I guess you’ve still yet to explain how the oceans are warming from below?
Shouldn’t this question be directed at the alarmists? The climate models predicted that global average surface temperatures would have rise by more than the 0.8C observed since 1900. Trenberth’s missing heat is hypothesized as being in the deep oceans. Skeptics tend to state that models are much to extreme, so most, if not all, of recent warming can be explained by natural variations.
I always wondered why geothermal energy works–does that have something to to with this gradient and atmosphere thing and under the ground warmness? 🙂
(/sarc)
KK, they don’t want any facts, sing ’em a lullaby about how wonderful they are, the earth revolves around ’em and they will receive all the achievement trophies they can dream of.
Nice one reminds me of a miners sign, The arrow points down, the caption reads, This way up.
Usually I ingore your posts, but in this case I’m interested in you explaining why the upper levels are warmer than the lower levels of the ocean, since you think thermal warming from the depths is causing the warming.
Also could you explain why subterrainean heat increased at exactly the same time greenhouse gases?
Kinky – you say “heat is coming from Earth’s core to space” but that is not necessarily so, just because there is a thermal gradient.
And the gradient in bore hole measurements is more like 25 deg C / Km – not 1. At 9Km depth in a German bore hole it is about 270C. The reason the gradient is steeper is to do with the specific heat being about a quarter that of the atmosphere, so the gradient in the outer crust is about 4 times that in the atmosphere. But in the mantle the specific heat is far higher, so the gradient (-g/Cp) is far less.
It’s all in my paper “Planetary Core and Surface Temperatures” along with the physics involved.
You are right, the 1 C deg was not correct, I just used a guesstimate from long ago when I was doing a geology subject.
The real rule of thumb may have been 1 F deg per 1000 ft which seems to match the 2K deg per km which I have seen on one web page.
All I did was very rough 4,000 mile radius, converted to metres then temperature gradient 5430 – 18 for delta of 5412 C deg ; Very rough . Comes out at about 0.84 C deg / km
But you are correct, most pages show the gradient as nearer 30 C deg per km and I guess that just relates to the fact that the core temperature is well insulated leading to a fairly uniform internal temp.
This explains the higher gradient in the last little bit of the crust, the lithosphere.
I can recall going down a 4,000 ft deep mine in Broken Hill in a falling cage. According to your comment the temperature would have been surface of 28 C plus 1207 metres at 25per = 30.17 for a total of 58.1 C.
Even allowing for the fact that they must have had ventilation , it seems unlikely that we would have been dealing with an original 58C
1) It’s time to stop being surprised by the things the Left/Green alarmists get up to, whether it’s criminal stuff like Gleick, ad hominems and name calling, blatant data manipulation, suppression of inconvenient data, attempted suppression of free speech, and the rest of it.
It’s what Leftists do.
2) The ‘deficit model’. This is an attitude which says “If only they had the knowledge and understanding of this issue that I do, they would see that I am right.”
It’s a widely discredited notion, as the same facts can produce wide variations in interpretation and response — for example, ask your local Green fanatic what they infer from the Met Office data showing a 17-year pause in global warming.
However, the Green/Left is wedded to the deficit model, so the mere existence of skeptics causes them to infer:
* we are not communicating the ‘settled science’ in the right way
* they are being paid by Big Oil to spread disinformation (‘deniers’)
* they are too selfish (more ‘deniers’)
* they are politically motivated (even more ‘deniers’)
* they are too stupid
They’re right in one thing; there is definitely ‘no debate’ possible with people whose thinking is so constrained and polarised as this.
For a touch of reality on the subject of climate, readers might like to read the following letter, which appeared in the UK’s Guardian newspaper on the 26th May 2011:
“Why do you say climate change could deal a fatal blow to the beleaguered ski industry in Scotland? (1707 v 2011,G2, 20 May)? It is articles like this that could deal the fatal blow. The ski industry is not beleaguered. My business is highly profitable, employing up to 15 technicians, instructors and sales staff. We are currently expanding to create more jobs and more ski-hire facilities. We have a newly developed cross-country ski facility which provided 67 skiable (sic) days in the forest last season and 120 the previous season. We have experienced a continual growth in skier numbers over the last five years, bucking the economic woes of the UK.
William M Wilson, Glenmore Outdoor, Aviemore
I think it’s the typical unthinking throwaway statement on Climate Change near the end of this typically self indulgent & uninformed Gruandian article that the gentleman involved in the allegedly affected to industry is referring to. How Scotland in 2011 compares to 1707
Thanks Joe V – agreed.
I think readers might like to see the comment without reading the whole article, so here it is via the link you’ve helpfully provided:
“2011 Rising temperatures are predicted to raise the sea level around Scotland by up to 60cm over the next 80 years. Snow could become a thing of the past, dealing a fatal blow to the country’s beleaguered ski industry.”
It was Sudden Lower Stratospheric Warming actually. Don’t worry, the Met Office learned about it from Piers Corbyn who predicted both the mid & late January events more than a month and 45 days ahead, respectively.
I guess you’ve still yet to explain how the oceans are warming from below? Hopefully you’l be making a special post on that topic – right?
517
Mrs Nice, I’m not demanding your money for a scheme to change the weather. I don’t have to explain anything.
I guess you still can’t find That Mystery Paper to support your passionate unskeptical faith? Shame eh.
153
You made a claim, but can’t justify it. I’m not asking for money, I’m asking you to stop making stuff up.
75
Shouldn’t this question be directed at the alarmists? The climate models predicted that global average surface temperatures would have rise by more than the 0.8C observed since 1900. Trenberth’s missing heat is hypothesized as being in the deep oceans. Skeptics tend to state that models are much to extreme, so most, if not all, of recent warming can be explained by natural variations.
40
We are asked by an in intellectual vac why oceans are warmed from below.
That’s a hard one!
Let’s see.
The facts
Centre of Earth about 5430 deg C
Approx above sea level ground temp in area 30 degrees either side of equator is about 18 Deg C.
Space is about 1.6 C deg above zero abs.
Wow! Unbelievable.
There is a temperature gradient.
Heat is moving from earths core to space.
Wow.
The gradient works out at about 1 deg C per 1000 metres.
Wow
This is confirmed by deep mines.
They find that for every kilometer of depth the average temperature increases by 1 C deg per 1000 m.
Wow.
We are cooling
Wow.
Oceans are helping to bring this core heat to the surface .
Wow.
I get tired of warmer crap.
Wow. Will this never end now that every eco nutter on Earth has access to the Internet and the learned peer material on sites like the SkS??
KK 🙂
120
I always wondered why geothermal energy works–does that have something to to with this gradient and atmosphere thing and under the ground warmness? 🙂
(/sarc)
30
KK: “Centre of Earth about 5430 deg C”
No it isnt…it “MILLIONS OF DEGREES”…we know that for a fact because AL GORE SAID SO…and he said it ON TV! So there.
91
Just wait till Al Baby starts luring his young on-line gamers into Dropping Reality and pasting his approved ‘Truths’ all over the place for points.
‘Reality Drop’ offers achievements for getting in climate change comment wars
I hope Jo’s got the software to detect these little spam bots at work and give them the help they need.
41
KK, they don’t want any facts, sing ’em a lullaby about how wonderful they are, the earth revolves around ’em and they will receive all the achievement trophies they can dream of.
Nice one reminds me of a miners sign, The arrow points down, the caption reads, This way up.
30
Usually I ingore your posts, but in this case I’m interested in you explaining why the upper levels are warmer than the lower levels of the ocean, since you think thermal warming from the depths is causing the warming.
Also could you explain why subterrainean heat increased at exactly the same time greenhouse gases?
63
Still no takers?
Gee, you were all telling me how stupid I was, yet you can’t explain “Jo’s theory of deeper ocean heat”.
00
Kinky – you say “heat is coming from Earth’s core to space” but that is not necessarily so, just because there is a thermal gradient.
And the gradient in bore hole measurements is more like 25 deg C / Km – not 1. At 9Km depth in a German bore hole it is about 270C. The reason the gradient is steeper is to do with the specific heat being about a quarter that of the atmosphere, so the gradient in the outer crust is about 4 times that in the atmosphere. But in the mantle the specific heat is far higher, so the gradient (-g/Cp) is far less.
It’s all in my paper “Planetary Core and Surface Temperatures” along with the physics involved.
http://principia-scientific.org/publications/PROM/PROM-COTTON_Planetary_Core_and_Surface_Temperatures.pdf
11
Hi Doug
Thanks for the comment.
You are right, the 1 C deg was not correct, I just used a guesstimate from long ago when I was doing a geology subject.
The real rule of thumb may have been 1 F deg per 1000 ft which seems to match the 2K deg per km which I have seen on one web page.
All I did was very rough 4,000 mile radius, converted to metres then temperature gradient 5430 – 18 for delta of 5412 C deg ; Very rough . Comes out at about 0.84 C deg / km
But you are correct, most pages show the gradient as nearer 30 C deg per km and I guess that just relates to the fact that the core temperature is well insulated leading to a fairly uniform internal temp.
This explains the higher gradient in the last little bit of the crust, the lithosphere.
I can recall going down a 4,000 ft deep mine in Broken Hill in a falling cage. According to your comment the temperature would have been surface of 28 C plus 1207 metres at 25per = 30.17 for a total of 58.1 C.
Even allowing for the fact that they must have had ventilation , it seems unlikely that we would have been dealing with an original 58C
Will check yopur post
KK 🙂
10
Deep mines? I worked in shallow mines (approx 10 meters) for many years. The temperature was always around 27 degrees, all year ’round.
10
Two observations:
1) It’s time to stop being surprised by the things the Left/Green alarmists get up to, whether it’s criminal stuff like Gleick, ad hominems and name calling, blatant data manipulation, suppression of inconvenient data, attempted suppression of free speech, and the rest of it.
It’s what Leftists do.
2) The ‘deficit model’. This is an attitude which says “If only they had the knowledge and understanding of this issue that I do, they would see that I am right.”
It’s a widely discredited notion, as the same facts can produce wide variations in interpretation and response — for example, ask your local Green fanatic what they infer from the Met Office data showing a 17-year pause in global warming.
However, the Green/Left is wedded to the deficit model, so the mere existence of skeptics causes them to infer:
* we are not communicating the ‘settled science’ in the right way
* they are being paid by Big Oil to spread disinformation (‘deniers’)
* they are too selfish (more ‘deniers’)
* they are politically motivated (even more ‘deniers’)
* they are too stupid
They’re right in one thing; there is definitely ‘no debate’ possible with people whose thinking is so constrained and polarised as this.
81
It is the Triple Point of Water
Sorry it can’t be that
Alfred
00
For a touch of reality on the subject of climate, readers might like to read the following letter, which appeared in the UK’s Guardian newspaper on the 26th May 2011:
“Why do you say climate change could deal a fatal blow to the beleaguered ski industry in Scotland? (1707 v 2011,G2, 20 May)? It is articles like this that could deal the fatal blow. The ski industry is not beleaguered. My business is highly profitable, employing up to 15 technicians, instructors and sales staff. We are currently expanding to create more jobs and more ski-hire facilities. We have a newly developed cross-country ski facility which provided 67 skiable (sic) days in the forest last season and 120 the previous season. We have experienced a continual growth in skier numbers over the last five years, bucking the economic woes of the UK.
William M Wilson, Glenmore Outdoor, Aviemore
50
I think it’s the typical unthinking throwaway statement on Climate Change near the end of this typically self indulgent & uninformed Gruandian article that the gentleman involved in the allegedly affected to industry is referring to.
How Scotland in 2011 compares to 1707
11
Thanks Joe V – agreed.
I think readers might like to see the comment without reading the whole article, so here it is via the link you’ve helpfully provided:
“2011 Rising temperatures are predicted to raise the sea level around Scotland by up to 60cm over the next 80 years. Snow could become a thing of the past, dealing a fatal blow to the country’s beleaguered ski industry.”
20
Wait, isn’t record snowfall a result of Global Warming ?
11
It was Sudden Lower Stratospheric Warming actually. Don’t worry, the Met Office learned about it from Piers Corbyn who predicted both the mid & late January events more than a month and 45 days ahead, respectively.
20
You assume they want the ski industry to be successful as most of us would want.
Reality is, they don’t. 🙁
51
its ok – i hear all the warmists are heading north for the winter. lookout queensland!!!
11
Great article in theaustralian on the weekend….$28million a yeara department might be merged!.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/in-this-climate-one-departments-not-safe/story-fn59niix-1226588817164
the gravt train; quantas clubs, international business flights, etc. etc. hopeully GONE.
20
Having some fun over at The Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/like-summer-on-steroids-australias-hottest-ever-year-blamed-on-climate-change-with-really-frightening-temperatures-in-store-8519918.html#comment-819273707
01
SO, being humiliated by people pointing out your errors is “fun”, is it?
I guess it takes all sorts…
00