Models vs real world (click to enlarge)
Why do these quotes sound so drearily familiar?
“It is inappropriate for you to question the motives or quality of our science.”
“You will not last long in your career.”
“I hope you will refrain from contacting me again.”
Because they are the typical response of a climate scientist desperate to avoid sharing data [or avoid being caught out – Ed]. Sounds like the kind of tone you would get from Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann, or our friend from CRU, Phil Jones, who once famously said:
“Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Anyway, it seems once again, with so much in the alarmism industry, that getting the right ‘message’ across is more important than letting the data speak for itself. So the latest ‘-gate’ emerges, catchily entitled NOAAgate.
The argument is that increasing CO2 decreases ocean pH, making it more acidic less alkaline, which negatively affects the shell-building capabilities of sea creatures. It is the little brother to global warming, if you like.
This claim is supported by research by Feely and Sabine, a summary of which is available on the NOAA website here (PDF). It shows increasing CO2 concentration in the ocean matched by an accelerating decline in pH. But this is where the story gets interesting.
A PhD student with 30 years prior experience in hydrology, Mike Wallace, asked Feely and Sabine for the time series data for the ocean pH. Cfact takes up the story:
Feely’s work is based on computer models that don’t line up with real-world data—which Feely acknowledged in e-mail communications with Wallace (which I have read). And, as Wallace determined, there are real world data. Feely and his coauthor Dr. Christopher L. Sabine, PMEL Director, omitted 80 years of data, which incorporate more than 2 million records of ocean pH levels.
…
Sabine responded by saying that it was inappropriate for Wallace to question their “motives or quality of our science,” adding that if he continued in this manner, “you will not last long in your career.” He then included a few links to websites that Wallace, after spending hours reviewing them, called “blind alleys.” Sabine concludes the e-mail with: “I hope you will refrain from contacting me again.”
When real world data is substituted for Feely and Sabine’s modelled data, there is no trend in ocean acidification in the last 100-plus years, and the alarmist narrative goes away. What a surprise.
Read the whole thing here.
Australian Climate Madness 
It’s great to see your realistic phrase ‘less alkaline’ rather than ‘more acidic’. It’s a long way yet to reach pH equals 7.0.
For some real acidity, last night I dreamed that the oceans had turned into Coca-Cola. When I awoke, it was all just a fantasy.
Brian
The salt in the sea is alkaline – you need to get read of the salt first, before start talking about ; the seawater getting acidic!: https://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com/seawater-is-getting-too-alkaline/
Sadly, alarmists will label this incident as “typical ‘d*nier’ harassment” without actually having any substance to their argument (since there is none)
I hope that the World does not end before New Years Day, I’m going to a party. N
I think the joke is “and when I awoke it was all just a Fanta sea”.
If you have the time, drop by http://www.1ocean-1climate.com to see a theory about oceans influencing climate, or by http://www.arctic-warming.com to see a debate about the 20th century climate. As for the studies based on computer studies, I really don’t believe in them. It’s much more important, in my oppinion, to analyse the real facts and the historical datas (as much as they exist) in order to come up with a proper scientific conclusion.