Skip to comments.
135 Years of Records Reveals Deep Ocean Warming
scientificamerican.com ^
| 1 April 2012
| David Biello
Posted on 04/01/2012 9:40:29 PM PDT by smokingfrog
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-63 next last
To: SunkenCiv
I’m glad it’s still above -2 degrees C, give or take a pinch of salt.
41
posted on
04/01/2012 11:09:29 PM PDT
by
BIGLOOK
To: FrankR; All
The ocean currents are in constant movement and variations that small mean nothing.
Perpetual Ocean
42
posted on
04/01/2012 11:16:54 PM PDT
by
rottndog
(Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
To: smokingfrog
In 1872, how did they obtain an accurate temperature measurement at 900 meters?
The instrument had to be pulled back on ship to read, correct?
At the very least, that means it spent 1 or 2 minutes in progressively warmer water.
Were temperatures read on deck in hot summer sunshine?
Were they read in freezing winter winds?
Has anyone rebuilt the 1872 instrument and tested it against the exquisitely precise 2012 instruments?
To: SaraJohnson
It was very serious when humanists moved into business and science departments of University and culturally cleansed western ethics. Now it is realitivity and scientific process means nil. They always controled the soft sciences and they made no sense but everyone knew they were socialist political activists. Now they own hard science and so the Wests progress will decline accordingly.Excellent point.
44
posted on
04/01/2012 11:23:40 PM PDT
by
VeniVidiVici
(The Democrat Ku Klux Klan is alive and well nowadays as the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus)
To: smokingfrog
there are obviously too many fish in the ocean putting out much too much body heat - get yer fishin boats boys, we gotta go save the planet !
45
posted on
04/02/2012 12:17:12 AM PDT
by
blueplum
To: smokingfrog
0.1 degrees 100 years ago?
i’m going with measurement error
46
posted on
04/02/2012 1:03:59 AM PDT
by
sten
(fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
To: Doe Eyes
47
posted on
04/02/2012 1:13:06 AM PDT
by
SatinDoll
(No Foreign Nationals as our President!)
To: Publius6961
Isn’t SA owned by Germans?
48
posted on
04/02/2012 2:17:49 AM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
(Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
To: zeestephen
In 1872, how did they obtain an accurate temperature measurement at 900 meters? The instrument had to be pulled back on ship to read, correct? At the very least, that means it spent 1 or 2 minutes in progressively warmer water. Were temperatures read on deck in hot summer sunshine? Were they read in freezing winter winds?Those questions would not have mattered, since they would have been using simple but very accurate max/min mercury thermometers of the kind still used by gardeners in greenhouses. These have pins sealed into the u-shaped glass tube which are pushed by the two extremities of the mercury column. The pins stay at the maximum and minimum positions reached until reset by a magnet after a reading has been taken.
This would give a measurement of the coldest temperature reached in that sounding: but of course the coldest temperature would not necessarily be at the greatest depth. To check that would need repeated soundings at the same location, but at progressively reducing depths. Which, knowing the thoroughness of Victorian scientists, I've little doubt they did. I'd be wary, too, of underestimating the accuracy of Victorian scientific instruments.
To: smokingfrog
Isn’t the Challenger Deep, deepest part of the Marianas Trench, named after the British ship Challenger? I remember watching a show on History Channel, “How the Earth was Made” about the trench and the work the Brits did on the late 1800’s measuring the ocean, discovering the depth of the trench with a rope and an iron weight.
50
posted on
04/02/2012 3:08:40 AM PDT
by
submarinerswife
(Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results~Einstein)
To: smokingfrog
OOPS I meant realizing that the trench depth was beyond measuringbecause they ran out of rope.
51
posted on
04/02/2012 3:14:04 AM PDT
by
submarinerswife
(Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results~Einstein)
To: Winniesboy
Great answer, much of it brand new to me.
Thank you.
To: Doe Eyes
Was the 135 y.o. equipment calibrated before using its numbers? Was the same methodology, dates and locations used for the readings? If not the comparison IS meaningless. The fact that it is reported as “135 years of records” is a clue-to-the-skew. It is in fact two years of records using wholly different equipment and methodologies. Ergo it is nonsense.
53
posted on
04/02/2012 3:40:14 AM PDT
by
Justa
To: blueplum
54
posted on
04/02/2012 5:16:00 AM PDT
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
To: submarinerswife
Isnt the Challenger Deep, deepest part of the Marianas Trench, named after the British ship Challenger? I remember watching a show on History Channel, How the Earth was Made about the trench and the work the Brits did on the late 1800s measuring the ocean, discovering the depth of the trench with a rope and an iron weight.Yes, that's the one. This was one of the many projects devised by the Admiralty to keep the Royal Navy occupied, and its brightest minds engaged, during the hundred years after the end of the Napoleonic Wars in which it had undisputed command of the high seas.
To: Doe Eyes
If the 0.1 increase "at depth" is real, it means that the earth is sequestering heat in the deep ocean where it is gone forever (i.e. a thousand years or so). Think about what would happen if that water, now warmed from 1.0C to 1.1C (just above freezing) came back to the surface. It would cool the atmosphere much more than "global warming" from CO2 could ever warm it.
IOW, any increase in the deep ocean temperature is a good thing, it means that CO2 warming is negated.
56
posted on
04/02/2012 5:46:25 AM PDT
by
palmer
(Before reading this post, please send me $2.50)
To: smokingfrog
Any readings that did not fit the desired model after 1950 were discarded...
57
posted on
04/02/2012 7:14:53 AM PDT
by
JimRed
(Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
To: smokingfrog
This is ridiculous. The temperature readings from Challenger are of no use in any scientific enquiry. They are talking about 260 sets of data points, separated by what amount of time? What time of year? Based on what accuracy of the readings? If they’d taken a reading at the height of el-nino we might now be reading that ocean temps had dropped significantly. Oh wait. No we wouldn’t. It doesn’t fit the neo-luddite narrative.
58
posted on
04/02/2012 7:25:41 AM PDT
by
zeugma
(Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
To: DB
Were the thermometers in use at that time even remotely that accurate? Did they have 0.1 degree C resolution? Especially one that could be lowered to 900 meters and brought back to the surface to read... Worth repeating.
59
posted on
04/03/2012 6:01:22 PM PDT
by
Rocky
(REPEAL IT!)
To: smokingfrog
60
posted on
04/03/2012 6:32:00 PM PDT
by
Rocky
(REPEAL IT!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-63 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson