A 3C rise in temperature is just a 1% energy rise

With no phase changes the energy content of the air is proportional to its temperature. Earth's pre-industrial average temperature is 15C. Under a high estimate for CO2 warming of 3C the final temperature is 18C. Convert to absolute temperature and the difference is just 1.04%:

(273 + 18) - (273 + 15) / (273 + 15) = 1.04%

Warmists don't like facts laid bare like this (_1, _2). 1% is not enough to notice any difference in any climate metric such as hurricanes or tornadoes. Instead they insist on expressing the energy increase in joules or Hiroshima atomic bomb equivalent. This is more useful for their scare narrative. But when this energy is spread out over a large area it's nothing. This is why warmists hate the percentage value.

The true significance of ocean warming

AGW believers use ocean warming as their number one excuse for the atmospheric warming pause going on 19 years now – a pause during the time of highest CO2 rise. Their refrain is that the oceans are warming because they're absorbing the "missing AGW heat". [1, 2, 3] 

But a new paper by Trenberth et al (link, mirror) published in March 2017 suggests that ocean warming is coming from deeper layers, especially the 700 to 2000m layer, and is surely therefore due to natural factors not global warming.

Has the hockey schtick left the building?

Unfortunately we may never know the real identity of who the hockey schtick is. They have protected their anonymity well. And no blame there. Why would't you protect your anonymity online? You have every right to. The only thing I can gather from their blog is that their initials are  "MS". But who knows if that's even valid?

Hockey Schtick appears to be a chemical engineer by trade who last blogged on Feb 4 2017. Lately their twitter feed appears to have been hacked.

GRACE satellite Greenland data is too negative-biased

Despite the DMI institute showing quite a mass gain for Greenland in 2016:

..The GRACE satellite data showed a continued mass decline.

BoM uptweaking Australia's average temperature to suit global warming narrative

Below is my derived RSS satellite temperature for Australia in the following rectangle:

New improved Australia RSS TLT satellite temperature

In my first attempt at this I got the longitude wrong (details here). Having corrected that, in my second attempt I defined a smaller rectangle to avoid any ocean areas as shown in the graph that follows.



...which yields the graph (16-point moving average in red):

More RSS TLT temps

It's often said there's a lot of warming in the North Atlantic & surrounding land stations so let us check there first with the RSS TLT temps in a square as depicted in the following map:



There is some warming in excess of the global average. It looks similar to the temps for North latitudes 21.25 N to 36.25 N (see graphs further down). In red is the code for Matlab R2016a.

RSS satellite temperature for Australia/Pacific

Below are RSS satellite temperatures for various regions in Australia/Pacific.  In a previous post (here) I derived lower tropospheric temp for Australia in a rectangle shown in the map below.

In this post I define a smaller rectangle (red) to avoid any ocean areas, between longitudes 123.75 E to 146.25 E and latitudes 31.25 South to 21.25 South.

RSS temp anomaly for Australia corrected for longitude

I've discovered a mistake in my first attempt at unlocking the RSS temperature file for lower tropospheric temps: my longitude was off by 180 degrees.

Some time around that first attempt I took the time to verify the latitude (described here) but not the longitude. I discovered my mistake when I decided to verify the longitude for an upcoming post. Here is how the latitude and longitude numbers in the 144 x 72 x 458 array should look on a world map:

Preview of upcoming "summary" rebuttal

My recent post on OLR is the hopefully the final preliminary post in preparation for a ~13-point rebuttal I plan to the AGW theory. Here's an outline of those points. I give a couple of links with each point to further explain.

It's interesting to see how far my thinking has evolved since my first attempt at a similar summary 7 years ago.

1) No temperature rise during time of highest CO2 rise also known as "the hiatus" in warming

(Links: One, Two, Three)

2) Lower stratosphere is not cooling

(Link: One)

Outgoing Longwave Radiation – the fuller story

For a couple of years or so I have been claiming [1, 2] that outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) should be decreasing if infrared was being curtailed by increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as per AGW theory. But there is more to the story.

On a spectral line near 700 wavenumber (14.3 µm) there is indeed quite a reduction in radiation expected to be caused by an increase in CO2.

The following chart (data via the Modtran simulator) shows a deepening of the groove that appears around 700 to 770 wavenumber with surface temperature kept constant and atmospheric carbon dioxide increased from 150 to 1000 ppm.

How to load .nc files into Matlab

Much climate data comes in the form of NetCDF files which have an .nc suffix.

This post is as much for my own reference in case I forget how to do it, as it is for anyone else interested in opening a NetCDF file in Matlab.

Here's a list of the current climate NetCDF files I am interested in:

• ·       Satellite Temperature Lower Troposphere

http://www.remss.com/measurements/upper-air-temperature

↳

ftp://ftp.remss.com/msu/data/netcdf

↳

uat4_tb_v03r03_anom_chtlt_197812_201509.nc3.nc

(Note that the name suffix changes slightly with each month)

•     NCEP Reanalysis 2 of Upward longwave radiation flux at nominal top of atmosphere

Why the "missing heat" of AGW can't be going in the ocean

The reason "missing heat" can't be going in the ocean is that the ocean is warming. A warmer ocean makes it less likely that heat will be drawn in from the atmosphere, not more.

Here is the global sea surface temperature anomaly, and it's on the rise:

(Source. Many more graphs here. Also here.)

Circular axis unfairly weights more recent years

In the latest deception by Team Consensus, Ed Hawkins converts temperatures that are normally displayed on an X-Y plane to a circular axis.

This has the effect of increasing the area occupied by recent years and cramming past years into a little dot in the middle. The resulting spiral, made scarier by employing a violet to red rainbow colour, gives the impression of an out of control temperature rise.

Spiralling global temperatures from 1850-2016 (full animation) https://t.co/YETC5HkmTr pic.twitter.com/Ypci717AHq

— Ed Hawkins (@ed_hawkins) 9 May 2016