J F AUS
Imagine you are at a camp fire. The fire is warming you by giving off heat. This is an exothermic reaction.
Stored energy is released to produce heat. That energy came to be in the wood because of the opposite type of reaction, endothermic.
Photosynthesis absorbed sunlight and converted it to stored energy. The sunlight would have otherwise become heat. This did not make the tree hot when it happened.

Likewise photosynthesis does not make algae warm.
Now imagine you are at an endothermic reaction instead of a campfire. It will absorb your warmth.
Photosynthesis absorbs radiated energy from the sun thus PREVENTING that energy from becoming heat. Just like a refrigerator absorbs the warmth to make it cool. This energy is not lost to space it is just stored to make heat later like in your campfire.
All that being said heat may happen there for some other reason but I just cannot see it. Another reason could be mechanical absorbtion of ocean wave or tidal energy.

Here is a good little 2.4 min video of an endothermic reaction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQkJI-Nq3Os

The schoolchild Max Green said he was tired of being shown to be a liar and a fraud supporter, and decamped.He purported to leave the field to the unqualified, incompetent ignoramus, the flea, who has posted nothing relevant since.
Max could not resist a baseless, puerile criticism of Jennifer Marohasy. He has no science, so his post consisted of schoolyard insults. This is what the dunce had to say:” Marohasy creating more denialist click bate”.
He uses the scurrilous term “denial” after proving to us that he has no science to deny. He relied on the fraudulent assertion of the pseudo-science of the IPCC, which asserted that science would show a "hotspot" which would be the "signature" for human caused warming.
A good summary of the situation is:”The ultimate test for the IPCC's catastrophic AGW hypothesis is the existence of the predicted "hotspot" that is a sign of a positive feedback loop for accelerating global warming - newest data show that even after record setting human CO2 emissions the "hotspot" failed to materialize
http://www.c3headlines.com/2013/02/ipccs-global-warming-hypothesis-fails-ultimate-test-no-tropical-hotspot-after-17-years-of-immense-co.html

Where is the science to show any measurable human effect on climate, Max?
You have none, but call a competent scientist puerile names, for stating the proven science.
Max, of course, is the school dunce.

Leo

I'm really pleased that you know more than, James Hansen.

Professor Hansen has proven to be right in the past.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP-cRqCQRc8&feature=youtu.be

Dr Hansen has just had the paper he speaks about in his video talk published and peer reviewed. Reference to the Hansen et al paper:

http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/20059/2015/acpd-15-20059-2015.pdf

Permafrost breakdown clearly is related to temperature:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/02/17/207552/nsidc-thawing-permafrost-will-turn-from-carbon-sink-to-source-in-mid-2020s-releasing-100-billion-tons-of-carbon-by-2100/

Whats up in the clouds also has an impact:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/07/clouds-climate-change-analysis-liquid-ice-global-warming

The Pacific Ocean off the West Coast is not in good shape: there is discussion of acidification and hypoxia already beginning:

http://westcoastoah.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/OAH-Panel-Key-Findings-Recommendations-and-Actions-4.4.16-FINAL.pdf

The references relate to science, not semantics as mostly displayed by Leo.

• Why would I know more than Hansen, flea? He knows better than I do, and in more detail, what a charlatan he is.
• He has been an arrant promoter of climate fraud, and used his time at NASA to tamper with the temperature records.: A convenient summary is
“Dr. Hansen made to the historical US temperature record after the year 1999. He cooled the 1930s, and warmed the 1980s and 1990s. The year 1998 went from being more than half a degree cooler than 1934, to warmer than 1934.

Hansen’s recent temperature data tampering is not limited to the US. He has done the same thing all over the planet. Below is one recent example in Iceland, where he dramatically cooled the first half of the century, and warmed the present. He appears to be trying to erase evidence that there was a very warm period in much of the Arctic around 1940.”
• https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/spectacularly-poor-climate-science-at-nasa/
• Just the sort of reference that a dishonest fraud supporter, like the flea, needs.

Siliggy,

Consider I am alongside the pond where I am based.
It's a hot sunny day and I place the back of my hand on a wet soggy blob of algae floating on the pond surface in full sunlight.
I distinctly feel warmth coming off the blob onto my hand.
Then I lift the back of my hand off the blob and again use the back of the same hand to lightly touch the surface of the pond water alongside the blob, and I feel the water is obviously colder than the blob of algae.
How does science describe this particular type of temperature change?

Of course photosynthesis does not cause algae to warm, however fact that photosynthesis occurs in ocean algae is proof solar radiated warmth is reaching and entering that ocean algae plant matter.

It is fact solar radiated warmth can warm ocean surface water, and I think it is obvious there is evidence a slight degree of that warmth can be taken up particle to particle in ocean and waterway algae plant matter.
Yes, no or what do you call that warmth taken up?

Is anyone suggesting that on a hot sunny day the Amazon rainforest leaf matter does not take up warmth from the atmosphere/wind, and/or does not take up direct radiated heat from the sun?

If a sheet of compressed (dead) vegetable fibre wallboard is in sunlight all day the board warms and at sundown it takes minutes or a few hours for the board to cool down.

Is anyone suggesting leaf matter remains at the night time temperature and does not warm when exposed to sunlight such as during photosynthesis?

If density of such plant matter is natural then weather and climate would be natural.

If such plant matter did not exist there would be no carry-over of warmth after sundown.

If density of ocean and waterway algae plant matter is significantly increased due to proliferation by nutrient over-load linked to human sewage and land use, I think that overload could change weather and climate sometimes in some regions.