# Climatologist Dr. Michael Mann completely vindicated...again. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 23, 2011, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724 "2011-08-23T00:17:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![AT116](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/49beb7/32.png) [@AT116](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AT116)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/61 "2011-08-24T03:58:38Z")
These “people who are skeptical of climate skeptics” are engaged in propaganda not science. Anyone who wants to know what REAL scientists think should acquaint themselves with the following: > [@](#): > > [http://www.petitionproject.org/](http://www.petitionproject.org/) ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/62 "2011-08-24T04:01:53Z")
> [@AT116](#): > > These “people who are skeptical of climate skeptics” are engaged in propaganda not science. Anyone who wants to know what REAL scientists think should acquaint themselves with the following: Ah, so you are just joking then. You had me for a while there. Carry on. ---
**Author:** ![user\_hostile](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/user_hostile/32/474_2.png) [@user\_hostile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/user_hostile)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/63 "2011-08-24T04:02:13Z")
> [@AT116](#): > > These “people who are skeptical of climate skeptics” are engaged in propaganda not science. Anyone who wants to know what REAL scientists think should acquaint themselves with the following: That means absolutely nothing; it is an fallacious “argumentum ad verecundiam” (argument from authority). ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/64 "2011-08-24T04:06:27Z")
[quote=“GIGObuster, post:58, topic:593724”] First time I see that a graph from the National Classifieds Directory is something that needs to be taken seriously, it is a bogus one BTW. Lets look at the real data from NASA GISS and Solanki, 1979 to 2009: > **[Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions](https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm)** > > \In the last 35 years of global warming, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. Sun and climate have been going in opposite directions.\ that’s not a cite from NASA and the chart legend makes no sense. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/65 "2011-08-24T04:09:01Z")
> [@AT116](#): > > These “people who are skeptical of climate skeptics” are engaged in propaganda not science. Anyone who wants to know what REAL scientists think should acquaint themselves with the following: - Well, no. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/Py2XVILHUjQ/maxresdefault.jpg "32000 Scientists") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py2XVILHUjQ) [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/qZzwRwFDXw0/hqdefault.jpg "9. Climate Change - Meet the Scientists") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZzwRwFDXw0) You are swallowing the propaganda of the same people that worked before denying that tobacco smoke caused cancer. Doubt is their profession. - That was such a softball of a post that it is like he is playing tee ball and at the same time we are playing baseball.. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/66 "2011-08-24T04:13:23Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > that’s not a cite from NASA and the chart legend makes no sense. In the legend there are the direct links to the data sets from NASA and the Solar organization, the debunking is following the “logic” that the deniers are using. The point is to show that their own assertions are contradicted by the real data. ---
**Author:** ![AT116](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/49beb7/32.png) [@AT116](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AT116)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/67 "2011-08-24T04:15:39Z")
Here’s the source of the chart I showed, that GIGObuster claims is bogus: [http://www.petitionproject.org/gw\_article/GWReview\_OISM150.pdf](http://www.petitionproject.org/gw_article/GWReview_OISM150.pdf) It’s simply astonishing the degree to which these climate alarmists will lie, but it’s been going on for centuries, ever since the first witch doctors told their flocks that the bad weather they were suffering from was a sign that the gods were unhappy with their sinful ways, and that their only chance to survive was to obey his orders. This current nonsense kind of retains that “religious” element to it. The truth will be evident for all to see in the relatively near future, as earth heads into a prolonged cooling period. The truth always comes out in the end… ---
**Author:** ![matt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a6a055/32.png) [@matt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/68 "2011-08-24T04:34:41Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > I may point out here that there is a little nit to this, Pat Michaels has pointed out that the problem of using the argument that it has not warmed up since 1998 or other recent years is that things like el nino and la nina and low solar activity have conspired to make the “flat” but still warmer by decade line we are currently in, the danger for skeptics (and misguided deniers), as Pat Michael explained, is that once the sun and other items stop conspiring to keep this “apparent” slow down of the anthropological forcing then it will make the life of skeptics impossible as on top of that natural forcing the human emitted CO2 with its warming will be worse by then also. That was my point too! A flat or even cooling period doesn’t help us unless we know what’s causing it, and whether it will last. The thing is, we don’t really _know_ what is causing the current slow down. It’s not just surface temperatures - ARGO has registered a flat ocean heat content since it was up and running, and the steric sea level has stayed constant over the same period. The sun may be quiet in terms of sunspots and flares but the actual heat and light energy it’s been putting out has been normal for the past decade, see TSI plots here: [http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant](http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant). El Nino and la Nina are cyclic fluctuations - they create no net trend, and the high temperatures of 1998 and 2010 are El Nino spikes. _Something_ seems to have changed around the turn of the millenium and we don’t know what it is. I’ve read various speculations about the excess heat going into the deep ocean through localised downwellings that aren’t picked up by the ARGO network, and a recent study suggests its all due to Chinese coal-fired power stations emitting sulphates - see [http://www.worldweatherpost.com/2011/07/06/has-sulfate-pollution-from-asia-masked-a-decade-of-warming/](http://www.worldweatherpost.com/2011/07/06/has-sulfate-pollution-from-asia-masked-a-decade-of-warming/). Neither is confirmed, and neither are particularly convincing to me. At least however there is now an acknowledgement that warming _has_ levelled off, which is somehow seen as a victory by one “side” but gets us absolutely nowhere unless we figure out what is going on. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/69 "2011-08-24T04:35:11Z")
> [@AT116](#): > > Here’s the source of the chart I showed, that GIGObuster claims is bogus: > > [http://www.petitionproject.org/gw\_article/GWReview\_OISM150.pdf](http://www.petitionproject.org/gw_article/GWReview_OISM150.pdf) And it is still bogus, it is in reality missing the last decades showing that the the sun activity is no longer driving the current heath increase. The bogus graph also appeared in “The Great Global Warming Swindle” and this video shows why that petition graph is a fake one: [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/boj9ccV9htk/maxresdefault.jpg "The Big Swindle Movie") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boj9ccV9htk) > [@AT116](#): > > It’s simply astonishing the degree to which these climate alarmists will lie, but it’s been going on for centuries, ever since the first witch doctors told their flocks that the bad weather they were suffering from was a sign that the gods were unhappy with their sinful ways, and that their only chance to survive was to obey his orders. This current nonsense kind of retains that “religious” element to it. > > The truth will be evident for all to see in the relatively near future, as earth heads into a prolonged cooling period. The truth always comes out in the end… Indeed. [http://lasp.colorado.edu/images/science/solar\_infl/Surface-Temp-w-paleo.jpg](http://lasp.colorado.edu/images/science/solar_infl/Surface-Temp-w-paleo.jpg) As the Skeptical Science explained in the comments: > **[Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions](https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm)** > > \In the last 35 years of global warming, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. Sun and climate have been going in opposite directions.\ > [@](#): > > Response: The only information at the LASP page about long term trends in solar irradiance is the following graph: > > What it shows is a close correlation between Solar Irradiance (the orange line) and global temperature (dotted blue line). **But they also show the correlation ends when the modern global warming trend begins in the mid-70’s. The data is all there and it’s unambiguous - there’s a reason why so many studies (listed above under “Other Studies on solar influence on climate”) conclude the sun’s influence on recent global warming is minimal.** ---
**Author:** ![AT116](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/49beb7/32.png) [@AT116](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AT116)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/70 "2011-08-24T04:35:14Z")
Here’s what is perhaps the best overview on the BS that enviro-fascists like the one on this blog that I’ve ever heard: Enjoy! [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/EjmtSkl53h4/hqdefault.jpg "George Carlin on The Environment") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4) ---
**Author:** ![AT116](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/49beb7/32.png) [@AT116](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AT116)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/71 "2011-08-24T04:41:28Z")
GIGO ends his newest comment by saying: > [@](#): > > the sun’s influence on recent global warming is minimal. I rest my case! Use your common sense everyone! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/72 "2011-08-24T04:46:00Z")
> [@matt](#): > > _Something_ seems to have changed around the turn of the millenium and we don’t know what it is. I’ve read various speculations about the excess heat going into the deep ocean through localised downwellings that aren’t picked up by the ARGO network, and a recent study suggests its all due to Chinese coal-fired power stations emitting sulphates - see [http://www.worldweatherpost.com/2011/07/06/has-sulfate-pollution-from-asia-masked-a-decade-of-warming/](http://www.worldweatherpost.com/2011/07/06/has-sulfate-pollution-from-asia-masked-a-decade-of-warming/). Neither is confirmed, and neither are particularly convincing to me. At least however there is now an acknowledgement that warming _has_ levelled off, which is somehow seen as a victory by one “side” but gets us absolutely nowhere unless we figure out what is going on. :dubious: > **[Does ocean cooling prove global warming has ended?](https://skepticalscience.com/cooling-oceans.htm)** > > Early estimates of ocean heat from the Argo showed a cooling bias due to pressure sensor issues. Recent estimates of ocean heat that take this bias into account show continued warming of the upper ocean. This is confirmed by independent estimates of... > [@](#): > > What the science says… > > The most recent ocean measurements show consistent warming. > > There are, however, disputes about the accuracy of Argo buoys and expendable measuring devices dropped into the sea, and the reporting of temperatures down to only 700 metres. How do scientists resolve these kind of disputes – bearing in mind that such disputes are the very stuff of science, the essence of true scepticism? One way is to find more data sources – different ways of measuring the phenomenon in dispute. By using results from seven different teams of scientists, all using different tools and methods, we are able to see a clear trend. And while there is variation between team results due to the differences in technique and measurement methods, one thing they all agree on: long term, temperatures are going up. > > Source: Lyman 2010 > [@](#): > > While there is a great deal we don’t know about how the oceans behave, we do however know that it’s safer to discuss all aspects of climate change using multiple sets of data, rather than just one, as Pielke Sr did. If ocean heat is a guide, then global warming is still on track to cause great disruption if we don’t modify our actions to reduce the release of anthropogenic CO2. > > Claims that global warming is not happening on the basis of short-term ocean temperatures are not supported by the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/73 "2011-08-24T04:48:59Z")
> [@AT116](#): > > GIGO ends his newest comment by saying: > > I rest my case! > > Use your common sense everyone! That works only by removing the context, scientists are referring to the current increase in heath, the sun is still there and no it is not ignored when calculating the heath increase observed decade by decade. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/74 "2011-08-24T04:53:11Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > In the legend there are the direct links to the data sets from NASA and the Solar organization, the debunking is following the “logic” that the deniers are using. The point is to show that their own assertions are contradicted by the real data. You can’t expect to be taken seriously when you use terms like “deniers” when there are plenty of scientists who challenge “global warming” on some level. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/75 "2011-08-24T05:14:09Z")
> [@AT116](#): > > Here’s what is perhaps the best overview on the BS that enviro-fascists like the one on this blog that I’ve ever heard: Enjoy! > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4) I think you need to look at the definition of sarcasm, it is more likely that George was more for the Gaia hypotheses (itself something that most scientists do not go for either) > **[George Carlin: Global Warming Denier … ?](https://energysmart.wordpress.com/2008/06/27/george-carlin-global-warming-denier/)** > > This video is the rage among the Global Warming denial sect, as they pass it around and post it with great glee following Carlin’s death. Their RIP is a celebration that George was one of the… [http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20153859,00.html](http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20153859,00.html) Watch this one to get a bit of a different perspective on Carlin: https://www.youtube.com/embed/tceH2RS6V5I?feature=oembed&wmode=opaque > [@](#): > > Here’s an example. Let’s say a water main breaks in downtown Los Angeles. Then it floods an electrical substation, knocking out all the traffic lights, and tying up the entire city. And then emergency vehicles can’t get through. **And at the same time, one of those month-long global warming heatwaves comes along** , but there’s no air conditioning, > **[George Carlin: Global Warming Denier … ?](https://energysmart.wordpress.com/2008/06/27/george-carlin-global-warming-denier/)** > > This video is the rage among the Global Warming denial sect, as they pass it around and post it with great glee following Carlin’s death. Their RIP is a celebration that George was one of the… > [@](#): > > No, Carlin doesn’t really come off as much of a denier in this one. > > > [@](#): > > > > There’s no learning curve with these people … > > No, the deniers have no interested in learning, even as they have fun showing up a George Carlin rant. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/76 "2011-08-24T05:21:23Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You can’t expect to be taken seriously when you use terms like “deniers” when there are plenty of scientists who challenge “global warming” on some level. Give it up, it is the effort of trying to claim that the term denier “can not be used in this case” that can not be taken seriously. specially when I already pointed out that there are skeptics that do look at the science and deserve to be called that and then there \*\*are \*\*deniers. Let Brickmore explain: [sarcasm here just in case you miss it:] > **[Monckton Ureservedl-ish Apologizes for Nazi Comment](https://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/monckton-ureservedl-ish-apologizes-for-nazi-comment/)** > > Lord Christopher Monckton, caught up in a media firestorm in Australia for calling economist Ross Garnaut a fascist while flashing up a slide with a rather innocuous statement of Garnaut’s ne… > [@](#): > > That’s why I avoid using the word “sympathizer.” The first time I heard that word, someone was talking about “Nazi sympathizers,” so when I heard someone speaking of “terrorist sympathizers,” I was appalled. I mean, obviously the person talking meant to imply that all terrorist sympathizers are closet Nazis. How else could I interpret it? For shame. > > On a serious note, I avoid using the terms “denier” and “denialist”–not because I think such terms are usually meant to equate people with Nazis, but because I don’t want to listen to all the whining. Well I do not mind, that is a silly reason why one should not use it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![matt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a6a055/32.png) [@matt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/77 "2011-08-24T05:25:52Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > :dubious: > > [Does ocean cooling prove global warming has ended?](http://www.skepticalscience.com/cooling-oceans.htm) I don’t rate that skeptical science article very highly at all. Firstly, the Levitus data and the Lyman data don’t remotely match each other, probably because the Levitus plot has a large step change where ARGO came on line around 2003-2004. Secondly, ALL SEVEN of the Lyman plots show a distinct inflection point and leveling off around the 2003 mark when ARGO came on line. Sure, some of them still have a slight upward trend but it is very much reduced compared with the previous trend. Saying “it’s still going up, a tiny little bit, so there!” as the article does totally misses the point and reveals the biases of skeptical sciences authors. Anyway, there’s more involved than just ARGO. Steric sea level rise (the rise caused by thermal expansion of the water, and NOT by melting ice) has been practically zero over the same period, see [http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global\_change\_analysis.html](http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global_change_analysis.html). Taken with the surface temperature record, the ARGO data and steric sea level all reinforce each other. Something has changed, and if it hasn’t, why are people publishing papers on Chinese sulphates trying to explain it? Different link to same story: [http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/332152/title/Sulfur\_stalls\_surface\_temperature\_rise\_](http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/332152/title/Sulfur_stalls_surface_temperature_rise_) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/78 "2011-08-24T05:32:44Z")
Well, I’m just saying that the error here is to repeat the same apparent error made by concentrating on the last few years of surface temperature while ignoring the past decades, but this time with ocean temperatures. > **[Does ocean cooling prove global warming has ended?](https://skepticalscience.com/cooling-oceans-intermediate.htm)** > > Early estimates of ocean heat from the Argo showed a cooling bias due to pressure sensor issues. Recent estimates of ocean heat that take this bias into account show continued warming of the upper ocean. This is confirmed by independent estimates of... > [@](#): > > In climate discussions, the most common error is focusing on a single piece of the puzzle while ignoring the big picture. The ocean cooling meme commits this error twofold. Firstly, it scrutinises 6 years worth of data while ignoring the last 40 years of ocean warming. Secondly, it hangs its hat on one particular reconstruction that shows cooling, while other results and independent analyses indicate slight warming. > > The bottom line is there is still uncertainty over the reconstruction of ocean heat. Generally, the various reconstructions show the same long term trends but don’t always agree over short periods. The uncertainty means one cannot conclude with confidence that the ocean is cooling. Independent analysis seem to indicate that over last half dozen years, the ocean has shown less warming than the long term trend but nevertheless, a statistically significant warming trend. ---
**Author:** ![matt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a6a055/32.png) [@matt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/79 "2011-08-24T05:53:53Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Well, I’m just saying that the error here is to repeat the same apparent error made by concentrating on the last few years of surface temperature while ignoring the past decades, but this time with ocean temperatures. I’m not ignoring the past decades, which have quite clearly shown warming. I agree that the time scale is small, but something seems to have changed. Ocean heat content is quite different from surface temperatures - it’s a lot less subject to weather noise, it’s an integrating measurement of energy accumulation, and thanks to the enormous heat capacity of the oceans, the measurements _are_ significant in the short term. (Note that ocean heat content is not just sea surface temperature - it’s volumetric). Six years (more like eight, now) of little to no energy accumulation by the oceans is an anomaly, and a big one. It has only happened in the past when big volcanos erupted, but we have no such volcano in this instance. Maybe it will be shown to be due to Chinese coal-fired power stations, but at the moment it’s a missing piece of the puzzle. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2011, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724/80 "2011-08-24T06:02:54Z")
Still, I do not think one could dismiss the Levitus or the Lyman data that easily, if they were not highly rated then the ones managing ARGO would not had put one of them\*\* in the same page you linked too\*\*. (One just needs to scroll down a little more to find also the other researchers the ARGO people are agreeing with here) [http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global\_change\_analysis.html](http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global_change_analysis.html) > [@](#): > > Ocean temperature and heat content > > Over the past 50 years, the oceans have absorbed more than 80% of the total heat added to the air/sea/land/cyrosphere climate system (Levitus et al, 2005). As the dominant reservoir for heat, the oceans are critical for measuring the radiation imbalance of the planet and the surface layer of the oceans plays the role of thermostat and heat source/sink for the lower atmosphere. > > Domingues et al (2008) and Levitus et al (2009) have recently estimated the multi-decadal upper ocean heat content using best-known corrections to systematic errors in the fall rate of expendable bathythermographs (Wijffels et al, 2008). For the upper 700m, the increase in heat content was 16 x 1022 J since 1961\*\*. This is consistent with the comparison by Roemmich and Gilson (2009) of Argo data with the global temperature time-series of Levitus et al (2005), finding a warming of the 0 - 2000 m ocean by 0.06°C since the (pre-XBT) early 1960’s\*\*. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climatologist-dr-michael-mann-completely-vindicated-again/593724.md?page=5)