This is the final Zone which had sufficient data with which to generate graphs.
As you can see in Fig. 7, it is a tough area from which to gather data.
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Zones A7, A8, and A9 give us a picture depicting some of what is happening around the coast of Antarctica, as well as what is happening to the ocean water way down under the sea surface there.
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
As said in a recent comment by Randy, the graphs are similar but not exact from Zone to Zone, even though these Zones are next to one another.
The only things separating them are imaginary latitude and longitude lines, which do nothing real to separate the actual ocean water.
In reality it is one body of ocean water: The Southern Ocean, so the graphs have a similarity to them.
But, since there were 521 separate "cruises" during which they collected "station" data at 55,778 station locations, from which they took 2,942,762 usable temperature readings (at various depths), we need something to arrange them in manageable sizes, hence the three Zones.
I downloaded the data from a NASA site (see Databases Galore - 13) with the intention of continuing to falsify "the bathtub model hypothesis" along with its partner in crime "the thermal expansion is 'a' or 'the' major factor in global sea level change" hypothesis.
Professor Mitrovica of Harvard had stated in a couple of videos that the "bathtub model," as well as the "global mean average sea level rise" notions, were sources of blindness to the realities of sea level change (see videos at Peak Sea Level - 2, and at the end of this post).
I did it that way because I wanted to discuss, in Dredd Blog series which focused on a particular aspect, the different concepts which these data suggested.
In future posts I will look at Zones from other database sources to see if the deep subsurface ocean, in less remote locations, follows a similar pattern (the sea-saw or "saw tooth" pattern of ups and downs).
I hope you learned from this exercise as I did.
Check out the previous post in this series here. Professor Jerry Mitrovica:
09:15 using global average mean sea level rise has led us astray for a hundred years 15:20 taking the average [sea level] is assuming something ... it assumes what we call the "bathtub model" ... sea level rises uniformly ... that leads to problems ... the European problem ... this is completely wrong ... sea level does not rise uniformly ... not even close
It would seem that we can agree that most ocean water is below the ocean surface.
The surface where most sunlight impacts upon the ocean.
Thus, the upper level near the ocean surface, one would assume, is where the most direct solar induced thermal expansion takes place (at least according to our senses at first blush).
But, what about all that water in near-total-darkness down there where "the Sun don't shine"?
Yes, down there where "there is rarely any significant light", down there "beyond 200 meters" ?
The NOAA graphic at Fig. 1 has a link to the general specifics indicating that most of the ocean depths are void of sunlight (cf. the incredible depth).
Do these depths and the temperatures there have anything to do with the see-saw patterns of sea level change?
Fig. 4
Remember that in a previous post I wrote "The see-saw phenomenon in the tide gauge records of SLC is a very normal phenomenon" (Questionable "Scientific" Papers)."
Fig. 5
Generally, this has been attributed to ice sheet degradation.
You know, the phenomenon which generates melt water as the major cause of sea level change, withthe Dredd Blog notion of "ghost-water" as the second major cause of sea level change (The Ghost-Water Constant, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7).
Fig. 6
But now let's take a look at what happens where most of the ocean water is (way below the surface).
Fig. 7 All Depths
There, a strange mystery lurks and works.
Anywhere any ocean water is at a temperature below 4 degrees C (adjusted for salinity), a certain "magic" happens.
That is, when that ocean water is either warmed or cooled further, it will expand.
Yes, whether circumstances warm it or cool it, at any location or time when it is at 4 degrees C, it will expand, period (The Warming Science Commentariat - 2, at Section IV).
However, if it is warmed when its temperature is above 4 degrees C, it will only expand, never contract.
More magic: when it is below 4 degrees C, say 0.5 degrees C, it will contract (shrink) when warmed until it reaches 4 degrees C, at which time further warming will cause it to expand.
As you can see from Fig. 1, most ocean water is at a temperature below 4 degrees C.
And as you can see by Fig. 2 - Fig. 7, massive amounts of that ocean water changes temperature from time to time.
Those changes are both toward 4 degrees C as well as away from 4 degrees C.
Is, then, the see-saw effect (the up and down nature of sea level change) contributed to by those deep water temperature changes?
I am not talking about the sea level change trends, which follow an upward trend in some areas but follow a downward trend in other areas (Proof of Concept , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).
Fig. 8 (click to expand)
No, I am talking about short term variations in sea level recorded for hundreds of years at PSMSL official tide gauge stations around the world (Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level)
Notice the graphic at Fig. 8 .
It points out that warming will cause vast areas to shrink as cooling causes vast areas to expand.
Yes, that happens even down there where the Sun does not shine.
Fig. 9 (click to expand)
How that warming and/or cooling takes place will be discussed in future posts of this series.
Let me add that the percentage of expansion/contraction per volume is not much (Fig. 9).
Again then, it is time for the thermal expansion commentariat to reel it in and get real about this.
The only influences I can think of who would want us to believe that sea level rise is caused only by the Sun is Oil-Qaeda.
The warming commentariat (The Warming Science Commentariat, 2, 3, 4) in the past has proclaimed that "thermal expansion" has been "the" (or "a") major cause of sea level rise (SLR) since the Industrial Revolution began circa 1750.
I have hypothesized that their assertion, as a falsifiable hypothesis, is simply false (ibid).
One of the Romper Room types of experiments which they typically show is some kid filling a flask with water, then letting the flask sit a while to, perhaps, reach room temperature (no bias! mmm kay?).
Then, the kid uses a magic marker to place a line on the flask at the top of the water column.
Next comes the Bunsen Burner, which is used to heat the column of water in the flask.
After a bit of time, a new line is drawn on the flask at the top of the water column.
Voila, the second line is higher than the first one, hence "water always expands when it is heated."
To stretch the fantasy a bit further, this rap goes on to assert that because of global warming the ocean is warming more that it once did.
Ocean warming is therefore "a" or "the" major reason why global mean average sea level is rising (A Green Solar Example).
Fig. 3
The problem is that these experiments are fundamentally false because water expands or contracts when heated or cooled ... DEPENDING ON ITS TEMPERATURE at the time when that heating or cooling is applied to it (The Warming Science Commentariat - 2).
The oceans, like for instance The Great Lakes, generally consist of water layers that have different average temperatures at different depth layers.
For instance, depending on the latitude of a given ocean, the surface is warmer than the depths ... or the surface of the ocean is colder than the deeper parts.
Fig. 4
That is, if Fig. 1 was a graphic of the ocean at the Equator, the water temperatures at each layer would generally vary from warmest at the top, to colder and colder further and further down.
However, the opposite is generally the situation in areas near Antarctica.
The temperatures would be colder at the surface, and generally would be warmer at deeper layers.
So, depending on the temperature at the time of application, the water would expand or contract when sunlight or other sources of heat fell upon it, or it would expand or contract even when cooling sources fell upon it.
Ocean water (i.e. non-pure water) varies with chemical alteration (e.g. salinity), but holds to the same principles (see Fig. 2, and be sure to read Section IVhere).
The "take home" from this is that preceding from a 4 degrees C thermometer reading, if you heat the water to 5 degrees C, that water will expand, or if you cool it to 3 degrees C, that same water will also expand.
The graph at Fig. 7 is Fig. 2 - Fig. 6 combined into one graph to show how the temperature increases and decreases can negate one another in terms of thermal expansion vs. thermal contraction.
In the "warming science commentariat" there has been no satisfactory explanation of the actual dynamics of thermal expansion.
At least not satisfactory or robust enough to be competent explanations.
Thus, the haphazard use of the bogus bathtub model fused with the utterly incomplete thermal expansion model have been presenting a half-baked scenario to the public.
That gloss-over acts as pabulum, or as a sedative.
Another illustration of the insufficiency of the presentations of layers of ocean water at different depths, and their intermingling at times but not at others, is seen in a previous post:
In one sense, it's [El Niño is] like an iceberg; most of it is submerged, but part of it sticks out above the sea's surface, as the wedge floats in the surrounding ocean. Partly because warm water is less dense than cool water, and also partly because El Niño waters are less salty than normal
Fig. 8
seawater. (It's always raining over an El Niño, and the rainwater dilutes the sea.) Both of these conditions contribute to buoyancy. A sharp temperature and density change—called the thermocline—floats about 100 meters below the surface, and marks the bottom of this warm "iceberg." The top layer of water may protrude 150 or more centimeters above sea level. This isn't so hard to picture if you think about tides, which also pile water up above sea level.
Finally, other data sources have shown (Fig. 8) that under the Antarctic ice shelf the warmest temperatures, for some reason, are at about 400m down (Is A New Age Of Pressure Upon Us? - 8).
Let's not reject the obvious, which is that Greenland, Antarctica, and non-ice-sheet glacial melt water (enhanced with ghost-water), are the two major contributors in sea level change dynamics (The Ghost-Water Constant, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7).
The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.
