Is the education system a mess? My thoughts exactly.

Recall that the Gulf Stream is not the same as the Thermohaine Circulation (THC). The Gulf Stream spreads out as it leaves the U.S. coast and becomes the North Atlantic Drift Current. Only a fraction of the waters of the Gulf Stream move toward Northern Europe, the majority turns back towards the south and circulates around the sub-tropical gyre. It's the THC branch of the Gulf Stream water which does keep Northern Europe somewhat warmer than the coastal regions at a similar latitude on the North Pacific coast. Both locations are warmer than land areas at similar latitudes on the western side of the respective ocean basins.

But, to get back to reality, Global Warming is an atmospheric problem. The oceans can be expected to warm eventually, but the large mass will mean that the warming of the oceans will lag the warming in the atmosphere. The fact that the oceans are stratified implies that the warming of the deep oceans will be slow. What I was attempting to point to was the physics of the energy flows thru the atmosphere, with the solar input being balanced by the IR leaving. The physics says the balance point is changing, thus increasing the global temperature at the surface.

E. Swanson

By asking these questions you are proving one of two things: you don't understand what is or is not relveant in the science of global climate, or you have never bothered to do ANY research whatsoever becuase those are the most basic of questions and have the most basic of answers. If neither A nor B are true, then you are a troll on this topic for you are asking unimportant questions for questionable reasons.

You see, since none of those questions are really relevant anymore, having been fully accounted for and being fully understood in terms of their roles in the science of global climate, there can be only one reason to ask them (keeping in mind what I stated in the first paragraph): obfuscation. You wish to mislead those not well-versed in the topic to believe there is some doubt. There is not.

I present the same challenge to you I present to ALL denialists (And given that we know the vast majority are politicized, are paid off and don't do any perr reviewed science, I am completely comfortable with labeling them to almost certainly be criminals spreading disinformation in such a manner as to undermine the future security of humanity on this planet. That is, you are almost certainly committing crimes against humanity. Given that scale, if you are either A or B are true, then you are wasting everyone's time and deserve any vitriol that comes your way.): Present some peer-reviewed science that has stood the critiques or shut the hell up. (Hint: there isn't any.)

Let's be charitable for a nano-second and assume you are just gullible:

http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/02/how-to-talk-to-global-warming-...

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.html

You can also search on any topic related to climate change at RealScience.

There will be no further charity from me. If you can honestly look at the science then return here and honestly remain a sceptic, then you are just lacking in objectivity and/or intelligence or are on the take.

Cheers