Archive for the ‘climate’ Category

Paul Vaughan has suggested we hold a discussion on bi-decadal climatic variation, which exhibits quasi-cyclic patterns in various datasets. To get the ball rolling, Paul has kindly given some time to producing some very interesting plots which he has introduced across a few recent threads. This posts puts these in one place and acts as an invitation to those interested in a focussed discussion on the topic.

The Bidecadal Oscillation

Is it caused by the solar Hale Cycle as suggested by Tim Channon or is it caused by the velocity of the sun with respect to the solar system barycenter as suggested by Nicola Scafetta?

http://s18.postimg.org/74uty1eix/Bidecadal_SST_Sun_Velocity_Hale_Cycle.png

Bidecadal_SST_Sun_Velocity_Hale_Cycle
(more…)

It’s 10 years since the death of John Daly, but we forgot to mark this decadal anniversary back at the end of January. Here is the article by John Izzard originally published at Quadrant.org.au in 2009, which looks back at his life and work. If anyone has a copy of his book “The Greenhouse Trap” please let me know. Google and Amazon aren’t interested (and probably think n0-one else should be either).

John L. Daly (31 March 1943 – 29 January 2004)
by JOHN IZZARD

Daly-picYesterday I visited John L. Daly’s tiny office where he lived on the outskirts of Launceston. It is about the size of two telephone boxes. His wife, Amy, has kept is just as it was when John died in 2004. His computer, his files, the maps on the wall — his notes, letters, photographs and dairies. She has also kept alive his web-site which he was still updating at the time of his death.

Looking at his scientific work today gives an insight into why the people at the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit were so annoyed with Daly’s work and why he was such a thorn in the side of their climate theories and research.

(more…)

Via GWPF:

Matt Ridley: Whatever Happened To Global Warming?
Date: 05/09/14 Matt Ridley, The Wall Street Journal

whateverGWOn Sept. 23 the United Nations will host a party for world leaders in New York to pledge urgent action against climate change. Yet leaders from China, India and Germany have already announced that they won’t attend the summit and others are likely to follow, leaving President Obama looking a bit lonely. Could it be that they no longer regard it as an urgent threat that some time later in this century the air may get a bit warmer?

In effect, this is all that’s left of the global-warming emergency the U.N. declared in its first report on the subject in 1990. The U.N. no longer claims that there will be dangerous or rapid climate change in the next two decades. Last September, between the second and final draft of its fifth assessment report, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change quietly downgraded the warming it expected in the 30 years following 1995, to about 0.5 degrees Celsius from 0.7 (or, in Fahrenheit, to about 0.9 degrees, from 1.3).

Even that is likely to be too high. The climate-research establishment has finally admitted openly what skeptic scientists have been saying for nearly a decade: Global warming has stopped since shortly before this century began.

(more…)

Has Joe done what Uncle Sam couldn’t?

Posted: August 25, 2014 by tchannon in climate, ENSO, sea ice, weather

Some say money can buy brains, brains are cheap. Duffers think that, make the mistake of confusing rote with The Spark. As a wit said ‘the most intelligent person in the room is the room’… to which I add, buying others to inside still leaves the room. Self selection is recursive.

There again for here, an oscillation does not explain itself. Small step first.

Joe Bastardi is writing sense, Gosselin runs with it.

Image

A Single Meteorologist Explains What $165 Billion In Government-Funded Climate Science Couldn’t

By P Gosselin on 24. August 2014

Large scale oceanic oscillations responsible for most of the post 1980 “warming”

By Joe Bastardi

I think global warming is a misnomer.

There is a distortion of the temperature pattern on the globe, brought about by the natural cyclical warming events of the warm PDO and warm AMO together. I spoke about this at Heartland a couple of years ago – how the sea ice increase in the south and the decrease in the north were the hidden message that here is no “warming” just a distortion.

http://notrickszone.com/2014/08/24/a-single-meteorologist-explains-what-165-billion-in-government-funded-climate-science-couldnt/

(more…)

Ocean currents [image credit: BBC]

Ocean currents
[image credit: BBC]


Bad news for fans of global warming theory dreaming of ‘strong’ El Ninos or indeed anything that might point global temperature stats in an upward direction.

Even the BBC is having to come to terms with climate reality, to some limited extent at least.

(more…)

Igloo time [image credit: Ansgar Walk / Wikipedia]

Igloo time
[image credit: Ansgar Walk / Wikipedia]


This is worth a look just for the last paragraph, which undermines most of the rest of it. Under the optimistic sub-heading ‘Warming to recommence’ we find:

‘Despite the warming hiatus, Knutti is convinced there is no reason to doubt either the existing calculations for the climate activity of greenhouse gases or the latest climate models.’

“Short-term climate fluctuations can easily be explained. They do not alter the fact that the climate will become considerably warmer in the long term as a result of greenhouse gas emissions,” says Knutti.

‘He believes that global warming will recommence as soon as solar activity, aerosol concentrations in the atmosphere and weather phenomena such as El Niño naturally start returning to the values of previous decades.’ [bold added]

Translation: as soon as the sun, the weather and volcanoes – all natural factors – allow, the world will start warming again. Who knew?

Farsnews report: Why Global Warming Is Taking a Break

Good to hear a warmist trashing his own theory in order to explain the lack of temperature rise this century – without realising it.

Climate quote of the week

Posted: August 12, 2014 by oldbrew in climate, humour, Psychobabble
Did I say that? [image credit: simpsons.wikia]

Did I say that?
[image credit: simpsons.wikia]

“The fundamental laws of physics say that as the temperature goes up, it has to get warmer,” Liu says.

Nice work Professor. Homer Simpson couldn’t have put it better.

So you still take "climate scientists" seriously?

Clams [credit: Wikipedia]

Clams [credit: Wikipedia]

El Niño and its twin La Niña are under the spotlight this year as climate-watchers hunt for signs of expected activity that seems to have gone largely missing in recent years if compared to, say, the 1990s.

Has the strength of these phenomena changed in modern times? Apparently not.

‘The charts created by the research team suggest that the ENSO cycle does not have a predictable cycle and also that it has not been increasing in strength over the course of the Holocene as others have suggested.’

(more…)

Not Geoffrey Lean  [image credit: BBC]

Not Geoffrey Lean
[image credit: BBC]

Fishy business – James Delingpole takes aim at the Telegraph’s leading ‘green’ reporter. Hard to miss really.

Dellers: ‘The Telegraph’s resident enviro loon Geoffrey Lean has come up with some new terrifying evidence for the existence of “global warming.” ‘

‘So what, er, is the new most important metric for global temperature rises, now that it’s not measured global temperature rises, our Geoff?
Well, apparently, it’s…..fish.’

Won’t spoil the fun – read it here

New paper: Gleissberg Cycle minimum ahead?

Posted: August 5, 2014 by oldbrew in climate, Solar physics

Quiet sun {credit: NASA]

Quiet sun [credit: NASA]


As The Hockeyshtick reports:

‘A paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics finds that recent low solar activity “mirrors” extended solar minimums in the 19th and early 20th centuries, as well as other periods over the past 1000 years consistent with the Centennial Gleissberg Cycle of solar activity. Such periods have also been associated with global cooling.’

The co-authors of the paper are (quoting The Hockeyshtick):
‘Joan Feynman [sister of famed physicist Richard Feynman] and A. Ruzmaikin’

(more…)

Heatwave time [image credit: BBC]

Heatwave time [image credit: BBC]


Piers Corbyn has made a weather forecast. Nothing new there, that’s his line of work. But this one has caught the attention of at least one organ of the UK national press [warning: loud headline ahead]…
Daily Express report

Reading the forecast, it clearly states the behaviour of the jet stream is the key factor. So what are the chances of showing any significant link between the behaviour of jet streams and small variations in atmospheric trace gases? They appear to be remote at present.

(more…)

Paul’Vaughan posted a link to this plot on the tail end of a long running thread which has dropped off the front page now, so I thought I’s give it prominence today. It’s a ‘food for thought’ starter – the main course will be served as and when Paul has time.

Sun_Wind

It’s all coming together. Both Paul and I have been working on the sunspot integral over the last several years. Back in 2009 I found that by subtracting the average sunspot number at which the ocean neither gains nor loses energy from the monthly value and summing the running total, I could make use of the sunspot integral as a proxy for ocean heat content (OHC).

(more…)

imageThe Met Office has unveiled their latest update:

Even Newer Dynamics for General atmospheric modelling of the environment (ENDGame)

ENDGame is an evolution of the current dynamical core, the New Dynamics, and is based on a semi-implicit semi-lagrangain discretisation of the governing equations.

(more…)

Prolific solar-planetary scientist and long-time talkshop friend Nicola Scafetta has a new paper published in Physica A entitled ‘Global temperatures and sunspot numbers. Are they related? Yes, but non linearly. A reply to Gil-Alana et al. (2014)’ which comments on Gil-Alana et al 2014; a paper purporting to dismiss any correlation between solar activity and terrestrial surface temperature. Nicola gently points out the limitations of their methods and patiently explains how the astronomical-solar signal can be found in the data. Here is Figure 3 to whet your appetite:

 

scafetta-2014b-fig3

Fig. 3. (A) Annually solved HadCRUT3 global surface temperature record [34] from 1850 to 2013. (B) Power spectrum density functions calculated using the MEM method (using M = N/2 = 82) and the MTM periodogram f (p) [35,36]: the calculations were made with the SSA–MTM Toolkit. Several spectral peaks (e.g.: at about 9.1, 10.4, 20 and 60 yr) are statistically significant above the 95% confidence level, and their solar, lunar and astronomical origin is explained in the literature (e.g.: Scafetta [10,32,33,25]).

Nicola also provides plots of several of the various solar and temperature related indices and techniques for representing them over a wide range of timescales which clearly demonstrate the plain fact of the close coherence between the activity of our host star which supplies all our energy, and the fluctuations of the lovely moderate temperatures we live in on the surface of our planet.

(more…)

Australia repeals carbon tax

Posted: July 19, 2014 by Andrew in climate, Energy, Politics

image

Note from the co-moderator. We welcome Andrew as a new Talkshop contributor.

The biggest story in energy and climate politics, by a mile this week, is the news that at 11:15 EST Thursday the Australian Senate voted 39-32 to repeal the Climate Tax.

Following the vote, Prime Minister Tony Abbott declared it a “Useless destructive tax, which damaged jobs, which hurt families’ cost of living & which didn’t actually help the environment”. Tony Abbott made removing the bill the key promise of his election campaign.

Not everything has run smoothly for supporters of the repeal. In the days before the Senate vote Clive Palmer, leader of the PUP with 3 key senators, stood next to Al Gore while apparently discussing an emissions trading scheme. He then prevented the first attempt to repeal the bill. After the vote Opposition leader Bill Shorten described Abbott as an “environmental vandal”. This comes on the eve of Australia hosting the G20.

The reaction has been global. The Guardian is not amused, Graham Readfern writes “Science denial, so-called “free market” ideology and the interests of the fossil energy industry are the termites chewing away at the base all efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions”.

Slate ” In Australia, as the Simpsons joke goes, the water goes down the toilet counterclockwise . Now with its government voting to repeal the country’s tax on Carbon – in the process killing it’s most significant means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions – it seems that Australia’s new Prime Minister Tony Abbott, is determined to take the country in the same direction”. While some on Twitter hope for other countries to punish Australia.

On the other hand The Wall Street Journal headline simply  reads ” Tony Abbot shows that climate absolutists have a problem : democracy”. There is an Emission Reduction Fund White Paper as consolation for the supporters of the bill, but the Abbott Government seems intent on further cuts to the Green gravy train.

There has been some progress in the greenhouse. On the ‘toy planet’ thread, physicist Tim Folkerts now agrees with me that longwave infra-red radiated from the air towards the surface doesn’t directly heat the ocean but makes it harder for the ocean to cool. In my view this is due to IR radiation from the ocean making the air warm, reducing the temperature differential between ocean and air, slowing the rate of the Sun warmed ocean’s heat loss. Tim says:

LWIR is indeed incapable of “heating” the oceans in the strict sense of the word (net transfer of thermal energy). The best it can do is aid in making it “a far more difficult task escaping” for the energy.

But it’s hard for him to let go of ingrained notions, so his next comment is full of ambiguities, which I have tried to deal with in my followup comment:

Tim Folkerts: The DWIR DOES amount to ~ 330 W/m^2.

Fine, no problem.

This energy DOES get absorbed by the ocean.

In the top few microns, and is soon re-emitted along with an additional ~60W/m^2 IR, upwards.

The ocean IS warmer than it would be without this DWIR from the atmosphere.

But not because it is absorbed and re-emitted from the top few microns of ocean. The thermalisation of IR in the bulk air helps keep the air warm and that warm air slows the sun warmed ocean’s heat loss.

But the reason the air is warm is because the ocean warms it with the energy it emits into it which is absorbed and re-emitted, or conducted to the O2 and N2 in the air, by water vapour (from the ocean) and co2 (mostly from the ocean). Air has very little heat capacity of its own, and is nearly transparent to incoming solar short wave radiation. And this ocean warmed air is usually convecting upwards.

(more…)

The mainstream climatologists are fond of telling us that additional co2 increases the ‘Effective Height of Emission’ of radiation to space by ‘Greenhouse Gases’, and that this must cause a rise in surface temperature because the lapse rate from the average temperature of 255K at the ‘EEH’ to the surface will mean a higher temperature. That lapse rate is what is shown by the slanting red line from surface to tropopause in Fig 1 below.

atm-temp-profile

Figure 1: The atmospheric temperature profile of Earth

But there are some problems with this theoretical scenario.

The 255K figure is derived from the 240W/m^2 solar shortwave radiation incoming to the Earth’s climate system AFTER a proportion has been removed to account for reflection by clouds. But the models underestimate the amount of solar radiation absorbed by clouds because the fundamental physics of light scattering in clouds is poorly understood.

Although we are told a change in the EEH ‘must’ change the surface temperature, no viable mechanism is offered to explain how this imperative ‘must’ will be enforced.  The more rational proponents of the enhanced greenhouse effect hypothesis long ago abandoned trying to claim ‘downwelling longwave radiation’ heats the ocean, since nearly all LW emitted in wavelengths absorbed by water vapour and co2 is absorbed with a kilometre of the surface, all downwelling longwave from above a kilometre above the surface will be absorbed, converted to sensible heat, and convected back  upwards before reaching the surface too. In any case, the 10% of LW reaching the surface from on high can’t penetrate the ocean surface by more than a few nanometres.

So much for radiative theory, but what can a look at the data for the vertical temperature profile shown in Fig 1 tell us that might be really useful?

(more…)

The Spectator has a good analysis on the BBC climate reporting bias debacle which coins a new phrase – ‘Climate Correctness’. A few excerpts:

gagging-ordersIt is only a matter of time before Nigel Lawson — if he is allowed on the BBC at all — has to have his words spoken by an actor in the manner of Gerry Adams at the height of the IRA’s bombing campaign during the 1980s. In the case of Mr Adams, whose voice was banned from the airwaves by the government, the BBC stood up for free speech. But it is quite a different story with Lord Lawson. The BBC has effectively banned the former chancellor (and former editor of this magazine) from appearing on its programmes to debate climate change, unless he is introduced with a statement discrediting his views.

When people try to close down debate rather than engage with it, there is a pretty clear conclusion to be drawn: they lack confidence in their own case. The suppression of debate was shown again this week when Vladimir Semonov, a climate scientist at the Geomar Institute in Kiel, Germany, revealed that a paper he wrote in 2009 questioning the accuracy of climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was effectively censored by the scientist to whom it was sent for review.

(more…)

Greenhouse effectsFollowing on from our recent debate on the likely extent of the greenhouse effect on Earth, this post will broaden the scope of discussion by allowing consideration of planetary surface temperatures on imaginary worlds. Tim Folkerts proposes a world at the distance from the Sun of our moon (i.e. the same average distance as Earth), with a twist on surface composition:

Konrad,

Just out of curiosity, if I put a ball of water — say a few km in diameter — in some sort of clear plastic baggie to keep it together and prevent evaporation in orbit around the sun @ 1 AU, are you claiming the water inside the baggie will be at least 80 C everywhere?

Or if I put a series of such plastic baggies on the moon to cover the entire surface with water 1 km deep that cannot evaporate, that the surface of the moon would be at or above 80 C everywhere (lets even limit the question to the “tropics” out to ~ 30 degrees N & S to avoid question about what happens at the poles)?

(We could even make the baggie slightly elastic to apply 1 Atm of pressure inward on the ball of water).

____________________________

Tim appears to have misunderstood what Konrad and I are telling him about the atmosphere being a cooling agent rather than a warming agent, and how pressure acts to slow the loss of energy from the oceans via the atmospheric suppression of evaporation and the increased density of a near surface atmosphere, which is not present on his toy planet.

(more…)

Physorg has a story on a new reconstruction of volcanic activity from ice cores in Antarctica. It’s fairly strong on boilerplate but there is an interesting kicker near the end of the article:

A team of scientists led by Michael Sigl and Joe McConnell of Nevada’s Desert Research Institute (DRI) has completed the most accurate and precise reconstruction to date of historic volcanic sulfate emissions in the Southern Hemisphere.

“Both observations and model results show that not all eruptions lead to the same spatial pattern of sulfate deposition,” said Matthew Toohey from the German institute GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel. He added, “Spatial variability in sulfate deposition means that the accuracy of volcanic sulfate reconstructions depends strongly on having a sufficient number of ice core records from as many different regions of Antarctica as possible.”
(more…)