Saturday, January 27, 2018

Questionable "Scientific" Papers - 17

"Catnip, the bottom is the other way."
I. Use The Best Sources

The World Ocean Database (WOD) is a premiere database of in situ ocean measurements, made by scientific researchers around the globe:
"The World Ocean Database (WOD) is the World's largest publicly available uniform format quality controlled ocean profile dataset. Ocean profile data are sets of measurements of an ocean variable at a single geographic location within a short (minutes to hours) temporal period in some portion of the water column from the surface to the bottom. To be considered a profile for the WOD, there must be more than a single depth/variable pair. Multiple profiles at the same location from the same set of instruments is an oceanographic cast.

There are more than 13 million oceanographic casts in the WOD 2013 (WOD13) initial release, from the second voyage of Captain Cook (1772) to the modern Argo floats (end of 2012).

Ocean variables in the WOD13 include temperature, salinity, oxygen, nutrients, tracers, and biological variables such as plankton and chlorophyll.

Quality control procedures are documented and performed on each cast, the results included as flags on each measurement."
(Data dot Gov, emphasis added). The WOD folk even provide robust documentation with that data, including an online manual (WOD Manual).

Within that manual you will find a complete list of variables and variable codes at Table 3 (WOD Manual @ Page 9; PDF version @ page 19).

Today's post is about the reason why there is no variable for "heat content" in that list of crucial variables.

But there is a variable for Temperature (Variable Code #1), and heat is temperature, right?

No, temperature and heat are not the same thing (Difference: Heat v Temp, Difference Wiki, Heat and Heat v Temperature, Heat vs. Temperature).

II. Measurements of "Heat Content"

Scientists in China have stated that 2017 was the warmest ocean ever (2017 Sees Warmest Ocean on Record).

Some in the U.S. commentariat (The Warming Science Commentariat, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11) evidently interpreted "warmest" in Chinese to mean "hottest" in English (Oceans During 2017 Were the Hottest on Record).

A commenter on that hot threat associated "heat content" with thermal expansion, an unfortunate but common misunderstanding (On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27).

In situ temperature (T), salinity (Sp), and pressure (P) measurements (not heat content) are the "coin of the realm" for computing thermal expansion (TEOS-10, The Layered Approach To Big Water - 3, On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction - 16, Questionable "Scientific" Papers - 12).

In fact, the heat content is not necessary to know in order to calculate thermal expansion and/or contraction (The Art of Making Thermal Expansion Graphs).

The ARGO floats which the Chinese scientists used do not have a calorimeter on board with which to measure heat content (ARGO).

Those ARGO floats measure temperature and salinity: "At typically 10-day intervals, the floats pump fluid into an external bladder and rise to the surface over about 6 hours while measuring temperature and salinity" (ibid, emphasis added).

III. The Paper

The statement of Will Rogers ("All I know is just what I read in the papers") is not the full story, but ("All I know is just what I read in the papers, and that's an alibi for my ignorance") is the full story.

We can trust, but we must at some point also verify (The Pillars of Knowledge: Faith and Trust?).

So, when I read "the paper" (instead of simply trusting someone's interpretation of it), I took (among others) the following  notes:
Title: "2017 was the Warmest Year on Record for the Global Ocean
ADVANCES IN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES, VOL. 34, MARCH 2018, 261–263 ..."

Authorship; "... according to an updated Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences ... ocean analysis ..."

"The oceans in the upper 2000 m ..."

"The results support the provisional announcement by the World
Meteorological Organization in November 2017 that 'Global
ocean heat content in 2017 to date has been at or near record
high levels' ...”
...
"The IAP provides an observation-based ocean temperature analysis from the sea surface down to a depth of 2000 m, available from the year 1940 ..."
(Paper at Springer, p. 261-262, emphasis added). What this means is that they relied on data from about half of the ocean (median depth is about 3,688 meters) to determine their conclusion.

To me, that is insufficient to speak for the whole ocean, especially when the coldest portion was not measured (Questionable Scientific Papers, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16).

IV. Conclusion

Denialists are always looking for chinks in our armor, which they call "climate porn" (Pole Dancing In The Lab).

We ought not to make it easy, or even easier, for them.

The previous post in this series is here.

Friday, January 26, 2018

On The More Robust Sea Level Computation Techniques - 8

Fig. 1
In the previous post of this series I indicated that I would be adding a changes-only graph-view to the RLR view: "One thing I have yet to finish is the anomaly change pattern (patterns without the RLR range of values)".

I finished that work so they are presented in today's graphs.

The graph at Fig. 1 shows the individual sea level change (SLC) that has taken place in the Southern and Northern Hemispheres as recorded by all PSMSL tide gauge stations located in each of those hemispheres (1,226 stations in the N. hemisphere, and 256 stations in the S. Hemisphere).

Fig. 2
As you can see, the two hemispheres were quite different in the years prior to WW II, but they follow a closer-together and similar-looking track thereafter.
Fig. 3

Fig. 4
I conformed the satellite records (1993-2017) to fit with the tide gauge records in order to show how the Satellite GMSL pattern comports with the tide gauge record pattern.
Fig. 5

They show the same trend.

In the graph at Fig. 2 I added the previously used "Golden 23 WOD Zones" (G23) just for comparison with the new hemispheric look.

Those G23 stations track higher than the hemispheric and satellite records do, because they do not use the sea level fall areas (see Proof of Concept, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).

(Sea level fall near large ice sheets and glacier fields is a factor that causes the hemispheric and satellite record averages to be low, because as sea level falls there that water flows toward the equator where it causes "ghost sea level rise").

I also added the satellite data to Fig. 2, which has been recorded since 1993 (when that specific technology began to be used).

And finally, the average of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres has also been added to Fig. 2.

In the graph at Fig. 3 the satellite and G23 records are removed, leaving a clearer picture of the PSMSL tide gauge records for each hemisphere as well as those two hemispheres averaged together.

The remaining graphs (Fig. 4Fig. 5, and Fig. 6a - Fig. 6c) continue with patterns that make it easier to see the difference in the hemispheres, G23, and the satellite patterns.

Fig. 6a
Fig. 6b
Fig. 6c
The bottom line is that sea level rise is accelerating, as is sea level fall, because the ice sheets and glaciers are seriously melting.

The water released into the oceans is making its way toward the equator, and is deforming the ocean bottom, which is a serious threat (You Are Here - 6).

Yes, a serious threat that is being under-reported in the corporate main stream media and in the scientific journals:
"I suspect the existence of what I call the `John Mercer effect'. Mercer (1978) suggested that global warming from burning of fossil fuels could lead to disastrous disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet, with a sea level rise of several meters worldwide. This was during the era when global warming was beginning to get attention from the United States Department of Energy and other science agencies. I noticed that scientists who disputed Mercer, suggesting that his paper was alarmist, were treated as being more authoritative.

It was not obvious who was right on the science, but it seemed to me, and I believe to most scientists, that the scientists preaching caution and downplaying the dangers of climate change fared better in receipt of research funding. Drawing attention to the dangers of global warming may or may not have helped increase funding for relevant scientific areas, but it surely did not help individuals like Mercer who stuck their heads out. I could vouch for that from my own experience. After I published a paper (Hansen et al 1981) that described likely climate effects of fossil fuel use, the Department of Energy reversed a decision to fund our research, specifically highlighting and criticizing aspects of that paper at a workshop in Coolfont, West Virginia and in publication (MacCracken 1983).

I believe there is a pressure on scientists to be conservative. Papers are accepted for publication more readily if they do not push too far and are larded with caveats. Caveats are essential to science, being born in skepticism, which is essential to the process of investigation and verification. But there is a question of degree. A tendency for `gradualism' as new evidence comes to light may be ill-suited for communication, when an issue with a short time fuse is concerned."
(On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction - 8, quoting Dr. J. Hansen). That reticence is more reminiscent of political thinking than it is of scientific thinking.

The previous post in this series is here.

Thursday, January 25, 2018

You Are Here - 6

Fig. 1 Ring of Fire
The doomsday clock, like the drumming rabbit, keeps on ticking closer to midnight (Doomsday Clock).

In an "unrelated" crescendo the Ring of Fire is also acting up (Fig. 1).

Whether these are fateful, existential eventualities, or simply coincidences, they converge in an area where most of the melt water from Greenland and Antarctica is ending up (The Ghost-Water Constant, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).

That added volume and weight of water is bending and deforming the crust of the Earth (Ocean Bottom Deforming).

Regular readers and I have been expecting and observing this convergence to be a problem  (Is A New Age Of Pressure Upon Us?, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,11, 12, 13, 14).
Fig. 2 Two Hundred Times Worse

Especially since the scope of the amount of water that will end up there is unimaginably huge (Fig. 2).

Eventually, two hundred times the current weight of water pressing on the ocean floor could be concentrated in the area of the Ring of Fire (Fig. 1);.

For years Dredd Blog has been pointing out that water is moving from "Point A to Point B" and that is not a good thing for current civilization (The Gravity of Sea Level Change, 2, 3, 4; NASA Busts The Ghost).

And all of this is happening at a time when denial-ism is at an apex (A few minutes ago on MTP Daily, Chuck Todd argued that we should lose the Doomsday Clock).

There is also something profoundly wrong with the United States of America’s system of government, which is in among other things, in retrogression (American democracy is failing).

One has to wonder why people don't get the fact that we cannot go backwards in time by twisting the knobs on our wrist watch (Convergence - Fear of Death Syndrome).

Not even if we know that the past was better than the future is going to be (Where Have We Been?).

The previous post in this series is here.

Tangled up in News ...




Wednesday, January 24, 2018

On The More Robust Sea Level Computation Techniques - 7

Fig. 1
I recently decided to drop the "golden" from the method of selecting WOD zones (using a sample number of locations).

That "golden" description is an apt description, an efficient practice, and a worthwhile technique.

However, using hemisphere grouping may work better in this age of Oil-Qaeda induced climate-science mistrust (Humble Oil-Qaeda).

In place of golden locations, I have decided to use only three categories (Northern Hemisphere, Southern Hemisphere, and Both Hemispheres averaged together).

Fig. 2
Additionally, improvements have been made, problems have been solved, and the research has settled down in the satellite based technology we use for determinations of global sea level changes (Satellite snafu masked true sea-level rise for decades).

In response to those two eventualities I have conformed and synchronized the Dredd Blog software modules so that satellite and tide gauge station records can be graphed together in a hemispheric orientation.

Fig. 3a
Fig. 3b
Fig. 3c
The graph at Fig. 1 shows the hemispheric orientations without showing the satellite data pattern.

Fig. 4
The graph at Fig. 2 shows the hemispheric patterns along with the satellite data patterns

That satellite data begins in 1993, a time when the patterns merge together to form a tighter grouping.

The satellite record is entangled in the middle of the other three tracks.

To make it easier to detect, in the graphs at Fig. 3a - Fig. 3c, I isolated the hemisphere patterns to a single hemisphere (and both averaged) while including the satellite pattern.

The graph at Fig. 4 shows only the satellite pattern.

What we see is that the tide gauge station sea level change patterns in the two hemispheres are different, but they are closer in the satellite era from 1993 on to the present.

The isolated satellite record at Fig. 4 shows that global sea level rise is quite clear, and that the rate of rise is accelerating.

I hope that regular readers like this new arrangement as much as I do.

One aspect of this arrangement that is particularly worthwhile is that it is the same as the WOD graphing technique (e.g. The World According To Measurements - 10).

Now our ocean temperature, salinity, and volume change patterns are presented in the same geographical manner that hemispheric and global sea level change is presented.

One thing I have yet to finish is the anomaly change pattern (patterns without the RLR range of values).

The graphs today (including satellite data) are conformed to the Revised Local Reference (RLR) sea level millimeter standard (Definition).

The anomaly change pattern shows only the change in sea level from zero to the current level (0 to about 185 mm since circa 1880).

In closing, let me add that I recently updated the databases with year 2017 values where and when I could find them.

They will continue to trickle in over the months ahead (PSMSL is the slowest this year ... only 1 station reported 2017 records so far).

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



Sunday, January 21, 2018

The World According To Measurements - 11

Fig. 1a
Fig. 1b
I. Good Reasons

Some good reasons to study the oceans are:
"The oceans cover 71 percent of the Earth's surface and contain 97 percent of the Earth's water.

Less than 1 percent of the Earth's water is fresh water, and 2-3 percent is contained in glaciers and ice caps.

The oceans contain 99 percent of the living space on the planet.

If the ocean's total salt content were dried, it would cover the continents to a depth of 5 feet."
(Oceanic Institute). Not to mention that if the ice sheets were to continue to melt, the sea level would rise and eventually incapacitate civilization as we know it (Civilization Is Now On Suicide Watch, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).

For one reason, that is because our current civilization of the 21st Century is like ancient Phoenicia in the sense of international trade being based on seaports used for shipping conducted on the oceans (The Extinction of Robust Sea Ports - 3).

Fig. 2a
Fig. 2b
II. Good Sources

Here at Dredd Blog we watch the oceans with data from reputable and well established institutions such as:  World Ocean Database (WOD), Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL), and the Thermodynamic Equation Of Seawater - 2010 (TEOS-10).
Fig. 2c

III. Good Measurements

All of the measurements taken by very hard working researchers in the fields of Oceanography and the various Climate Sciences must be used correctly in order to produce the most useful results.

Today's examples in support of that assertion are in the graphs at Fig. 1a - Fig. 1b compared with the graphs at Fig. 2a - Fig. 2c.

These show that measurements taken in the vast oceans (see section I) can be used for different purposes.

For example, the graph at Fig. 1b compared with Fig. 2b does not show the same pattern in terms of temperature.

That is as it should be, because Fig. 1b uses all temperature measurements but Fig. 2b does not.

The graph at Fig. 2b uses only "pairs" of measurements where the measurement equipment gathered both salinity and temperature measurements at the same time, depth, and location.

The pair condition is required by the very sophisticated TEOS-10 oceanographic toolkit for proper use of thermodynamic formulas.

The use of all temperature measurements includes those conditions where the salinity, for one reason or another, could not be taken along with the temperature.

IV. Good Trends

The more important uses of data are to establish trends because we can only change the future we are making for ourselves, which is not the case for the past, for our history.

Fig. 3 Sea Level Change History
It is what it is.

But if we want to avoid breaking the 2017 record for the highest climate catastrophe costs in the U.S.A., we will have to focus on trends that indicate what we can expect in coming years.

The year 2017 will not change for the better.

V. Good Future?

Will the remainder of the 21st Century have new records of climate catastrophe costs?

The truth is in the trend line.

It can be measured and used to tell us what to expect from the future we are making for ourselves.

We have been measured after all, because measuring the world is measuring ourselves.

The previous post in this series is here.