I think the idea that the oceans dominate the global climate has a lot of merit. This is due to their immense area and volume, their heat capacity, and the ability of sea water to remove carbon dioxide by precipitating it in the form of carbonate rocks. The oceans also contain huge amounts of carbon dioxide in solution, releasing it into the atmosphere when the water warms, and absorbing it when the oceans cool. In the following article, Dr. Endersbee provides documentation showing man's influence on global warming and climate change is negligible.
Peter
Carbon Dioxide and the Oceans
Dr. Lance Endersbee in Focus
Should we try harder to understand the causes of natural climate change instead of assuming present climate change is man-made? In the past, sea temperatures were obtained from measurements by passing ships in the sea lanes of the world. It is only in the past three decades that more accurate data on sea surface temperatures has become available. The analysis of this recent data by the author shows that: � the oceans regulate the composition of the atmosphere; the influence on climate of human-generated carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere is negligible; and global climate change has natural causes. The oceans and the atmosphere are quite shallow in relation to the vast surface area of the oceans.
The interaction of the atmosphere and the oceans is essentially a phenomenon of the ocean surface. It would be expected that there would be almost a direct correlation between levels of CO2 in the air and the global mean sea surface temperatures, and that is the case. It is possible to plot an experience curve of the relationship between ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels. In order to do so it is necessary to recognise that the oceans have a vast storage capacity for heat and dissolved gases, and that changes are slow. On the other hand, the atmosphere has a much more rapid response time. If we use a 12-month moving average of atmospheric CO2 and a 21-year moving average of the more accurate recent data on global average sea surface temperatures, a remarkably clear experience curve is obtained. The 12-month moving average of CO2 levels filters out the variations of the annual cycle and, in related analyses, provides a view of the influence of other natural events. The 21-year moving average of sea surface temperature covers the complete solar cycle, including the change in magnetic polarity of the sun, the El Nino and La Nina influences on global climate, and recognises the vast storage capacity of the oceans for CO2 and the slow response time of the oceans.
The chart shows that the CO2 levels in the atmosphere and global average sea surface temperatures are locked together. The correlation is so firm it is reasonable to include it as a condition in the computer simulations used to study climate change.
Se larger image here
It is my view that the present fear of man-made climate change is quite mistaken. We should try harder to understand the real causes of natural climate change.
Lance Endersbee
Emeritus Professor Endersbee AO, FTSE, is a civil engineer and his early professional career included 27 years in engineering practice followed by 13 years at Monash University. His career in engineering practice included service with the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Authority, the Hydro-Electric Commission of Tasmania and the United Nations in South-East Asia as an expert on dam design and hydro power development. He is now active on conceptual plans for several major new national engineering projects directed to Australian national economic and social development.
Showing posts with label oceans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oceans. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Old News: Al Gore Is Wrong, There Is No "Consensus"
Dr. William Gray is a respected, renowned hurricane forecaster and college professor. His opinion about the cause of global warming, or climate change, computer models, water vapor and the leading proponent of the myth of man-caused global warming is well-worth considering. Search this blog and you'll find other statements by Dr. Gray. At the very least, this shows there is no "consensus" on global warming......and the "debate" is certainly not over.
Peter
Famed Hurricane Forecaster William Gray Predicts Global Cooling in 10 Years
Expert states ocean cycles will have a more profound effect on climate than CO2; criticizes James Hansen's climate models.
By Jeff Poor Business & Media Institute 3/4/2008 11:47:32 AM
It turns out Al Gore was wrong. The scientists aren’t all in agreement on global warming; thus there is no “consensus.”
Prominent hurricane forecaster Dr. William M. Gray, a professor at Colorado State University, told the audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 4 in New York that a natural cycle of ocean water temperatures related to the salinity (the amount of salt) in ocean water was responsible for some global warming that has taken place. However, he said that same cycle means a period of cooling would begin within 10 years.
“We should begin to see cooling coming on,” Gray said. “I’m willing to make a big financial bet on it. In 10 years, I expect the globe to be somewhat cooler than it is now, because this ocean effect will dominate over the human-induced CO2 effect and I believe the solar effect and the land-use effect. I think this is likely bigger.”
Gray, 79, wasn’t sure if he’d be around to see his prediction come true.
“I may not be around by that time,” Gray said. “But, I’ve asked some of my students to put dandelions on my grave if that happens.”
Gray criticized NASA scientist and global warming alarmist James Hansen, calling him “the most egregious abuser” of data. According to Gray, Hansen’s alarmism is exaggerated because the models he uses to predict the increase in global warming count on too much water vapor in the atmosphere.
“[S]o he puts that much vapor in his model and of course he gets this,” Gray said. “He must get upper troposphere where the temperature is seven degrees warmer for a doubl[ing of] CO2. Well, the reason he got that was – why this upper-level warming was there – was he put too much water vapor in the model.”
At the same conference March 3, the founder of The Weather Channel advocated suing carbon traders, including former Vice President Al Gore, to expose what he called “the fraud of global warming.”
Peter
Famed Hurricane Forecaster William Gray Predicts Global Cooling in 10 Years
Expert states ocean cycles will have a more profound effect on climate than CO2; criticizes James Hansen's climate models.
By Jeff Poor Business & Media Institute 3/4/2008 11:47:32 AM
It turns out Al Gore was wrong. The scientists aren’t all in agreement on global warming; thus there is no “consensus.”
Prominent hurricane forecaster Dr. William M. Gray, a professor at Colorado State University, told the audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 4 in New York that a natural cycle of ocean water temperatures related to the salinity (the amount of salt) in ocean water was responsible for some global warming that has taken place. However, he said that same cycle means a period of cooling would begin within 10 years.
“We should begin to see cooling coming on,” Gray said. “I’m willing to make a big financial bet on it. In 10 years, I expect the globe to be somewhat cooler than it is now, because this ocean effect will dominate over the human-induced CO2 effect and I believe the solar effect and the land-use effect. I think this is likely bigger.”
Gray, 79, wasn’t sure if he’d be around to see his prediction come true.
“I may not be around by that time,” Gray said. “But, I’ve asked some of my students to put dandelions on my grave if that happens.”
Gray criticized NASA scientist and global warming alarmist James Hansen, calling him “the most egregious abuser” of data. According to Gray, Hansen’s alarmism is exaggerated because the models he uses to predict the increase in global warming count on too much water vapor in the atmosphere.
“[S]o he puts that much vapor in his model and of course he gets this,” Gray said. “He must get upper troposphere where the temperature is seven degrees warmer for a doubl[ing of] CO2. Well, the reason he got that was – why this upper-level warming was there – was he put too much water vapor in the model.”
At the same conference March 3, the founder of The Weather Channel advocated suing carbon traders, including former Vice President Al Gore, to expose what he called “the fraud of global warming.”
Friday, October 26, 2007
The IPCC......Call It Political Propaganda, Not Science
Another geologist speaking out about the absurd notion that carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming. The skeptics are growing in number, or rather they are speaking out more. The interesting thing Mr. Segalstad says below is that the oceans control the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. They must. There has to be a regulator in the carbon cycle that keeps it from getting out of control.
Peter
IPCC
Call it propaganda, not science
Tom V. Segalstad: Oceans Regulate CO2.
"The IPCC needs a lesson in geology to avoid making fundamental mistakes," he says. "Most leading geologists, throughout the world, know that the IPCC's view of Earth processes are implausible if not impossible.
Catastrophic theories of climate change depend on carbon dioxide staying in the atmosphere for long periods of time -- otherwise, the CO2 enveloping the globe wouldn't be dense enough to keep the heat in. Until recently, the world of science was near-unanimous that CO2 couldn't stay in the atmosphere for more than about five to 10 years because of the oceans' near-limitless ability to absorb CO2.
This time period has been established by measurements based on natural carbon-14 and also from readings of carbon-14 from nuclear weapons testing, it has been established by radon-222 measurements, it has been established by measurements of the solubility of atmospheric gases in the oceans, it has been established by comparing the isotope mass balance, it has been established through other mechanisms, too, and over many decades, and by many scientists in many disciplines," says Prof. Segalstad, whose work has often relied upon such measurements...
Amazingly, the hypothetical results from climate models have trumped the real world measurements of carbon dioxide's longevity in the atmosphere. Those who claim that CO2 lasts decades or centuries have no such measurements or other physical evidence to support their claims. Neither can they demonstrate that the various forms of measurement are erroneous. "They don't even try," says Prof. Segalstad. "They simply dismiss evidence that is, for all intents and purposes, irrefutable. Instead, they substitute their faith, constructing a kind of science fiction or fantasy world in the process.
In the real world, as measurable by science, CO2 in the atmosphere and in the ocean reach a stable balance when the oceans contain 50 times as much CO2 as the atmosphere. "The IPCC postulates an atmospheric doubling of CO2, meaning that the oceans would need to receive 50 times more CO2 to obtain chemical equilibrium," explains Prof. Segalstad. "This total of 51 times the present amount of carbon in atmospheric CO2 exceeds the known reserves of fossil carbon-- it represents more carbon than exists in all the coal, gas, and oil that we can exploit anywhere in the world."
Original Source of Segalstad's Criticisms
Peter
IPCC
Call it propaganda, not science
Tom V. Segalstad: Oceans Regulate CO2.
"The IPCC needs a lesson in geology to avoid making fundamental mistakes," he says. "Most leading geologists, throughout the world, know that the IPCC's view of Earth processes are implausible if not impossible.
Catastrophic theories of climate change depend on carbon dioxide staying in the atmosphere for long periods of time -- otherwise, the CO2 enveloping the globe wouldn't be dense enough to keep the heat in. Until recently, the world of science was near-unanimous that CO2 couldn't stay in the atmosphere for more than about five to 10 years because of the oceans' near-limitless ability to absorb CO2.
This time period has been established by measurements based on natural carbon-14 and also from readings of carbon-14 from nuclear weapons testing, it has been established by radon-222 measurements, it has been established by measurements of the solubility of atmospheric gases in the oceans, it has been established by comparing the isotope mass balance, it has been established through other mechanisms, too, and over many decades, and by many scientists in many disciplines," says Prof. Segalstad, whose work has often relied upon such measurements...
Amazingly, the hypothetical results from climate models have trumped the real world measurements of carbon dioxide's longevity in the atmosphere. Those who claim that CO2 lasts decades or centuries have no such measurements or other physical evidence to support their claims. Neither can they demonstrate that the various forms of measurement are erroneous. "They don't even try," says Prof. Segalstad. "They simply dismiss evidence that is, for all intents and purposes, irrefutable. Instead, they substitute their faith, constructing a kind of science fiction or fantasy world in the process.
In the real world, as measurable by science, CO2 in the atmosphere and in the ocean reach a stable balance when the oceans contain 50 times as much CO2 as the atmosphere. "The IPCC postulates an atmospheric doubling of CO2, meaning that the oceans would need to receive 50 times more CO2 to obtain chemical equilibrium," explains Prof. Segalstad. "This total of 51 times the present amount of carbon in atmospheric CO2 exceeds the known reserves of fossil carbon-- it represents more carbon than exists in all the coal, gas, and oil that we can exploit anywhere in the world."
Original Source of Segalstad's Criticisms
Friday, July 6, 2007
Climate Changes (Warming) Have Brought Great CO2 Pulses Up From the Deep Sea (maybe)
This is an interesting article which reveals some of the complexity involved with the relationship between the oceans and the atmosphere, and of course the role of carbon dioxide and global warming. Read carefully and you'll realize how little the scientists really know. They're doing what scientists do; exploring, speculating, trying to understand.
This means more study and more funding, which is fine; but there is just not enough evidence that man is causing global warming to create massive changes is social policy.
Peter
from: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news/2007/05_14_07.htm
News 05/14/07
Contact: Clare Oh 212-854-5479 or coh@ei.columbia.edu
Climate Swings Have Brought Great CO2 Pulses Up From the Deep Sea
Researchers use sophisticated research vessels to extract deep-sea sediment cores from oceans around the world, allowing them to chart past climate change.
A study released on May 11, 2007 provides some of the first solid evidence that warming-induced changes in ocean circulation at the end of the last Ice Age caused vast quantities of ancient carbon dioxide to belch from the deep sea into the atmosphere. Scientists believe the carbon dioxide (CO2) releases helped propel the world into further warming.
The study, done by researchers at the University of Colorado, Kent State University and Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, appears in the May 10 advance online version of the leading journal Science.
Atmospheric CO2, also produced by burning of fossil fuels, is largely responsible for global warming. However, scientists have known for some time that the gas also goes through natural cycles. By far most of the world’s mobile carbon is stored in the oceans — 40 trillion metric tons, or 15 times more than in air, soil and water combined. But how this vast marine reservoir interacts with the atmosphere has been a subject of debate for the last 25 years.
The study indicates what many scientists have long suspected, but could not prove: sometimes the oceans can release massive amounts of CO2 into the air as they overturn.
"The lesson is that abrupt changes in ocean circulation in the past have affected the oceans’ ability to keep carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere," said geologist Thomas Marchitto of the University of Colorado, a co-lead author. "This could help us understand how that ability might be affected by future global warming."
The researchers found the evidence in a core of Pacific Ocean sediment brought up from 705 meters — about 2,300 feet — off the coast of Baja California, Mexico. The core held the remains of bottom-dwelling protozoa called foraminifera, which take up carbon from surrounding water and use it to build their shells.
The isotope carbon 14 — normally used to date organic remains such as wood and bones — can also be used to date the water in which the foraminifera grew. Going back through layers built up over the past 38,000 years, the researchers found the shells contained expected levels of C14 in all but two brief periods, beginning roughly 18,000 years and 13,000 years ago. That meant the protozoa were using older sources of carbon, long isolated from the atmosphere.
The carbon could come from only one place: upwelling of the deep sea, from depths of 3 kilometers (nearly two miles) or more.
The researchers believe the water came not from the Pacific, but from the faraway Antarctic Ocean — the only part of the world where great upwelling can occur, due to the bottom topography and wind patterns. Most of the rising C02 probably poured out into the air in southern latitudes, but some carbon-rich water traveled on currents at intermediate depths to the north, where the foraminifera recorded its C14 signature. The upwelling and release of this carbon dioxide matches well with rapid warming and rises in atmospheric CO2 shown in glacial ice cores from Antarctica and other far-flung records.
The researchers believe that largely as a result of these episodes, CO2 in the atmosphere went from 190 parts per million (ppm) during glacial times to about 270 ppm, and remained at that level until recently. A similar but much more rapid rise, to 380 ppm, has taken place since the Industrial Revolution — most of it in the last few decades. Both rises almost certainly stoked global warming.
Exactly what caused the upwelling is not clear, but many scientists believe the world was already undergoing a natural warming cycle, possibly due to a slight periodic change in earth’s orbit. This suddenly ended the last Ice Age, in turn changing ocean currents and wind patterns. The hypothesis favored by paper’s authors is that sudden disintegration of northern ice sheets during this initial warming slowed or halted deep Atlantic Ocean circulation. This in turn warmed the Antarctic, causing massive retreats of sea ice and allowing deep Antarctic waters to surface.
Thus, it is possible that the signal detected in the Pacific ultimately originated on the other side of the world. "Once the CO2 started rising, it probably helped the warming process along — but exactly how much, we can’t say," said Robert Anderson, a Lamont-Doherty expert in ocean circulation who was not involved in the study. "And there is still huge uncertainty as to how the oceans will respond to current warming."
Anderson says the study should be a wake-up call to the scientific community to expand studies of the oceans’ relationship to climate change. Lamont-Doherty senior researcher Alexander van Geen, a coauthor of the paper, was chief scientist on the cruise that collected the cores, and has coordinated much research on them since.
The other authors are paleoclimatologists Scott Lehman and Jacqueline Flueckiger at the University of Colorado, and geochemist Joseph Ortiz of Kent State University.
The paper, "Marine radiocarbon evidence for the mechanism of deglacial atmospheric CO2 rise," was posted on Science Xpress on May 10, 2007. Background information on current thinking about ocean circulation and climate is contained in the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, a member of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, is one of the world's leading research centers examining the planet from its core to its atmosphere, across every continent and every ocean. From global climate change to earthquakes, volcanoes, environmental hazards and beyond, Observatory scientists provide the basic knowledge of Earth systems needed to inform the future health and habitability of our planet.
This means more study and more funding, which is fine; but there is just not enough evidence that man is causing global warming to create massive changes is social policy.
Peter
from: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news/2007/05_14_07.htm
News 05/14/07
Contact: Clare Oh 212-854-5479 or coh@ei.columbia.edu
Climate Swings Have Brought Great CO2 Pulses Up From the Deep Sea
Researchers use sophisticated research vessels to extract deep-sea sediment cores from oceans around the world, allowing them to chart past climate change.
A study released on May 11, 2007 provides some of the first solid evidence that warming-induced changes in ocean circulation at the end of the last Ice Age caused vast quantities of ancient carbon dioxide to belch from the deep sea into the atmosphere. Scientists believe the carbon dioxide (CO2) releases helped propel the world into further warming.
The study, done by researchers at the University of Colorado, Kent State University and Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, appears in the May 10 advance online version of the leading journal Science.
Atmospheric CO2, also produced by burning of fossil fuels, is largely responsible for global warming. However, scientists have known for some time that the gas also goes through natural cycles. By far most of the world’s mobile carbon is stored in the oceans — 40 trillion metric tons, or 15 times more than in air, soil and water combined. But how this vast marine reservoir interacts with the atmosphere has been a subject of debate for the last 25 years.
The study indicates what many scientists have long suspected, but could not prove: sometimes the oceans can release massive amounts of CO2 into the air as they overturn.
"The lesson is that abrupt changes in ocean circulation in the past have affected the oceans’ ability to keep carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere," said geologist Thomas Marchitto of the University of Colorado, a co-lead author. "This could help us understand how that ability might be affected by future global warming."
The researchers found the evidence in a core of Pacific Ocean sediment brought up from 705 meters — about 2,300 feet — off the coast of Baja California, Mexico. The core held the remains of bottom-dwelling protozoa called foraminifera, which take up carbon from surrounding water and use it to build their shells.
The isotope carbon 14 — normally used to date organic remains such as wood and bones — can also be used to date the water in which the foraminifera grew. Going back through layers built up over the past 38,000 years, the researchers found the shells contained expected levels of C14 in all but two brief periods, beginning roughly 18,000 years and 13,000 years ago. That meant the protozoa were using older sources of carbon, long isolated from the atmosphere.
The carbon could come from only one place: upwelling of the deep sea, from depths of 3 kilometers (nearly two miles) or more.
The researchers believe the water came not from the Pacific, but from the faraway Antarctic Ocean — the only part of the world where great upwelling can occur, due to the bottom topography and wind patterns. Most of the rising C02 probably poured out into the air in southern latitudes, but some carbon-rich water traveled on currents at intermediate depths to the north, where the foraminifera recorded its C14 signature. The upwelling and release of this carbon dioxide matches well with rapid warming and rises in atmospheric CO2 shown in glacial ice cores from Antarctica and other far-flung records.
The researchers believe that largely as a result of these episodes, CO2 in the atmosphere went from 190 parts per million (ppm) during glacial times to about 270 ppm, and remained at that level until recently. A similar but much more rapid rise, to 380 ppm, has taken place since the Industrial Revolution — most of it in the last few decades. Both rises almost certainly stoked global warming.
Exactly what caused the upwelling is not clear, but many scientists believe the world was already undergoing a natural warming cycle, possibly due to a slight periodic change in earth’s orbit. This suddenly ended the last Ice Age, in turn changing ocean currents and wind patterns. The hypothesis favored by paper’s authors is that sudden disintegration of northern ice sheets during this initial warming slowed or halted deep Atlantic Ocean circulation. This in turn warmed the Antarctic, causing massive retreats of sea ice and allowing deep Antarctic waters to surface.
Thus, it is possible that the signal detected in the Pacific ultimately originated on the other side of the world. "Once the CO2 started rising, it probably helped the warming process along — but exactly how much, we can’t say," said Robert Anderson, a Lamont-Doherty expert in ocean circulation who was not involved in the study. "And there is still huge uncertainty as to how the oceans will respond to current warming."
Anderson says the study should be a wake-up call to the scientific community to expand studies of the oceans’ relationship to climate change. Lamont-Doherty senior researcher Alexander van Geen, a coauthor of the paper, was chief scientist on the cruise that collected the cores, and has coordinated much research on them since.
The other authors are paleoclimatologists Scott Lehman and Jacqueline Flueckiger at the University of Colorado, and geochemist Joseph Ortiz of Kent State University.
The paper, "Marine radiocarbon evidence for the mechanism of deglacial atmospheric CO2 rise," was posted on Science Xpress on May 10, 2007. Background information on current thinking about ocean circulation and climate is contained in the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, a member of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, is one of the world's leading research centers examining the planet from its core to its atmosphere, across every continent and every ocean. From global climate change to earthquakes, volcanoes, environmental hazards and beyond, Observatory scientists provide the basic knowledge of Earth systems needed to inform the future health and habitability of our planet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)