World Ocean Temperatures - There and Back Again

[missouriboy]

Mar 15, 2016 20:48:47 GMT sigurdur said:

Mar 15, 2016 19:47:30 GMT missouriboy said:



A 1-DEGREE C TEMPERATURE WAVE IN THE GREAT SOUTHERN OCEAN (50-65 S) ??    

I was wandering through my Argo charts and noticed what appeared to be a west-to-east temperature wave in the Southern
Ocean (50-65 S Latitude).  The three attached charts show annual temperature deviations from 2004 averaged across 50-65 S
latitude displayed in 1-degree longitude bands from 0-360 E Longitude.  This series shows what appears to be a temperature
wave that starts opposite the Indian Ocean in 2005 with a magnitude -0.6 C and increases in magnitude to about -1 C as it progresses
eastward.  By 2008, it covers 70 degrees of longitude centered on the S Pacific Ocean.  By 2009-11 it is pulsing back and forth
in the Eastern Pacific.  During the 2012-15 period it located south of the S Atlantic Ocean.  By 2014-15, that area of the Southern
Ocean adjacent to the S Pacific is up to 0.2 C above 2004 across its entire width.  If this is a wave, then its circum-global 
period would be about 17-18 years.

The arrows on the charts denote the Eastern edge of Australia and the Western edge of South America.

Missouriboy: Wow, what an asset you are on this board!

What a veryyyyy interesting outcome. You should e-mail Tisdale! You guys are both "in the know" because of your research and what a combination you two would make!

The LARGER question is......why don't "climate scientists" study this and write papers about it? Does it show something they don't want to acknowledge?

I read a lot...and I have NOT come across any paper talking about what you just graphed for us.

I can only commend you!

Thank you Sig.  What I don't understand is why the boys and girls that work with Argo don't publish some of this stuff.  It's hard to 
believe that they're all cowards.  And surely they can't all be 'True Believers'!  They could even adopt a moniker and float things out
to the blogs ... a modern day Deep Throat.  I REALLY THINK THAT SOME GS-9 IN THE FEDS OR GRADUATE STUDENT AT A UNIVERSITY
OUGHT TO TAKE THE PLUNGE.  The firing squad only hurts for a minute.  
Maybe I'll drop Bob a line and ask him what he thinks.

[sigurdur]

I hope you do, as I think you and Bob would get along very well and potentially expand on the results of the quest for knowledge.

I can read and think, analyze but I don't have the time to do the deep research. Nor do I have the talent to graph like you do!!!!

You are an appreciated gift to me! And I believe many others as well.

[nautonnier]

Mar 15, 2016 22:30:18 GMT missouriboy said:

Mar 15, 2016 20:48:47 GMT sigurdur said:

Missouriboy: Wow, what an asset you are on this board!

What a veryyyyy interesting outcome. You should e-mail Tisdale! You guys are both "in the know" because of your research and what a combination you two would make!

The LARGER question is......why don't "climate scientists" study this and write papers about it? Does it show something they don't want to acknowledge?

I read a lot...and I have NOT come across any paper talking about what you just graphed for us.

I can only commend you!

Thank you Sig.  What I don't understand is why the boys and girls that work with Argo don't publish some of this stuff.  It's hard to 
believe that they're all cowards.  And surely they can't all be 'True Believers'!  They could even adopt a moniker and float things out
to the blogs ... a modern day Deep Throat.  I REALLY THINK THAT SOME GS-9 IN THE FEDS OR GRADUATE STUDENT AT A UNIVERSITY
OUGHT TO TAKE THE PLUNGE.  The firing squad only hurts for a minute.  
Maybe I'll drop Bob a line and ask him what he thinks.

Argo details went very quiet when they did not support the AGW hypothesis. The reason you do not see this published is that it goes against the wishes of the funding politicians. I can assure you that you cannot get research funding or project approval if there is no 'political' will to accept an embarrassing answer. Even research grants at universities are written like the IPCC remit. So there could be research funding for finding reasons why Argo is not finding the heat that is in the deep ocean. But none would be available for mapping heat distribution and trends found by Argo in the oceans. No funding equals no research in that area. Apart of course from people interested and capable, with time available, reporting through unofficial media, like Bob Tisdale and of course Missouriboy

[missouriboy]

ARGO'S STEERING TEAM - AN INTERNATIONAL CAST  www.argo.ucsd.edu/members.html

NEARLY 200 THESES USING ARGO - With links (so read up guys)  www.argo.ucsd.edu/argo_thesis.html

FROM ARGO'S WEB SITE  www.argo.ucsd.edu/global_change_analysis.htm

1.  We are young.  Give us time.  Anytime now.  (All good things take time)

The global Argo dataset is not yet long enough to observe global change signals. Seasonal and interannual variability dominate the present
10-year globally-averaged time series. Sparse global sampling during 2004-2005 can lead to substantial differences in statistical analyses
of ocean temperature and trend (or steric sea level and its trend, e.g. Leuliette and Miller, 2009). Analyses of decadal changes presently
focus on comparison of Argo to sparse and sometimes inaccurate historical data. Argo's greatest contributions to observing the global oceans
are still in the future, but its global span is clearly transforming the capability to observe climate-related changes.  (From Argo)

2.  We must continue to test and fine-tune our data.  (No government program is complete without this)

Global coverage is essential, but for global change applications, Argo data must also have high accuracy and minimal systematic errors.
Therefore, a high priority for Argo is to continue work aimed at identifying and correcting pressure measurement errors, especially those
with systematic impacts. High quality shipboard CTD transects are critical for assessing data quality in nearby profiling floats.  (From Argo)

3.  The Climate Change Monitoring Issue.  Why we exist.  (But ... we are important)

Over the past 50 years, the oceans have absorbed more than 80% of the total heat added to the air/sea/land/cyrosphere climate system
(Levitus et al, 2005). As the dominant reservoir for heat, the oceans are critical for measuring the radiation imbalance of the planet and
the surface layer of the oceans plays the role of thermostat and heat source/sink for the lower atmosphere.  (From Argo)

4.  The Data and the Message.  Ocean Heat Content Changes Over Time.

You will note in the three attached graphs, the parabolic nature of their shape, with a low point in 2007-2008.  While the early Argo
data may be less reliable (due to number of platforms, etc), I needn't mention that the shape looks very much like what one would expect
from the solar energy curve between SC23 and SC24.
If one believes the early data then the total decadal temperature change for 0-700 meter, 700-2000 meter and 0-2000 meter depths
amount to 0.04, 0.02 and 0.02 respectively (or 0.4, 0.2 and 0.2 C per century).  If you straight-line the trend then you get a 0.10, 0.03
and 0.05 C decadal change (or 1.0, 0.3 and 0.5 C per century).  Not exactly enough to fry the imaginations of warmists.  (From Me)

SO ... if these data have not been adjusted, then I have to give credit to the directing members for allowing the data to go where
it will ... rather than changing the data to match the expectations.  Under those assumptions, as a past government employee, I can
understand their need to protect their butts from the raging mob.  GO IT BOYS!  Or am I being presumptuous?



     

[missouriboy]

A CONTINUATION OF THE GREAT SOUTHERN OCEAN TEMPERATURE WAVE



The previous charts that I presented were based strictly on SST anomalies averaged across 50-65 S around the globe.
In the right-hand set of charts (the bottom right image) I selected the years 2007 and 2008, and ran the same routines
for 0-300 and 300-700 meters depth.  As you can see, the temperature differences are not just surface anomalies.  They
extend to some depth at many locations, although they fall off (sometimes quite dramatically) with depth.

Second, if this is a type of waveform, then it does not move with any consistent speed.  While it seems to progress from
west to east, there are often several temperature depressions and peaks spaced at seemingly equidistant locations, usually
with one dominant depression.  In some years this multiplicity and their magnitudes decline.  In others, they pick up.  The
15 charts above (one for each year starting with 2005-2008 in left series, 2009-2012 in the central and 2013-2015 in the
right) show mean temperature anomalies for 3 latitude zones progressing from the Southern Ocean (50-65 S), to the 
mid-latitudes (25-50 S), to the tropics (0-25 S).  These are meant to look at possible south-north (or vice versa) interactions
between the latitude zones.  In some cases such as 2008, the negative temperature anomalies of the Southern Ocean
opposite of the central Pacific extend all the way to the equator.  There are many cases where the anomaly signs of the
Southern Ocean are the same as the mid-latitude zone (covering both positive and negative anomalies), and many where
the tropics and mid-latitudes are similar but opposite of the Southern Ocean.  The El Nino year of 2009 is an example of the latter.
As in the previous charts, I have drawn lines to indicate the East coast of Australia and the West coast of South America. 

The progression of the lowest temperature anomaly appears to be from west to east, but if it is a wave, it can progress
great distances in a year (e.g. 2005-06 - W Atlantic to the Central Indian ~120 degrees, or, 2006-07 - Central Indian to West
Pacific ~100 degrees), or stall out (2007-08 it expanded its range eastward 10 degrees into the Pacific) and double back on 
itself (2010 to 2012 - W Atlantic to E Pacific and back again).  Also 2013-2015.  To say the least, it is quite complex ... as we
would probably expect.  Or perhaps it's more like the progression of a tornado that can rise and fall at various distances
along its transect due to atmospheric conditions.

Take special note of the charts for 2009 and 2010.  The 2009 chart appears to clearly show the temperature decline between
140-180 W Longitude that I had associated with northward currents feed the equatorial El Nino Stream.  In 2010, Bob Tisdale's
westward moving warm-water streams seem to show up in the Eastern Indian and Atlantic Oceans.  

[sigurdur]

Mar 16, 2016 21:25:17 GMT missouriboy said:

A CONTINUATION OF THE GREAT SOUTHERN OCEAN TEMPERATURE WAVE

View AttachmentView AttachmentView Attachment

The previous charts that I presented were based strictly on SST anomalies averaged across 50-65 S around the globe.
In the right-hand set of charts (the bottom right image) I selected the years 2007 and 2008, and ran the same routines
for 0-300 and 300-700 meters depth.  As you can see, the temperature differences are not just surface anomalies.  They
extend to some depth at many locations, although they fall off (sometimes quite dramatically) with depth.

Second, if this is a type of waveform, then it does not move with any consistent speed.  While it seems to progress from
west to east, there are often several temperature depressions and peaks spaced at seemingly equidistant locations, usually
with one dominant depression.  In some years this multiplicity and their magnitudes decline.  In others, they pick up.  The
15 charts above (one for each year starting with 2005-2008 in left series, 2009-2012 in the central and 2013-2015 in the
right) show mean temperature anomalies for 3 latitude zones progressing from the Southern Ocean (50-65 S), to the 
mid-latitudes (25-50 S), to the tropics (0-25 S).  These are meant to look at possible south-north (or vice versa) interactions
between the latitude zones.  In some cases such as 2008, the negative temperature anomalies of the Southern Ocean
opposite of the central Pacific extend all the way to the equator.  There are many cases where the anomaly signs of the
Southern Ocean are the same as the mid-latitude zone (covering both positive and negative anomalies), and many where
the tropics and mid-latitudes are similar but opposite of the Southern Ocean.  The El Nino year of 2009 is an example of the latter.
As in the previous charts, I have drawn lines to indicate the East coast of Australia and the West coast of South America. 

The progression of the lowest temperature anomaly appears to be from west to east, but if it is a wave, it can progress
great distances in a year (e.g. 2005-06 - W Atlantic to the Central Indian ~120 degrees, or, 2006-07 - Central Indian to West
Pacific ~100 degrees), or stall out (2007-08 it expanded its range eastward 10 degrees into the Pacific) and double back on 
itself (2010 to 2012 - W Atlantic to E Pacific and back again).  Also 2013-2015.  To say the least, it is quite complex ... as we
would probably expect.  Or perhaps it's more like the progression of a tornado that can rise and fall at various distances
along its transect due to atmospheric conditions.

Drop me an e-mail Missouriboy.

[socold]

I think oceans are going to keep warming. Imo AGW is the only theory that both explains and also predicted continued warming.

[acidohm]

Mar 17, 2016 0:36:17 GMT sigurdur said:

Mar 16, 2016 21:25:17 GMT missouriboy said:

A CONTINUATION OF THE GREAT SOUTHERN OCEAN TEMPERATURE WAVE

View AttachmentView AttachmentView Attachment

The previous charts that I presented were based strictly on SST anomalies averaged across 50-65 S around the globe.
In the right-hand set of charts (the bottom right image) I selected the years 2007 and 2008, and ran the same routines
for 0-300 and 300-700 meters depth.  As you can see, the temperature differences are not just surface anomalies.  They
extend to some depth at many locations, although they fall off (sometimes quite dramatically) with depth.

Second, if this is a type of waveform, then it does not move with any consistent speed.  While it seems to progress from
west to east, there are often several temperature depressions and peaks spaced at seemingly equidistant locations, usually
with one dominant depression.  In some years this multiplicity and their magnitudes decline.  In others, they pick up.  The
15 charts above (one for each year starting with 2005-2008 in left series, 2009-2012 in the central and 2013-2015 in the
right) show mean temperature anomalies for 3 latitude zones progressing from the Southern Ocean (50-65 S), to the 
mid-latitudes (25-50 S), to the tropics (0-25 S).  These are meant to look at possible south-north (or vice versa) interactions
between the latitude zones.  In some cases such as 2008, the negative temperature anomalies of the Southern Ocean
opposite of the central Pacific extend all the way to the equator.  There are many cases where the anomaly signs of the
Southern Ocean are the same as the mid-latitude zone (covering both positive and negative anomalies), and many where
the tropics and mid-latitudes are similar but opposite of the Southern Ocean.  The El Nino year of 2009 is an example of the latter.
As in the previous charts, I have drawn lines to indicate the East coast of Australia and the West coast of South America. 

The progression of the lowest temperature anomaly appears to be from west to east, but if it is a wave, it can progress
great distances in a year (e.g. 2005-06 - W Atlantic to the Central Indian ~120 degrees, or, 2006-07 - Central Indian to West
Pacific ~100 degrees), or stall out (2007-08 it expanded its range eastward 10 degrees into the Pacific) and double back on 
itself (2010 to 2012 - W Atlantic to E Pacific and back again).  Also 2013-2015.  To say the least, it is quite complex ... as we
would probably expect.  Or perhaps it's more like the progression of a tornado that can rise and fall at various distances
along its transect due to atmospheric conditions.

Drop me an e-mail Missouriboy.

I hope that's to remind him not to forget about us when his efforts reach beyond our little forum Sig!

[missouriboy]

Mar 17, 2016 10:10:49 GMT acidohm said:

Mar 17, 2016 0:36:17 GMT sigurdur said:

Drop me an e-mail Missouriboy.

I hope that's to remind him not to forget about us when his efforts reach beyond our little forum Sig!

Not to worry Acidohm.  As the old goat ages, the distant pastures of youth look more and more like where he's currently grazing.     

[missouriboy]

Mar 17, 2016 7:52:00 GMT socold said:

I think oceans are going to keep warming. Imo AGW is the only theory that both explains and also predicted continued warming.

Nice charts!  But, as 'An Ode to Ecological Awareness' reminds us ... 'No relationship in the world is linear for long.'

[icefisher]

Mar 17, 2016 7:52:00 GMT socold said:

I think oceans are going to keep warming. Imo AGW is the only theory that both explains and also predicted continued warming.

Well some of the same scientists have also suggested the oceans will continue to warm for a thousand years after CO2 is controlled. . . .thus keeping the recovery from the LIA in the game as well until . . . uh. . . .about the year 2850.

[sigurdur]

Mar 17, 2016 7:52:00 GMT socold said:

I think oceans are going to keep warming. Imo AGW is the only theory that both explains and also predicted continued warming.

Socold: When it comes to OHC, reliable measurement is short. Also, the rise in the early 20th Century warming has not, to this day, been understood. I am not convinced that the small rise in the last 30 years is understood with any degree of confidence.

People make assumptions of what physics indicates about CO2 radiation. Unless there are new laws that I don't know about, CO2 in no way can account for the slight rise in OHC.

[missouriboy]

WHY ARE THE NORTHERN OCEANS WARMER THAN THE SOUTHERN OCEANS?

This is a question for some of you guys that have been at this longer than me.  Why are the northern oceans generally warmer
than the southern oceans at similar latitudes?  Sometimes, much warmer.  And this being regardless of the fact that the Southern
Oceans are tilted toward the sun on its closest annual approach.  You would think that the S Pacific would accumulate slightly more
heat, just due to that alone ... but no.
The charts below show N Pacific - S Pacific and N Atlantic - S Atlantic anomalies at latitudes 0-20 N/S, 20-40 N/S and 40-65 N/S
for the upper 100 meters.  This is a 12-Mth moving average for the years 2004 to 2015.

in the tropics (0-20 N/S) the differences are not dramatic.  The N Pacific fluctuates from positive to negative and the N Atlantic
is consistently about 0.2 C warmer than the S Atlantic.  In the mid-latitudes (20-40 N/S), the N Pacific had averaged about 1.5 C
warmer than the S Pacific prior to the current El Nino, although it had been trending downward since 2004.  The the mid-latitude
N Atlantic is much warmer than the S Atlantic (about 3.4 C ) with large regular fluctuations of about 0.5 C with an upward trend
through 2012, after which it may be declining.  In the high latitudes (40-65 N/S), the N Atlantic is MUCH warmer ( 6 C) than the 
S Atlantic and has declined throughout the period by about 0.8 C, whereas the high latitude N Pacific was cooler than the S Pacific
in 2004 and has been warming in relation to the S Pacific with the current now about par.

So again ... why the difference?  Is it just the open circulation from the Great Southern Ocean that's refrigerated by the
big southern ice cube?  Or is it more than that?

[tobyglyn]

Mar 21, 2016 4:39:30 GMT missouriboy said:

WHY ARE THE NORTHERN OCEANS WARMER THAN THE SOUTHERN OCEANS?

This is a question for some of you guys that have been at this longer than me.  Why are the northern oceans generally warmer
than the southern oceans at similar latitudes?  Sometimes, much warmer.  And this being regardless of the fact that the Southern
Oceans are tilted toward the sun on its closest annual approach.  You would think that the S Pacific would accumulate slightly more
heat, just due to that alone ... but no.
The charts below show N Pacific - S Pacific and N Atlantic - S Atlantic anomalies at latitudes 0-20 N/S, 20-40 N/S and 40-65 N/S
for the upper 100 meters.  This is a 12-Mth moving average for the years 2004 to 2015.

in the tropics (0-20 N/S) the differences are not dramatic.  The N Pacific fluctuates from positive to negative and the N Atlantic
is consistently about 0.2 C warmer than the S Atlantic.  In the mid-latitudes (20-40 N/S), the N Pacific had averaged about 1.5 C
warmer than the S Pacific prior to the current El Nino, although it had been trending downward since 2004.  The the mid-latitude
N Atlantic is much warmer than the S Atlantic (about 3.4 C ) with large regular fluctuations of about 0.5 C with an upward trend
through 2012, after which it may be declining.  In the high latitudes (40-65 N/S), the N Atlantic is MUCH warmer ( 6 C) than

[sigurdur]

Look at area. Think about evaporative cooling for starters.