Oceanic Debate

[jethro]

You're welcome.

Lately we've been getting more people new to this area joining in and more and more new people watching and reading, I think that's great news. For a long time new folk have been put off joining in and I'm sure the sniping and fear of what response they'd get played a large part in that. We've tightened up the moderating in this area hoping it would encourage more people and a broader range of views, it appears to be working, the new, stricter rules won't be relaxed and behaviour in here allowed to compromise that progress.

It's perfectly possible to argue a point without making it personal, it's perfectly possible to agree to disagree, sometimes in the heat of the moment it gets forgotten; we're all guilty of it.

[Yorkshiresnows]

Let us see if it pans out but ,and maybe more importantly, how it's effects manifest back to back with the hottest period measured so far? (and some of that during one of our 'better' winters...... so let's 'look' global even if we feel it 'local'........it's a big world so lets not judge it by our own neck of the woods....)

Hi GW,

You might want to qualify the above statement in bold.

Hotest period from where to where ..... and perhaps it might be wise to state that this is for the Northern Hemisphere ........ not globally.

Cheers

Y.S

[sunny starry skies]

http://www.ncdc.noaa.../?report=global

http://data.giss.nas...stemp/2010july/

2010 is the hottest year Jan-July on record, and we've just had the hottest 12 month period on record. I think G-W's statement of "the hottest period measured so far?" has some support in global records.

[Yorkshiresnows]

http://www.ncdc.noaa.../?report=global

http://data.giss.nas...stemp/2010july/

2010 is the hottest year Jan-July on record, and we've just had the hottest 12 month period on record. I think G-W's statement of "the hottest period measured so far?" has some support in global records.

But,

It is not the hottest year on record .... still 1998 ..... though it certainly is warm (no arguments here ... although lets see how the whole year pans out !!):

Interesting discussion over on Roy Spencers site (underlined my emphasis):

http://www.drroyspencer.com/

"I’m getting more and more questions about the daily global temperature updates we provide at the NASA Discover website. I suppose this is because 2010 is still in the running to beat 1998 as the warmest year in our satellite data record (since 1979).

But also we have made a couple of significant changes recently, and there continue to be some misunderstandings of the data that are posted there.

The bottom line is this: You can rely ONLY upon two channels at the Discover “Temperature Trends†page:

(1) the “Aqua ch.5 v2†channel for global-average mid-tropospheric temperatures, from the AMSU on NASA’s Aqua satellite, and

(2) the “Sea Surface†temperatures, which are averaged over the global ice-free oceans (60N to 60S), from the AMSR-E instrument on Aqua.

Do not trust any of the other channels for temperature trend monitoring. This is because, while the Aqua satellite equatorial crossing time is kept very near 1:30 am and pm with periodic orbit maneuvers, the rest of the channels come from the NOAA-15 satellite whose equatorial crossing time has now drifted from its original 7:30 am/pm value in late 1998 to about 4:30 am/pm now"

This orbital drift makes the NOAA-15 channels (4 and 6) unusually warm, and is why those of you who have been monitoring channel 4 and 6 at the Discover site are seeing such warm temperatures.

Going back to sea surface temperatures and earlier posts:

"Because of AMSR-E’s through-cloud sensing, it provides a more accurate global average SSTs on short time scales compared to the traditional infrared measurements. We download the binary gridded SST data from the RSS website once a day and compute global area averages, which are labeled “Sea Surface†in the channel list on the Discover Temperature Trends page":

Y.S

Edited August 25, 2010 by Yorkshiresnows

[Gray-Wolf]

Had I meant 'year' Y.S. I'm sure I would have said so........

Back to warming of the abyssal plain. Anyone want to guess at was 'frozen' substance resides down there? (clue: it puts the fizz in yer Pop)

[Yorkshiresnows]

Hi Folks,

Latest global temps here .... and August was another very warm month globally:

Here are the stats to date:

YR MON GLOBE NH SH TROPICS

2009 1 0.251 0.472 0.030 -0.068

2009 2 0.247 0.565 -0.071 -0.045

2009 3 0.191 0.324 0.058 -0.159

2009 4 0.162 0.315 0.008 0.012

2009 5 0.139 0.161 0.118 -0.059

2009 6 0.041 -0.021 0.103 0.105

2009 7 0.429 0.190 0.668 0.506

2009 8 0.242 0.236 0.248 0.406

2009 9 0.505 0.597 0.413 0.594

2009 10 0.362 0.332 0.393 0.383

2009 11 0.498 0.453 0.543 0.479

2009 12 0.284 0.358 0.211 0.506

2010 1 0.648 0.860 0.436 0.681

2010 2 0.603 0.720 0.486 0.791

2010 3 0.653 0.850 0.455 0.726

2010 4 0.501 0.799 0.203 0.633

2010 5 0.534 0.775 0.292 0.708

2010 6 0.436 0.550 0.323 0.476

2010 7 0.489 0.635 0.342 0.420

2010 8 0.511 0.672 0.349 0.362

From Dr Spencer's blog site (you can access the satellite charts here): http://discover.itsc....edu/amsutemps/

"While the global-average lower tropospheric temperature remained high, +0.51 deg. C in August, 2010, monitoring of the daily Aqua Ch.5 data at the Discover web site (see link) suggests that the cooling of global average sea surface temperatures that started several months ago is now causing the troposphere to cool as well".

How are we shaping up against 1998:

YEAR GL

1998 +0.61

2010 +0.55

Very close .... but will the predicted cooling begin to take effect in the Autumn months. Time as ever will tell.

Y.S

Edited September 3, 2010 by Yorkshiresnows

[Thundery wintry showers]

http://www.ncdc.noaa.../?report=global

http://data.giss.nas...stemp/2010july/

2010 is the hottest year Jan-July on record, and we've just had the hottest 12 month period on record. I think G-W's statement of "the hottest period measured so far?" has some support in global records.

In addition, even the HadCRUT dataset (which is more conservative, possibly as a result of not covering the Arctic) has the January-July 2010 anomaly as only about 0.01C short of the January-December 1998 anomaly. Given that September-December 1998 cooled down somewhat as El Nino became replaced by La Nina, 2010 will have to cool down a fair bit also in order to not break the record on all three datasets. On the other two, GISS & NOAA, as you correctly mention, 2010 has a headstart already.

Even if NOAA's modelling of SSTs turns out to be too warm, you also have the GISS and the HadCRUT datasets supporting record or near-record warmth over the oceans.

[BornFromTheVoid]

The MEI continues it's rapid decent, now down to -1.81, the second lowest on record for the July/August readings. It was also another record drop for the time of year, and the last 3 months drop has been the largest on record.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/klaus.wolter/MEI/table.html

[Yorkshiresnows]

Hi Folks,

A quick look at the global SST's and state of play:

La Nina really kicking into gear now !!!

Cheers

Y.S

[NorthNorfolkWeather]

Had I meant 'year' Y.S. I'm sure I would have said so........

Back to warming of the abyssal plain. Anyone want to guess at was 'frozen' substance resides down there? (clue: it puts the fizz in yer Pop)

Are you sure you are not confusing Methane Hydrate (Methane clathrate) with CO2?

[Gray-Wolf]

Are you sure you are not confusing Methane Hydrate (Methane clathrate) with CO2?

Not at all and our Siberian experience shows us how well it travels without dissolving (esp. in warmer oceans) and past 'rapid warmings' have us wondering just how unstable clathrates can be.

If you look at the Delta areas (Nile and Amazon) you'll then see how much 'fresh' clathrate is out there waiting for that 0.5c temp hike without troubling the submerged permafrost off Siberia or deep deposits off Svalbard.

In the same way that Antarctica was off the menu 15yrs ago only for our observations to prove us wrong the old 'No clathrate meltdown' reassurance of 10yrs ago is now under question esp. since the Siberian leak was noted.

[BornFromTheVoid]

A study reported Science Daily here

Among other things, the new research suggests North Atlantic SSTs and climate are more heavily influenced by volcanic eruptions and solar activities than by changes in ocean circulation...

Edited September 14, 2010 by NaDamantaSam

[NorthNorfolkWeather]

Had I meant 'year' Y.S. I'm sure I would have said so........

Back to warming of the abyssal plain. Anyone want to guess at was 'frozen' substance resides down there? (clue: it puts the fizz in yer Pop)

Any "pop" I've drunk has been carbonated, i.e. the fizz is Carbon Dioxide, hence the original question.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, methane hydrate is a much more powerful GHG, but it will take temps in the Abyssal plain >5.5 due to the pressures involved. Now, as water is densest at 4c, it means that the whole ocean has to warm to >5.5 for that to happen.

or are you going to give us a special on that as well?

[jethro]

Sorry if this is a really idiot question but I've been wondering about the Tsunami in Japan. As the earthquake was so large and on the ocean floor and the Tsunami it generated crossed the entire Pacific to the Western shores of the USA, what if any impacts will this have on the the temperature profile of the Pacific? Does it have the potential to change the profile of the La Nina by distributing or interrupting the distinctive temperature profile pattern?

[Iceberg]

I don't have any links or anything, but my understanding about this is that, it won't have any effect as its not water moving, but rather kinetic energy passing from one water molecule to the next i.e water molecule 1 bumps into number 2 and so on. Once the energy has moved on everything pretty much behaves as it did before. Due to this there will be no effect on the pacific water profile and no effect on ENSO.

[Gray-Wolf]

My understanding too Ice, if you think that the 'disruption' in waters over 600m deep is hardly noticeable then you can imagine how little impact it makes? As for dislodging clathrate deposits? well thats another question!!! We'd not want a large seismic event near any of the major deposits methinks!!!

[williams]

Hello I'm new,<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1878"><BR closure_uid_amu12k="1879">Currently I'm looking for monthly data (as TXT, or XLS, or DAT ...) SST anomalies or of the SST :<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1880">- Mediterranean ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1881">- Barents Sea ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1882">- the Sargasso Sea ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1883">- Labrador Sea ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1884">- the North Sea ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1885">- Channel ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1886">- and especially in different areas of the North Atlantic Ocean as the western North Atlantic, northern North Atlantic (between southern Greenland and southern Iceland), Western the Portuguese coast ;<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1887"><BR closure_uid_amu12k="1888">Do you know where to find such data in recent years ?<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1889"><BR closure_uid_amu12k="1890">Thank you<BR closure_uid_amu12k="1891"><BR closure_uid_amu12k="1892">Williams

[knocker]

My understanding too Ice, if you think that the 'disruption' in waters over 600m deep is hardly noticeable then you can imagine how little impact it makes? As for dislodging clathrate deposits? well thats another question!!! We'd not want a large seismic event near any of the major deposits methinks!!!

Not only that, the disruption on the surface is hardly noticeable. If you were in a boat you probably wouldn't even notice it passing. The diagram in my post here illustrates what I mean.

http://forum.netweat...s/page__st__493

Edited June 6, 2011 by weather ship

[williams]

Hello I'm new,

Currently I'm looking for monthly data (as TXT, or XLS, or DAT ...) SST anomalies or of the SST :

- Mediterranean ;

- Barents Sea ;

- the Sargasso Sea ;

- Labrador Sea ;

- the North Sea ;

- Channel ;

- and especially in different areas of the North Atlantic Ocean as the western North Atlantic, northern North Atlantic (between southern Greenland and southern Iceland), Western the Portuguese coast ;

Do you know where to find such data in recent years

Williams

[knocker]

I don't have any links or anything, but my understanding about this is that, it won't have any effect as its not water moving, but rather kinetic energy passing from one water molecule to the next i.e water molecule 1 bumps into number 2 and so on. Once the energy has moved on everything pretty much behaves as it did before. Due to this there will be no effect on the pacific water profile and no effect on ENSO.

I would basically agree with that but just to add potential energy also plays a role. It is a free wave in the sense that it was forced to begin with (by the earthquake). By contrast, tidal waves are generated by the gravitational force of the Sun and Moon, which do not shut off and so are "forced" waves. The Sun and Moon continue to constrain the tide all the way across the ocean. The essential point as you mentioned is that there is no mass horizontal movement of water.