Air has very low heat capacity. It is mathematically impossible for claimed global warming to have the slightest effect upon ocean temperatures or ice sheets, because air holds very little heat.

It means hurricanes cannot be caused by carbon dioxide in the air. It takes ocean heat to create hurricanes.

The total mass of the oceans is 262 times the mass of the atmosphere. A gram of sea water has 3.84 times as much heat capacity as a gram of the atmosphere. Combined, it takes 1006 times as much heat to raise the temperature of the oceans 1°C as to increase atmospheric temperature 1°C.

Before getting to the math of heat capacity, which is high school physics, the mind-frame needs to be criticized. Nonscientists do not have the slightest ability to evaluate science. It's way over their heads in details and complexities. That's particularly true of busy persons specializing in other subjects such as politicians and lawyers. So they have to go by some sort of social consensus. But that's politics, not journalism. Two major questions need to be answered: One, where did the fake science come from; and two, how could scientists be that wrong? Those questions can be answered, particularly since Trump and followers showed us how fraudulent social realities can be. Most scientists are totally incompetent because of the abstract complexities of science. The purpose of science is to extend knowledge into unknown areas. Knowledge is abstract. Incompetents do not develop abstract realities in their minds. They use replicating process and push their way into social structures which they hijack for power mongering purposes. There used to be about half of the scientists on each side of the global warming issue, until know-nothing journalists took sides and blocked all criticism of their position. They said the science is settled. Over time, the public saw nothing but the garbage journalists were feeding them and assumed it was science, while journalists claim everything that happens is influenced by carbon dioxide in the air. Real scientists used to say that isn't possible. They were silenced or shoved out of science by frauds with know-nothing journalists leading the pack and controlling the realities. But the errors can be explained. To buy into the frauds in contempt for the criticism is to be part of the problem. Fraud doesn't look anything like valid criticism. Know-nothings do no explaining. No explaining, no truth.

 
If the air temperature has increased 1°C, as claimed, that amount of heat could only increase ocean temperatures by 0.001°C. Even the top 100 meters of the ocean (2.7%) would only be 0.037°C warmer, if all atmospheric heating said to be caused by global warming went into it.

Melting ice takes 80 times as much heat as raising water temperature 1°C. Which means claimed global warming does not have the slightest ability to melt ice.

Fake Claims

Recently, a claim was made stating that much of the heating of global warming goes into the oceans. At first, the claim was 50% goes into the oceans, and then 90%. Climatologists are not allowed to say that. The oceans were supposedly taken into account in 1998, when the definitive equation was derived for calculating global warming based on fake radiative transfer equations. Nothing can change afterwards without discarding all previous science on the subject. The rationalizations of climatologists are not how science works.

Furthermore, There is no way to get the heat of the atmosphere into the oceans without removing it from the atmosphere. Radiation won't do it. The heat has to be in the atmosphere before it can be radiated. The radiative transfer equations say doubling the amount of CO2 in the air will create 3.7 watts per square meter of radiation, which will heat the near surface of the earth by 1°C.

Definition Of Heat

A calorie of heat will increase the temperature of a gram of water by one degree centigrade. Temperature depends upon mass. Doubling the mass with the same amount of heat reduces the temperature in half.

calories = grams x °C        °C = calories / gram

The Calculations

If all 1°C (not correct, because CO2 has not doubled yet) heating of the atmosphere said to be caused by global warming went into the surface of the oceans to a depth of 100 meters, the ocean surface temperature increase would be 0.037°C, and none of the heating would be left in the air. Ice would be even less influenced. It would take 100 times that much temperature increase in the ocean surface to influence hurricanes.

It means global warming does not have the slightest ability to warm the oceans, melt Arctic ice, create hurricanes or cause ocean levels to rise. Whatever is happening, it is not caused by greenhouse gases creating global warming.

Ocean Surface = 361 x 10⁶ km²

Depth = 0.1 kilometer = 361 x 10⁵ km³ = 361 x 10¹⁴ m³

Seawater Density = 1025 kg/m³

     x 361 x 10¹⁴ m³ = 3.7 x 10¹⁹ kg

Specific Heat of Seawater = 3850 joules per kg per °C

     x 3.7 x 10¹⁹ kg = 1.4 x 10²³ joules per °C in ocean surface

Mass of Atmosphere = 5.15 x 10¹⁸ kg

Specific Heat of Air = 1,000 joules per kg per °C

     1°C x 1,000 x 5.15 x 10¹⁸ kg = 5.15 x 10²¹ joules in air

5.15 x 10²¹ joules in air ÷ 1.4 x 10²³ joules in water per °C = 0.037°C (to 100 meters depth)

Total ocean: 1.35x10²¹ kg x 3850 joules per kg per °C = 5.20 x 10²⁴ joules per °C

5.15 x 10²¹ joules in air ÷ 5.20 x 10²⁴ joules in ocean per °C = 0.001°C (total ocean water)
 

Claims Of Ocean Heating

About ten years ago, various claims began to be made on oceans heating due to global warming. At first, someone said, about 20 or 30% of the heating of global warming due to greenhouse gases goes into the oceans. Then someone said, about half of the heating goes into the oceans. Then someone said, about 90% of the heating goes into the oceans. Now the claim is that 90% is the agreed upon fact, and new measurements indicate that it is a large amount.

The foundation of this subject is radiative transfer equations published in 1998. They do not allow any modified assumptions of heat going into the oceans. Radiative transfer equations form the basis of all claims for the amount of heat cabon dioxide adds to the atmosphere. The equations were said to have only 1% error in 1998. Any variation throws out the foundations of the subject and claims of knowing how much heat CO2 adds to the atmosphere.

It is not clear what was done in 1998 due to the lack of scientific standards of such publishing. Modeling was said to be added to the study. No explanation of what was modeled or how was published. The purpose of the claim of modeling was to indicate that all environmental variations were accounted for. No one can account for environmental variations with 1% error. There was no indication of how much heat was entering the oceans or how it was accounted for.

This situation is a result of incompetents contriving fake science with no standards of integrity attempting to make themselves lords of science through corruption. Considering that there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas trapping heat, there is nothing to measure; it's all contrivance.

Oceans have been warming more than expected over the past few years. One explanation given is that volcanoes on the ocean floor might be the cause. I think a more logical explanation is that solar intensity is increasing. Solar energy gets trapped in the oceans and does not easily escape. So warming oceans point to increased solar energy. The best explanation for the "medieval warm period" and "little ice age" is variations in solar intensity, which indicates that variations are common in solar intensity.

90% Going Into The Oceans Is Irrelevant

Even if 90% of the heating caused by carbon dioxide went into the oceans, 100 meters of the ocean's surface would increase 0.25°C instead of 0.025°C (a factor of ten), which is still irrelevant. And 100 meters of the ocean's surface is more shallow than mixing would allow.

If the heating were mixed throughout the whole ocean, the heating would be 0.00068°C.

It means the attempt to rationalize with 90% of the heat going into the oceans does not fix the fraud of oceans heating and arctic ice melting due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

But there is no such thing as 90% of the heating caused by CO2 in the atmosphere going into the oceans. Continuous radiation goes equally in all directions, while the oceans are only downward and 70% of the earth's surface.

In other words, the claim that 90% of heating going into the oceans is rationalistic, nonscientific garbage with no relationship to objective reality. It's reducing science to made up numbers to justify fraud in conflict with the science of the subject.
 
Back Radiation

The sometimes claim (there is never agreement without objective reality) is that back radiation is what does the heating. Then, the heat of the atmosphere doesn't move into the oceans; it radiates continuously into the oceans. There is no way to get 90% out of back radiation, because half of the radiation goes upwards.

Radiation is evaluated with the Stefan-Boltzmann constant as watts per square meter radiation given off at some temperature. But the Stefan-Boltzmann constant shows about 40 times too much radiation at the earth's average temperature of 15°C; so trying to use it for analysis is folly.

A variation of the analysis would be that the claimed 3.7 W/m² which supposedly creates 1°C atmospheric heating would be reduced in half as back radiation causing the oceans to heat at a rate of 1.85 W/m². But the 3.7 W/m² are a product of radiative transfer equations which are totally contrived with no relationship to reality.

As calculated above, the heat capacity of the oceans is 1006 times that of the atmosphere; and the top 100 meters of the oceans (2.7%) has a heat capacity of 27 times that of the atmosphere. Therefore, if the atmosphere has been heated 1°C through radiation, as claimed, there can be no more than half as much radiation going into a mass that has 27 times as much heat capacity. Dividing the 1°C by half and by 27 means the top 100 meters of the oceans could only be heated 0.019°C.

Even though there are two different types of radiation involved (fingerprint radiation absorbed by CO2 and black body radiation emitted by CO2, the amount of energy re-emitted must be the same as absorbed.

Since energy cannot be created or destroyed, there cannot be more than half the energy going into CO2 going into the oceans. When back radiation is the concern, a dynamic (continuous) system exists (non-trapping, non-greenhouse) where proportionalities must be maintained; meaning, the amount of radiation going into CO2 is the amount that goes out of CO2 with half going into the oceans (on a square foot basis).

While a certain amount of radiation will not do the same thing in the oceans as in the atmosphere, the claimed 1°C heating of the atmosphere is not a real concept. The actual heating in the atmosphere is trillionths of a degree. So one half as much radiation going into the oceans would result in trillionths of a degree, though not the same trillionths of a degree.