So funny. !

STILL unable to produce on single bit of evidence that human released atmospheric CO2 causes warming.. but goes on rant after rant anyway.

Such a waste of a puny little mind.

Ocean temperatures have been FAR higher than now for MOST of the last 10,000 years.

These guys are nearly as IGNORANT as you are loy.

Climate change deniers… all.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2020 5:36 am

yeah isnt it just amazing?
volcanos and vents of course arent mentioned?
im getting utterly sick of seeing crap like this produced day in day out it seems
and people still? believe it
Darwin awards just cant keep up!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2020 9:11 am

Alex
Yes, it is interesting how a “well-mixed” gas could be responsible for a localized hot spot. Yet, Loydo sarcastically dismisses alternative hypotheses. Maybe he/she/it can also see CO2 like someone who hasn’t yet finished school.

GLENN W FESTOG
Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2020 10:24 am

Most scientists call a volcano “active” if it has erupted in the last 10k years; there are 1,500 of those, all land based. Water covers 70% of the planet; how many volcanoes are there in that 70%? Volcanic activity has been rising, but it doesn’t happen underwater?

Now there is ONE potential heat source unexamined.

Loydo
Reply to  GLENN W FESTOG
September 26, 2020 7:24 pm

“Volcanic activity has been rising…”

Nope.

“unexamined.”

Nope.

Should at least do a minimum read before giving any half-baked opinions…here is NASA’s, sounds likely. Teleconnection with extending open water in the Arctic is almost certainly playing a part.
https://earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/blob

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 11:12 pm

““Volcanic activity has been rising….. Nope.”

WRONG yet again !!

Seismic activity had a big jump just before the 1998 El Nino.

comment image

ALL oceans have experienced an increase in seismic activity

comment image

There has also been a large increase in > 2.5 magnitude Earthquakes since 1973

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8b1e35c81887434a00544dbfae45fd5a

Mauna Loa also having increased Earthquake rates

comment image

You should at least do a minimum read before giving any half-baked opinions…

There is NO EVIDENCE that human released CO2 has caused this any warming

Mythical “back radiation” from atmospheric CO2 cannot heat the oceans.

They can only be heated by solar or sub-ocean warming

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 1:48 am

WRONG again, Loy…

All oceans have experience increased seismic activity

comment image

Strong correlation between ocean seismic activity, lagged 2 years, and atmospheric temperatures.

comment image?resize=550%2C279&ssl=1

Should at least do a minimum read before submitting your usual erroneous garbage.

Loydo
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 4:32 am

You and your mickey mouse graphs, really?

Tell me how do you think surface waters are warming so much faster than deep water (where your volcanoes are)?

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 5:01 am

I know data is an enema to you, Loy..

And reading simple graphs is way beyond your capability…

But if you don’t understand solar warming…. no-one can help you except to suggest you leave your basement at least once, some time in the next several years.

comment image

If you are ignorant in the drop in tropical cloud cover, after being shown many time.. that is your decision to remain ignorant.

comment image

Still waiting for you to answer some simple questions

1… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?

2… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be SCIENTIFICALLY proven to be of human causation?

You seem destined to remain a mindless abyss, poor petal

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 5:46 am

And , of course, Loy- DOH has now just shown how little he knowns about seismic activity

Hint, little mind, most seismic activity isn’t in the “deep” oceans, its around the edges

comment image

A lot of seismic activity of the coast of western USA, Mexico and Canada

comment image

Look up “Ring of fire” and at least TRY to educate yourself for once. !!

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 5:48 am

Let’s not also neglect the Indonesian region..

comment image

Get educated , you are making a fool of yourself, as usual.

wadelightly
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:05 am

And everyone knows that an “actual” scientist has NEVER been wrong. Right?

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:16 am

Models and fake statistics all the way down..

Just the sort of thing to FOOL the AGW collaborators and junkies.

Carbon Bigfoot
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 6:16 am

Seems the U of B’s Climate Parrots have been tainted by GREEN MONEY. The Swiss are normally honest and ethical what happened here?

Sara
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 6:40 am

So subsurface volcanism doesn’t enter into it either? Plate boundaries that are moving and are thin enough to permit eruptions don’t count for something?

Gee, that’s a major geological factor where I come from.

Latitude
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 7:56 am

Loydo, explain why….without cherry picking dates…it’s exactly the same rate it was before global warming….when CO2 levels were ~290ppm

CO2 has increased to ~400ppm….and has had no effect on the rate

Loydo
Reply to  Latitude
September 27, 2020 2:03 am

Why would anyone be surprised at fluctuations? If CO2 was the only forcing, then your surprise might be justified, but who thinks that? Temps have plateaued since the last El Nino as well. Surprised?

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 3:25 am

Still just fantasies from Loy… DOH !!

1… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?

2… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be SCIENTIFICALLY proven to be of human causation?

“Temps have plateaued since the last El Nino as well”

Showing once again that warming only occurs at El ninos, hence cannot be human caused.

Maybe you are finally waking up to reality ! Nope, not going to happen…

Temperatures are starting to fall as the La Nina approaches.

comment image

Loydo
Reply to  fred250
September 27, 2020 2:26 pm

You didn’t say “sea level rise”…

“it has had no effect on the “rate”….it is exactly the same
What data are you referring to?

fred250
Reply to  fred250
September 27, 2020 2:38 pm

Let’s try again

1… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?

2… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be SCIENTIFICALLY proven to be of human causation?

There is absolutely zero evidence of humans affecting sea level rise…

Latitude
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 11:54 am

Loydo, I asked you to explain why the increase in CO2 has had no effect on the “rate” of sea level rise……the rate was exactly the same before global warming and before CO2 ever increased…and after CO2 has increased….it has had no effect on the “rate”….it is exactly the same

Loydo
Reply to  Latitude
September 27, 2020 2:28 pm

The post at 2:26 pm is meant for Latitude.

fred250
Reply to  Latitude
September 27, 2020 2:40 pm

So what,

There is no evidence of any effect of human released CO2 indicated in the steady rise of sea level.

Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 8:40 am

Loydo, it is sunspots, El Nino, and PDO, but do you understand how and why?

I used Laufkötter’s results in my 2020 sun-climate symposium poster:

comment image

The common denominator is high TSI above my ocean warming threshold:

comment image

Marine heatwaves aren’t human-driven whatsoever, so ambitious climate goals will make no difference to whether marine ecosystems might disappear.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 8:41 am

““The recent heatwaves have had a serious impact on marine ecosystems, which need a long time to recover afterwards – if they ever fully recover,” explains Charlotte Laufkötter.A huge increase since the 1980s”

Actually the only “increase” is in our ability to detect and observe. It’s confirmation bias all the way down.

Komerade Cube
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 9:53 am

Hi Griff

Bill Powers
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 10:00 am

Yes, yes it is all those things and CO2 has very little to do with it. We know that. Why don’t you?

Loydo you you are either a tool or a fool. Tools are on the GovMint (and Soros) payroll, funded to sit on comment boards and social media sites to spread misinformation and misdirection. Fools are public school graduates accepted into college for the full Monty of indoctrination and brainwashing. Fully triggerable by an endless series of Hobgoblins all of them imaginary (hat tip to H.L.)

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 10:07 am

A slightly warmer atmosphere cannot heat the ocean, a physical impossibility.
It’s just made up

John Bell
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 10:09 am

Loydo please give an account of all the fossil fuels you use in a typical day, averaged, and electricity, natural gas, etc. all of it, paints, pharmaceuticals, plastics. thanks in advance.

Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 12:41 pm

There have been protracted periods of high temperature over land areas such as North America in the 30’s or India in the late 1800’s as well as Australia and China and even Europe. Is there some reason why a similar phenomenon can’t derive over oceans from the same chaotic weather sytems?
How do you function with no ability whatsoever to think for yourself? God help you if you ever stumble upon the Shopping Channel.

MarkW
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:37 pm

Once again, reality and Loydo manage to pass each other in the dark.

Loydo can’t be bothered with refuting actual arguments made by actual people. Instead it insists on making up arguments for others. Perhaps because refuting unmade arguments is all that it is capable of.

Damiel kampo
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 6:22 pm

Loydo your wepons grade STUPED

Damiel kampo
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 6:34 pm

Loydo , Al , greta is it posible your all gust Libtard

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 2:06 am

Yes it’s called history.

We know of these processes, and have lots of empirical data on them. We still don’t know all we need to know about them.

We know about geothermal, but we don’t know its contribution overall, to overall OHC because it’s all guesstimates because of the logistical financial and technical shortcomings.

We have much data on these things and over a century of science done by hundreds of thousands of scientists and researchers, a long empirical history exists

CO2 though..
1. No geological or empirical evidence history that it ever controlled temperatures
2. No geological or empirical evidence currently, that it controls temperatures

The former relies on a vast amount of research and evidence
The latter relies on computer models that have never been tested against reality, models that cannot even create the past without being manually forced to do so. Models that overshoot observed warming by up to 200%. Models that are being replaced, so if you claim these models were “legit”, then how come they are being replaced with model sets that produce different results? and you will say those models are correct too.

Thinking is hard mmkay

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 2:11 am

Lets not forget the second half of the 20th century was a time of a very active sun.
That^, clouds and ocean cycles give you marine heatwaves

There is 0 evidence for it being humans, because the “scientist” never ever actually provides one jot of evidence.

This is cargo cult correlation science at its best, or should I say worse.
This is yet another feeder at the trough of climate slop

September 26, 2020 2:30 am

Ho ho, from what I’ve heard, water tend to circulate all the time.
I.e. there is always some warmer water some place and some colder water some other place.
Why did these guys only find the warmer places and not the colder?
Did the colder water get spilled on the way to the peer review?
Ho ho.

JeffC
September 26, 2020 2:46 am

And what were the seas doing between 0 and 1981? It’s like the hole in the ozone layer again. It wasn’t there until somebody found it. This is not science.

Reply to  JeffC
September 27, 2020 1:03 pm

Perhaps the models are validated by the Swiss navy? /sarc

SAMURAI
September 26, 2020 2:48 am

Loydo-san:

The satellite image of this article is of the very rare 2014~15 “The Blob” event, which was caused by a Ridiculously Resilient Ridge of high-atmospheric pressure.. it was not caused by CO2 forcing…

Global oceans are now cooling due to a strong developing La Niña event and possibly because the Pacific and Atlantic oceans are reentering their respective 30-year cool cycles.

Look at all the gigantic cooling areas of global oceans in the below link (btw, most of the gray areas should also be blue, but NOAA changed its color coding since June 2020 to hide the extent of the current cooling):

https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/

Yes, CAGW is a scam run by immoral global Leftists wanting to steal $100’s of trillions from taxpayers around the world to fix a “catastrophe” that doesn’t exist…

Loydo
Reply to  SAMURAI
September 26, 2020 4:29 am

OHC, SST rises unabated.
https://www.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/kaiyou/english/long_term_sst_global/glb_warm_e.html
Way above trend and accelerating.

Your “gigantic cooling areas”, your La Nina and your 30 year cycles are being steamrolled into oblivion at a rate that is very unlikely to end well. Your belief that a rapidly warming ocean could possibly have anything to do with so-called leftists exposes your credulity.

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:29 am

Poor loy, shows graph representing about 0.05ºC of ocean warming.

How about you look at it in perspective, loopy-loy

a Maybe that will cure your ADD manic anxiety syndrome.

comment image

See that little red squiggle at the end.

Ocean temperature are still WELL BELOW what they have been for most of the last 10,000 years, having barely recovered from the freezing cold of the LIA.

Get a grip, little worm, you cannot afford to damage what you have left of your mind.

And STILL absolutely ZERO EVIDENCE that the beneficial warming has anything to do with human anything.

You are a scientific ABYSS, loy.

(You are a smart man, you don’t need to use a lot of snarky, personal attacks on him, he is being civil, why can’t you, Andy?) SUNMOD

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:43 am

” SST rises unabated.”

Absolute PROOF that the warming is NOT coming from the atmosphere.

Or do you really think the colder atmosphere can warm the ocean…

Only SOLAR energy or energy from under the oceans can do that

The mythical “back-radiation” from atmospheric CO2 is so weak that it cannot even penetrate a micron into the water surface.

You poor scientifically illiterate twerp.

mikewaite
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:50 am

A longer time series , as published by the UK Met Office -Had Centre (HADSST4) gives a slightly different , and I thnk more revealing picture in terms of mechanisms;
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst4/HadSST4_accepted.pdf
especially look at the diagrams for the glolal anomaly (adjusted – not very different from unadjusted) from 1850 to present:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst4/diagrams.html (Fig 9)
On it there are 2 rise and fall periods , the first being from ca 1905 to 1945 and the second from ca. 1980 to 2015, a 35 to 40 year period or 70 to 80 for the full cycle . In each case the rise is followed by a fall and at present we seem to be in the cooling phase . The second cycle is displaced in terms of anomaly upwards by about 0.4C, which is presumably the AGW contribution , but one should not ignore the other mechanism responsible for the anomaly cycling . I assume that the latter mechanism ,is or is related to, the AMO , christened I undestand by the Great Mann himself.
Note that the authors of the Met Office paper quote :
“Together with air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature is the most important variable for determining the state of the climate system”
If so, then understanding the mechanisms for rise and fall of SST is crucial to predicting future trends and hysterical panic over one short time series is not a mature or educated response (IMO).

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:50 am

You do know that there was absolutely no ability to measure ocean heat content before about 2003, don’t you Loy.. (or were you IGNORANT about that, as well !)

The coverage was sparse to non-existent, especially in the southern oceans, and the error bands would be magnitudes larger than any anomalies

Even with ARGO buoys the coverage is still very sparse

comment image

Most of that chart is purely model based speculation.

Alan S
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 5:56 am

Sorry but how did they measure annual global sea surface temperature in 1891? Just asking

Damiel kampo
Reply to  Alan S
September 26, 2020 6:24 pm

Right On 😊

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 6:13 am

Even Hadley contradict that load of tosh

comment image

Showing very clearly that the ocean warming was ONLY in 1998 (El Nino) and the 2015/16 El Nino Big Blob

Between 2001 and 2014…. THERE WAS NO SST WARMING

Before that , is purely modelled data, because there was not

UAH shows no ocean warming from 1980 -1997

comment image

Reply to  fred250
September 26, 2020 9:26 am

fred250,
Seems like I have to trust you appr. 97% more than this study.
Hoho.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 6:44 am

“SST rises unabated.”

Not really!
But your simplification attempt doesn’t hold:
Why are the dT rates the same for the period WWI to WWII and 1970s to now?
At least it we can see from the two equal rates, that CO2 has little or nothing to do with it.

So Loydo, would you be so kind to prove the fingerprint from humans and farm animals. Until then, work for finding explanations, rather than ceaselessly discarding everyone else’s suggestions.

If you wish to revert your welfare to preindustrial time, just say it strait instead of postulating we all need to follow You and Greta.

Loydo
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
September 27, 2020 2:36 pm

“Why are the dT rates the same…”

Why wouldn’t they be? Are you expecting them to follow atmospheric temperature trends? That could be your mistake. SST and OHC ARE rising unabated in lock step with CO2 concentration.
https://www.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/kaiyou/english/long_term_sst_global/glb_warm_e.html

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 3:57 pm

WOW,

you STILL haven’t figured out that warming oceans means increased atmospheric CO2

Why do you persist in being so bizarrely ignorant !!

1… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?

2… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be SCIENTIFICALLY proven to be of human causation?

3… Do you have ANY evidence at all that CO2 causes ocean warming

Its all just a zero-science FANTASY to you, isn’t it loopy-loy.

Belligerent and willful ignorance.

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 27, 2020 4:41 pm

ROFLMAO

Heavily adjusted recent SST’s..

and totally FABRICATED. before about 2003

They did NOT have measurements of SSTs for most of the SH before then, and forget about anything anywhere before 1950..

comment image

And yet again, you seem to DENY that the LIA was a very cold period, and that sea temperature have been far warmer before that anomalously cold period.

You have zero sense of perspective of time.

You are devoid of any actual science.

Even Hadley contradict that load of tosh

comment image

Showing very clearly that the ocean warming was ONLY in 1998 (El Nino) and the 2015/16 El Nino Big Blob

Between 2001 and 2014…. THERE WAS NO SST WARMING

Before that , is purely modelled data, because there was not sufficient data to do anything else.

UAH shows no ocean warming from 1980 -1997

comment image

Meab
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 9:13 am

Your own link shows how linear the sea surface temp trend has been over the last CENTURY, but human CO2 emissions have been far higher in the last 50 years than the previous 50. The sea surface temp was rising at about the same (slow) rate at low atmospheric CO2 concentrations 100 years ago as they have been more recently. Yet somehow you think that the dara you posted supports your point? Seriously?

Komerade Cube
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 9:59 am

Looks really scary doesn’t it – until you actually look at it and see that we are talking about 0.33 degrees.

philincalifornia
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 2:24 pm

Loydo stridently posts a graph showing convincingly that anthropogenic CO2 doesn’t cause the rise in ocean warming but believes that anthropogenic CO2 causes the rise in ocean warming.

Just unbelievable stupidity.

Abolition Man
Reply to  SAMURAI
September 26, 2020 5:42 am

Samurai-sama,
The Loydo believes the atmosphere heats the oceans, not the reverse! It’s fundamentalist religious beliefs are impenetrable to logic, reason or science; having been inculcated by a series of con-artists and politicians posing as scientists! Forgive my impertinence, but I believe you are wasting your valuable time trying to convince him otherwise!
To paraphrase an old adage; you can lead a Loydo to the Truth, but you can’t make it THINK!

Loydo
Reply to  Abolition Man
September 26, 2020 4:24 pm

“The Loydo believes the atmosphere heats the oceans..”

Why do you say that?

fred250
Reply to  Loydo
September 26, 2020 11:15 pm

Because we know how stupid you are !

Coeur de Lion
Reply to  SAMURAI
September 26, 2020 6:27 am

Mercator is misleading in the above map. The cold area is dominant. See the ENSO tracking website.

Schroedinger’s Cat
September 26, 2020 2:52 am

What is the average sst? It doesn’t say.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Schroedinger’s Cat
September 26, 2020 8:44 am

It would be meaningless anyway.

Wolf at the door
September 26, 2020 2:59 am

“Marine heatwave can lead to increased mortality among birds…….” etc etc etc
CAN ? Evidence?
Plenty of evidence of increased mortality among birds, bats and insects caused by” eco-friendly ” wind turbines.

rhoda klapp
Reply to  Wolf at the door
September 26, 2020 3:44 am

Indeed, mortality among some species of bird and insects is 100%. Humans too, probably.

LdB
Reply to  rhoda klapp
September 26, 2020 6:09 pm

There was one guy who apparently escape the dreaded mortality syndrome after a couple of days as a body in a cave. I agree you would think a supposed science article could phrase that a bit better.

Ron Long
September 26, 2020 3:05 am

As a geologist with paleontology training, I have walked extensively through marine formations of Cretaceous age, when there was “hothouse earth” conditions, and can reassure (rational persons) that marine ecosystems did not disappear. In contrary, marine ecosystems seemed to be totally enjoying the conditions, with large numbers and large specimen sizes. These fossilized evidence of the robust marine ecosystems includes shelled, gilled, mammals (plesiosaurs) and many other types. If the marine “blobs” become more common the dinosaurs might make a comeback. Don’t wait for it.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Ron Long
September 26, 2020 5:51 am

Ron,
Be careful what you say! The Loydo is very impressionable, and might easily take your humor is seriously!
I can see it now, running around, screaming; “The dinosaurs are coming! The dinosaurs are coming! Aaaacck!!”

Sara
Reply to  Ron Long
September 26, 2020 6:46 am

Loydo either doesn’t know about or IGNORES (gasp!) those black smokers on the ocean floor that are awash in all sorts of wildlife like giant tube worms, shrimp by the thousands and other critters too numerous to mention.

But that that would reduce the whole ‘it’s all CO2’s fault!’ stuff that he carries around with him.

Komerade Cube
Reply to  Sara
September 26, 2020 10:01 am

Loydo / Griff are paid to make stupid comments and divert the conversation away from intelligent discourse.

Ron Long
Reply to  Sara
September 26, 2020 10:34 am

Good comment, Sara. Those black smoker ecosystems are totally devoid of dependence on solar energy. I wonder what they taste like?

Sara
Reply to  Sara
September 26, 2020 6:59 pm

Not sure, Ron Long, but they’re expelling a lot of minerals into their AO and the critters are happily feasting on that stuff (especially the tubeworms).

Probably has a high mineral content and a slightly metallic flavor??? Copper on the island of Cyprus originates in malachite. Makes lovely jewelry and when heated to release the copper, loses that green color.

Ulises
Reply to  Ron Long
September 27, 2020 7:11 am

“mammals (plesiosaurs)”……do they teach that in palaeontology? (You mean lung-breathing ?)

Seabirds and seals DO suffer in EN hot spots off the Pacific W coasts when their prey moves away or goes too deep. After the event,the system is restored.

mwhite
September 26, 2020 3:29 am
Komerade Cube
Reply to  mwhite
September 26, 2020 10:05 am

Your -0.8 degrees trumps (npi) Loydo / Griff’s 0.33 degrees by… let me see… a whopping 1.13 degrees! The end is here! It’s worse that we thought!

Rod Evans
September 26, 2020 3:35 am

Quote.
“Statistical analyses and climate simulations are used to assess the extent to which anthropogenic climate change is responsible for the occurrence of individual extremes in the weather conditions or the climate.”
I guess that proves computer simulation is a wonderful tool, it enables a 5.5 deg C increases over sea areas extending to 1.5 million sq km can be achieved.

mikewaite
September 26, 2020 3:37 am

-“If we are able to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, heatwaves will occur once every decade or century. “-
Every decade or century?
Not quite a settled science yet , is it ?

Alasdair Fairbairn
September 26, 2020 3:39 am

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

claude roessiger
September 26, 2020 4:04 am

Are these researchers not hoist by their own petard? First, they declare that in the last decade there have been 172 ocean heat wave events. Then they declare that if warming can be kept within 1.5C there would only be such an event “once every decade or century.” As warming is within 1.5C at this time, how did they get 172 events this last decade? Moreover a prediction of “once every decade or century” confesses its own inadequacy, does it not? Why not once every decade or century or millennium? These researchers have no idea, and the only evidence based warming around is their own hot air. Switzerland, a small country with many virtues, is also curiously politicized, its people inhabiting a rich bubble, but desperately wanting to be part of the wider world. Many of their themes are copy and paste.

Carl Friis-Hansen
September 26, 2020 4:25 am

I missed a “t” while reading the name Laufkötter and read it as Run-Bastard.

Beside that, the over sensitive ecosystem the lady is talking about, can only have existed the last 90 years. Based on the knowledge that heat waves in the 1930s may even have surpassed what we see today.
Laufkötter fails to explain if these ecosystems are only 90 years old or if they are way older, having somehow survived the 1930s, the viking age, the roman period, etc.

fred250
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
September 26, 2020 5:22 am

That little squiggly red line at the end is what has them doing a manic panic.

comment image

They either need a whole heap of Prozac, or an education.

Sara
Reply to  fred250
September 26, 2020 9:23 am

If only there were another planet we could ship them to….

Rich Davis
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
September 26, 2020 6:28 am

I think that der Köter would be better translated as cur or mongrel. Running dog lackey of capitalist imperialism, I think it was in the old time propaganda. But she’s a running dog lackey of Green nihilism.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Rich Davis
September 26, 2020 11:50 am

I thought “laufen” was “walk”.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 26, 2020 4:06 pm

Could be a quick walk, more like a jog.

Slow to fast: spazieren, gehen, laufen, rennen

Peta of Newark
September 26, 2020 4:29 am

Didn’t the ARGO buoys get sent out to confirm ‘ManMadeGlobalWarming and spectacularly failed.

How did they generate that graphic?
As per Roy Spencer and his Sputnik, also why it seems warm under a cloud – sea surface temp (that of the water) need not and often does *not* correspond to air temperature.

(Spencer’s Sputnik looks at radiation of between 55 and 60GHz coming from atmospheric oxygen, at very best to plus/minus 2C
How do we get a result for Global Alomonolomnies at 2 decimal places?
How did he survive when his IR thermometer measured a cloud above his head with a temp of 42C – doesn’t Lapse Rate suggest a surface temp where he was standing of approaching 60C?

What exactly was involved in Laufkötter’s “investigations”. What *did* she *actually* do?
Chat to her friends and ignore the ones who didn’t agree with her. The folks paying her salary might like to know.
Apart from: Have Cake And Eat

Can she explain how the radiations from the GHGE get into the water – *only* El Sol can heat the ocean, either by getting hotter itself or by there being less cloud.
BUT, the GHGE says there will be *more* cloud.

Any comment, Laufkötter?

fretslider
September 26, 2020 4:47 am

investigating the question of how anthropogenic climate change has been affecting major marine heatwaves in recent decades

That’s not a question, it’s a declaration of intent. All they have to do is invent a metric that will enhance their silly claims.

Without ambitious climate goals, marine ecosystems might disappear

Could, might, may, if etc etc etc are racing certainties in the area of attribution studies that we rational people call The Twilight Zone.

Graemethecat
Reply to  fretslider
September 27, 2020 12:00 am

Alarmists/Climatista poltroons like the authors of this execrable paper are unable to explain how life on this planet survived millions of years of climate change perfectly well without human intervention.

Climate believer
September 26, 2020 4:53 am

“Researchers led by Bern-based marine scientist Charlotte Laufkötter have been investigating the question of how anthropogenic climate change has been affecting major marine heatwaves in recent decades.”

….. Charlotte knows exactly how to get a grant.

wadelightly
September 26, 2020 5:10 am

I have been searching and asking for the scientific evidence that supports the claim that a 1.5 part/10,000 part increase in total CO2 over the last 4 decades is the predominant driver of “climate change” and all the associated calamities associated with it. Anyone know where to find it?

DMacKenzie
Reply to  wadelightly
September 26, 2020 8:05 am

Wade,
This is what “they” are saying. Note that it specifically declares the dominance of water vapor should one actually read all 86 pages. Also, an aside, methane not really worse than CO2 in figure 8.33, methane half-life 12 years….the truth is there if you know how to read past what the scientist had to say to stay part of the team.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf

Jim Gorman
September 26, 2020 5:26 am

Again, a “study” with no real evidence. Models are NOT evidence!

fred250
Reply to  Jim Gorman
September 26, 2020 6:15 am

Precisely.. Its models and simulations and statistics derived from dubious, heavily tampered data.

Its the epitome of NON-science.

Just Jenn
September 26, 2020 6:52 am

In its investigations, the Bern team studied satellite measurements of the sea surface temperature

I’m out. As a fellow marine biologist, they should know better. Oceanography 101 is a required course and they KNOW BETTER than to study the surface and make conclusions about the water column.

Lrp
Reply to  Just Jenn
September 26, 2020 12:20 pm

It’s amazing how with all their education and studies they can’t produce anything even remotely useful.

Lady Scientist
Reply to  Lrp
September 26, 2020 5:34 pm

In the Publish-or-perish regime of academia it has never been explicitly expected that the published material actually has to be useful.

Gary Pearse
September 26, 2020 7:04 am

They havent said a thing about the cold “blobs” that have replaced them in the last
5 yrs. In fact I’ve been talking about this change since 2015 and argued that the volume of warm water in the ENSO regions was relatively small and this was the reason the El Niño in 2016 plummeted so precipitously to La Niña conditions at a record pace.

The neutral conditions that followed and the development of the present La Niña conditions was aided by a new mechanism that saw cold waters from the temperate zones in both N and S hemispheres slanting equatorward from the cold blobs. In other words, ordinary upwelling in the eastern equatorial Pacific had been considerably supplanted by this new source of cold water.

Look at the Enso page of WUWT. There isnt any real warm water anywhere in the entire SH and certainly scads of cold water in the NH. I predicted a late cool Summer in Canada and another horrifically cold winter. Lilacs were three weeks late this year and commercial Quebec strawberries only arrived about 2wks ago! We had our first frost about 2-3 weeks early in the Ottawa Valley. Snow in Alberta and down into Colorado two weeks ago.

Why is this hot blob research coming out now and predicting the end of marine ecology!!

Mike McHenry
September 26, 2020 7:43 am

Once again I see thermodynamics being ignored. As I have said many times before air has a puny amount of heat versus water. That is air temperatures have little effect on water temperatures. Cloud cover has to be the real reason

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Mike McHenry
September 26, 2020 10:19 am

Yes
Part of what I do is cooling systems for large electrical apparatus

A given volume of water moves 24x as much heat as the same volume of air.

Unfortunately water is water, electricity no likey much

Mike McHenry
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
September 26, 2020 3:01 pm

Yes. Also the heat content of water vs an equal volume of air at room temperature is about 3000X. So if you transfer heat from air to water you get a miniscule effect

Gary Pearse
September 26, 2020 8:12 am

Mods: what was wrong with my apropos comment on the present ocean regime of cold “blobs” having replaced warm “blobs” over the past 5 yrs. and hence the projection that ocean ecology is therefore not at risk at all.

https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/

September 26, 2020 8:26 am

“Major marine heatwaves have become more than 20 times more frequent due to human influence. While they occurred every hundred or thousand years in the pre-industrial age…” As confirmed by data from ancient satellites.

Paul Johnson
September 26, 2020 8:42 am

How can “statistical analyses demonstrate human influence”? If the authors are noting increased marine heatwaves in an era of increasing CO2, that’s correlation not causation.

DMA
Reply to  Paul Johnson
September 26, 2020 12:04 pm

Whats more, the increasing CO2 is not caused by human emissions.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/19/co2responsiveness/
So how can “statistical analyses demonstrate human influence”.

Jay Albrecht
September 26, 2020 8:49 am

How can any scientist prove that man made this oceanic heat wave happen? It seems that the scientists involved go through the hoops to show how rare this is in our short period of record, but they can’t specifically state how on earth man caused it to happen. In other words, how did man concentrate the heat specifically in this area of the ocean? But somehow they come to the conclusion early on in the article. When the PDO shifts and the Aleutian low becomes stronger than average, will that also be due to humans? If we have the power to so easily cause this to happen, we should have the power to wave a wand and make it go away.

Peter W
September 26, 2020 9:07 am

Amazing to see how well the oceans recovered from the significantly warmer temperatures of the Holocene some 6,000 years ago. I wonder how they managed to do it.

September 26, 2020 9:38 am

“A marine heatwave (ocean heatwave) is an extended period of time in which the water temperature in a particular ocean region is abnormally high. In recent years, heatwaves of this kind have caused considerable changes to the ecosystems in the open seas and at the coast… STATISTICAL ANALYSES DEMONSTRATE HUMAN INFLUENCE.”
– Laufkötter et al (2020)

So humanity is responsible? OK… but now Nino34 area SST’s are getting much colder and a La Nina is forming. Nino34 SST’s are a good predictor of future global temperature.

Is man also responsible for cooling? I know, I know, I predicted global cooling starting circa 2020, way back in year 2002, but must I claim personal responsibility? Does that mean I will be at fault for the increase in Excess Winter Deaths and all the other terrible losses that occur in global cold periods? Saying I am sorry hardly seems adequate. Je suis désolé! I am desolated! It sounds so much better in French. (Tabarnac!)
(sarc/off)

Data:
comment image
comment image

Gary Pearse
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
September 26, 2020 12:00 pm

Bob Tisdale showed that this kind of warming is formed by eastern Pacific cold upwelling pushing El Niño hot water out the western end, thence to the temperate zones. He made a movie of this circulation. Do oceanographers and climate wroughters not know this? Another eminently retractable study. Is it to complicated to imagine the bulk of heating is in the ITCZ and the theory of “When you push the hot water out with cold, this water has to go somewhere”?

Reply to  Gary Pearse
September 26, 2020 7:44 pm

I like Bob’s work – link please?

Walt D.
September 26, 2020 9:55 am

Climate change is caused by butterflies flapping their wings in Brazil.
Lepidopterogenic Climate Change?

Art
September 26, 2020 10:22 am

As a prof once told me….”If you have to rely on statistics, you did the wrong experiment”

Reply to  Art
September 26, 2020 11:51 am

You are right. Climatology is an art, not science.

Reply to  Curious George
September 26, 2020 2:04 pm

The way gloabl warming alarmists practice it, climatology is a dark art – the very antithesis of science – a pack of insidious lies that have done enormous harm to humanity AND the environment.

Pat from kerbob
September 26, 2020 10:25 am

Posted before, simplistic but relevant to this.

At my lake in south Saskatchewan we had a cool and wet year right up to end of July, rarely above 20c, nevertheless the lake warmed from freezing to ~23c.
Then we had the most beautiful August in memory, lots of 30c and higher, sunny, no rain
And yet by end August the lake fell to 16c when we took out docs

Ie, atmosphere doesn’t warm water, sun height and length of day is all, water cools even with hot air above it
Duh

Gordon A. Dressler
September 26, 2020 10:41 am

Key statements in the above article:
— “The analysis has shown that in the past 40 years, marine heatwaves have become considerably longer and more pronounced in all of the world’s oceans . . .
— “In its investigations, the Bern team studied satellite measurements of the sea surface temperature between 1981 and 2017 . . .
— “The temperatures in the sea usually fluctuate only slightly . . .
— “Statistical analyses demonstrate human influence . . . Statistical analyses and climate simulations are used to assess the extent to which anthropogenic climate change is responsible for the occurrence of individual extremes in the weather conditions or the climate . . .
— “According to the findings of the attribution studies, major marine heatwaves have become more than 20 times more frequent due to human influence. While they occurred every hundred or thousand years in the pre-industrial age, depending on the progress of global warming, in the future they are set to become the norm.”

So, the “researchers” admit they only looked at satellite data for the period of 1981 to 2017. In fact, there were NO satellites capable of measuring/inferring sea surface temperatures prior to 1967 (ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements ).

So how did they compare that very limited span of direct scientific measurements of SSTs to equivalent data from the pre-industrial age, or even going back thousands of years prior to that, to support their claim that “major marine heatwaves . . . occurred every hundred or thousand years in the pre-industrial age?

Well, of course, no such DATA exists, so instead they used “statistical analyses and climate simulations”. What could possible go wrong there . . . GIGO perhaps . . . hidden agenda perhaps?

Since they obviously have no data to determine what the distribution of global sea surface temperatures was, say, 200 or more years ago, these “researchers” have no credibility in assessing “the extent to which anthropogenic climate change is responsible for the occurrence of individual extremes in the weather conditions or the climate”, let alone in making the idiotic statement “major marine heatwaves have become more than 20 times more frequent due to human influence.”

Like shooting fish in a barrel.

September 26, 2020 11:59 am

The mostly-red image in the header is a fake perspective. Try to reproduce it in Google Earth or Google Maps. It heavily exaggerates the size of the warm blob. Long live data manipulation.

Gordon A. Dressler
September 26, 2020 1:48 pm

Curious G, my thoughts exactly! At first, I had difficulty recognizing the coastline as being anywhere on Earth. Then I recognized the perspective had the Baja California Peninsula at the bottom right and the Aleutian Islands at the top left, with huge perspective distortion of the relative size of Vancouver Island in the middle.

I have never before seen such a perspective of Earth presented. It was obviously chosen for the exactly the reason you stated . . . to raise alarm over the magnitude and to what areal extent Earth’s oceans have warmed in the satellite era, especially the NE Pacific “Blob”.

Distorted imagery to accompany distorted “science” . . . it figures.

Mike
September 26, 2020 8:56 pm

How deep was the ”deviation of 5.5 degrees” measured?
Are they saying there was that much deviation at anymore than 10 meters or so?
What evidence is there that marine life is adversely affected?
What evidence is there that marine life ”needs a long time” to recover?
How long is a ”long time”?

”Researchers led by Bern-based marine scientist Charlotte Laufkötter have been investigating the question of how anthropogenic climate change has been affecting major marine heatwaves in recent decades.”

First they need to prove that anthropogenic climate change exists, then they need to quantify it by separating it from natural variation, THEN they might be able to tell us how humans are affecting the temps, THEN they might be able to start to figure out how we are affecting oceanic life…
Garbage from start to finish.

Latitude
September 27, 2020 11:55 am

Loydo, I asked you to explain why the increase in CO2 has had no effect on the “rate” of sea level rise……the rate was exactly the same before global warming and before CO2 ever increased…and after CO2 has increased….it has had no effect on the “rate”….it is exactly the same

Streetcred
September 27, 2020 10:14 pm

Imagine if we didn’t have the likes of Lloydo and his shadow personality Griff come here and entertain us with their ignorance. To be sure, I have an old friend, who I once respected and thought was reasonably intelligent, “guarantee” me that CO2 was warming the Earth and that it had to be cut back and controlled … his son living in California told him so. I find it curios that the bleating that I hear from these types is so consistent, from one to another, like they were all tuned to the same propaganda organ.

September 27, 2020 10:19 pm

Hot seawater associated with marine heatwaves are better explained by submarine volcanism. Recent examples
of hot blobs supported by records of ARGO data buoys include the 2013-2016 North Pacific Blob, the 2018-2019 Southwest Indian Ocean Blob and the 2019-2020 South Pacific Blob.

Ulric Lyons
September 28, 2020 7:06 am

Negative AO/NAO drives warm blobs, that’s normal for a centennial solar minimum. There’s a great analogue of the 2013-2014 NE Pacific warm blob in 1876-77 winter, a cold northeast US, and a mild stormy and wet UK.
https://craigm350.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/the-great-global-weirding-of-18767/

%d bloggers like this: