Comments on: Possible Error in OHC? http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/ The Power of Numeracy Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:57:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: http://test.com http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-914 http://test.com Mon, 15 Feb 2010 19:43:03 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-914 <strong>test...</strong> Q5c93t0 | test ... test…

Q5c93t0 | test …

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-916 Bob Tisdale Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:34:08 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-916 Cohenite, the North Atlantic shows a long-term rise that appears to be caused in part by cycles in AMO/AMOC, but the South Atlantic has a more variability with a sudden upward shift in 2003. Cohenite, the North Atlantic shows a long-term rise that appears to be caused in part by cycles in AMO/AMOC, but the South Atlantic has a more variability with a sudden upward shift in 2003.

]]> By: cohenite http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-915 cohenite Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:27:33 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-915 So, the 'artifact' is mainly a factor of something in the Atlantic, predominantly the North Atlantic, data? So, the 'artifact' is mainly a factor of something in the Atlantic, predominantly the North Atlantic, data?

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-11947 Bob Tisdale Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:34:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-11947 Cohenite, the North Atlantic shows a long-term rise that appears to be caused in part by cycles in AMO/AMOC, but the South Atlantic has a more variability with a sudden upward shift in 2003. Cohenite, the North Atlantic shows a long-term rise that appears to be caused in part by cycles in AMO/AMOC, but the South Atlantic has a more variability with a sudden upward shift in 2003.

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-913 Bob Tisdale Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:34:08 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-913 Cohenite, the North Atlantic shows a long-term rise that appears to be caused in part by cycles in AMO/AMOC, but the South Atlantic has a more variability with a sudden upward shift in 2003. Cohenite, the North Atlantic shows a long-term rise that appears to be caused in part by cycles in AMO/AMOC, but the South Atlantic has a more variability with a sudden upward shift in 2003.

]]> By: cohenite http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-11946 cohenite Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:27:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-11946 So, the 'artifact' is mainly a factor of something in the Atlantic, predominantly the North Atlantic, data? So, the ‘artifact’ is mainly a factor of something in the Atlantic, predominantly the North Atlantic, data?

]]> By: cohenite http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-912 cohenite Sun, 01 Nov 2009 21:27:33 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-912 So, the 'artifact' is mainly a factor of something in the Atlantic, predominantly the North Atlantic, data? So, the 'artifact' is mainly a factor of something in the Atlantic, predominantly the North Atlantic, data?

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-11945 Bob Tisdale Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:22:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-11945 Here are some OHC spaghetti graphs for further discussion about the OHC shift in 2003. The first is the OHC from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009 for the North and South Atlantic, North and South Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. As you can see the biggest shift in 2003 takes place in the South Atlantic. http://i38.tinypic.com/2q8xdu8.png And here’s the same comparison of the major ocean basins with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009. http://i33.tinypic.com/w14u3n.png Using the South Atlantic for reference, here’s a comparison of Arctic and Southern Oceans from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. Both have sizeable increases but they appear to be part of a multiyear rises. http://i37.tinypic.com/333v6zo.png And here’s the same comparison of the South Pacific, Arctic and Southern Oceans with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009. http://i34.tinypic.com/311nspg.png So the 2003 shift in the South Atlantic OHC seems to be the outlier. For this part of the post, I’ll borrow two graphs from my post “North Atlantic Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Is Governed By Natural Variables”: http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/north-atlantic-ocean-heat-content-0-700.html The early 2000s rise in tropical South Atlantic OHC appears to lag the tropical North Atlantic by 1 to 2 years. Curious. http://i34.tinypic.com/3532k5l.png And the tropical North Atlantic seems to shift in response to the multiyear La Nina that followed the 1997/98 El Nino. http://i38.tinypic.com/2jcbgvb.png Now for two new graphs. The first is a comparison of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. The Mid-To-High Latitude OHC anomalies of the South Atlantic appear to mimic the tropical OHC anomalies, or vice versa, with the Mid-To-High Latitudes being noisier. Is the higher variability a result of the Southern Annual Mode, like the North Atlantic is impacted by the NAO? Dunno. http://i37.tinypic.com/vqmsrd.png And here’s the short-term version of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic OHC comparison. http://i37.tinypic.com/1z3bif9.png Is the 2003 OHC shift a natural effect? Is it a result of an overcorrection of ARGO biases? Dunno. I’ll try to take a closer look at the Southern Ocean and Arctic Ocean OHC data soon. Here are some OHC spaghetti graphs for further discussion about the OHC shift in 2003. The first is the OHC from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009 for the North and South Atlantic, North and South Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. As you can see the biggest shift in 2003 takes place in the South Atlantic.
http://i38.tinypic.com/2q8xdu8.png

And here’s the same comparison of the major ocean basins with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009.
http://i33.tinypic.com/w14u3n.png

Using the South Atlantic for reference, here’s a comparison of Arctic and Southern Oceans from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. Both have sizeable increases but they appear to be part of a multiyear rises.
http://i37.tinypic.com/333v6zo.png

And here’s the same comparison of the South Pacific, Arctic and Southern Oceans with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009.
http://i34.tinypic.com/311nspg.png

So the 2003 shift in the South Atlantic OHC seems to be the outlier. For this part of the post, I’ll borrow two graphs from my post “North Atlantic Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Is Governed By Natural Variables”:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/north-atlantic-ocean-heat-content-0-700.html

The early 2000s rise in tropical South Atlantic OHC appears to lag the tropical North Atlantic by 1 to 2 years. Curious.
http://i34.tinypic.com/3532k5l.png

And the tropical North Atlantic seems to shift in response to the multiyear La Nina that followed the 1997/98 El Nino.
http://i38.tinypic.com/2jcbgvb.png

Now for two new graphs. The first is a comparison of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. The Mid-To-High Latitude OHC anomalies of the South Atlantic appear to mimic the tropical OHC anomalies, or vice versa, with the Mid-To-High Latitudes being noisier. Is the higher variability a result of the Southern Annual Mode, like the North Atlantic is impacted by the NAO? Dunno.
http://i37.tinypic.com/vqmsrd.png

And here’s the short-term version of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic OHC comparison.
http://i37.tinypic.com/1z3bif9.png

Is the 2003 OHC shift a natural effect? Is it a result of an overcorrection of ARGO biases? Dunno.

I’ll try to take a closer look at the Southern Ocean and Arctic Ocean OHC data soon.

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-911 Bob Tisdale Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:22:27 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-911 Here are some OHC spaghetti graphs for further discussion about the OHC shift in 2003. The first is the OHC from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009 for the North and South Atlantic, North and South Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. As you can see the biggest shift in 2003 takes place in the South Atlantic.<a href="http://i38.tinypic.com/2q8xdu8.png" rel="nofollow">http://i38.tinypic.com/2q8xdu8.png</a>And here’s the same comparison of the major ocean basins with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009.<a href="http://i33.tinypic.com/w14u3n.png" rel="nofollow">http://i33.tinypic.com/w14u3n.png</a>Using the South Atlantic for reference, here’s a comparison of Arctic and Southern Oceans from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. Both have sizeable increases but they appear to be part of a multiyear rises. <a href="http://i37.tinypic.com/333v6zo.png" rel="nofollow">http://i37.tinypic.com/333v6zo.png</a>And here’s the same comparison of the South Pacific, Arctic and Southern Oceans with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009.<a href="http://i34.tinypic.com/311nspg.png" rel="nofollow">http://i34.tinypic.com/311nspg.png</a>So the 2003 shift in the South Atlantic OHC seems to be the outlier. For this part of the post, I’ll borrow two graphs from my post “North Atlantic Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Is Governed By Natural Variables”:<a href="http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/north-atlantic-ocean-heat-content-0-700.html" rel="nofollow">http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/north-at...</a> The early 2000s rise in tropical South Atlantic OHC appears to lag the tropical North Atlantic by 1 to 2 years. Curious. <a href="http://i34.tinypic.com/3532k5l.png" rel="nofollow">http://i34.tinypic.com/3532k5l.png</a>And the tropical North Atlantic seems to shift in response to the multiyear La Nina that followed the 1997/98 El Nino. <a href="http://i38.tinypic.com/2jcbgvb.png" rel="nofollow">http://i38.tinypic.com/2jcbgvb.png</a>Now for two new graphs. The first is a comparison of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. The Mid-To-High Latitude OHC anomalies of the South Atlantic appear to mimic the tropical OHC anomalies, or vice versa, with the Mid-To-High Latitudes being noisier. Is the higher variability a result of the Southern Annual Mode, like the North Atlantic is impacted by the NAO? Dunno.<a href="http://i37.tinypic.com/vqmsrd.png" rel="nofollow">http://i37.tinypic.com/vqmsrd.png</a>And here’s the short-term version of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic OHC comparison.<a href="http://i37.tinypic.com/1z3bif9.png" rel="nofollow">http://i37.tinypic.com/1z3bif9.png</a>Is the 2003 OHC shift a natural effect? Is it a result of an overcorrection of ARGO biases? Dunno. I’ll try to take a closer look at the Southern Ocean and Arctic Ocean OHC data soon. Here are some OHC spaghetti graphs for further discussion about the OHC shift in 2003. The first is the OHC from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009 for the North and South Atlantic, North and South Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. As you can see the biggest shift in 2003 takes place in the South Atlantic.http://i38.tinypic.com/2q8xdu8.pngAnd here’s the same comparison of the major ocean basins with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009.http://i33.tinypic.com/w14u3n.pngUsing the South Atlantic for reference, here’s a comparison of Arctic and Southern Oceans from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. Both have sizeable increases but they appear to be part of a multiyear rises. http://i37.tinypic.com/333v6zo.pngAnd here’s the same comparison of the South Pacific, Arctic and Southern Oceans with the data limited to Jan 2000 to Jun 2009.http://i34.tinypic.com/311nspg.pngSo the 2003 shift in the South Atlantic OHC seems to be the outlier. For this part of the post, I’ll borrow two graphs from my post “North Atlantic Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Is Governed By Natural Variables”:http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/north-at… The early 2000s rise in tropical South Atlantic OHC appears to lag the tropical North Atlantic by 1 to 2 years. Curious. http://i34.tinypic.com/3532k5l.pngAnd the tropical North Atlantic seems to shift in response to the multiyear La Nina that followed the 1997/98 El Nino. http://i38.tinypic.com/2jcbgvb.pngNow for two new graphs. The first is a comparison of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic from Jan 1955 to Jun 2009. The Mid-To-High Latitude OHC anomalies of the South Atlantic appear to mimic the tropical OHC anomalies, or vice versa, with the Mid-To-High Latitudes being noisier. Is the higher variability a result of the Southern Annual Mode, like the North Atlantic is impacted by the NAO? Dunno.http://i37.tinypic.com/vqmsrd.pngAnd here’s the short-term version of the Low Latitude (25S-0) and Mid-To-High Latitude (60S-25S) South Atlantic OHC comparison.http://i37.tinypic.com/1z3bif9.pngIs the 2003 OHC shift a natural effect? Is it a result of an overcorrection of ARGO biases? Dunno. I’ll try to take a closer look at the Southern Ocean and Arctic Ocean OHC data soon.

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/possible-error-in-ohc/#comment-11944 Bob Tisdale Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:09:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=3180#comment-11944 David, sorry, I should have clarified my speculations above...that the 2003 rise would assumedly result from a lagged temporary shift in cloud cover. The rebound of tropical Pacific OHC during the recharge phase of ENSO is likely the result of atmospheric circulation changes, primarily cloud cover. What then happened to Hadley and Walker circulation, wind stress, cloud cover, etc., globally when the 1998/99/00 La Nina relaxed and ENSO conditions returned to neutral? Sorry, just thinking out loud. A three-year lag does seem excessive and unlikely. David, sorry, I should have clarified my speculations above…that the 2003 rise would assumedly result from a lagged temporary shift in cloud cover. The rebound of tropical Pacific OHC during the recharge phase of ENSO is likely the result of atmospheric circulation changes, primarily cloud cover. What then happened to Hadley and Walker circulation, wind stress, cloud cover, etc., globally when the 1998/99/00 La Nina relaxed and ENSO conditions returned to neutral? Sorry, just thinking out loud. A three-year lag does seem excessive and unlikely.

]]>