1
7

[–] Vanwe 1 point 7 points (+8|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Yes and no. I would say that it certainly shows that our understanding of what was happening and why is incomplete. There are various theories as to why this is happening, but none that have convinced me.

It however does not invalidate the 100 or so years of observed warming prior to this. It is also worth noting that the NOAA has come out and said the surface measurements were incorrect. Noteworthy that it does not say the satellite measurements were incorrect.

0
0

[–] Level_Cannon ago 

There is actually a NASA study showing that during the "Hiatus" the subsurface temperatures in the ocean increased dramatically and would explain where the heat went.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4655

0
0

[–] Vanwe ago 

I remain unconvinced. Looking at the first chart from the official argo website, there is a relatively dramatic time of increasing surface temperature (the cyan at the bottom) during the 60's. This does not match up with with the observed atmospheric temperature during the 60's, which had a mostly downward trend.

This is just from a very quick review of the data.

1
1

[–] harebrane 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

I suspect what we're seeing right now is simply that all the added heat has simply caused the atmosphere to begin convecting much more energetically. This would cause portions of the surface to actually cool noticeably even as the entire system warmed even more rapidly and became increasingly violent.

0
0

[–] Vanwe ago 

That is possible, but that's part of the problem. There are several possible explanations for the phenom, but none that are really being tested(to my knowledge at least). But to my knowledge the only explanation given is either, the data is not conclusive to deny our previous conclusions, or that the newer data is "interpreted incorrectly".