Greenhouse gases 'largely to blame' for ocean warming

Alarmist Broadcasting Corporation

Instead of reporting the problems with its last alarmist story, namely the fact that bloggers have once again found holes in a supposedly “peer-reviewed” paper propping up the consensus, the ABC just moves on and runs another:

A new US-led study, featuring research by Tasmanian scientists, has concluded that warming ocean temperatures over the past 50 years are largely a man-made phenomenon.

Researchers from America, India, Japan and Australia say the study is the most comprehensive look at how the oceans have warmed.

The study, published today in the journal Nature Climate Change, examined a dozen different models used to project climate change, and compared them with observations of ocean warming over the past 50 years.

It found natural variations accounted for about 10 per cent of rising temperatures, but man-made greenhouse gases were the major cause. (source)

Authors supporting “the Cause” include Aussie John Church and Ben Santer. Need I say more?

Judith Curry gets technical about it here, and ocean temperature records in general were pretty rough before the ARGO era, but concludes that the latest paper will no doubt win out in AR5. Why? Because it’s the “right answer”, according to the consensus. Politics and activism win out over impartial science every time.


  1. If bullshit were dollar’s, Al Gore would be filthy rich.
    Wait a minute……

  2. They also ignore volcanic vents!

    • Drewski says:

      Did they? I suggest you go to the source study to find out how misinformed your are.

  3. “Oceans largely to blame for greenhouse gases”? The decomposition of billions of tons of biomass each day? Effing Oceans! Let’s drain’em, before they destroy the world!

  4. Mike Sanford via Facebook says:

    David Al Gore is rich because this sort of bullshit lol

  5. Athelstan. says:


    The sun warms the oceans.

  6. It’s based only on models. A model puts out whatever rubbish the programmer puts in.

  7. Yeah I agree with Eric. Let us drain the oceans! I have dibs on all the treasure ships we find!

  8. Yes lets hope that this paper can be examined with the same degree of scrutiny that the Gergis et al study was given. It is important that each one of these supposed scientific studies lodged for AR5 and in support of AGW IPCC doctrine gets this treatment. Without the science foundation their policy prescriptions can be more clearly seen for what they are.

    And especially in this case given Santer and Churchills record.

  9. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    From the ABC report:

    “He said there was simply no way the upper layers of every ocean in the world could have warmed by more than 0.1 degrees Celsius through natural causes alone.”

    Simple to calc the effect of doubling pCO2 from this. If pCO2 rose from 310 to 390 ppmV during 50 years, the calculation is:

    2XCO2 = (0.1 x log(2)) / (log(390) – log(310)) = 0.3 C

    In other words Dr Church has implied that 2XCO2 is less than half of Prof Lindzen’s value…

    And is therefore even more harmless.

  10. Richard C (NZ) says:

    All they need now is the actual physical mechanism.

    Could be problematic given the spectroscopy, around now for at least 39 yrs e.g. Hale & Querry 1973.

  11. Anyone who thinks they knw what the ocean surface temperature was 50 years ago to within 0.1 of a degree must be a wonderful scientist or a liar.

    My thoughts are that anyone who thinks they know what it is now to within that limit is nuts.

  12. Credit to the Australian Broadcasting Communists for learning well from the propaganda methods used by similar organisations in China, USSR etc – Lie, Repeat, Distract, Repeat, Ignore, Repeat

  13. So, now we hear that Greenhouse gases ‘largely to blame’ for ocean warming.

    Let me say this… today, any study that promotes man-made global warming should be treated as biased fiction. One word suffices, actually… BULLSHIT!

  14. BrownOut says:

    And of course we get back to the old issue where downward LWR does not penetrate beyong the top millimetre (ie: the skin) of the ocean & therefore cannot heat the ocean as described. The more likely scenario is that fewer clouds allow more direct SW solar radiation into the ocean sytem, which causes heating down to a depth of 100 metres.

    • On 50m radious – there is fluctuation of 1-2-3C in the sea. Stating that oceans are warmer than 50y ago – it’s expected of them. How warm were the oceans 50y ago?!… Who was monitoring 50y ago, on every 50m, during the cold war… only he knows – the rest are all liars.

      Extra oils / fats washed now in the sea – spreads on the surface of the water – prevent evaporation – evaporation is cooling process for the water b] less evaporation -> less clouds; clouds are the sun umbrella for the sea. c] less clouds = less rain, rain cools the oceans.

      If you people know what makes the water warmer – they wouldn’t have being lying, to blame CO2. Calculate: how much more olive, canola oil is produced now and ends up in the sea from untreated sewage. d] how many more chickens and pigs are eaten now, compare with 50y ago – the extra fat from pork, chicken – takes many weeks to brake down on the sea surface; new arrives every day. + more industrial oils now washed into the rivers = into the sea. Carbon molesters will not tell you that. WHY?!

  15. Scarface says:

    I guess these ‘scientists’ will also turn up the temperature in their bathroom, to heat the bathwater…

    TasMANNian scientist would be more appropriate.

  16. But the argo program (the only really accurate measure) set up at the behest of the warmists shows the temperature of the ocean (to 2000m) has been cooling since the program began – but CO2 continues to rise?

  17. Drewski says:

    The point the scientists were making is that ALL the oceans have risen 0.1 degree and that fact alone accounts for a GLOBAL cause.

%d bloggers like this: