Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Please remember the terms of your membership agreement.

Moderators: valis, garyb

User avatar
valis
Posts: 7680
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by valis »

Oceanographers have long known that the 20-year-old paradigm for describing the global ocean circulation– called the Great Ocean Conveyor – was an oversimplification. It's a useful depiction, but it's like describing Beethoven's Fifth Symphony as a catchy tune.

The conveyor belt paradigm says the Gulf Stream-warmed ocean releases heat to the atmosphere in the northern North Atlantic, leaving ocean water colder and denser as it moves north. The cold waters sink and flow southward along the "deep western boundary current" that hugs the continental slope from Canada to the equator. To replace the down-flowing water, warm surface waters from the tropics are pulled northward along the conveyor's upper limb.

But while the conveyor belt paradigm establishes the melody, the subtleties and intricacies of the symphony of global ocean circulation largely remain a puzzle.

Now, research led by oceanographers at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) and Duke University have teased out a new piece of that puzzle, expanding our understanding of this circulation model. Using field observations and computer models, the study shows that much of the southward flow of cold water from the Labrador Sea moves not along the deep western boundary current, but along a previously unknown path in the interior of the North Atlantic.

The study by co-principal authors Amy Bower, a senior scientist in the WHOI Department of Physical Oceanography, and Susan Lozier, a professor of physical oceanography at Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment, will be published in the May 14 issue of the research journal Nature.

... more @ eurekalert.org
Science Daily is reporting that just because they teach you something in graduate school doesn’t make it right. A 50 year old model of global thermohaline circulation that predicts a deep Atlantic counter current below the Gulf Stream is now formally called into question by an armada of subsurface RAFOS floats drifting 700 - 1500m deep. Nearly 80% of the RAFOS floats escaped the Deep Western Boundary Current (DWBC), drifting into the open ocean.

This confirms suspicions that have been around since the 1990’s, and likely plays havoc with global models of climate change. The findings by Drs. Amy Bower of Wood’s Hole and Susan Lozier of Duke University et al. are published in a forthcoming issue of Nature.

The implications would be for more cold, oxygenated water along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, but I’m just making that last part up. Best to read for yourself. As I recall, the DWBC was notoriously slow. You have to wonder whether a big yellow float responds to these currents the same as suspended matter, like plankton and particulates. Either way, the research represents a major paradigm shift in ocean circulation theory.

- via "Deep Sea News"
(edited to add quotes & chose a less inflammatory title)
User avatar
Shroomz~>
Posts: 5669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: The Blue Shadows

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by Shroomz~> »

Surely oceanographers are doing more accurate experiments than this?
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23380
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by garyb »

Shroomz~> wrote:Surely oceanographers are doing more accurate experiments than this?
any idea how BIG the oceans are? :)
User avatar
next to nothing
Posts: 2521
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Bergen, Norway

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by next to nothing »

Oceans are big, but one of the most uniform substances you can do math on, in real life :)
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23380
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by garyb »

and yet, everything they said they knew is now wrong....
User avatar
Shroomz~>
Posts: 5669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: The Blue Shadows

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by Shroomz~> »

Gary, how much money is supposedly going towards 'global warming' research & how many satellites are orbiting the planet that could be tracking billions of tiny encapsulated microchips flowing around the oceans at varying depths?
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23380
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by garyb »

well, supposedly lots...

and yet, everything that they knew is wrong. the deeper depths have NEVER been examined.

but for size comparisons, i once again suggest looking at the fact that all 6.5 billion humans can occupy the State of Texas with 102 square meters per person of personal space. Texas is 695,621 square kilometers. the Earth's oceans are 361,000,000 square kilometers, more than 2-1 the land area. the depth is some 3700 kilometers, with the deepest areas twice that. the volume of seawater is 1.37 billion cubic kilometers. it's big.

besides, that "research" has never been because of a real, or managable, crisis........
User avatar
Shroomz~>
Posts: 5669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: The Blue Shadows

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by Shroomz~> »

All I'm saying is that it's a tad surprising that this study is breaking new ground (if it is at all). It's even more surprising that anyone would deem it as an even remotely adequate study in this technological age.

Maybe there's a deliberate cap in place to stop any worthwhile level of research.
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23380
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by garyb »

it's not that surprising. very little money is spent on "pure" research, and Scientific "facts" are being revised everyday.
User avatar
Shroomz~>
Posts: 5669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: The Blue Shadows

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by Shroomz~> »

Well it's surprising to me. It would be interesting to see some figures on how much money has been spent on researching marine creatures in the last 20 years in comparison to researching the oceans they live in. I guess studying the movements of sharcs & crocodiles etc makes better TV programming than studying the oceans themselves. :lol:
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by dawman »

The Everglades are going to disappear, they have ruined the largest Amercian Wetland which has jepordized all living things.................
The Manatee is more populous and healthy than ever before.
I go to Anna Marie Island every year to hang with Ma & Pa and take Scope4live Jr. to Disneyworld, and there are so many of those FAT BASTARDS mooching food and blocking the channels it's a ridiculous....
I don't listen to any reasearch experts anymore, I believe what I see.
ALSO..........The St.Johns River has the largest Bass growth in decades...they are actually so over populated fishing has no limits and they are even found in the mouth of the river at Jacksonville where it hits the Ocean.
But I heard they were suppose to all die becuase of Global warming and loss of water in the Everglades........I think I remember Al Gore saying that as he flew across the country in his Lear Jet...............
Nice to chat about something else actually... :wink:
User avatar
siriusbliss
Posts: 3118
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Cupertino, California US
Contact:

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by siriusbliss »

Meanwhile -

http://www.iceagenow.com/Alaskas_Hubbar ... er_day.htm

Maybe global warming is also global cooling? :lol:
Is a polar shift underway?
solar flares (or lack thereof)?
incoming meteor?

or do humans HAVE to continue to be so irresponsibly responsible for every friggin' thing on this planet?

Greg (who still expects Xite to warm up his house this Summer) :P
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by dawman »

You know one of the guys who's truth still is more accurate than all of these modern day Ivory Tower scientists is Benjamin Franklin. He use to take tempuratures as he made his many trips across the Atlantic and actually termed it the Gulf Stream.
Back when we really needed France......... :lol:
Now I still need France, but for Scope developers only.
User avatar
Shroomz~>
Posts: 5669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: The Blue Shadows

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by Shroomz~> »

XITE-1/4LIVE wrote:Back when we really needed France......... :lol:
Now I still need France, but for Scope developers only.
And for their outstanding production of french women. :D
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by dawman »

Agreed 100%.
I have grown particurally fond of women who don't speak a lick of English lately.
It's still in their nature to spend and argue, but the percentages of occurances are much lower.
Sophie Marceau comes to mind.


JOKE:......................How does a French Whore Hold Her Liquor.......??
>....................................

By the ears.. :lol: ............................Ankyu.............
User avatar
valis
Posts: 7680
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by valis »

Shroomz~> wrote:Gary, how much money is supposedly going towards 'global warming' research & how many satellites are orbiting the planet that could be tracking billions of tiny encapsulated microchips flowing around the oceans at varying depths?
I know that in the US funding for longterm research and most "pure" research programs has dried up dramatically in the last 10-15 years, much of what was originally funded by research grant money has been shifted to the private sector (corporate investment) with more immediate gains usually yielding a better chance at continuing research when you enter the general public or continue on to 'higher' levels of education (masters/phd). Being able to publish tangible results that your peers will accept ("peer review") and the US's continuing focus on more and more immediate financial gain for projects (5 year business plans?).

In any case I'm not suggesting that because I found something on the internet it is correct, but it's good to remember that even secular 'intellectual' circles erect totems of worship via the same mechanisms used elsewhere, repetition (ritual to the religious) and peer-review (aka "common sense"). Or as Robert Anton Wilson says, it's good to be skeptical about even your own bullshit.
User avatar
Shroomz~>
Posts: 5669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: The Blue Shadows

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by Shroomz~> »

Valis, I'm not trying to say that your point regarding revising oceanic stream models is worthless, or that the research you point out is worthless. What I'm saying should be pretty obvious - I'm saying that more investment in this type of research would be the way to go, since it seems to me like it's way behind the times & that oceanographers should be conducting much more accurate, high-tech studies in this day & age.
User avatar
valis
Posts: 7680
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by valis »

Shroomz~> wrote:Valis, I'm not trying to say that your point regarding revising oceanic stream models is worthless, or that the research you point out is worthless. What I'm saying should be pretty obvious - I'm saying that more investment in this type of research would be the way to go, since it seems to me like it's way behind the times & that oceanographers should be conducting much more accurate, high-tech studies in this day & age.
I didn't take you that way at all actually, in fact I was agreeing with you about research. At least in the country I'm in I think there's currently a real lack of 'pure' research compared to when I was in school, ie, research that focuses on something besides immediate economic gain...
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23380
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by garyb »

valis wrote:there's currently a real lack of 'pure' research compared to when I was in school, ie, research that focuses on something besides immediate economic gain...
nonsense, they aren't only interested in economic gain, they're also looking for military advantage and population management/control. there's plenty of work being done there....
User avatar
valis
Posts: 7680
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Re: Time to revise global oceanic stream models?

Post by valis »

In the case of the military at least I would tender the opinion that financial gain is still a primary motive, especially for companies investing in military research (in the hopes of contracts when it comes time for 'military spending'.) I grew up in households that functioned based on those contracts...
Post Reply