Google the following for an interesting update on the ocean heat content measurements.
"The Mystery of Global Warming's Missing Heat"
Summary:
Ocean apparently not warming down to a depth of 3000 feet over the last 4 years.
But sea-levels are continuing to rise quickly. Some rise is coming from quicker melting of Greenland and Antarctica, but they can't account for all the rise. Either oceans are warming below 3000 feet (deeper than the measurements are taken) or there is a problem with the temperature data, or there is something the scientists don't know...
OK here's leftfield solution - suppose the planet has cooled, it will have slightly reduced it's surface area so oceans would be deeper and the heat lost would have passed into the atmosphere causing recent atmospheric warming.
If I can take a stance further left the SOMisplacement! All the new ocean has covered loads & loads of pebbles(try dropping one in a glass of water, it works)
If I can take a stance further left the SOMBig Grinisplacement! All the new ocean has covered loads & loads of pebbles(try dropping one in a glass of water, it worksSmile)
Man that makes no sence at all
Watch where you put colons poeple(SOM : Displacement )
All the new ocean has covered loads & loads of pebbles(try dropping one in a glass of water, it works.
You may have a point there muf. Although an ice shelf is supposed to be supported by sea-water displacement and not cause any extra displacement on its collapse, the ice shelves appear to be crumbling under their own weight due to 'lack of support' more than 'melting'. Especially in Antarctica. There must surely also be some similar effect in the Arctic.
Hey suricat, ice is probably the weirdest substance on the planet( I wouldn't trust it ) but talking of water displacement on a global scale, surely, any ocean volumes would have to be 'best guesses' at least, which would make 'sea levels; spurious?
Satellite measurements of sea level are pretty accurate. It's a bit complicated because the sea level is not actually level! Significant local variations are caused by tides, winds and air pressure (obvious), but also variations in gravity, rates of evaporation, salt concentration and probably a few other things. But they seem reasonably happy that they can measure the current trend of 3mm per year rise reasonably accurately.
Off on my hols for a couple of weeks. Of course, being concerned about the environment it's a sustainable holiday a short cycle ride away, and I'll be helping in the Quorn harvest and making bricks out of used shopping bags
suricat, we've discussed at length UV s interaction with earth, and it would seem that science has kept pace with us. And it would seem to me that science is driven not, by answers, but, by asking the right questions!So I'll ask this one. What happens [after] the sea/ocean bed has absorbed what is left of the UV rays to the water directly above?
I'm not sure what you are asking muf, but the action of UVb is mostly one of 'warming', 'chemical alteration' and 'bleaching'. It all depends on what it is that receives it, so this also will affect the 'aftermath' of its passing.
I'm not sure what else to say. This is the $64,000 question!
I'm not sure what you are asking muf, but the action of UVb is mostly one of 'warming', 'chemical alteration' and 'bleaching'. It all depends on what it is that receives it, so this also will affect the 'aftermath' of its passing.
I'm not sure what else to say. This is the $64,000 question!
Best regards, suricat.
I'm only guessing suricat, but I'd think that the ocean bed isn't abundant in UV reflecting materials so we'd end up with some kind of mechanism for the heating of the water on the bottom. Physics dictates that this water will expand(thus raising the sea level) Also, undisturbed, this sea water will take a while to cool down no?
How about. Lower insolation due to solar UV minimum has caused an atmospheric temperature drop leading to 'de-watering' of the atmosphere to maintain a constant relative humidity (RH)?
Is this why ocean levels continue to rise during 'cooling'?
But if the water is below 3.98 deg C then warming it will cause it to shrink
SOM this figure is when H2O is at its most dense, above and below this mark, it becomes less dense! Saying that, water on the ocean bed isn't exactly what we'd call H2O,(I wouldn't drink it anyhow)
Forgot to add, this is at surface pressure too!! Have also found out that we(us) don't even know the temp. of the sea at the bottom of the ocean, and that all we can do at the moment in extrapolate the temp from what we do know(kinda makes you feel humble don't it )
In" Antarctic temperature trends", suricat mentioned that ,WV`s infrared frequency span over laps with the frequency span of CO2, does this imply that clouds by removing water from the air lessen the intensity of the infrared being reflected back to the oceans/earth surface (away from the polar regions)?
In" Antarctic temperature trends", suricat mentioned that ,WV`s infrared frequency span over laps with the frequency span of CO2, does this imply that clouds by removing water from the air lessen the intensity of the infrared being reflected back to the oceans/earth surface (away from the polar regions)?
Although you seem to be looking for a verification of things I've mentioned, you don't seem to have a reply yet so I'll try to expand on this.
First of all, clouds don't remove water from the air until the water in them precipitates (it rains out), but the water droplets in them can keep changing phase between water and vapour and back and forth, until, the water eventually precipitates out as rain (even the 'rain' can evaporate again before it hits the ground). So clouds can be thought of as 'thermal stores' for recent warming events and use the 'latent heat' from phase changes to 'buffer' local temperatures.
The water droplets in clouds have about the same 'radiative transmission' factor as water vapour, but because of their size and shape effectively scatter 'all' radiation, both 'outgoing infrared' and 'incoming insolation'. Clouds are an effective 'back-scattering' barrier, but their efficiency in this is altered by their altitude (and, of course, depth or thickness).
So I surmise that, No. Clouds don't "lessen the intensity of the infrared being reflected back to the oceans/earth surface" if by "removing water from the air" you mean 'dehumidify'. The 'relative humidity' within a cloud is always at 'saturation point', or very close to it, by nature. If anything, clouds either enhance this IR reflection back to Earth, or 'store' some of it as latent heat.
isplacement! All the new ocean has covered loads & loads of pebbles(try dropping one in a glass of water, it works
