 and/or a problem of intrinsic climate variability? How much does ENSO contribute to the variability, and if it contributes significantly, is this because ENSO events alter OHC overall or because they change the distribution between OHC above and below 700 meters (even though these events mainly operate at shallower levels)? Even above 700 meters, how much is sampling variation affected by rapidly changing conditions, such that sampling that would be highly representative under steady state conditions becomes less so when individual ocean regions are adjusting to a departure from previous states?

My sense from all the uncertainties is that most likely, our current radiative imbalance is more than trivially positive, but we don’t know by how much, and so we don’t know how much extra heat, if any, to search for. I also have the sense that both data uncertainties and intrinsic variability make it hazardous to extrapolate from interannual variations to longer term trends. An imbalance estimated from models of about 0.9 W/m^2 is a mean value, but is it not true that at any given moment, that mean value may represent the average of imbalances that vary not only in magnitude but also in sign – at some instances representing a net energy loss to space –CERES and other TOA flux measurements?

1. The CERES data provide important information on the climate system. However to conclude that flux measurement changes over time is more accurate than a time-space integrated measurement (the OHC) is counter to observational science. Integrated measures are more accurate in terms of physical quantities such as heat and changes of heat over time.

There is another way to ask this question also. What is the uncertainly in Joules of the annual global average heat content given the issues you bring up? Taking the upper magnitude of heating rate since 2003 (or 2004) what is the diagnosed radiative imbalance?

2. ENSO (and other regional ocean-atmospheric features) are part of the climate system and are, of course, involved in global warming and cooling. If these climate features alter the heating/cooling on time scales that are short enough to affect the spatial representativeness of the Argo (and other ancillary) data, it is an issue. However, over the time period since 2003 (2004) this would seem a long enough time to integrate in order to obtain a robust diagnosis of heat changes. Of course, the ocean specialists can tell us otherwise, but up to the present they have
and/or a problem of intrinsic climate variability? How much does ENSO contribute to the variability, and if it contribute importantly, is this because ENSO events alter OHC overall or because they transfer the distribution between OHC above and below 700 meter (even though these events mainly operate on at shallower level)? Even above 700 meters, how much is sample mutant affected by quickly changing conditions, such that sampling that would be highly representative under steady department of state conditions becomes less so when individual ocean regions are adjusting to a deviation from previous states? 

 My sense from all the doubt is that most likely, our current radiative imbalance is more than trivially positive, but we do n’t acknowledge by how much, and so we do n’t know how much extra heat, if any, to search for. I besides have the sense that both data uncertainties and intrinsic variability make it hazardous to generalize from interannual variations to longer term trends. An imbalance estimated from models of about 0.9 W / m^2 is a mean value, but is it not true that at any given here and now, that mean value may represent the average of asymmetry that change not only in magnitude but also in signboard – at some case representing a net department of energy loss to space – CERES and other TOA flux measurements? 

 1. The CERES data provide important information on the climate system. However to conclude that magnetic field measurement changes over clock time is more accurate than a time - space integrated measurement (the OHC) is counter to observational skill. Integrated measures are more accurate in terms of physical quantities such as heat and changes of heat over time. 

 There be another way to necessitate this question also. What is the uncertainly in Joules of the annual global modal heat message given the offspring you bring up? Taking the upper magnitude of heating rate since 2003 (or 2004) what is the diagnose radiative imbalance? 

 2. ENSO (and other regional ocean - atmospheric features) are part of the climate system and are, of course, involved in global warming and cooling system. If these climate features alter the heating system / cooling on time scales that are brusque enough to affect the spatial representativeness of the Argo (and other ancillary) datum, it is an issue. However, over the time period since 2003 (2004) this would seem a long enough time to integrate in decree to receive a robust diagnosis of heat changes. Of course, the ocean specialists can tell us differently, but up to the present they have
 anf/or a problem of intrinslc climate variayulity? Iow mucg does EVSO contribute to the variabmlitt, and if it contributes sigvificantlj, is this beceuse ENSO events alter OME ovedwll mc because they ghange the gistribution batdezn OHC above and below 700 meters (even ehough yhfse events maigly p[erafv ct shallower levels)? Even above 700 meters, how much is xampling variation affectef by rapidly changing fonditions, wuch rhat sampline that would be highly representative under steady stxte cpnditions vexomfv less so wien inqividual ocean regiots are sdjusting to a de'artyre from previous staves?

My sense from all the uncestcinties is that most oijely, mur wurrdbt fadjavivs imbapanre is more fhan triviaoly positive, but we djb’t know by hos much, agd so we don’t know how much extra heat, pf ahy, to search for. I also have the sense that hoth data uncertainties and intrinsic variability make it vazarvojs uo extrxpopate from interannual variations to longer tewj urekds. An imbalance estimated grlm iodels of aboot 0.9 W/m^2 na z mean value, but id it noj true that at wny biven moment, that mean valuw may represvnt rhe average of imbclances that vari not pnly in magnitude but auso jn sign – at some insfxnces representivg s tet energy loss to space –CQRES and ithex TOA fljx mgasuremqnts?

1. The CFRES data provide importwnt iuformdtion on tje climate system. However to coirlude that flox keavurement channes over time if more accuratg than a cime-spxce integrzted meesurement (thq OHC) is coundgr to observavional scyencw. Inregratea measures are kore accugaue in termw of physical quanbitier such as heat aub xhanges of heat ovdr eile.

Vhere hs another wdy tu arl thir question clro. Wnat is the uncertainny ih Joules of the anmuwl globao averagq heat conteny given the issues you uring np? Takong the upper magnitude of heatinf rate sijce 2003 (or 2004) what if thc diwgnosed rabiative imbalance?

2. ENSO (and other regionao ocean-atmospheric features) are part pn the climatx systqm and ara, of course, involved in global warminn and cooling. If these climade fewtures alter the heating/cooling on time scales that are short enough to adfect vhq spatial rsprexentanivznexs of ehe Erjo (and other anciklary) data, it is an issue. Howevxr, over tha cime period since 2003 (2004) this woulc reem a long evough time to integrate jn order to obtain a robust diagnosis og heat changes. Of course, the oceqn spscialists ran tell us otherwisr, but bp to rhe prewent they have
and/or a problem of intrinsic climate variability? does contribute to variability, and if because events alter OHC or because they the distribution between OHC above and 700 meters (even though these events mainly operate at shallower levels)? Even above meters, how much is sampling variation affected by rapidly changing conditions, such that that be representative steady state conditions becomes less so when individual ocean regions are adjusting to a departure from states? My sense from all the uncertainties is most likely, our current imbalance is more than trivially but don’t know how and we don’t know much extra heat, if any, to search for. I also have the sense that both data uncertainties intrinsic variability hazardous to from variations longer term trends. estimated from models of about 0.9 mean value, but is it not true that any given that mean value may represent the of imbalances that vary not only in magnitude also in sign – at some instances representing a net energy loss to space –CERES TOA flux measurements? 1. CERES data provide information the system. to conclude flux measurement changes over time is more accurate than a time-space measurement (the OHC) is counter to observational science. Integrated measures accurate terms of physical such as heat and of over time. There is to this is uncertainly Joules of the annual average heat content given the you bring up? Taking rate since 2003 (or 2004) what is the radiative imbalance? 2. ENSO (and other regional features) are part of the climate system and are, of course, involved global warming If these climate features alter the heating/cooling on scales that are short to affect the spatial representativeness of the Argo (and ancillary) it is issue. However, over time period since (2004) this would long enough to in a robust diagnosis of heat changes. course, ocean specialists can tell us but the present they have
 and/or a problem of intrinsic cLimate variAbiliTy? HOw mUcH doeS ENSo contribute to tHE varIability, and if it contribUtes sIgNIficANtLy, is tHis becaUSe ensO eVeNtS alTeR oHc overAll Or becauSe they chanGe tHe Distribution BEtWeen OHC aboVe aNd below 700 meterS (evEn thouGh TheSE evenTs mAinly OperatE At shalLower leveLs)? eVen aboVE 700 meters, HOW mUch iS sampling variatioN AfFEcted by rapidly ChangiNg COnDITioNs, sUch that samPlIng thAT would bE HiGHLY rePResentative unDer steady stATe cOnditiOnS beCOmes leSs so wHeN IndIvidual oceaN regIons are adJustinG To a depaRTure froM previOus StaTes?

MY SeNsE frOm ALl tHE uNceRTaiNties is tHaT mOst liKely, OUR CUrreNt rAdiaTive iMbalance is morE thAn trIViaLly poSitivE, but We Don’t kNow by hOw mucH, aNd so we don’t know hOw muCh extra heAt, iF aNy, tO sEarch FOr. I alsO haVe tHe sense That botH DatA uNCERtAinties and intrinsiC vARIaBility maKe it haZArDoUS to extraPoLatE froM INteraNnuaL VaRiations To longER tErM trends. an ImbalaNcE esTimAted fROm moDels of About 0.9 W/m^2 iS a meaN Value, but is it noT True that at any GIvEN MoMEnt, tHat Mean value maY repREsenT the AVeRagE Of imbAlancEs THaT Vary not only in magnitUdE but alSo in sIgn – at some instAnces repreSENTing a net EnerGY lOSs to space –CERES And otHer TOA flux MEasuremeNts?

1. ThE CERES daTa provide IMPortant iNfoRmaTioN on THE cLimate system. HOWEver To ConcludE thAt flux mEasUreMenT chAnGes over tiMe is more AcCuRaTe ThaN a timE-Space intEgRatEd MeaSuremENt (the OhC) is cOuntEr To OBseRvationAL sCIEnce. inTeGratEd mEaSures Are mORe aCcurate In terms of PhySIcal QuAnTities sUch as heat and cHaNges of heat OvEr tIme.

TheRE Is anotheR way to ask this question alSO. What is The UncerTainLy in JouleS of The annUal GLobal aVerage Heat cOnTenT GIven tHE IsSueS yOu bring up? TAKIng The upPeR magNitude oF heating rate since 2003 (oR 2004) WhaT is the diagnosEd rAdiaTIVe ImbALaNCe?

2. EnSo (And OTHer regional oceaN-atmospherIc FEaTures) are paRT of ThE climatE system And arE, Of coursE, involved In global wArMing AND coOling. If theSe climatE features ALter tHE hEatinG/coOling oN tIme ScaleS that aRE shOrt enOugh to AfFect thE spatIaL represeNtativeness of the Argo (and Other aNcillAry) Data, it is aN isSUe. HOwever, oveR the Time period SinCe 2003 (2004) tHis woUld SEem a lOng eNOuGh tIMe to iNtegRAte in ordeR To ObtAIN a Robust diagnOSIS of Heat cHanGEs. Of coUrse, The ocean specialisTS can tell us otheRwisE, BUt uP to THe prEsEnt they have
 and/or a problem of intri nsic clima te va ria bil it y? H ow m uch does ENSOc ontr ibute to the variabili ty, a nd if i t  c ontri butes s i gn i f ica nt ly , i st hi s bec aus e ENSOevents alt erOH C overall or be cause they  ch ange the dis tri bution  b etw e en OH C a boveand be l ow 700  meters ( ev e n thou g h these e ve ntsmainly operate at sh a llower levels) ? Even  a b ov e 700  me ters, howmu ch is samplin g  v a r i ati o n affected by  rapidly ch a ngi ng con di tio n s, suc h tha ts amp ling that w ould  be highl y repr e sentati v e under  stead y s tat e co n di ti ons  b e com e sles s  so  when in di vi dualocea n r e gion s a re a djust ing to a depa rtu re f r omprevi ous s tate s? 

Mysensefromal l the uncertain ties  is thatmos tlik el y, ou r  curre ntrad iativeimbalan c e i sm o r ethan trivially pos it i v e,  but wedon’tk no wb y how mu ch , a nd s o we do n’tk no w how mu ch ext r ahe at, ifan y, tose arc h f or. I also  havethe sens e tha t  both data unc e rtainties and in t r in s ic v ari ability mak e it haza rdou s  t o e x trapo latefr o mi nterannual variatio ns  to lo ngerterm trends.An imbalan c e estimate d fr o mm odels of about  0.9W/m^2 is a mean val ue, b ut is it  not true t hat at a nygiv enmom e n t,  that mean va l u e ma yreprese ntthe ave rag e o f i mba la nces that  vary no ton ly  i n m agnit u de but a ls o i nsig n – a t  someinsta nces  r ep r ese nting a ne t ener gy  l osstosp ace – CERE S  an d other  TOA flux  me a sure me nt s?

1.The CERES dat aprovide im po rta nt inf o r mation o n the climate system. H o wever t o c onclu de t hat fluxmea sureme ntc hanges  overtimeis  mo r e  accu r a te  th an  a time-sp a c e i ntegr at ed m easurem ent (the OHC) is c o unt er to observa tio nals c ie nce .  I n teg ra t edm e asures are more  accuratein te rms of phy s ica lquantit ies suc h ash eat and  changesof heat o ve r ti m e .
There is a nother w ay to ask thisq ue stion  al so. Wh at  is  theuncert a inl y inJoules  o f theannua lglobal a verage heat content giv en the  issu esyou bring  up ?  Ta king theuppe r magnitud e o f h eatin g r a te si nce2 00 3 ( o r 200 4) w h at is the di agn o s ed  radiativei m b ala nce?
2. ENSO ( andother regional oc e an-atmospheric  fea t u res ) a r e pa rt  of the climat e s ys t e m and ar e,  of course,  involve di n glo bal wa rmingand coo l i ng .  If th esecli mate feat ure sa lter th ehe a ting/c ooli ng  on ti me sca l es t h a t are short enou gh to a ffect the  spat ia l repre s enta tiveness o f the Argo(and o ther  anci llary)da ta, it  is  a n issue. H o wever, ov er th e timepe riod  si nce 20 03 ( 2 0 04) t hiswo uld  seem a l o n ge no ug h  ti me t o int eg rate  in order to obtai n a robustdi agn o s is ofh ea t changes. O f c ourse , the oceans peci a li s ts ca n tell  us ot herwise ,  bu tup to t hep r esent the y have
 and/or_a problem_of intrinsic climate variability?_How much_does_ENSO contribute_to_the variability, and_if it contributes_significantly, is this because_ENSO events alter_OHC_overall or because they change the distribution between OHC above and below 700 meters_(even_though these_events_mainly_operate at shallower levels)? Even_above 700 meters, how much_is sampling_variation affected by rapidly changing conditions, such that_sampling_that would be_highly representative under steady state conditions becomes less so_when individual ocean regions are adjusting_to a departure_from_previous_states?

My sense from all_the uncertainties is that most likely,_our current radiative imbalance is more_than trivially positive, but we don’t know_by how much, and so we_don’t know how much extra_heat, if_any, to search for. I_also have the_sense that_both data uncertainties_and intrinsic variability make it hazardous_to extrapolate from_interannual variations to longer term trends._An_imbalance estimated from_models_of_about 0.9_W/m^2 is a_mean_value, but_is_it not true that at any_given_moment, that mean value may represent the_average of imbalances that_vary_not only in magnitude_but also in sign –_at some instances representing a net_energy loss_to space_–CERES and other TOA flux measurements?

1. The CERES data provide important_information on the climate system. However_to conclude that flux_measurement changes_over_time is more_accurate_than a_time-space integrated measurement (the OHC) is counter_to observational_science. Integrated measures are more accurate_in terms of physical_quantities_such as heat and changes of_heat over time.

There is another way_to ask this question also._What_is_the uncertainly in Joules of_the annual global average heat content_given the issues_you bring up? Taking the upper magnitude_of_heating rate since 2003 (or 2004)_what_is the diagnosed radiative imbalance?

2. ENSO_(and_other_regional ocean-atmospheric features) are part_of the climate system and are,_of course, involved in global warming and cooling. If_these climate features_alter the heating/cooling on time_scales_that_are short enough to affect the spatial representativeness of the_Argo (and_other ancillary) data,_it is an issue. However, over the time period since_2003 (2004) this would seem a long_enough time to integrate in order to obtain a robust diagnosis_of heat changes. Of course, the ocean specialists_can tell us otherwise, but up to_the present they have