Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Global Warming is a Scam
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(3)
Message 107 of 164 (671946)
08-31-2012 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by foreveryoung
08-31-2012 9:03 PM


Re: More fun than a barrel of junkies
foreveryoung writes:
So which part of my post do you disagree with and why? Anybody can fill a post packed full of snark like you just did.
You're just using a couple sentences of snark to avoid addressing the factual content. Here's Lithodid-Man's post with the snark edited.
Lithodid-Man writes:
Just a few comments to make here....
foreveryoung writes:
The ARGO network of 3200 floating robot sensors that have been in full deployment since 2003 show a decrease in oceanic heat content since then
This is incorrect. From Page not found | Argo
For the upper 700m, the increase in heat content was 16 x 1022 J since 1961. This is consistent with the comparison by Roemmich and Gilson (2009) of Argo data with the global temperature time-series of Levitus et al (2005), finding a warming of the 0 - 2000 m ocean by 0.06C since the (pre-XBT) early 1960's
They are only the people actually looking at ocean temps. I did notice that a good amount of your post is from:THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Why Greenhouse Gases Won't Heat the Oceans (I assume your writing?)
Now on the Robertson & Watson (1992) paper from Nature. You might have a point if research on the subject ended there. I am sure in your exhaustive research on sea surface temperatures you must have seen the paper by McGillis and Wanninkhof (2006) suggesting that local increases in CO2 solubility due to wind driven evaporative cooling (not sure why you thought that infrared radiation caused this, but okay) and decreases in CO2 solubility when there is no wind and infrared radiation is warming the skin-layer have both been overestimated and the overall effect is negligible. Takahashi et al (2009) showed that because of evaporation the micro-increase in salinity at this skin-layer cancelled out the increased solubility effect of lowered temperatures.
I cannot access the 2012 Humlum paper from where I am at, but I will take a look when I return from the field. If it is anything like his Humlum et al (2011) paper I do not expect to be impressed. That was the one where the authors suggest that the moon is an important cause of global warming.
Humlum, O., J. Solheim, and K. Stordahl (2011) Identifying natural contributions to late Holocene climate change, Global and Planetary Change, vol. 79, pp. 145-156.
McGillis, W. R. and R. Wanninkhof, (2006), Aqueous CO2 gradients for air-sea flux estimates, Marine Chemistry 98 (1), 100-108.
Takahashi, T., S. C. Sutherland, R. Wanninkhof, C. Sweeney, et al. (2009), Climatological mean and decadal change in surface ocean pCO2, and net sea-air CO2 flux over the global oceans, Deep Sea Research (II) 56 (8-10), 554-577.
So there's all the facts without the snark. How about an answer?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by foreveryoung, posted 08-31-2012 9:03 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by foreveryoung, posted 08-31-2012 10:33 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024