Numb: Number & Number

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig. 1 (modified Fig. 5.2 @ Bindoff et al., 2007)

The graphic at Fig. 1 (which is Fig. 5.2 in the paper I recently cited: On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction - 16) has layers 1-16 marked (0 & 17 are out of scope).

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig. 2 Hypothesized Steric SLC

I think that it shows how the graphs I generated today (with the new software modules I recently wrote) reflect the validity of the argument against the bathtub model (The Bathtub Model Doesn't Hold Water, 2, 3, 4).

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig. 3 Layer Zero

The different colors in that graphic represent different degrees of "heat content" in the upper 700m of an obviously large expanse of ocean.

That is not the way bathtubs work, so I will be glad when the use of that term is relegated to historical mistakes of the oceanographer realm.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.4 Layer One

The graph at Fig. 2 is also from that paper.

It purports to show 'steric' sea level rise in a trend that seems to mimic Greenland-and-Antarctica-caused types of sea level rise (the "old-fashioned" melting ice type).

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.5 Layer Two

The color codes in Fig. 1 show that ocean heat content varies from depth level to depth level, latitude to latitude, and longitude to longitude.

That dovetails with the graphs I generated (Fig. 3 - Fig. 19) for reader perusal while reading this post.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.6 Layer Three

Those 4-panel graphs show sea level change compared with temperature and salinity changes.

The first two panels are generated from PSMSL tide gauge stations in the particular layer being graphed.

The temperature and salinity measurements in the WOD database at all depths in a particular layer are averaged into one data value for each year the graph covers.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.7 Layer Four

The same goes for the sea level change values.

The years involved in the WOD CTD & PFL temperature and salinity measurements are matched to the annual sea level measurements in the PSMSL database.

(Even though there are far more measurements in the PSMSL database, in terms of years, I only use those years that are also in the WOD datasets.)

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.8 Layer Five

Take a moment to compare the graphs of WOD style latitude layers (Fig. 3 - Fig. 19) with each other.

Be sure to also notice where they fit (in terms of latitude & longitude) on that graphic at Fig. 1.

Can you see that salinity & temperatures measured at those layer locations also vary from time to time?

That is what the contrasting colors also indicate on the graphic at Fig. 1.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.9 Layer Six

The 4-panel graphs of WOD data indicate non-bathtub type variations just as the Fig. 1 graphic does.

Where it shows different colors at different locations (meaning different heat content, meaning different temperatures), the 4-panel graphs show variation in temperature and in salinity.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.10 Layer Seven

However, one very major difference between the "shallow water technique" and these Dredd Blog graphs, is that I do not stop the measurements at 0-700m.

No, I go all the way.

That is, I go as far and wide, and as deep as the measurements in the WOD database go.

Today's graphs cover all the water in the oceans (except Layer Seventeen, the Antarctic, the South Polar region) where there is robust data in the CTD and PFL datasets to make it worthwhile.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.11 Layer Eight

There was only enough room on the Fig. 1 graphic to get Layer One through Layer 16 listed (on the right hand side of the graphic, in red numerals).

After perusing the Fig. 3 - Fig. 19 graphs, I can't see any coherent correlation between or among the sea level change patterns and the temperature-salinity patterns.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.12 Layer Nine

Thus, I can't accept the validity of the graph at Fig. 2 because it does not match the temperature-salinity graphs either.

Visually, it is much more like the sea level change graphs than it is like the temperature-salinity graphs.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.13 Layer Ten

In other words, it looks like the sea level rise graphs that Greenland and Antarctica produce as they melt away.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.14 Layer Eleven

I, for one, would like to know how (and with what) they constructed it.

Did they use PSMSL in situ tide gauge station records that produce a pattern of a specific area?

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.15 Layer Twelve

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.16 Layer Thirteen

The global mean average bathtub model approach does not do that.

It is more like the song "little houses made of ticky tacky that all look the same" or the "one size fits all" saying.

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.17 Layer Fourteen

Those "global average" machinations do not change the reality that one person's sea level rise is another person's sea level fall (Proof of Concept , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.18 Layer Fifteen

I don't see doctors handing out the same medicine and treatment for all illnesses, no, I see them tailoring solutions to fit a particularized diagnosis.


We often see written that "sea level rise and fall have different values" but that seems to be a cop out ("Furthermore, changes in the storage of heat and in the distribution of ocean salinity cause the ocean to expand or contract and hence change the sea level both regionally and globally." - Bindoff et al., 2007).

Obviously, engineers working on revisions to sea ports can't use abstract notions about what is happening globally or in a region far away.

They must have exact measurements and sufficient visionary analysis to know how to engineer specific solutions (Why Sea Level Rise May Be The Greatest Threat To Civilization, 2, 3, 4, 5).

Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.

Fig.19 Layer Sixteen

The Industrial revolution which began circa 1750 eventually brought concepts of mass production and a bias against "different strokes for different folks."

This has impacted researchers in the scientific community who are in the "global mean average" trance.

They have lashed out against the once robust number of tide gauge stations designed to inform people around them what is happening where they actually live and work (The Warming Science Commentariat - 11).

These local observations points that have provided specific information (about what is happening where local reality takes place) are not being perpetuated, not being rebuilt.

Their numbers are in decline.


The safety of people everywhere, then, is also in decline.

That is especially true when, as in the U.S.eh?, a coup takes place which engenders behaviors that are chillingly close to the behavior of mass-murder suicide plots (MOMCOM's Mass Suicide & Murder Pact, 2, 3, 4, 5).