Sentences with phrase «of ocean heat data»

Several people have linked to the NASA site Correcting Ocean Cooling [1], which details the «pencil - whipping» of ocean heat data which eliminated the «deep sea cooling» of 2003 - 2005.

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.

Not exact matches

The scientists, led by Eric Oliver of Dalhousie University in Canada, investigated long - term heat wave trends using a combination of satellite data collected since the 1980s and direct ocean temperature measurements collected throughout the 21st century to construct a nearly 100 - year record of marine heat wave frequency and duration around the world.

Figure 3 is the comparison of the upper level (top 700m) ocean heat content (OHC) changes in the models compared to the latest data from NODC and PMEL (Lyman et al (2010), doi).

Rather than use a model - based estimate, as did Hansen (2005) and Trenberth (2009), the authors achieve this by calculating it from observations of ocean heat content (down to 1800 metres) from the PMEL / JPL / JIMAR data sets over the period July 2005 to June 2010 - a time period dominated by the superior ARGO - based system.

However, the large - scale nature of heat content variability, the similarity of the Levitus et al. (2005a) and the Ishii et al. (2006) analyses and new results showing a decrease in the global heat content in a period with much better data coverage (Lyman et al., 2006), gives confidence that there is substantial inter-decadal variability in global ocean heat content.

To calculate the Earth's total heat content, the authors used data of ocean heat content from the upper 700 metres.

Another figure worth updating is the comparison of the ocean heat content (OHC) changes in the models compared to the latest data from NODC.

We present new estimates of the variability of ocean heat content based on: a) additional data that extends the record to more recent years; b) additional historical data for earlier years.

A total of 2.3 million salinity profiles were used in this analysis, about one - third of the amount of data used in the ocean heat content estimates in Section 5.2.2.

ECCO model - data syntheses are being used to quantify the ocean's role in the global carbon cycle, to understand the recent evolution of the polar oceans, to monitor time - evolving heat, water, and chemical exchanges within and between different components of the Earth system, and for many other science applications.

The Web GIS tutorial video and the teacher guide also models data exploration and analysis techniques for using the elevation - profile tool to discover that ocean bathymetry is related to both surface heat flow and the age of the ocean floor.

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.

Data collected by a network of free - floating sensors, known as ARGO floats, show that from January 2006 to December 2013, a lot more heat has been finding its way to the deep ocean instead.

More than 95 % of the 5 yr running mean of the surface temperature change since 1850 can be replicated by an integration of the sunspot data (as a proxy for ocean heat content), departing from the average value over the period of the sunspot record (~ 40SSN), plus the superimposition of a ~ 60 yr sinusoid representing the observed oceanic oscillations.

Alternatively, more direct observations of that radiative imbalance would be nice, or better theoretical and observational understanding of the water vapor and cloud feedbacks, or more paleoclimate data which can give us constraints on historical feedbacks, but my guess is that ocean heat content measurements would be the best near term bet for improving our understanding of this issue.

Remember too that ocean heat content increases were a predicted consequence of GHG - driven warming well before the ocean data was clear enough to demonstrate it.

Now anyone can see from the data that the ocean heat capacity (OHC) has been accumulating energy at a rate on the order of 0.5 to 1 W / m ^ 2.

«The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual — indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates.

The next figure is the comparison of the ocean heat content (OHC) changes in the models compared to the latest data from NODC.

... a pronounced strengthening in Pacific trade winds over the past two decades — unprecedented in observations / reanalysis data and not captured by climate models — is sufficient to account for the cooling of the tropical Pacific and a substantial slowdown in surface warming through increased subsurface ocean heat uptake.

A similar question has in a way been posed in NPR's Richard Harris report that Kevin Ternberth of NCAR speculated that extra ocean heat may have radiated back into space (re: Argo data).

The objective of our study was to quantify the consistency of near - global and regional integrals of ocean heat content and steric sea level (from in situ temperature and salinity data), total sea level (from satellite altimeter data) and ocean mass (from satellite gravimetry data) from an Argo perspective.

Abstract:... Here we show that a pronounced strengthening in Pacific trade winds over the past two decades — unprecedented in observations / reanalysis data and not captured by climate models — is sufficient to account for the cooling of the tropical Pacific and a substantial slowdown in surface warming through increased subsurface ocean heat uptake.

There have been many explanations put borth inlcluding deep ocean heating, ozone chemistry, volcanoes reducing incident energy, trade winds and, of course, Cowtan and Way along with this latest data set that shows the energy imbalance is still tracking CO2.

Trenberth et al. suggest that even the choice of a different data set of ocean heat content would have increased the climate sensitivity estimate of Otto et al. by 0.5 degrees.

One thing I would have liked to see in the paper is a quantitative side - by - side comparison of sea - surface temperatures and upper ocean heat content; all the paper says is that only «a small amount of cooling is observed at the surface, although much less than the cooling at depth» though they do report that it is consistent with 2 - yr cooling SST trend — but again, no actual data analysis of the SST trend is reported.

Sorry, I was comparing heat content (not SST, neither SAT) of different parts of the oceans down to 300 m depth (where most of the variation is visible), based on the data of Levitus e.a. which can be downloaded from the NOAA web site.

----- On a matter unrelated to the late Sir Arthur: @Thapa (# 5), see NASA's current issue of The Earth Observer (page 16): «These findings were enough to convince the scientists who initially reported the ocean cooling [Willis et al. (2007)-RSB- to go back and closely reexamine the recent ocean heat storage data they had collected.

There's important work to be done on this question but — as the oceanographer Carl Wunsch notes at the end of this post — the paucity of data on ocean heat makes it tough to get beyond «maybe» answers.

In situ and reanalyzed data are used to trace the pathways of ocean heat uptake.

Data from 3,000 scientific robots in the world's oceans show there has been slight cooling in the past five years, never mind that «80 % to 90 % of global warming involves heating up ocean waters,» according to a report by NPR's Richard Harris.

This makes perfect sense since there is little to no evidence of an anthropogenic global warming effect on global Ocean Heat Content (OHC) data.

Which implies that since the late» 40's - early» 50's we have had a data collection system deployed capable of measuring and tracking the annual TEMPERATURE of the top 2000 meters of the oceans of the world (necessary to calculate its heat content)-- all of them — with a precision and accuracy in the millidegree range.

Unfortunately we do not have any reliable and comprehensive measurements of upper ocean temperature and heat content prior to 2003, when ARGO measurements replaced the old expendable and spotty XBT data.

The RF time series are linked to the observations of ocean heat content and temperature change through an energy balance model and a stochastic model, using a Bayesian approach to estimate the ECS from the data.

We asked you to support your claim that the resolution of the oceanic temperature data is not sufficient to make a determination of a trend in ocean heat content, which you have yet to provide.

You made a specific claim, that the resolution of the data is not sufficient to make a determination of a trend in ocean heat content.

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.

I don't know about all of you, but I do find that the uncertainty around e.g. the various issues related to ocean heat content or issues regarding connecting the Argo float network to other data networks is SO much better covered in Judith's bizarre and uniquely repetitive mischaracterizations of other scientists» comments, than by the published science and its critical review.

Then there appears to be some difference in the rate of ocean heat lost and the rate of ocean heat uptake but absolutely no way of determining either because of limits of data.

Of the heat accumulating in the upper 1,800 meters of oceans for 2004 — 2011, 46 percent was sequestered in the deep oceans (below 700 meters) in the Lyman & Johnson data seOf the heat accumulating in the upper 1,800 meters of oceans for 2004 — 2011, 46 percent was sequestered in the deep oceans (below 700 meters) in the Lyman & Johnson data seof oceans for 2004 — 2011, 46 percent was sequestered in the deep oceans (below 700 meters) in the Lyman & Johnson data set.

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. (20data 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. (20Data 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).

Temperatures measured by the ARGO floats and the XBTs before them are rising in the raw data, and the ocean heat content (OHC) is simply observed temperature change scaled by the thermal mass of the ocean layer in question - not some kind of complex model.

The «puzzling» facts triggered the predictable alarmist tactic of attacking the data and claiming the heat was hiding in the really deep ocean.

When the first studies of the XBT data were produced in then early 2000's, showing just how much heat had been added to the oceans, the climate science community labelled this «The Smoking Gun».

Comparisons of direct measurements with satellite data and climate models suggest that the oceans of the southern hemisphere have been sucking up more than twice as much of the heat trapped by our excess greenhouse gases than previously calculated.

In contrast, closure of the global ocean mean net surface heat flux budget to within 20 W m — 2 from observation based surface flux data sets has still not been reliably achieved (e.g., Trenberth et al., 2009).

DK12 used ocean heat content (OHC) data for the upper 700 meters of oceans to draw three main conclusions: 1) that the rate of OHC increase has slowed in recent years (the very short timeframe of 2002 to 2008), 2) that this is evidence for periods of «climate shifts», and 3) that the recent OHC data indicate that the net climate feedback is negative, which would mean that climate sensitivity (the total amount of global warming in response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels, including feedbacks) is low.

There also was a discussion (p 11) of the uncertainty of ocean heat flux data being 10 - 20 % (or 20 W / m2) versus the change in global heat flux due to AGW since 1900 being less that 2 W / m2 (a factor of 10 less).