Politicspoliticslittleiceagehampersglobalwarmingmagic

Sat Jan 5, 2019, 08:58 PM

If the ocean refuses to warm as quickly as continually predicted, find something unique to blame...

The 'Little Ice Age' hundreds of years ago is STILL cooling the bottom of Pacific, researchers find

As much of the ocean responds to the rising temperatures of today’s world, the deep, dark waters at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean appear to be doing the exact opposite.

A Harvard study has found that parts of the deep Pacific may be getting cooler as the result of a climate phenomenon that occurred hundreds of years ago.

Around the 17th century, Earth experienced a prolonged cooling period dubbed the Little Ice Age that brought chillier-than-average temperatures to much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Though it’s been centuries since this all played out, researchers say the deep Pacific appears to lag behind the waters closer to the surface, and is still responding to the Little Ice Age.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6558285/Little-Ice-Age-hundreds-years-ago-cooling-bottom-Pacific-researchers-find.html

15 replies, 416 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Gamle-ged (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2019, 09:08 PM

1. Wait, they just discovered this?

I thought scientists already had a comprehensive knowledge of all things weather around the globe.

I thought they proved that via consensus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 12:17 PM

9. If the science is settled, why are we even spending money on these studies?

Wouldn’t the money be better spent on feeding hungry people? Please, someone think of the children!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DavesNotHere (Reply #9)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 12:36 PM

10. Grant money and federal dollars feed the scientists' chillun

And also pay to fly them to climate change conferences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #10)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 12:49 PM

11. Yes, but why are they studying something when they already

Know how it works? The science is settled. And whenever you don’t like the way money is spent, I believe you’re required to calculate it in terms of how many people it would feed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DavesNotHere (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 12:54 PM

12. They need the money to come up with more tipping points and doomsday scenarios

in order to make climate change even scarier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2019, 09:14 PM

2. Yet they call Trump a liar?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2019, 09:26 PM

3. So this really really really slow convection process is why the ocean isn't boiling today....got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 08:14 AM

4. And people wonder why science is in such disgrace in America?

They have no evidence that todays cooling is the result of the events that brought on the little ice age!

Secular science needs to remove their heads from their butts, stop thinking their equations answer everything and stick their heads out the window for a change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 09:04 AM

5. Here is the article and the paper.

Just in case some people don't want to take the Daily Mail as a good source.
They didn't even link it.

https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2019/01/long-memory-of-pacific-ocean

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6422/70

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 09:32 AM

6. In the Harvard.edu link...

HMS Challenger, a three-masted wooden sailing ship originally designed as a British warship, was used for the first modern scientific expedition to explore the world’s ocean and seafloor. During the expedition from 1872 to 1876, thermometers were lowered into the ocean depths and more than 5,000 temperature measurements were logged.

“We screened this historical data for outliers and considered a variety of corrections associated with pressure effects on the thermometer and stretching of the hemp rope used for lowering thermometers,” said Huybers.

The researchers then compared the HMS Challenger data to the modern observations and found warming in most parts of the global ocean, as would be expected due to the warming planet over the 20th Century, but cooling in the deep Pacific at a depth of around two kilometers depth.

- - - - -

"... screened this historical data for outliers and considered a variety of corrections..." and afterwards they "...
found warming in most parts of the global ocean..."

Screening 150-year-old data for outliers (eliminating what you decide to BE outliers) and considering a variety of corrections (and then making what you insist ARE corrections) will surely give you the end results you want, if you are inclined to WANT a particular result BEFORE the screening and correcting...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 03:46 PM

14. No. That's explained in the paper.

Our focus is to test the model prediction of deep-Pacific cooling. Therefore, we guard against observational biases that would predispose results toward such a trend. In particular, we adjust Challenger temperatures to be 0.04°C cooler per kilometer of depth in keeping with a previously used correction for the effects of compression (18, 19). Another concern is that the rope used for measurements may not have paid out entirely in the vertical, causing depths to be overestimated. But comparing Challenger reports of ocean depth against modern bathymetry (20) indicates that, if anything, depths are underestimated, possibly because the hemp rope used aboard the Challenger stretched (fig. S4). We apply no further depth corrections because underestimates would only bias our analysis toward showing greater warming. The exception is in the Southern Ocean, where strong currents are expected to cause greater horizontal deflection of the line (18); data south of 45°S are therefore excluded. Finally, the max-min thermometer used on the Challenger would have been biased in regions with vertical temperature inversions. To mitigate the influence of such reversals, we also exclude the 164 data points that are located in temperature inversions in modern climatology (21), leaving a total of 3212 observations.

And in the article you can click the references and see why they did what they did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #14)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 04:05 PM

15. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 10:16 AM

7. It's almost as if the environment is governed my innumerable phenomena we can neither

fully account for nor control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 10:27 AM

8. But we MUST believe if the Warmist claim of 97% of scientists agree on.. SOMETHING or other...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gamle-ged (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 01:06 PM

13. Well, the last big "warm up", gave us the Great Lakes and Chicago

Sorry about the Chicago thing, started out OK but the Dims took over in the 19th Century and still wont go away.

The Warm Up melted a mile plus thick glacier, dug out the great lakes and created the St. Lawrence seaway to drain the lakes into the Atlantic.

In fact, they say that the glacier, at one time between the 4 ice ages, was actually almost 2 miles thick.

When the Climate Change alarmists are freaking about how we won't be able to grow wheat or corn in Kansas ... how come no one ever asks them how many acres of now frozen Tundra will be tillable for crops when it warms up?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticslittleiceagehampersglobalwarmingmagic