EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Mon Nov 24, 2014 2:51 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 1:59 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

Unless the regions averaged are equal in all ways, that would be a useless manipulation of the data.


How is it a manipulation of the data, if the heat content for all of the different places of the globe are averaged out to produce a baseline average where you can compare the heat content trends in different parts of the globe? The fact that only the Indian Ocean has seen a significant gain in OHC is troubling for the AGW hypothesis.


If I average the temperature of a gallon of water and a quart of water without taking into consideration the volume I will get a bogus number.

If the gallon is 100 C and the quart is 50 C The "average would be 75 C, but if I actually mix them an measure the average temperature it will be more like 90 C because 4/5 of the volume is 100 C and 1/5 is 50 C.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:08 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Image


Yep, and that image clearly shows that we have pretty much stopped gaining OHC over the past 10 years.



"Pretty much stopped"? If you look at the 2001 point and the 2011 there is an increase of ~7 10^22 joules. Maybe you want to pick another starting point in trying to disbelieve the trend?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:09 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:

If the gallon is 100 C and the quart is 50 C The "average would be 75 C, but if I actually mix them an measure the average temperature it will be more like 90 C because 4/5 of the volume is 100 C and 1/5 is 50 C.


Ahh, I see your problem with the graph now.

The graph doesn't combine the individual locations across the world to provide an average. I said that, because it looked like as if you were to combine all of the different places in the world, you would get a flat line, similarly to what has been observed over the past 10 years as measured by ARGO.

Just thought it was interesting.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:11 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Image


Yep, and that image clearly shows that we have pretty much stopped gaining OHC over the past 10 years.



"Pretty much stopped"? If you look at the 2001 point and the 2011 there is an increase of ~7 10^22 joules. Maybe you want to pick another starting point in trying to disbelieve the trend?


I said over the last 10 years, which would be in the beginning of 2002, not 2001. The data only goes to late 2011, but the beginning of 2002 to the end of 2011 is pretty much 10 years.

You're living in the past Wayne...! :razz:

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:12 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Image


So does this image.


Only if you cock your head far enough to the side. Again, there is ~7 10^22 Joule difference between 2001 and 2011 averages.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:15 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
By the way Wayne, I'm interested in your opinion on this thread:

http://envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=17318

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:16 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Image


Yep, and that image clearly shows that we have pretty much stopped gaining OHC over the past 10 years.



"Pretty much stopped"? If you look at the 2001 point and the 2011 there is an increase of ~7 10^22 joules. Maybe you want to pick another starting point in trying to disbelieve the trend?



Snowy123 wrote:
I said over the last 10 years, which would be in the beginning of 2002, not 2001. The data only goes to late 2011, but the beginning of 2002 to the end of 2011 is pretty much 10 years.

You're living in the past Wayne...! :razz:


That would show ~8 10^22 Joules change on that graph .... unless there was a huge drop since the last data point you are still wrong. :razz:

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:18 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:

It's hard to tell really on that graph. It's either 2002 or 2003 since we have stopped gaining Heat Content in the oceans. If 2003, I would have to revise my statement to "over the last 9 years."

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:21 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

It's hard to tell really on that graph. It's either 2002 or 2003 since we have stopped gaining Heat Content in the oceans. If 2003, I would have to revise my statement to "over the last 9 years."


You would have to go to 2004 to have a similar start/stop level with 2011 and that would be too short of a period to get a trend ......

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:27 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

It's hard to tell really on that graph. It's either 2002 or 2003 since we have stopped gaining Heat Content in the oceans. If 2003, I would have to revise my statement to "over the last 9 years."


You would have to go to 2004 to have a similar start/stop level with 2011 and that would be too short of a period to get a trend ......


It's 2003:

Image

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:32 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
You can't deny though that there has been a tremendous slow down in OHC gain over the last several years, which bears a problem for the CAGW Hypothesis.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:42 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

It's hard to tell really on that graph. It's either 2002 or 2003 since we have stopped gaining Heat Content in the oceans. If 2003, I would have to revise my statement to "over the last 9 years."


You would have to go to 2004 to have a similar start/stop level with 2011 and that would be too short of a period to get a trend ......


Snowy123 wrote:
It's 2003:

Image


That is not a situation with no increase. The trend line shows a ~0.03 Gj/m^2 increase over the period.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:47 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
You can't deny though that there has been a tremendous slow down in OHC gain over the last several years, which bears a problem for the CAGW Hypothesis.


Why? We know there are fluctuations in the OHC over the years and there has been a decreasing solar output with which to contend. A short term "blip" in a long term trend does not cause the problem you seem to think it should.

Was the mid 1980s through mid 1990s a problem? It would have been if you were doing the same review than as you are now.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:05 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:33 am
Posts: 67
Snowy123 wrote:
You can't deny though that there has been a tremendous slow down in OHC gain over the last several years, which bears a problem for the CAGW Hypothesis.


We may not have very good data for levels below 700 meters but what we do have have indicates that extra heat is finding its way down there.
Image

_________________
Pollution is not the solution


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:45 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20579
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Image


The data measured for 0-2000 meters of the ocean is way more uncertain than the 0-700 meter range, since there aren't as many sensors that extend as far deep as 2000 meters. Since we have not observed heat mixing through the 0-700 meter depth of the ocean over the last 9 years, while it has flatlined in the 0-700 meter range, we can conclude that the data for 0-2000 meters is likely contaminated, which would make sense, since it is an uncertain sporadic dataset.


That would be the reason for the larger error bars, but which still show an increase over the period for which we have these data.

We could conclude a lot pf things. The vertical mixing. which in the average shows only a slight trend in the 0-700 meter range, moving more heat to the lower levels would be another conclusion which could be made. That is supproted by the data without an assumption of data error.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group