How is the accumulation of heat energy in the ocean good for us?

The new Argo Float System will eventually give us a better idea of how our oceans transfer heat energy. I think this was a great step in understanding how our oceans operate.

On the flip side of your question is the total opposite thought : What if the AMO and PDO both go into a "negative" (cooling) phase? It seems that is why we had our recent Arctic Ice build up.

Grifter: <Where do you DA deniers keep getting all this Earth cooling crap.>

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2...

We are getting it from the sources that James Hansen and Phil Jones concocted when the earth was in a real warming trend. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

<10th warmest year globally in 132 years > I'll go you one better. It is probably one of the warmest years going back to 1650, the bottoming of the Little Ice Age. It is natural and part of the Earth's natural cycle, as we have been saying for a long time. This just shows that the 'saviors of the earth' will cling to anything in their feeble attempt to prove their point.

In direct answer to the question: This aspect of the argument is too new to really properly address it. For one thing, we are discovering new volcanoes beneath the sea surface almost daily. What does that have to do with the ocean heat and position of the heat? How do these affect the currents? Just too many unknowns to be conclusive.

PDO is negative but AMO is positive, when AMO goes negative it will cool.

I dont have proof and cant even tell how (what mechanism) but El nino's are a response to ocean surface heating and La Nina's respond to cooling, the last 15yrs temperatures have flat lined which is why we have neutral ENSO conditions

Here we go again. We have a very limited amount of data regarding the ocean temps.

You've got some serious demonstrating to do if you can demonstrate to me that we have had any ocean warming at all.

You will undoubtably come up with some and selected data that claims some sort of increase at some ocean level with an implied accuracy that is far inside any margin of error a rigorous argument should have.

To think a half degree rise in atmospheric temps has a detectable effect on a body whose thermal mass is 250 times greater is absurd.

Who's the denier now?

1998 was a strong El-Nino, El-Nino and the PDO phase are two different phenomena, you can still have both El-Nino's and La-Nina's during negative and positive PDO phases. Generally during the PDO warm phase there are more El-Nino's than La-Nina's.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/ts.gif

Where do you DA deniers keep getting all this Earth cooling crap.The Earth is not cooling The next 4 years are expected to be at or near global high temp range. AGW is not a straight line, there will be variations. However, that doesn't change that fact that GW is here.and 2012 was the 10th warmest year globally in 132 years That doesn't seem like cooling to me We have pumped enough extra greenhouse gases since the beginning of the industrial revolution to fuel AGW until beyond 2100

Indeed the oceans are warming, As a result there is more sea ice melting which is cold water. Sort of balances out. Ocean temps raising can disrupt marine life, particularly certain types of algae. Algae provides 60-90% of our oxygen. Ocean warming may effect the movement of the Gulf Stream veering away from Europe which means they may have to X-country ski to the pub in the future

Sounds like crying wolf one more time.

Lots of sciency sounding acronyms but the truth is there never was a basis for claiming CO2 has a significant affect on climate.

The global insurance industry, being obviously nothing but an army of puppets pulled by Al Gore, is busy destroying itself by denying prize-winning Blogosphere-scientists who have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that it's cooling, warming is due to the sun, and human-caused warming is good for us, all at the same time.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-18/insurance...