Posted on 08/22/2014 8:10:16 AM PDT by NowApproachingMidnight
Following rapid warming in the late 20th century, this century has so far seen surprisingly little increase in the average temperature at the Earth’s surface. At first this was a blip, then a trend, then a puzzle for the climate science community.
More than a dozen theories have now been proposed for the so-called global warming hiatus, ranging from air pollution to volcanoes to sunspots. New research from the University of Washington shows that the heat absent from the surface is plunging deep in the north and south Atlantic Ocean, and is part of a naturally occurring cycle. The study is published Aug. 22 in Science.
(Excerpt) Read more at washington.edu ...
Funny, I always thought hot fluids rise. Guess I need go back to chemistry class.
So, these guys are documenting what appears to be a naturally occurring cycle???
But, we have been told that we need to make drastic changes to our lives, because global warming is man made.
To me, this is just more evidence that we don’t fully understand earth climate cycles. And even if we want to say for sake of argument that man contributes to global warming, we don’t know how much or how significant our contribution is, as compared to naturally occurring phenomena, which we have no control over.
How many ice ages have their been in earth’s history? Previous ice ages did not end because Cro-Magnon Man or Neanderthals were driving SUVs.
Chicago was buried under a mile of ice during the last ice age. All that ice didn’t melt due to Neanderthals running coal fired power plants.
Point is, ice ages came and went due to natural cycles, which we don’t fully understand.
That must be unsettling to some scientists.
And THEY better not mess with Mother Nature.
A new study has a new explanation for why our models are getting it wrong: equatorial winds. Evidently, Pacific trade winds have been blowing much harder over the past 20 years than they normally do, and as a result, surface heat is being stored in our oceans.
Global warming continues, but volcanoes are slowing down the warming of the atmosphere
the oceans are responsible for the recent warming slowdown.
more aerosol pollution from countries like China
A different theory is that the Earth's climate is a bit less sensitive to increases in greenhouse-gas emissions than scientists and models have assumed
"Global warming is continuing, it just gets manifested in different ways," says Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a scientist with the National Center for Atmospheric Research who co-authored the study with NCAR's Dr. John Fasullo.
The lower pace of warming in recent years may be explained by natural phenomena including volcanic eruptions, a periodic drop in the sun’s warmth and natural variation in the weather, the panel said in its wider report, the UN said.
Global warming has slowed because of pollution Global warming has slowed in the last decade, according to the Met Office, as the world pumps out so much pollution it is reflecting the sun’s rays and causing a cooling effect.
Maybe they will develop a ‘Dark Heat’ theory to ‘explain’ it................
Says Link can’t be found.
Computer modeling is not science. The model responds only to the data input to it by the person who may want to show a specif 'result'................
What global warming there is can be fixed with duct tape.
One strip of duct tape daily over the mouth of Al Gore!
The cycle starts when saltier, denser water at the surface northern part of the Atlantic, near Iceland, causes the water to sink. This changes the speed of the huge current in the Atlantic Ocean that circulates heat throughout the planet.
What about the Pacific Ocean? It’s much larger.
Not to validate their malarkey, but if you heat the surface of a liquid, conduction can transfer the heat to greater depths.
Skip chemistry and try physics ;-)
But the same holds true for these so-called scientists of 'global warming'. They are trying to be good B.S. artists.
The warmists just don’t give up, do they?
The men behind the curtain proclaim “pay no attention to that large, round, yellow object in the sky...that object has nothing to do with falling and rising temperatures.”
So the climate models that didn’t contain this and can’t explain primary data are now all OK? I don’t think it works like that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.