The Warming Science Commentariat - 7

Fig. 1  SLC Nain (PSMSL stn #1029)

The graphic at Fig. 1 is from PSMSL (there is a link under the graphic).

Fig. 2

It is the nearest tide gauge station, in the PSMSL system, to Nuuk, Greenland, which the other graphs of today's post relate to.

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

The graph at Fig. 2 shows the temperature of ocean water from the surface level down to a depth of about 3,000 meters (~10,000 feet).

Fig. 8

The other graphs (Fig. 3 - Fig. 8) show each relevant depth level as individual lines on individual graphs.
Those individual lines had been displayed as a combined whole (one bowl of spaghetti) in Fig 2.

This should tell us something about the thermal expansion myth (TEM).

In yesterday's post, I alluded to a software module that will travel each of the ups and downs in each of the depth levels, to determine what the net effect is, ultimately, of each change in temperature.

I mean, this is what we want to discern when analyzing the bottom line impact of all of the changes.

I developed a beta software module that works well enough, so, I ran the data on these particular graphs.

That beta module came up with:

warmer = 15 , warmer = 15 , warmer = 15 , warmer = 13 , warmer = 13 , warmer = 16
colder = 16 , colder = 16 , colder = 15 , colder = 14 , colder = 15 , colder = 11

warmer[87] - colder[87] = 0

That is, there were 87 temperature changes within the 6 layers, but, in the end, the net ups and the net downs equaled out.

Like I said, that is an hour's worth of (beta) work.

A few more hours of work, and the exact calculation of the net degree of temperature change (over decades) will be coded.

I am so charged up because they have spouted this stuff without ever having first taken sufficient note of the data foundation upon which such a magnanimous assertion rests.

So, while I am chastening the warming science commentariat, I will also clue them in.

NOTE: I am not directing this at scientists, I am directing it toward the warming science commentariat, or as the mob describes their commentariat, "da mouthpiece."

In this case I am addressing the one which claims to speak for the scientists.

Big difference.

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

---

---