Oceans Are Cooling According To NASA
obnzo
BOO HOO (Smirk)
January 21 2009
Justin Berk, Baltimore Weather Examiner
Warming of the oceans stopped and reversed in 2003
Two separate studies through NASA confirm that since 2003, the world's
oceans have been losing heat. In the peak of the recent warming trend, 1998
actually ranked 2nd to 1934 as the warmest year on record.
John Willis, an oceanographer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab, published his
first report about the warming oceans. He used data from1993-2003 that
showed the warm-up and followed the Global Warming Theory. In 2006, he
co-piloted a follow-up study led by John Lyman at Pacific Marine
Environmental Laboratory in Seattle that updated the time series for
2003-2005. Surprisingly, the ocean seemed to have cooled. He was surprised,
and called it a 'speed bump' on the way to global warming.
A second, independent study was conducted. Takmeng Wong and his colleagues
at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia came up with the same results.
Wong studies net flux of solar energy at the top of our atmosphere. From
the 1980s to 1990s his team noticed increased amounts net energy when
comparing incoming solar energy to what Earth radiates and reflects. Since
then, the solar flux has remained the same. Other studies have suggested
that the sun's output has decreased in the past few years.
Wong's take is that melting arctic ice is responsible for the cooling of the
oceans. I contend that if that were the case, why did it take until 2003 to
show cooling, after a few decades of warming?
Also, the UK MET office showed that Earth's temperatures have been cooling
for the past five years. Since 75% of the planet is water, that would make
sense.
Just last week, I wrote about the arctic sea ice returning to 1979 levels
just 1 1/2 years after the fear of the biggest summer ice retreat in 2007.
But what about the basics? Ocean temperatures do experience a 'lag' or
delay in heating and cooling. That is why Ocean City's surf temperatures
are chilly during Memorial Day weekend, but warm significantly by Labor Day
weekend. The average Northern Hemisphere's peak heat (air temp) is in
mid-July, while the Atlantic Ocean's peak heat (water) is in mid-September.
The ocean temperature peaks in mid-September coincide with heightened
hurricane activity.
So, could these reports indicate that melting cools the oceans and has a
negative feedback on warming?
Is this just a speed bump in the general trend of warming?
Does this 'surprise' almost sound like they are dissapointed that the
warming trend has not continued so far?
Or is this just part of a natural cycle, such as the seasons, but on a
larger scale?
With regard to cycles, we have only been sampling and studying a small part
of Earth's history and have perhaps jumped to conclusions about the impact
of carbon dioxide (there are more potent gases such as methane that don't
make headlines). What do you think?
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
true.bl...@gmail.com
obnzo wrote:
> "Scientists" disappointed!
Liar - they were "suprised", just like they were in 1998 when the
satellite measurements gave a suspiciously high (+.5C) reading.
And if you bothered reading the original NASA research, you would see
the upshot of it was they had some faulty sensors.
> BOO HOO (Smirk)
Wipe it off - it's not smirk, it's egg, because you've been sprung
posting lies about 1,000,000 times now.
> January 21 2009
>
> Justin Berk, Baltimore Weather Examiner
Not just a journalist, but a weatherman.....
Bozo, how about some good sources from respected experts with original
research instead of half-witted misquotes by journalists?
sshea
"obnzo" <ob...@l.com> wrote in message news:4977efe6$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Scientists" disappointed!
>
> BOO HOO (Smirk)
>
> January 21 2009
>
> Justin Berk, Baltimore Weather Examiner
>
Why is this being presented as news when NASA has since made it clear there
was a problem with the sensors that were being used to collect their data?
Willis' map of ocean temperature change from 2004 to 2006 originally showed
drops of over 1.5° Celsius in the Atlantic Ocean. The apparent large drop in
temperature was due to bad data from the Argo floats and XBTs, and it
disappeared when errors in these data sets were corrected.
"So the new Argo data were too cold, and the older XBT data were too warm,
and together, they made it seem like the ocean had cooled," says Willis. The
February evening he discovered the mistake, he says, is "burned into my
memory." He was supposed to fly to Colorado that weekend to give a talk on
"ocean cooling" to prominent climate researchers. Instead, he'd be talking
about how it was all a mistake.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/OceanCooling/page3.php
Very disappoiting, Bonzo- I'm relying on you to disprove anhropogenic
warming so I can sleep better at night, and all you can do is fed me this
misleading information.
James
<true.bl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:708f7511-3b47-458e...@p2g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
NASA doesn't qualify? I thought as much. Damn. Can't trust anybody.
Lloyd
> "Scientists" disappointed!
>
> BOO HOO (Smirk)
>
> January 21 2009
>
> Justin Berk, Baltimore Weather Examiner
>
> Warming of the oceans stopped and reversed in 2003
>
> Two separate studies through NASA confirm that since 2003, the world's
> oceans have been losing heat. In the peak of the recent warming trend, 1998
> actually ranked 2nd to 1934 as the warmest year on record.
>
No they don't.
> John Willis, an oceanographer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab, published his
> first report about the warming oceans. He used data from1993-2003 that
> showed the warm-up and followed the Global Warming Theory. In 2006, he
> co-piloted a follow-up study led by John Lyman at Pacific Marine
> Environmental Laboratory in Seattle that updated the time series for
> 2003-2005. Surprisingly, the ocean seemed to have cooled. He was surprised,
> and called it a 'speed bump' on the way to global warming.
>
No such conclusion. Read what he actually said in his article and
subsequently.
> A second, independent study was conducted. Takmeng Wong and his colleagues
> at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia came up with the same results.
> Wong studies net flux of solar energy at the top of our atmosphere. From
> the 1980s to 1990s his team noticed increased amounts net energy when
> comparing incoming solar energy to what Earth radiates and reflects. Since
> then, the solar flux has remained the same. Other studies have suggested
> that the sun's output has decreased in the past few years.
>
> Wong's take is that melting arctic ice is responsible for the cooling of the
> oceans. I contend that if that were the case, why did it take until 2003 to
> show cooling, after a few decades of warming?
>
> Also, the UK MET office showed that Earth's temperatures have been cooling
> for the past five years. Since 75% of the planet is water, that would make
> sense.
No they don't.
>
> Just last week, I wrote about the arctic sea ice returning to 1979 levels
> just 1 1/2 years after the fear of the biggest summer ice retreat in 2007.
>
Except you lied. Even a 5th grader can read a graph.
> But what about the basics? Ocean temperatures do experience a 'lag' or
> delay in heating and cooling. That is why Ocean City's surf temperatures
> are chilly during Memorial Day weekend, but warm significantly by Labor Day
> weekend. The average Northern Hemisphere's peak heat (air temp) is in
> mid-July, while the Atlantic Ocean's peak heat (water) is in mid-September.
> The ocean temperature peaks in mid-September coincide with heightened
> hurricane activity.
>
> So, could these reports indicate that melting cools the oceans and has a
> negative feedback on warming?
>
> Is this just a speed bump in the general trend of warming?
>
> Does this 'surprise' almost sound like they are dissapointed that the
> warming trend has not continued so far?
>
> Or is this just part of a natural cycle, such as the seasons, but on a
> larger scale?
>
> With regard to cycles, we have only been sampling and studying a small part
> of Earth's history and have perhaps jumped to conclusions about the impact
> of carbon dioxide (there are more potent gases such as methane that don't
> make headlines). What do you think?
>
> http://www.examiner.com/x-1586-Baltimore-Weather-Examiner~y2009m1d21-...
>
> Warmest Regards
>
> Bonzo