Effectively, if we can not detect an anthropogenic signal in
deep ocean heat data, anthropogenic global warming would necessarily be characterized as a belief, not a scientifically confirmed hypothesis.
Using the last 30y
of ocean heat data and simply adopting the official IPCC forcing values rather than his modified versions» I agree that would have been a useful addition to my work.
Argo provides the
accurate ocean heat data which constrains plausible combinations of sensitivities and aerosol offsets.
Ocean heat data can also be independently determined through other empirical means.
Since 2003,
ocean heat data has been measured by the newly deployed Argo network.
Figure 1 only goes as far as 2003 as
the ocean heat data used (Domingues 2008) only goes that far.
As
the ocean heat data only goes to 900 metre depth, Trenberth suggests that perhaps heat is being sequestered below 900 metres.
Interestingly, they use
the ocean heat data with the erroneous 2003 cooling trend (see Figure 5.1).
So the challenge is to try to resolve that evidence with
the ocean heat data that shows that the energy is going into other ocean basins.
Interestingly, they use
the ocean heat data with the erroneous 2003 cooling trend (see Figure 5.1).
Given that
the ocean heat data are not particularly accurate I don't see how you can jump to such a neat conclusion that La Ninas and El Ninos always and at all times integrate to provide the necessary energy swings to account for all climate variability.
Does
the ocean heat data suggest that «global warming» only started around 1975 (ironically as solar irradiance started to decrease somewhat).