Sentences with phrase «nodc ocean heat content data»

Also notable is the substantial variation in ocean heating rates between the three different ocean heat content data sets.

Second, that hypothesis is not supported by NOAA's satellite - era sea surface temperature data or by NOAA's ocean heat content data since 1955.»

And since we don't have good ocean heat content data, nor any satellite observations, or any measurements of stratospheric temperatures to help distinguish potential errors in the forcing from internal variability, it is inevitable that there will be more uncertainty in the attribution for that period than for more recently.

Even if ultimately there is real confidence in ocean heat content data — i.e. the trends exceed the differences in data handling — without understanding changes in reflected SW and emitted IR it remains impossible to understand the global energy dynamic.

The error bars on the CERES retrievals, particularly when all 4 sensors are available are significantly less than the (reported) error bars on the ocean heat content data in the Lyman et al work.

This is at least ten additional years compared to the majority of previously published studies that have used the instrumental record in attempts to constrain the ECS.We show that the additional 10 years of data, and especially 10 years of additional ocean heat content data, have significantly narrowed the probability density function of the ECS.

Balmaseda et al. (2013) was a key study on this subject, using ocean heat content data from the European Centre for Medium - Range Weather Forecasts» Ocean Reanalysis System 4 (ORAS4).

For example, as discussed in Nuccitelli et al. (2012), the ocean heat content data set compiled by a National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) team led by Sydney Levitus shows that over the past decade, approximately 30 percent of ocean heat absorption has occurred in the deeper ocean layers, consistent with the results of Balmaseda et al. (2013).

Chen and Tung (2014) analyse the ocean heat content data maintained by a Japanese research group, Ishii et al (2005), and make a number of statements about the cause of multi-decadal fluctuations in ocean heat mixing rates.

However, in evaluating the ocean heat content data and scientific literature, Curry made a number of mistakes.

The bottom line is that all available ocean heat content data show that the oceans and global climate continue to build up heat at a rapid pace, consistent with the global energy imbalance observed by satellites.

I've presented videos and gif animations to show the impacts of ENSO on ISCCP Total Cloud Amount data (with cautions about that dataset), CAMS - OPI precipitation data, NOAA's Trade Wind Index (5S - 5N, 135W - 180) anomaly data, RSS MSU TLT anomaly data, CLS (AVISO) Sea Level anomaly data, NCEP / DOE Reanalysis - 2 Surface Downward Shortwave Radiation Flux (dswrfsfc) anomaly data, Reynolds OI.v2 SST anomaly data and the NODC's ocean heat content data.

The data are especially poor prior to 1970, when the satellite era began and also the ocean heat content data are poor then and prior to then.

Unfortunately, we don't have good ocean heat content data for this period, while the data we do have — global mean atmospheric surface temperature — is dominated by ocean oscillations.

However, the much - adjusted NODC ocean heat content data for the tropical Pacific (Figure 1) shows a decline in ocean heat content since 2000, and the ocean heat content for the Atlantic (Figure 2) has been flat since 2005.

That's just not true if you include ocean heat content data to 2000 meters.

Nova ignores both the 0 - 700m AND the 0 - 2000m Ocean Heat Content data.

The heating is also quite spatially variable as shown in the ocean heat content data with a significant fraction going into the Southern Oceans.

The Ocean Heat Content data also accounts for changes in salinity.

If the model Curry and colleagues discussed had incorporated the latest ocean heat content data, their relatively low best estimate for climate sensitivity would have been more in line with previously reported, higher estimates.

The method preferred by the GWPF report, and that which Lewis has used in his own papers, involves estimating climate sensitivity using a combination of recent instrumental temperature data (including ocean heat content data), less complex climate models, and statistics.

Indo - Pacific Warm Pool and what limited ocean heat content data (vertical temperature anomaly) we have to compare the rate of warming required for full recovery from the LIA.

Their target is the uncertainty surrounding the various efforts to create a homogenised ocean heat content data set that deals appropriately with the various instrument changes and coverage biases that have plagued previous attempts.

I don't prefer one over the other as an intrinsic metric (they provide two different pieces of information), but I find the ocean heat content data to be a much less mature data set than the surface temperature data set.

Exactly how good is the ocean heat content data on which this argument is based?

You might get better results using data starting in 1850 (or 1851 — there is a slight jump) rather than 1900, and TOA radiative imbalance rather than ocean heat content data, for your analysis.

The Levitus ocean heat content data says that huge amounts of heat are going into the ocean and coming out of the ocean on a quarterly basis.

To accurately evaluate the efficacy of volcanic forcing you would need to have better ocean heat content data for the period following a major eruption.

The ocean heat content data can be downloaded from the National Oceanographic Data Center here.

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach There have been a lot of electrons sacrificed on the altar of the discussion of the Levitus ocean heat content data.

Figure 1 Ocean Heat Content data represents the heat stored of the oceans to specified depths.

The NODC's ocean heat content data represents the change in the heat stored in the oceans to depths of 700 meters or about 2300 feet.

And the sea surface temperature and ocean heat content data do not support the existence of a human - induced global warming signal.

It's a long post, I'll grant you that, but if you're interested in ocean heat content data, it's worth a read.

Why the warming of the ocean heat content data for the tropical Pacific is dependent on the 1973 - 76 and 1995/96 La Niña events, and without those La Niñas the ocean heat content for tropical Pacific would cool.

If memory serves, Nuccitelli et al 2012 relied on the NODC's pentadal ocean heat content data which were discussed here: http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/is-ocean-heat-content-data-all-its-stacked-up-to-be/ and here: http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/nodcs-pentadal-ocean-heat-content-0-to-2000m-creates-warming-that-doesnt-exist-in-the-annual-data-a-lot-of-warming/

Many of the problems with ocean heat content data were described in the blog post Is Ocean Heat Content Data All It's Stacked Up to Be?

This morning I found two emails in my inbox about an alarmist blog post that claims Big Jump in Ocean Warming, in response to the NODC's recent quarterly update of their Ocean Heat Content data.

That is, the NODC only presents its annual ocean heat content data for...

The article in The Guardian also fails to describe all of the problems associated with ocean heat content data.

OVERVIEW Before the ARGO floats were deployed, there were so few temperature and salinity observations at depths below 700 meters that the NODC does not present ocean heat content data during that period for depths of 0 - 2000 meters on an annual basis.

The NODC's Ocean Heat Content data used in Figure 1 (and in the other ocean heat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate Explorer.

For more information, including a discussion of the natural warming of ocean heat content data, refer to my illustrated essay «The Manmade Global Warming Challenge» [42 MB].

But, as shown in Figure 1, the ocean heat content data for the Pacific Ocean from pole to pole (90S - 90N, 120E - 80W) shows cooling.

OVERVIEW In a number of posts, we've discussed and illustrated the difficulties with ocean heat content data.

Cloud amount data, sea surface temperature data, ocean heat content data, trade wind strength and direction data, ocean current data, thermocline depth data, etc., all confirm the processes of ENSO.

As shown in the above linked essay, there is nothing in the ocean heat content data or satellite - era sea surface temperature data to indicate that manmade greenhouse gases have had any impact on the warming of the global oceans.

The ocean heat content data for the tropical Pacific show that Mother Nature is responsible for the fuel for El Niño events.

Ocean Heat Content data and satellite - era sea surface temperature data also indicate the oceans warmed naturally, but you have to understand that ENSO works as a recharge - discharge oscillator (with La Niña as the recharge mode and El Niño as the discharge mode) to see Mother Nature's handiwork.

Ocean heat content data for the Pacific Ocean contradicts Dana Nuccitelli's opening statement and illustration.