Global Warming is still accelerating

The fossil fuel industry's propaganda machine continues to grind out new pseudo-science and misinformation. Witness the recent spurt of bogus articles claiming something like "climate scientists are puzzled by halt in global warming for last 15 years". The fact is the Earth has continued to retain more of the sun's energy than it can radiate away into space due to the increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere that mankind has created, primarily through the burning of fossil fuels, but because the rise in surface temperatures has slowed down compared to the three previous decades of very rapid increases in surface temperatures, many people has misinterpreted that to mean that global warming has paused or is in a "lull". This is not true. The excess heat energy retained by the excess CO2 has been transferring itself to the ocean depths, but it will eventually return to the surface and radically increase surface temperatures once again in the next decade. Meanwhile, global warming has continued to manifest itself in the melting of the Arctic ice cap, Greenland, West Antarctica and the world's glaciers, as well as the many other symptoms, like the changing of seasonal timing and increases in extreme weather events.

Global warming is actually still accelerating and competent climate scientists are not puzzled about what is happening. Here's a good explanation of just what is really happening.

In Hot Water: Global Warming Has Accelerated In Past 15 Years, New Study Of Oceans Confirms
ClimateProgress
By Dana Nuccitelli
Mar 25, 2013
A new study of ocean warming has just been published in Geophysical Research Letters by Balmaseda, Trenberth, and Källén (2013). There are several important conclusions which can be drawn from this paper.
* Completely contrary to the popular contrarian myth, global warming has accelerated, with more overall global warming in the past 15 years than the prior 15 years. This is because about 90% of overall global warming goes into heating the oceans, and the oceans have been warming dramatically.
* As suspected, much of the ‘missing heat’ Kevin Trenberth previously talked about has been found in the deep oceans. Consistent with the results of Nuccitelli et al. (2012), this study finds that 30% of the ocean warming over the past decade has occurred in the deeper oceans below 700 meters, which they note is unprecedented over at least the past half century.
* Some recent studies have concluded based on the slowed global surface warming over the past decade that the sensitivity of the climate to the increased greenhouse effect is somewhat lower than the IPCC best estimate. Those studies are fundamentally flawed because they do not account for the warming of the deep oceans.
* The slowed surface air warming over the past decade has lulled many people into a false and unwarranted sense of security.

Figure 1: Ocean Heat Content from 0 to 300 meters (grey), 700 m (blue), and total depth (violet) from ORAS4, as represented by its 5 ensemble members.


(continued on website linked in article headline)

 

It has become a common propaganda meme of the fossil fuel industry's disinformation campaign to claim that "global warming stopped 16 years ago" but that is based on distortions and misrepresentations of the actual science. Climate scientists are very aware that surface temperature changes represent only a small fraction of the picture. Surface temperatures have risen over the beginning of this century with each of the last 12 years (2001 - 2012) being one of the 14 warmest years on record and with 2010 and 2005 being tied for the position of the warmest year on record. After very rapid rises in surface air temperatures in the 70's, 80's and 90's, the rate of rise in surface air temperatures slowed a bit since 2000 but research has shown that the Earth has continued to warm at an accelerating rate with more of the excess heat going into the oceans than was the case in the previous three decades. Here is what the denier cult dupes want to ignore.


Figure 1 - A visual depiction of how much global warming heat is going into the various components of the climate system for the period 1993 to 2003, calculated from IPCC AR4 5.2.2.3 versus where skeptics/contrarians seem to think it's going. Note the graphic totals 99.9%, so 0.1% is unaccounted for.
(source)

 

Yes this has been posted here before. Trenberth has claimed he has found his missing heat. Now it is defying convection and storing in the deeper and colder oceans...Sounds great now can he prove that?Seems the graph is too small to make out, even on the linked source page..

I think it's important to note that Trenberth is responsible for the energy budget which came to the missing heat point. So he does another paper to defend his own work. The problem for me is his claim of the missing heat storing in the deep oceans for so many years seems to defy convection, and coincidentally warmers claimed there was no missing heat anyway. So if the warmers are right why does it need to be defended anyway?

- - - Updated - - -

Your graphic is wrong... It ignores the fact the atmosphere doesn't store the heat, it releases it up and out into space.. Convection at work...

 

Is the preferred "remedy" still increased taxation and regulation?

If so, go to blazes.

 

Another study showing that global warming/climate change is still accelerating.

Climate Changing Faster Than Expected
Discovery.com News
FEB 11, 2013
(excerpts)
As climate change exceeds the worst projections, scientists underscore the urgency of reducing emissions. By just about any measure, global warming is matching or exceeding experts' worst projections, and could bring drastic change to our planet, including a 19-foot sea level rise and the extinction of many species, according to a new report released today. The study was published by 26 climate scientists, the majority of whom were authors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report in 2007. The researchers point to a gloomy slate of evidence: Carbon dioxide emissions are 40 percent higher than in 1990. Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an accelerated pace. Sea level crept 80 percent higher over the last 15 years than projected in 2001. It is on track to rise twice as much by 2100 as the IPCC projected in 2007. Arctic sea ice melted 40 percent more than the average prediction in the IPCC report. "This stunned the scientific community because it was far greater than any projection," said climate scientist and study co-author Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria in Canada's British Columbia. "Things are happening faster and with greater magnitude than when the IPCC was published in 2007," Weaver said.

"We are in the lead-up to an historic climate summit -- the Copenhagen climate summit -- and it is absolutely essential that any policy making regarding climate change be based on the best and most up-to-date science," said co-author Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University in State College. Scientists have learned a lot since summer 2006 -- the cutoff for publication of research considered in the 2007 IPCC report. "What this report is an attempt to do is to provide an update of the current scientific understanding," Mann said. "We are all concerned that we are basically on target for changes that are in general larger than what was projected from the IPCC report," he continued. "The observations are telling us that changes in many respects are happening faster than models projected." To avoid a 3.6 degree increase, immediate action is needed, the researchers said. Global emissions must peak within the coming decade and they most drop off rapidly after that. "Among the things we've learned that we were not so sure of three years ago is that there is an urgency to this problem that isn't a political issue," said report author Richard Somerville of Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego. "It's Mother Nature herself." The science that has emerged since the 2007 IPCC report appears to point to accelerating climate change, said Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution of Washington in Stanford, Calif., who was not a part of the study.

 

Let me give a breif synopsyis on the logic behind Trenberths paper.

First the ARGO data shows no trend since it was fully implemented in 2001. This data is a reanalysis. In other words they ran the data through a model to get a trend.

How does Trenberth justify this well lets begin with the circular logic.

The models show warming. However, the data doesn't show warming. Where is the warming? Well other oceanic models show that increased winds move the heat to the deep ocean. What wind? Well the atmospheric models show that there should be an increase in wind. What causes the increase in wind in the atmospheric models? The warming. What warming? The models show warming. But the data doesn't show warming. That is because it is in the deep ocean. How? From the wind. What wind? The wind caused by the warming.

As you can see Trenberths paper is simply models relying on flawed models. The output from the atmospheric models are being input into oceanic models and that output is used to bias the ARGO data. In the end the ocean warming is just a game of 3 card Monte. The flawed atmospheric models is laundered through an oceanic model which is then used to do a reanalysis of the ARGO data. What is sold as actual ocean data is just the falsified atmospheric model.

 

Turly astounding, the level of BS climate science get's away with..

 

Problem: this paper is not reporting empirically observed deep-ocean warming at all. It is, as admitted in the abstract, an "observation-based reanalysis" of ocean temperature data. IOW, Trenberth et al. are not reporting any new empirical measurement of deep ocean warming. They are simply taking the existing temperature data, which do not show deep ocean warming, and massaging it through new models until it does show deep ocean warming.

A classic example of CO2-AGW climate "science."

 

While not being a very good scientist Trenberth welds huge political power. He can get any crap he wants published most of tje climate science community is affraid of him.

 

I was thinking there must be something besides his scientific ability at at work here. I mean most others would have been on the obscure published scientist if they had his history.. The mans revised the same paper in one form or another more times than I care to count, it seems he gets a pass..

 

There have been a number of studies now that support the theory that the movement of cooler waters to the surface of the Pacific and the transfer of heat energy to the ocean depths are responsible for the slowdown in the rate of rise in surface temperatures in the last decade or so.

Cooling Pacific has dampened global warming, research shows
Research explains why changes in tropical waters could be responsible for recent 'pause' in rising temperatures
The Guardian
Fiona Harvey
28 August 2013
(excerpts)
Cooling waters in the tropical Pacific Ocean appear to be a major factor in dampening global warming in recent years, scientists said on Wednesday. Their work is a big step forward in helping to solve the greatest puzzle of current climate change research – why global average surface temperatures, while still on an upward trend, have risen more slowly in the past 10 to fifteen years than previously. Waters in the eastern tropical regions of the Pacific have been notably cooler in recent years, owing to the effects of one of the world's biggest ocean circulatory systems, the Pacific decadal oscillation. Many people are aware of the El Niño and La Niña weather systems, which affect the Pacific and bring hotter and stormier or cooler weather in cycles of just a few years, and can have a strong effect on global weather. But few are aware that both of these systems are just part of the much bigger Pacific decadal oscillation, which brings warmer and cooler weather over decades. The system is now in a cooling phase, scientists have noted, which could last for years. The last such phase was from the 1940s to the 1970s.

The new study by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and supported by the US government's National Oceans and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), published in the journal Nature, has linked the "pause" in global warming with the Pacific oscillation. Dan Barrie, programme manager at NOAA, called the research "compelling" and said: "It provides a powerful illustration of how the remote eastern tropical Pacific guides the behaviour of the global ocean-atmosphere system, in this case exhibiting a discernible influence on the recent hiatus in global warming." In winter, the effect of the cooler phase of the oscillation on the northern hemisphere is to depress temperatures slightly; but in summer, the cooler waters in the equatorial Pacific have less impact on the northern hemisphere's weather. The scientists, using computer models, compared their results with observations and concluded that global average annual temperatures have been lower than they would otherwise have been because of the oscillation. But the observed higher summer temperatures of recent years show more of the true effects of global warming, according to the research. Global average temperatures are taken over the whole year, obscuring the effect of this seasonal variation. Shang-Ping Xie, professor of environmental science at Scripps, said: "In summer, the equatorial Pacific's grip on the northern hemisphere loosens, and the increased greenhouse gases continue to warm temperatures, causing record heat waves and unprecedented Arctic sea ice retreat." Research indicates that oceans have absorbed much of the heat and about a third of the additional carbon dioxide pumped into the air from pre-industrial times. Scientists also think that the circulation of heat from the top layers of the ocean, which have been most affected to date, to the deeper oceans below may be another factor behind the "hiatus" in global warming. The slowdown in the upward march of global average temperatures has been greeted by climate sceptics as evidence that the climate is less affected by greenhouse gases than thought. But climate scientists are much more cautious, pointing out that the trend is still upwards, and that the current temperature rises are well within the expected range. Past temperature records and computer predictions both show that periods of slower rises are to be expected as part of the natural variability of the planet's climate. The scientists warned, however, that when the current cooling phase turns, the upward march of temperatures is likely to resume, perhaps at faster rates than before as greenhouse gas emission rates are higher.

 

Doesn't this beg the question of what effect the positive PDO and strong el nino dominated ENSOs had on global temperatures?

 

Actually, that's pretty clear. As the scientific research has shown, the negative phase of the PDO coupled with multiple strong prolonged La Niña events, like we've seen over the last 15 years, pull warmer waters deep into the ocean and move cooler water to the surface, thus slowing down the rate of rise in surface air temperatures (only), even as the planet as a whole continues to rapidly warm. On the other hand, times with a positive PDO and a strong El Niña event will accelerate the warming trend. 1998 is a good example, with one of the strongest El Niñas in recorded history driving surface temperatures to a record high well above previous records. And so, natural variations create periods with faster or slower rates of warming that modulate the underlying warming trend created by increasing CO2 levels.

 

There have been a number of studies that have found that the "missing heat" is being transferred to the ocean depths by various natural factors, like the extended La Nina conditions this last decade. This movement of thermal energy is not "defying" anything except in your imagination. You seem to have very little understanding of what "convection" means in the total dynamics of the oceans.

Trenberth did some research on the difference between the amount of energy the Earth is receiving from the sun and the amount it is radiating away into space and found that, as expected because of the enhanced greenhouse effect due to the 40% increase in CO2 levels, the Earth's overall energy flow is out of balance and the Earth is retaining more of the sun's energy than it is losing, thus warming the planet. They could figure out how much more energy was being retained but, at that time, they could not account for where all the energy was going. Now the science is clearer and they can account for the excess heat. Trenberth is continuing his research on a number of things but that is not equivalent to trying "to defend his own work", as you posit. His earlier work did not need to be defended from other scientists. Again, your ignorant notions about how "convection" between ocean layers works and the implications for this research are simply wrong.

You seem to be filled with a lot of misinformation. The atmosphere does indeed warm up, which equals "storing the heat" in your lingo. No heat is ever released into space by "convection. You are again revealing that your understanding of science is pretty minimal. Space is a vacuum. No convection possible. Heat is only passed out into space through radiation. You imagine that all of the scientific graphs and charts and studies are "wrong only because you don't know what you're talking about.

 

The only thing thats 'still accelerating' is the hysteria generated by the dwindling number of disciples for this dying faith as reality intrudes ever more inconveniently upon it.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/ha.../uah/from:2004.75/plot/uah/from:2004.75/trend

 

I don't worry about global warming. I'm 2,200 feet above sea level. And I'd rather dress down than dress up.

 

LOLOLOL.....some amusing delusions you got there, flogger. It must be tough for you to exclude reality so completely like that. Cherry picking the data helps, of course, like your graph does by starting around 1997/1998 when the world experienced a very strong El Nino coupled with a positive PDO that drove temperatures to a record high significantly above the previous records. Try re-figuring your chart with a start date of 2000 and see where the trend goes.

Here's the actual trends over time in world surface temperatures. The trend is even steeper for ocean warming, as the last graph here shows.







GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

 

Todays warming is well within natural variability in both its level and rate of change since the last glaciation. Theres simply nothing 'alarming' about any of it frankly especially now the warming has stopped and it may even reverse now who knows ? Certainly not the climate scientists judging by their predictive abilities to date

Everything is unprecedented when you simply ignore the precedents as alarmists have done since this lucrative 'crisis' was first invented about 25 years ago

 

Did you ever stop to consider that when ice melts it has to go somewhere?

The cooler fresh water stays on top of the more dense salt water and cools the surface of the ocean and this will cause a temporary cooling of land masses. I will not be surprised if Britain has a very cold winter because of a weakened Gulf current. As it has been said before... some places will be cooler. The temps in the high arctic are warmer.

I did not bring this up before because I already know the responses.

Did you also note that the Great plains are warmer and the coastlines are cooler? I wonder why?

 

Warming phases like the current one (and even warmer) have happened many times since the last glaciation when nobody was recording the byproducts of such phenomena. We survived those so doubtless we'll can survive this one too if the environmentalists dont first deny us the resources and affordable technologies with which to do so

 

There are how many billion of us on earth?

A cool wet spring delayed planting for most of the country. An early frost will destroy most of the harvest and they already have frost warnings in Maine.

Sure some of us will survive...maybe...if this doesn't create unforseen consequenses...like war and famine.

All the cheap resoueces in the world will not make it rain...or stop it when it isn't needed.

 

Are you suggesting that we are in any way culpable for seasonal weather variation and can somehow control it ?

 

No...I am sugesting that if we continue on the path we are on we are looking at trouble...big trouble.

Something off topic to consider....if we converted our autos and trucks to natural gas would we be worried so much about the oil supply or the spike that will happen if we attack Syria?

 

What do you mean by 'big trouble' and what is your evidence for this ? Do you believe humans can control temperature and weather on the basis of modification (if this was even possible) of our 0.012% (by atmospheric volume) contribution of CO 2 to our biosphere ?

No

 

Your post = ridiculously wrong denier cult myths = clueless anti-science drivel

The warming has not stopped. Actually, it is still accelerating. Only surface air temperatues have seen their upward rise slow down somewhat while ocean temperatures have been rising faster. The current abrupt warming trend is already way beyond the limits of natural variability. The predictions of the climate scientists and the climate models have a very good track record, no matter what lies the myths of your little oddball cult of reality denial tell you.

It seems like maybe you get all of your misinformation regarding anthropogenic global warming/climate changes from the economically motivated propaganda being pushed by the fossil fuel industry and their stooges in the rightwingnut media echo chamber. No wonder you're so wrong about everything. I prefer to get the testimony of the world scientific community and the experts, i.e. - climate scientists, who do scientific research in these areas all the time.

Scientific Opinion on Climate Change
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement, adopted by the society in 2003, revised in 2007[54], and revised and expanded in 2013,[55] affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.

While important scientific uncertainties remain as to which particular impacts will be experienced where, no uncertainties are known that could make the impacts of climate change inconsequential. Furthermore, surprise outcomes, such as the unexpectedly rapid loss of Arctic summer sea ice, may entail even more dramatic changes than anticipated."​

The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2012 concluded:

"There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research. The observed warming will be irreversible for many years into the future, and even larger temperature increases will occur as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere. Avoiding this future warming will require a large and rapid reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions. The ongoing warming will increase risks and stresses to human societies, economies, ecosystems, and wildlife through the 21st century and beyond, making it imperative that society respond to a changing climate. To inform decisions on adaptation and mitigation, it is critical that we improve our understanding of the global climate system and our ability to project future climate through continued and improved monitoring and research. This is especially true for smaller (seasonal and regional) scales and weather and climate extremes, and for important hydroclimatic variables such as precipitation and water availability. Technological, economic, and policy choices in the near future will determine the extent of future impacts of climate change. Science-based decisions are seldom made in a context of absolute certainty. National and international policy discussions should include consideration of the best ways to both adapt to and mitigate climate change. Mitigation will reduce the amount of future climate change and the risk of impacts that are potentially large and dangerous. At the same time, some continued climate change is inevitable, and policy responses should include adaptation to climate change. Prudence dictates extreme care in accounting for our relationship with the only planet known to be capable of sustaining human life."[66]​