Sentences with phrase «when ocean measurement»

Why were these relied upon in the past, when ocean measurement was always available?

Not exact matches

You've got the radiative physics, the measurements of ocean temperature and land temperature, the changes in ocean heat content (Hint — upwards, whereas if if was just a matter of circulation moving heat around you might expect something more simple) and of course observed predictions such as stratospheric cooling which you don't get when warming occurs from oceanic circulation.
A fresh analysis of thousands of temperature measurements from deep - diving Argo ocean probes shows (yet again) that Earth is experiencing «unabated planetary warming» when you factor in the vast amount of greenhouse - trapped heat that ends up in the sea.
It really doesn't seem reasonable to attribute ocean imbalances selectively to a particular prominent forcing (GHG's) when «comprehensive ocean measurements do not go back very far».
Measurements of 13C / 12C on corals and sponges — whose carbonate shells reflect the ocean chemistry just as tree rings record the atmospheric chemistry — show that this decline began about the same time as in the atmosphere; that is, when human CO2 production began to accelerate in earnest.
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.
By contrast, there is quite a lot of data now telling us that CO2 is not a climate driver: We did the experiment of adding a large slug of CO2 to the air and the temperature stopped rising in 1997, the stratosphere stopped cooling in 1995 and the oceans showed no warming down to 700m when we replaced guesswork with accurate measurement in 2003.
Then, when combined with the number of measurements and uncertainties induces by thermal eddies and ocean mixture, it is seems unlikely to me that measurements can tease out the true OHC.
The basic assumption behind the Cowtan and Way (2013) paper appears to be, because the HADCRUT4 data doesn't capture the Arctic Ocean (there are no temperature measurements there other than sea surface temperatures when sea ice melts seasonally), the warming in the Arctic is underreported.
As 34F ocean below, this would lead to a 5 deg average temp increase in the measurements for the arctic area when in fact the ocean below hasn't warmed.
To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).
Our results show that GOIs derived from the Argo measurements are ideally suitable to monitor the state of the global ocean, especially after November 2007, i.e. when Argo sampling was 100 % complete.
In August and September 2012, sea ice covered less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other time since at least 1979, when the first reliable satellite measurements began.
When I commented on the ocean data I was thinking about the satellite measurements.
While measurements of deep - ocean temperatures existed further back in the past, they were taken only in limited locations until 1999, when Argo buoys were widely deployed.
But when you write in a post here at WUWT, «The problem of «extra heat» in land temperatures (likely to be UHI and more) is escalated by GISS because they extrapolate the ground based land temperature measurements over the oceans in stead of using real ocean data,» I will remind you that GISS notes the errors in the dTs data on their webpage:
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z