Argo floats improve temperature readings

But readings are still sparse

Actually, on average they’re about 300 km apart and visits to a given square of ocean can be months apart. That’s like filming with a stationary GoPro under the water at Mission Bay to count all the swimmers along 500 metres of the beach.

Click to enlarge.

There’s much variability, with possibly seasonal and certainly annual effects and an upward trend from about 2011. Over about ten years since then the above graph suggests there has been minor warming, which is obviously too deep to be due to atmospheric effects from man-made emissions.

I should acknowledge the enormous improvement in our knowledge of the oceans with the introduction of the Argo float programme, and of course everyone concerned wants improvements.

There’s a 2015 paper that bravely quantifies the term “warming” for those of us interested in the facts. Turns out deep ocean warming is measured in thousandths of a degree per decade. I suggest the more faint-hearted among us stop worrying:

I haven’t analysed the data, but anyone interested can learn about it from the University of California San Diego Argo Steering Team website. The Argo project generally exhibits significant data limitations, including limited coverage of the abyssal ocean (>4000 m depth), only ten years’ worth of data with the most modern and accurate floats, the deeper half of the ocean volume is currently much more sparsely sampled and the abyssal ocean (>4000-m depth) exhibited a detectable warming trend with large uncertainty from 1992 to 2005 of about 5 m °C [thousandths of a degree] decade−1 in the global mean with deep (>2000 m) trends closer to 30 m °C decade−1 in the Southern Ocean (Purkey and Johnson 2010). The largest deep long-term warming trends we have found published are 130 m °C decade−1 from 1980 to 2010 estimated from repeated measurements in the deep Greenland Sea. — Informing Deep Argo Array Design Using Argo and Full-Depth Hydrographic Section Data

See also Bob Tisdale’s informative and interesting article Ocean ‘Global Warming’ is not actually ‘global’ at all for logical clues to help separate the influence of atmospheric gases from ocean warming.

Views: 45

16 Thoughts on “Argo floats improve temperature readings

    • Mary Mac on 15/01/2021 at 8:59 pm said:

      From NASA:

      You know Nasa, the people who put people in space and on the Moon … what would they know about science!

    • Richard Treadgold on 16/01/2021 at 10:29 am said:


      You may not know that The Guardian is one of the most reliable sources of extreme alarmism on the planet.

      Abandoning courtesy, you say:

      If anyone stumbling on this blog wants the truth – start here:

      I do a lot of research to learn the truth, frequently say I’d rather be corrected than remain wrong, and never knowingly publish untruth. Please be so kind as to let me know when you stumble over untruth, under my name. Absent evidence of that, your increasingly discourteous visit threatens to be brief. That said, I apologise for rude remarks aimed at you by some readers.

      I examined your three references above, two Guardian articles and one paper. Alarming headings refer to climate crisis and various versions of record ocean heat. However, on closer examination I find either temperature rises in milli-degrees, or thousandths of a Celsius degree, or the thoroughly opaque use of joules to disguise how little warming is occurring.

      Such manifest trickery is scandalous.

  1. Harry Cummings on 16/01/2021 at 9:34 am said:

    The Guardian. Ha ha ha ha

  2. Mary Mac on 16/01/2021 at 5:09 pm said:

    Below the authors of the paper linked. In particular,

    Prof John Abraham wrote the article in the Guardian. Kevin Trenberth (from Christchurch) is a distinguished senior scientist at NCAR , Michael Mann is internationally respected climate researcher .
    Published: 13 January 2021
    Upper Ocean Temperatures Hit Record High in 2020
    Lijing Cheng, John AbMichaelraham, Kevin E. Trenberth, John Fasullo, Tim Boyer, Ricardo Locarnini, Bin Zhang, Fujiang Yu, Liying Wan, Xingrong Chen, Xiangzhou Song, Yulong Liu, Michael E. Mann, Franco Reseghetti, Simona Simoncelli, Viktor Gouretski, Gengxin Chen, Alexey Mishonov, Jim Reagan & Jiang Zhu
    Advances in Atmospheric Sciences (2021)

    And you match that with what? Personal incredulity.

  3. Mack on 16/01/2021 at 11:58 pm said:

    Trenberth and Fasullo are responsible for the looney Earth Energy Budget Diagrams…

  4. Mack on 17/01/2021 at 6:30 am said:

    @ Mary Mac

    Trenberth is a disgrace to science and NZ.

  5. Mack on 17/01/2021 at 11:08 am said:

    One small lie for Mann, one giant fraud for mankind.

  6. Brian Wilson on 17/01/2021 at 3:23 pm said:

    Hi Mary Mac,

    The real scientists and engineers from NASA that did put a man on the moon have issued an open letter to present day NASA to quit with the climate change nonsense. They are disgusted that the current NASA regime is hell bent on destroying the legacy of these innovative and brave pioneers. And, just as an aside, the present day NASA cannot even put a man in to orbit. How clever are they?

    As for Dr Fraudpants, it’s not called Mann made climate change for nothing.

    • Mary Mac on 21/01/2021 at 10:59 pm said:

      I won’t ask you for a link to your claim about NASA because I know it’s total nonsense. Have a look at the website yourself, It explains the science.

      Your rigmarole about particles etc is also total nonsense. Where do you find this drivel? Some crank site I suppose.

      Mann’s “hockey stick” has been verified some six times.

      If you’re a scientist I’m the Queen of Sheba.

  7. Brian Wilson on 22/01/2021 at 7:18 am said:

    Hi Queen of Sheba,
    I suppose we can’t all be civil and look at the evidence. So, here is the letter.

    The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
    NASA Administrator
    NASA Headquarters
    Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

    Dear Charlie,

    We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

    The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

    As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

    For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

    Thank you for considering this request.


    (Attached signatures)

    CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science

    CC: arse Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight centre

    Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.

    /s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years

    /s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years

    /s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years

    /s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years

    /s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years

    /s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years

    /s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years

    /s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years

    /s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years

    /s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years

    /s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years

    /s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years

    /s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years

    /s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years

    /s/ Anita Gale

    /s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years

    /s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years

    /s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years

    /s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space centre, 22 years

    /s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years

    /s/ Thomas J. Harmon

    /s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years

    /s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years

    /s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years

    /s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years

    /s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years

    /s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years

    /s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space centre, 24 years

    /s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, arse.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years

    /s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen

    /s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, arse’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years

    /s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years

    /s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years

    /s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years

    /s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years

    /s/ Tom Ohesorge

    /s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years

    /s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years

    /s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years

    /s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years

    /s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years

    /s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years

    /s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, arse’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years

    /s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years

    /s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years

    /s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years

    /s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years

    /s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years

    /s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years

  8. Brian Wilson on 22/01/2021 at 8:38 am said:

    Hi Queen of Sheba,
    Particle forcing, global electrical circuits, etc. So you support Mann, but ignore Richard Feynman, one of the greatest minds in recent physics? Interesting.
    Mann’s hockey stick has been thoroughly debunked many more than 6 times and even the IPCC no longer refer to it. He is so confident of his data that he refused to supply it for his recent court case against Dr Tim Ball, that Mann lost by the way. The hockey stick cannot be verified by anybody if Mann will not supply the data.
    You clearly don’t dispute NASA evidence. According to NASA the average surface temperature of Earth should be 15c So, if we look at your beloved NASA figures, 2020 was 1.02c above the 1951 to 1980 average. This average was 14c, putting 2020 at an average of 15.02c – right on the money (15c) within statistical variation, according to NASA themselves.

  9. Brian Wilson on 22/01/2021 at 5:35 pm said:

    Hi Queen of Sheba,

    Just in case that hasn’t sunk in. According to NASA, YOUR quoted source for all credible information on climate change, the average global surface temperature should be 15c. For the first time in 100 years, according to NASA, the global average surface temperature actually managed to reach this in 2020. In summary:
    – The global surface temperature should be 15c
    – In 2020 the average global temperature was 15c
    – Therefore, as at the end of 2020, THERE WAS NO WARMING BEYOND NORMAL LIMITS.

  10. Richard Treadgold on 14/03/2021 at 2:18 pm said:

    Brian, Mack and Harry,

    I’ve just caught up with this exchange after a busy period. I admire the work you’ve done (especially Brian) in response to Mary Mac’s inadequate offerings and I thank you. Her persistent faith in Michael Mann after his iconic graph was totally ignored in the IPCC’s very next report and his reckless refusal to obey the court’s demand for the data behind that iconic graph was widely published around the world and his case against Dr Tim Ball failed, is inexplicable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation