Die Welt: Scientists Not Really Sure Where Heat Has Gone…Rahmstorf Peeved By Skeptics’ Success

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

COP 19 in Warsaw is fast approaching and part of the ritual is the ringing of climate disaster alarms, much like churches ring their church bells on Christmas Eve.

The Die Welt article here tries to explain to readers why the climate catastrophe is still approaching even if temperatures haven’t risen in 15 years. The German daily tries to give the impression that it has the explanation for the temperature stagnation, but later in the article we see that it concedes it’s pretty much all speculation.

Die Welt writes that the high temperatures are hiding in the ocean depths and that it’s only a question of time before they reappear in the atmosphere with a vengeance. The German daily quotes alarmist scientists who claim that skeptics are “misinterpreting the data” when they insist the warming has stopped.

So where has the heat gone? Die Welt quotes Stefan Rahmstorf and a TV weatherman to explain it:

In the oceans. The world’s oceans are the biggest heat storages. When vertical currents such as those of the recent years provide for a colder sea surface, the oceans are able to take up more heat. […] ‘The greenhouse effect has not let up; it’s just that there is now more heat in the deep ocean and less at the surface,’ says climate scientist Rahmstorf.”

German TV weatherman Sven Plöger adds:

“The southern oceans are able to absorb an unbelievable amount of energy and thus act as a buffer.”

So the mystery is solved, Die Welt tries to have us believe. Well, not really because Die Welt then concedes that the explanations are only “plausible” at best.

Later in the article Die Welt does call the stagnation “baffling” and even offers other explanations for the warming stop that it calls “plausible”, like Chinese aerosols possibly dimming the atmosphere. Obviously their use of the world “plausible” implies that the ocean and aerosol explanations are not much more than guesses as to what is happening. This is hardly what anyone would call settled science.

Peeved Rahmstorf: skeptics have scored success

And Die Welt is forced to admit:

The fact is also: The projections from scientists have failed to forecast the stop in the temperature rise.”

Die Welt adds that warmists like Rahmstorf are highly irritated by the mileage skeptics have derived from the warming stop:

Scientist Rahmstorf is peeved by the headlines made by skeptics over the past months over the supposed pause in climate change. Those who put too much emphasis on the phenomenon are confusing ‘the noise of natural variations with the signal of global warming’.”

Rahmstorf adds that this has been “a success scored by the skeptics who are trying to seed doubt over global warming using arguments that aren’t really serious.”

 

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

25 responses to “Die Welt: Scientists Not Really Sure Where Heat Has Gone…Rahmstorf Peeved By Skeptics’ Success”

  1. Bernd Felsche

    The missing heat is hiding in my yoghurt.

    It must because because it’s just as detectable there as in the oceans. 🙂

  2. Ric Werme

    “Die Welt writes that the high temperatures are hiding in the ocean depths and that it’s only a question of time before they reappear in the atmosphere with a vengeance.”

    So if all that heat has warmed near-freezing sea water less than 0.1 Kelvins, how is that going to come back with a vengenence? Oh – it’s high temperatures that are hiding. They’re probably under Hawaii then. Not a problem. 🙂

  3. BobW in NC

    A local North Carolina newspaper carried a very short blurb on page 2, quoting some committee noting that the heat is most surely in the Southern Pacific Ocean, which is “10,000” times better at absorbing heat than elsewhere.

    There. Problem solved.

  4. Graeme No.3

    They seek it here,
    They seek it there,
    Is it in the heavens
    or is it in the ocean deeps?
    That missing heat gives them the creeps.

  5. Pete

    Rahmstorf is confusing ‘the signal of natural variations with the noise of global warming’.”

  6. Byron

    I often use lying to myself as a means of maintaining a sense of superiority over my fellow man. I think it is normal and practical that warmists are fabricating obsurd ideas to cover up their very public and monumentally expensive mistakes. And using the noise of excuses to obscure the signal of “boy did I screw up!” is vital to the ego. I for one applaud their smoke and mirrors strategy.

  7. Mindert Eiting

    Also the mermaids are hiding themselves in the deep ocean. BTW, a successful skeptic does not try to seed doubt, but seeds doubt.

  8. Roderic Fabian

    The sneeky heat will hide in the deep oceans until it bursts forth with a vengance some day, violating the 2nd Law Thermodynamics on the way. But the criminal heat doesn’t care about the law, you see.

    Skeptics are misinterpreting the data? What is there to misinterpret about simple measurements of the temperature?

  9. David Becker

    This is a puzzling conclusion. Temperatures increased from about 1920 to 1940, cooled, and then increased from about 1970 to 1995. What new process started occurring in 1996 that did not occur in the two previous warming cycles? Those who support AGW propose a mechanism which is plausible, but don’t tell us why it is happening now, but never happened before. The idea of energy uptake by the oceans that is unique to the present is nonsense. We are experiencing natural heating and cooling cycles.

  10. Sean

    What are the climate scientists going to do when the AMO goes negative in a decade and they have to explain global cooling? With any luck they will go into hiding along with the heat.

  11. Michael Combs

    The San Francisco Chronicle runs article after article awash in anxiety about a two-meter rise in sea level by 2100, yet no reporter has wandered to the waterfront and looked at their tide-gauge record going back to 1854 that shows a total rise of six inches in 159 years. And shows a diminishing rate the past two decades. Even if not scientists, where has the journalists’ legendary “nose for news” gone? Can they only accept “news” releases from rent-seeking advocacy groups?

  12. Otter

    Christmas bells ring in the Birth of Hope. COP19 on the other hand is all about doom, gloom and hysterics.

  13. gofigure560

    Never fear, Obama says it’s increased downpours he’s saving us from. (It may indeed be “downpours” we need to be rescued from, but these B.S. downpours are emanating from our fearless leader’s lips.)

  14. handjive

    Quote: “Die Welt writes that the high temperatures are hiding in the ocean depths and that it’s only a question of time before they reappear in the atmosphere with a vengeance.”

    What evidence do they have that the “current warming” is not heat from a previous global warming episode hiding in the oceans “reappearing with vengeance” and not man made carbon(sic).

    Do these people think out these stupid excuses? Rhetorical question.

  15. HL Mencken

    Obviouosly they do not systematically think their way through to sound logical conclusions. Otherwise they would refrain from making such patently stupid assertions in the first place.
    In fact, one of Dr. Bill Gray’s suggestions (to whom I give considerable
    credance) is that the comparative regularity of the well documented multidecadal
    warming and cooling cycles can be explained by thermal variations in the
    slow moving deep ocean currents that upwell in the tropical eastern Pacific.

    1. david russell

      And also according to Dr. Gray, these cycles are explained in terms of variations of the salinity of the tropical surface waters (due to evaporation). Hence the term thermo-haline (heat-saltitness) cycle. It all makes sense and has NOTHING to with CO2.

  16. HL Mencken

    Obviously those who make such assertions (viz., as global warming hiding in the oceans) have not thought them through to their logical conclusions. Otherwise they would not have made such a patently absurd assertion in the first place.

  17. HL Mencken

    Obviously those who are making such assertions (viz., as global warming hiding in the oceans) have not thought them through to their logical conclusions. Otherwise they would not have made them in the first place.

  18. Lubos Motl

    The excuses that the “missing heat has been hiding in XY” are useless for the alarmist cause, anyway, because if the heat has hid in XY, it can do so again and indefinitely, so no warming ever has to materialize from the hypothetical causes.

    To prove that there will be warming caused by these causes, one has to show that the hiding place works now but won’t work in the future but this is a very awkward conjecture to demonstrate.

  19. Stephen Richards

    using arguments that aren’t really serious.”

    Ah like the heat is in the deep oceans and it was magiced there by Hansen & Mann the well known deep sea divers.

  20. Mervyn

    It never ceases to amaze me how global warming alarmists can “make it all up as they go along” yet they are never held accountable. Why is that?

    Take for example the IPCC. Its hypothesis is that CO2 emitted by human activities is causing catastrophic global warming and is the key driver of climate change. Yet in almost 25 years in existence, the IPCC has never cited even one peer-reviewed study that supports this hypothesis. Why is that?

    More importantly, why has no government ever demanded from the IPCC evidence, by way of a citation to such a study, that supports its hypothesis?

    1. DirkH

      “yet they are never held accountable. Why is that?”

      The media are controlled.

  21. Sam Pyeatte

    The obsession of the warmists is bordering on being a medical condition. The desperation is something to behold.

  22. feliksch

    In the future, when the hidden heat will reappear in the atmosphere, the sea-level will fall, as the waters will have cooled agained. So, don’t build too far from the shoreline now.

  23. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close