Tuesday, March 17, 2015

Study Finds Earth’s Ocean Abyss Has NOT Warmed- Not Warmed!

Recall we are supposed to believe that the oceans have absorbed the warming that hasn’t occurred for approximately 15 years now? Yup, in 2013 we were informed by the AGW agenda pushers/profiteers that the deep ocean absorbed all the warming. Allegedly. IPCC claims  deep ocean water taking a bullet for us
“Initially absorbed by surface waters, that heat is increasingly moving into the deep ocean, where it may seem "hidden" .....
Of course, claims being, claims- these claims were completely wrong

Late in 2014 NASA admitted. Acknowledged, exactly the opposite based on actual water temperature measurements. Of course, the actual news, these actual measurements, went totally unreported on the main stream AGW promoting media

Earth's Ocean Abyss- Deep Waters- Have NOT Warmed!
Oct. 6, 2014: The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.
Deep sea creatures, like these anemones at a hydrothermal vent, are not yet feeling the heat from global climate change. Although the top half of the ocean continues to warm, the bottom half has not increased measurably in temperature in the last decade. Image credit: NERC

Scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean temperature data from 2005 to 2013 and found the ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably. Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself.
The findings do throw suspicion aplenty on the AGW climate change theory- Because just last year we were told “The oceans were taking a bullet for us” Absorbing the warming to explain away the fact there is has been no warming since 2000- However,  real, actual, temperature measurements make clear that the oceans have not warmed measurably. Nothing!

 “To arrive at their conclusion, the JPL scientists did a straightforward subtraction calculation, using data for 2005-2013 from the Argo buoys, NASA's Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites, and the agency’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites. From the total amount of sea level rise, they subtracted the amount of rise from the expansion in the upper ocean, and the amount of rise that came from added meltwater. The remainder represented the amount of sea level rise caused by warming in the deep ocean.

The remainder was essentially zero. Deep ocean warming contributed virtually nothing to sea level rise during this period”
No deep ocean warming- None!


  1. Do not come here and leave any ad hominem comments

  2. Thinking that fifty years ago the "Climate Change" was all about the Coming of the new Ice Age!
    First for Britain : "Little Ice Age predicted for Britain", The Deseret News - Jan. 30, 1964
    Then the 1970 Ice Age Scare: ‘Almost every major climate organization endorsed the 1970s ice age scare, including NCAR, CRU, NAS, NASA – as did the CIA’

    How times change! Or do they?

    1. Hi Wiz Oz; Times haven't changed- The climates does change.
      But lying b@st@rds with an agenda or a complete lack of understanding about the earth , never do any good for anyone- but themselves

  3. Robert J Molineaux SrMarch 17, 2015 at 11:01 PM

    The item does not mention the role of ocean currents and changes in wind patterns. These factors are included in computer models that have been used by qualified scientists to assist them in reaching sound conclusions. Climate change deniers are doing a great disservice to the public by promoting the interests of the fossil fuel industry.

    1. I specifically say, don't come here and engage in ad hominem or logical fallacies and what does one of the AGW adherents do?
      I should say, what does yet another one of the AGW true believers do? Come here and leave the most ridiculous comment I had to read first thing in the morning.
      Should have just deleted it!

      The comment is a combo of strawman, red herring with ad hominem for good measure.
      The first red herring is "ocean currents and wind patterns"?? WTF!? Not necessary for this specific news, which is dealing with the IPCC LIE of -oceans absorbing the warming. So you use your red herring to take readers right off topic- It's also a strawman because it then enables you to think you are taking the information down- You're not. Because 'ocean currents and wind patterns' aren't an issue in this post.

      "Qualified Scientist" ad hominem- I'm not and I don't need to be to understand when lies are being told
      Climate Change deniers- ad hominem- The climate always changes no one would sensibly deny that

      The interests of the fossil fuel industry- strawman again

      I promote all my own interests- it is actually the liars, shills and con artists behind AGW that are promoting the interests of the fossil fuel industry.

      Better known as bankers, big oil, big pharma, big chemical and big agriculture- the clear winners, all the way around in the AGW lie

      So Robert Molineaux Sr- whose whore are you?

    2. So scientists disputing AGW have sold out to the oil industry. Hmmm. I wonder if any scientists would sell out to the Trillion dollar carbon tax scam.

    3. Robert J. Molineaux, Sr., please help me understand your comment.

      Are you actually claiming fraud, and saying that if measured abyssal temperatures are at odds with the output of someone's un-vetted computer correlation, that the model results must be 'right,' because they are in line with what global warming theory says they should be, and the description of physical reality must be taken as the fruit of a conspiracy theory?.

    4. Hi Arnold Gregory

      the AGW 'scientists' have long sold their souls to the trillion dollar carbon tax and trade scam- which will benefit the bankster /big oil crowd as all the taxpayer funded green projects have.... and all the taxpayer funded carbon sequestration projects too-
      because the captured carbon boosts oil production- not a surprise


      The climate scientists are the most oily whores around


  4. "Fossil fuel is a general term for buried combustible geologic deposits of organic materials, formed from decayed plants and animals that have been converted to crude oil, coal, natural gas, or heavy oils by exposure to heat and pressure in the earth's crust over hundreds of millions of years." @www.sciencedaily.com/articles/f/fossil_fuel.htm

    But would they still qualify as "fossil" once the their abiogenic origin is gaining more credence?

    1. great,,,rarely do I hear of Abiotic oil,,,,! the deep drilling in Russia got me wondering and the fact that wells are refilling here in USA Gulf of Mexico...

  5. The only people who have a "suspicion" about AGW are those who refuse to read the science. Which is quite apparent on this blog.

    Massive amounts of warming water are now circulating past Greenland and warming water is also causing gigantic cracks in Antarctica. But that's what the science says.

    So either get your climate news from science and qualified experts or read inane blogs like this one.

    1. It's to be understood that you'll leave us (alone).
      Good by!

    2. Anonymous 9:43
      I don't want to lose WizOz's contribution because he is a valued contributor on a number of topics and never engages in ad hominmen attacks, if I delete your claptrap I will lose wiz's response - Your comment is so pointless- and nonsensical- this post is from an article by NASA- an entity that promotes the AGW theory
      Therefore this news is from a "qualified expert"
      I am really glad I posted this, the msm ignored the news, to support the agenda but, it's getting a great many reads here- and dammit I am happy!

      FACT- The IPCC lied

    3. WizOz- they won't go away- They are on the dole.
      But, we can hope :)

  6. WizOz- The abiogenic or abiotic oil theory is very interesting stuff.
    I've read dribs and drabs on it here and there but, if you got some good info, please share?

    1. Well, start with the Wikipedia: Abiogenic petroleum origin

      A good survey at:

      More technical:

      "Deep-seated abiogenic origin of petroleum: From geological assessment to physical theory", by Vladimir G. Kutcherov and Vladilen A. Krayushkin, in Reviews of Geophysics, Volume 48, Issue 1, March, 2010

      And you shouldn't miss the lovely "Confessions Of An 'Ex' Peak Oil Believer", by F. William Engdahl
      initially at http://www.rense.com/general78/expeak.htm, but reproduced by many other sites.

    2. Expulsion of hydrocarbons from sedimentary source rocks to form commercial accumulation of hydrocarbons is scientific but this do nor scientifically prove the biogenic origin of hydrocarbons . pls observe the following paper.


  7. This information is reported like some newsflash. We ALL know Global Warming is a total myth. Well...not a myth as much as a bold-faced lie. No matter how many times the engineers of this fallacy are caught--RED HANDED--jinking the evidence (or, as they refer to it..."proof"! LOL!) we just keep reporting it like it's brand new information.

    We ALL know--including the vast majority of the Warmers--that this is just a money-making, king-making scheme.

    1. Hi Don

      It's amazing the number of lies from the mouths of the AGW proponents and the IPCC-

      The oceans are hiding the warmth- no they aren't
      The sea levels are rising- no they haven't- They dropped then recovered and I am not sure where they are at now-
      The Himalayan ice is melting- It was growing
      Ice free Arctic- wrong
      Ice shrinking in Antarctic- nope
      I've covered a slew of these here
      We were supposed to be burning up- no warming for fifteen years now
      and on and on and on
      At some point in time the 'believers' have to face the fact of these many, many falsities and ask themselves- What other lies have been told wrt AGW?