Unfortunately, it appears the array of instruments is biased too much to the smaller northern oceans. New instuments coming online in the southern hemisphere are revealing a shocking underestimation of ocean warming. Published two days ago... http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2389.html
Scientists probably have significantly underestimated how much the world’s oceans have warmed since the 1970s, according to a new study. The finding may force researchers to revise their gauges of some climate change effects, including the rate of sea-level rise. The study, by Paul J. Durack of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and others, found that the underestimation was the result of decades of spotty sampling of water temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere, home to three-fifths of the world’s oceans. Until 2004, when a worldwide system of autonomous floats, called Argo, became operational, there were relatively few temperature measurements south of the Equator. Continue reading the main story RELATED COVERAGE By Degrees: In the Ocean, Clues to ChangeAUG. 11, 2014 While atmospheric warming because of the trapping of heat by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases has most of the public’s attention, the oceans store far more of this heat. The study showed that the amount of heat absorbed by the top 2,200 feet of the oceans from 1970 to the mid-2000s may be as much as 58 percent higher than previously estimated. “We potentially may have missed a fair amount of heat that the ocean has been taking up,” Dr. Durack said.
10 years ago, it was Global Warming that was going to kill us all. Remember that one, guys? WARMING. Now, after a decade of getting wrong, the climatologists are unified in consensus again! CO2 is war......errrrr, cooling the planet! Yes, that's right! Cooling!! 40 years ago, climatologists were convinced the globe was on the brink of the next great mini ice age! They were convinced of it!! From meteorologists who can't predict weather 3 days out better then a coin flip to climatologists who can't figure out if CO2 causes cooling or warming (then cooling...?!), these guys change their minds more then a woman changes her outfit. If climatologists can't predict global temperatures 5 years out, why on earth would anybody trust their predictions 50 or 100 years out? Clearly, they have no idea what they're talking about because their models are incredibly and deeply flawed. Yet we all must suffer the idiots like Ricter and Futurecurrents, because Liberals tie their identity to causes instead of being guided by facts.
Yes, idiots like these guys... American Association for the Advancement of Science "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3 American Chemical Society "Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4 American Geophysical Union "Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5 American Medical Association "Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6 American Meteorological Society "It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7 American Physical Society "The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8 The Geological Society of America "The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9
"the climatologists are unified in consensus again! CO2 is war......errrrr, cooling the planet!" No one thinks that.
It is a modeled result. Here Judith Curry explains that there were 2 studies which both estimated the deep ocean was cooling and the top of the ocean was warming more than they thought.... But... taken together there is not enough warming to explain the missing warming the models predicted. Which is what the study we posted a day or 2 ago explained. http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/05/evidence-of-deep-ocean-cooling/ ---- Quantifying underestimates of long-term upper-ocean warming Paul J. Durack, Peter J. Gleckler, Felix W. Landerer & Karl E. Taylor Affiliations Contributions Corresponding author Nature Climate Change (2014) doi:10.1038/nclimate2389 Received 24 March 2014 Accepted 29 August 2014 Published online 05 October 2014 The global ocean stores more than 90% of the heat associated with observed greenhouse-gas-attributed global warming1, 2, 3, 4. Using satellite altimetry observations and a large suite of climate models, we conclude that observed estimates of 0–700 dbar global ocean warming since 1970 are likely biased low. This underestimation is attributed to poor sampling of the Southern Hemisphere, and limitations of the analysis methods that conservatively estimate temperature changes in data-sparse regions5, 6, 7. We find that the partitioning of northern and southern hemispheric simulated sea surface height changes are consistent with precise altimeter observations, whereas the hemispheric partitioning of simulated upper-ocean warming is inconsistent with observed in-situ-based ocean heat content estimates. Relying on the close correspondence between hemispheric-scale ocean heat content and steric changes, we adjust the poorly constrained Southern Hemisphere observed warming estimates so that hemispheric ratios are consistent with the broad range of modelled results. These adjustments yield large increases (2.2–7.1 × 1022 J 35 yr−1) to current global upper-ocean heat content change estimates, and have important implications for sea level, the planetary energy budget and climate sensitivity assessments.