The heat transfer from the earths core is minuscule compared to the heat output from the sun which is what warms our atmosphere.
If the sun were to go cold the earth would continue to lose its own intrinsic heat at its own intrinsic rate.
The amount of heat the earth itself emits would gradually diminish over time according to most scientists who assume that the core of the earth is cooling.
You are mixing up total energy, sun plus very small earth with energy flow,very small earth out with imagination, cold sun plus very small earth out. There is a larger differential in surface temp of the cooler earth to the temperature inside the earth but the flow of endogenous energy (very small) from the earth core to the surface remains the same and will diminish in time as the earth’ score cools.
But you might have heard claims like “there’s been no warming since 1998”, so let us have a look at temperatures starting in 1998 (the year sticking out most above the trend line in the previous graph)
I will be using the HadCRUT4 hybrid data, which have the most sophisticated method to fill data gaps in the Arctic with the help of satellites,
Keith Woollard said You lose me at the first graph. If you use the satellite data you cannot make any of the points you raise.
[Response: Of course the same points about the meaning of significance and confidence intervals could have been made also with satellite data. But here we are interested in the evolution of global surface temperatures, which cannot be measured by satellites. – stefan]
I’m curious, why aren’t they using the satellite data?
[Response: Satellite data doesn’t measure the same thing and has different levels of signal and noise. – gavin]
The issue is that claims like “there’s been no warming since 1998” relate to the satellite data which do show a pause for that time no matter how you try to deny it.
You cannot both incorporate satellite data and then dismiss it.
angech | December 5, 2014 at 5:07 am | Reply
Willis Eschenbach has an article up at WUWT
Argo And Ocean Heat ContentThe earth is closest to the sun in January, so the earth gains energy around that time, and loses it in the other half of the year. please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU DISAGREE WITH.
Time for me to get on a hobby horse and get knocked off.
I understand what you are trying to say but disagree with the concept.
The energy in equals the energy out on a 24 hour basis.
Hence when the earth is closer to the sun in January yes there is more energy in but also more energy out to balance.
The atmosphere is naturally hotter as the sun is closer.
But the earth does not retain more energy stored in the sea. Any heat that has gone deep is balanced by colder water elsewhere as the earth has to give up all the energy it takes in over the 24 hour cycle.
If that heat went deep somewhere else had to radiate the equivalent back to space.
Yes there are Kelvin waves, yes, there are pockets of down-welling hot water.
But these do not store extra heat, they only carry heat that has already been balanced by the outgoing radiation from the rest of the sea and land.
That is why “the net TOA imbalance generally only varies by something on the order of ± half a watt per square metre over the thirteen years of the record, with no statistically significant trend at all”
not astounding at all.
TOA is simply the heat in, heat out interface.
Hence so called stored heat cannot come back to bite us. It has already gone back to space.
ENSO and stadium waves and El Nino’s are simply descriptors of current weather patterns.
Yes El Nino is real, the sea is warmer but there is no more heat in the system because of it.
There must be more heat in the system causing El Nino.
The simplest explanation for this would be altered albedo due to cloud cover. This lets more heat into the atmosphere which then heats up.
More complex would be altered albedo due to atmospheric factors we have not taken into account.
Choppy surface water in storms, dust storms, forest fires.
or even factors in the sea which might cause increased reflectance off water.
The last would be simple variance in the amount of energy emitted by the sun which we are reluctant to consider.