Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings

All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Prev  1499  1500  1501  1502  1503  1504  1505  1506  1507  1508  1509  1510  1511  1512  1513  1514  Next

Comments 75301 to 75350:

  1. Extreme Flooding In 2010-2011 Lowers Global Sea Level
    Muon, The question would be, how does this affect global sea level? Looking at the total U.S. precipitation, there was a dip in the middle of the 20th century (1940s, 60s, and 70s), but otherwise recent precipitation is similar to a century ago. Is it a new "normal," or a return to a previous one? One would expect the added precipitation to raise lake levels and advance glaciers, both of which would act to lower global sea level. While the drop is of interest, unless the pattern persists, it will be just a short-term blip.
  2. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    A belated congratulations to John and the rest of the Skeptical Science team. I know it really opened my eyes to what was going on.
  3. Climate Denial Video #6: Past climate change
    Great series, really enjoying the videos. Nicely done to all involved.
  4. Extreme Flooding In 2010-2011 Lowers Global Sea Level
    camburn#12: "Was there a weather event" Yes: by definition, a tropical storm is a weather event. But that is, of course, an utterly irrelevant question. In case you missed it, the 'normals' changed. Have a look at the graphs of US Climate Extremes Indices, particularly this graph of 'extremes in one day precipitation'. The relevant questions are: What is causing the rise in extreme precipitation events? What is causing the 'normals' to change? Note the use of the word 'extreme' in the title of this post. Why are we hearing that word so frequently? But you seem to cling to the 'its fine' school: Climate change is always in the future. What we are seeing is merely weather. It is in the nature of Climate change that you can never observe it because only weather is observable. So everything is fine...
  5. Anne-Marie Blackburn at 00:16 AM on 13 September 2011
    Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    Ditto, Paul D. Congrats everyone - great achievement, and I'm glad John and SkS are finally getting the attention they deserve.
  6. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    Well I've learnt something even with this post, regarding 'just deserts'!
  7. Climate Denial Video #6: Past climate change
    Is there a menu that lists all the videos? Also how many in total will there be?
  8. Dessler Demolishes Three Crucial 'Skeptic' Myths
    It's really cute the way Camburn dismisses an actual peer reviewed scientific paper as not very good, but loves to go on and on about how masterful a blog analysis or two appears to him. People are advised to realize that not only aren't the two anywhere near equal, but the comparison is laughable. You may be tempted to think to yourself that scientists do not have a monopoly on science and good methods. This is true. Nor do doctors have a monopoly on medicine. You are welcome to allow yourself to be treated by someone who never went to medical school, and just reads and posts whatever he wishes, without critical review or consequence, on his blog "How I Can Cure You When Doctors Are Stupid Compared To Me, Especially Since, Unlike Them, I Will Tell You What You Want To Hear."
  9. CO2 is just a trace gas
    95, Pualie200, The equation you gave is ppm / km. This means that the units of measure of your answer is in ppm / km, not km. This basically represents molecules-of-CO2 per molecules-of-atmosphere per kilometer of depth, which is a fairly meaningless number. I'm not sure what you were driving at, however, by your post. Can you explain what you are trying to do?
  10. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    Congrats to JC and the SkS team.
  11. Climate Denial Video #6: Past climate change
    You must have done some research on those numbers. Care to share what those numbers are?
  12. Climate Denial Video #6: Past climate change
    It amazes me how many "skeptics" simultaneously believe that the earth's climate wildly varied in the past, while also believing the earth is only 6000 years old. I would pay a million bucks for a report to ask Governor Perry about this apparent contradition of his anti-scientific views.
  13. prudentskepticism at 21:42 PM on 12 September 2011
    Animals and plants can adapt
    What may be of conversely great concern to this topic is plants and animals that adapt exceptionally well but are pests - most insects, rodents, and weeds will and are adapting to warming trends exceptionally well, in some cases becoming invasive species on entire continents due to the change of climate allowing new habitation. In the same light, the change in climate is putting pressure on "friendly" and "neutral" species, as well as a strong increase is invasive and pest species, which does not bode well for our species even in the short term. It certainly doesn't bode well in terms of comfort - longer term, it won't sit well for meeting the basic needs of all of society as species relied upon for necessities are pushed out by species regarded as pests.
  14. CO2 is just a trace gas
    Paulie200, see http://funnel.sfsu.edu/satlab/docs/wthr_sat.1.html for just one example that seems to contradict your pathlength calculation.
  15. Climate Denial Video #6: Past climate change
    Typo already in this early morning: "...we explains (sic) how logical fallacies are employed...."
  16. CO2 is just a trace gas
    The average depth of the troposphere is 17km. 400ppm of a 17 km path is 400/1,000,000 x 17km = 0.0068km So 6.8 meters (~22 feet) of the shortest possible optical path for an IR photon leaving the earth is occupied by CO2.
  17. It's not bad
    Lancelot. Follow the moderator's link. I've responded there.
  18. IPCC is alarmist
    Lancelot (question on other thread) The results this last week for Arctic sea ice - lowest ever extent, lowest ever area, lowest ever volume - tell us that the IPCC was nowhere near 'alarmist' enough on this particular topic. As for floods. Pakistan, Australia, several South American countries, USA, several African countries have all had exceptional events recently. Droughts, likewise. For the policy implications? The scientists can only be as direct as possible in their drafts for IPCC reports. When the international negotiations start on watering down those direct scientific statements, the scientists try to keep the statistical likelihoods as close to their results as possible. But the reports are always less 'alarming' in your words, direct would be my preference, than the original. I'd like to see the "director's cut" for the next IPCC report. Seeing what it looks like before the editors / negotiators got their hands on it might be instructive.
  19. It's not bad
    Hello, I'm a newcomer in this field. I have read most of the arguments on all sides. This site by the way is really good. Keep up the god work The point of my question here is - OK, AGW is real, but for policy and decision makers, how much confidence can be placed in IPCC predictions, and how much weight should we attach to them? [- inflammatory comment snipped-] It would be great if any replies could be objective, rather than emotive.
    Moderator Response: (Rob P) Please take heed of the advice in your last sentence. Make sure posts adhere to the comments policy. If you wish to re-frame your question this SkS post is the relevant thread to comment on: Is the IPCC alarmist?
  20. Lessons from Past Climate Predictions: IPCC TAR
    Sphaerica and Dana, thank you!
  21. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    Bern: science one sided? I'd like to nuance that a little. If you just look at climate sensitivity, various evidence ranges from 1.5 to 8 degrees. Sealevel rise equally: from 30 cm to 4 meters by 2100. Etc, Etc. No, science is clearly not one-sided. However, I agree if you look at it from a distant septic vs science perspective. Afterall, science is pretty one-sided in accepting that CO2 a greenhouse gas and that more of it contributes to warming. ;-)
  22. Extreme Flooding In 2010-2011 Lowers Global Sea Level
    GFW - yes, I noticed that too. Interesting that the region (north west Greenland) that was showing 'recent' accelerated ice mass loss, seems to have gained a lot of snow in the last year. And southern Greenland ice loss, which had slowed right down, has lost a lost of ice in the last year. A recent paper on the Greenland ice sheet melt: Interannual variability of Greenland ice losses from satellite gravimetry - Chen (2011) illustrates that even the Greenland icesheet can undergo large year-to-year fluctuations. In other words, there's a natural signal component to the loss of ice - in addition to the melt induced by global warming. Seems to indicate the icesheet can respond very quickly to climatic change. Hopefully one of the SkS authors might want to write about the paper? (hint, hint)
  23. Extreme Flooding In 2010-2011 Lowers Global Sea Level
    muoncounter@9: Was there a weather event that caused the 7 day period of rain?
  24. Dessler Demolishes Three Crucial 'Skeptic' Myths
    Camburn @45, Still ignoring my question posed to you earlier I see. And if you do decide to answer that, please tell us also what is so "excellent" about Bart's blog analysis. What do you think about is lag time, for example? Is it physically plausible? And remember, "Why would anthropogenic CO2 now be the first forcing that doesn’t engage net positive feedbacks?" Dr. John Nielsen-Gammon Those in denial continue to bet against physics and history.
  25. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    chriskoz: yep, I was pretty surprised at just how one-sided the scientific evidence was, when I started reading SkS. mandas: I didn't come up with the headline, and I too thought it was a typo, until I looked it up. Just goes to show, you learn something new everyday!
  26. Extreme Flooding In 2010-2011 Lowers Global Sea Level
    The GRACE Map shows Greenland as much more blue than yellow/red. To me that would indicate mass gain from March 2010 to March 2011. But all the Greenland-specific mass balance papers of late have Greenland trending down hard. What explains this? I suppose very few papers are quite that up-to-date.
  27. Haydn Washington talks Climate Change Denial on Steaming Toad
    Good to see Haydn Washington for the first time, John.
  28. Dessler Demolishes Three Crucial 'Skeptic' Myths
    Tom: On that blog, Spencers, and at Judith Curry, Bart is doing an excellent analysis with the stats showing a negative feedback.
  29. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    He's an Australian. Of course they are just deserts (except when they are just flood plains. Congratulations John.
  30. Dessler Demolishes Three Crucial 'Skeptic' Myths
    As noted by Dana @ 39, the ratio of non-radiative forcing to -radiative forcing (including purported cloud forcing) of short term ocean temperature changes is in dispute between Dessler and Spencer. Dessler claims it is approximately 20, which if true means that cloud forcings are largely inconsequential as a driver of short term temperature variations, contrary to Spencer. In response, Spencer has claimed the ratio is closer to 2.2, and possibly as low as 1.7. Dessler and Spencer are currently in dispute about the appropriate source of data, the time scale to use, and the result obtained. On Spencer's blog Socratic has no[w] shed some light:
    "Hopefully my final post on this topic. While looking at what it would take to compute the mixing layer from WAO data, I found that it has already been computed on a global grid, and available from NOAA, here: http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/WOA94/mix.html There are three criteria in use: 1) (most common definition) depth at which temp is .5 C lower than the surface; 2) depth at which the density is .125 standard deviations greater than the surface; and 3) depth at which the density is equal to what the density would be with a .5 C change. These three definitions give rather different results. After downloading all the data and running global weighted averages (see my first post), the global average mixing layer depth for each definition was: 1. 71.5 meters 2. 57.2 meters 3. 45.9 meters For quarterly data, using these mixing layer depths gives for the LHS of the equation energy change rates of 8.9, 7.1, and 5.7 Wm^-2 respectively. For monthly data, these mixing layer depths give energy changes rates of 12.5, 10.0, and 8.0 Wm^-2 respectively. Dr. Dessler’s use of 9 Wm^-2 with monthly data therefore seems about right (though his mixing layer is too deep); Dr. Spencer’s use of 2.3 Wm^-2 with quarterly data seems too small (in large part because his mixing layer is too shallow)."
    Taking the best case scenario for Spencer, ie, 3 month data and shallowist mixed layer, the ratio becomes 10 to 1 at best, and 15 to 1 if, like Spencer, you assume a low climate sensitivity. If instead you use the more appropriate one month figures, the ration is Dessler's 20 to 1 or more. Either way you cut it, Spencer's fundamental assumption that cloud forcings are the major driver of short term variations in ocean temperature is falsified by this data.
    Moderator Response: Albatross, corrected typo "Socratic has no[w] shed some light". Yes, an interesting development and not one in favour of Spencer. We'll all have to wait to see what the corrected galley proofs look like.
  31. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    Mandas @37 - I'd originally assumed it was a pun, as that's what AGW implies for those of us here in Australia (though it's a bit more complicated for John's state of Queensland!) However, a quick google reveals that since the concept is derived from 'deserve' that's the spelling; it's just pronounced as though one was likely to receive a parfait!
  32. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    Re #29, I just read through the prize description and a few of the other winners. I think this site, patient mods and John Cook deserve this recognition and prize. Personally while I don't agree with every thread here, it has greatly added to my own knowledge.
  33. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    I want to say congratulations as well. But I tend to think they are 'just desserts', not 'just deserts'. Cheers
  34. ConCERN Trolling on Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate Change
    Nice new video from Potholer debunking all the guff being spouted about the CERN paper.
  35. Spending A Week Above Arctic Circle On M.S. Fram Off Greenland’s West Coast
    Those tunnels through the icebergs seem to be a common occurrence, thinking on another recent post here. I was pondering what would cause them and I have a guess; so, if you'll indulge me... The ambient temperature of the water must be close to freezing; else, the bergs would melt too fast to be interesting, or not melt at all. A randomly occurring hollow spot on a berg would slightly inhibit water flow, and, given the high albedo of ice, act a little like a reflector oven. These effects would combine to create a local spot of warmer water inside the hollow. As the hollow got deeper, the water flow would be reduced further, and, up to a point, the reflector oven would become more efficient. The hollow would progress to become a cave, and the cave might eventually become a tunnel, especially if a there was one coming in from the other side as well. If someone has a better idea, I'd like to hear it.
    Response:

    [DB] Another possibility is that they are part of the outlet glacier's natural plumbing, normally hidden from view, now exposed.  Many parts of the world, such as where I live in Michigan, have eskers, the fossil remnants of such features in continentally glaciated areas.

  36. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    The Tar Sands of Alberta are going to continue to be developed. Whether they are shipped by rail or pipeline remains to be seen, but I would hope pipeline as it is much more efficient and safer. Just as Australia will keep exporting coal to China, resources will be developed.
  37. Lessons from Past Climate Predictions: IPCC TAR
    cynicus - I matched up the two baselines (model and data) in 1990, because that's when the FAR projection began, and the SAR and TAR sought to compare their projections to those in the FAR.
  38. Hansen's 1988 prediction was wrong
    Climate sensitivity isn't an input, it's built into the model based on how various feedbacks react to a given forcing. I think understanding ocean interactions was one of the big challenges that took a while, perhaps the amount of CO2 uptake by the oceans.
  39. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    John and the rest of the SkS team, congratulations! 'Well deserved' is an inadequate way to describe it, but it'll have to do. Probably the best climate science communication website on the Net.
  40. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    Here's a graph of oil pipeline related spills in Alberta, CA (where the tar sands projects are located). Their record on the 15 year period shown - not so good. -- source Historical evidence reveals that the problem of oil pipeline ruptures and spills is endemic to the industry in Alberta. ... As the province pushes forward with tar sands development and aims to export its oil products to China via an extensive pipeline through to Kitimat, British Columbia, Canadians should take notice of this history and its implications for the country's future. Take notice? Nah, it's ok as long as it's not in my backyard. Alberta's tar sand crude is sour - higher in H2S and CO2 content than the light, sweet crude produced in much of the US Gulf Coast. Piping that stuff cross country is not good for the health of the pipe, nor for the people who live along the pipeline route. Desulphurization and CO2 capture has to take place at the upstream end. So anyone living downwind of the production facilities and pipeline route in what was formerly known as 'The Great White North' better bone up on their emergency preparation plans. On second thought, H2S is just a trace gas, so it can't be harmful.
  41. Hansen's 1988 prediction was wrong
    What are the basic reasons why Hansen et al chose a climate sensitivity of 4.2C as input to their model?
  42. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    In a perfect world, I wouldn't have to buy insurance as I, nor my employees would ever be involved in an accident. Even tho I maintain my equipment diligently to the highest standards, accidents do occur. When one looks at the per barrel transported verses spilled, it really is quit astonishing that it is as good as it is.
  43. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    I am an optomist by nature. When I see a downward trend in something that I consider bad, I am all for the trend. As far as more regulation etc, observe the present trend. It appears that the current regulation and employees are doing a fine job. I commend them for doing so.
  44. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    Camburn#71: "the trend is down, while the volume has risen. A good thing to observe." Not sure what volume you're referring to or if you have a source for that claim. However, it is a good thing to observe that it is not the spill that kills you, it's the pollution that doesn't get cleaned up after the spill: Federal records show that although the pipeline industry reported 25 percent fewer significant incidents from 2001 through 2010 than in the prior decade, the amount of hazardous liquids being spilled, though down, remains substantial. There are still more than 100 significant spills each year — a trend that dates back more than 20 years. And the percentage of dangerous liquids recovered by pipeline operators after a spill has dropped considerably in recent years. Also important to observe that much of this safety is due to federal regulation. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who oversees the pipeline agency, acknowledges weaknesses in the program and is asking Congress to pass legislation that would increase penalties for negligent operators and authorize the hiring of additional inspectors. That may be a tough sell in a Congress averse to new spending and stricter regulation. The pro-business agenda of many politicians will kill such regulation - and then you'd better not drink the water.
  45. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    Pete@68: It is a matter of tax policy as far as exportability. A stroke of the pen, and the tax policy will change, and the production will remain in the USA.
  46. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    Note how the trend is down, while the volume has risen. A good thing to observe. Thank you for posting this link. It is very encouraging.
  47. Spending A Week Above Arctic Circle On M.S. Fram Off Greenland’s West Coast
    Beautiful photos too. Doesn't it have some traditional farming? I usually point that out to deniers who claims that the Vikings farmed there with the assumption that it can't be done today.
  48. Tar Sands Impact on Climate Change
    A map of 20 years of pipeline related oil spills appears in Sept 9 NYT. Not surprisingly, there's a cluster of spills in the oil patch, places represented by the some of the most vocal deniers: Texas Guvna and would-be King Perry, Oklahoma's Sen. Inhofe, Kansas' Brownback, Louisiana's Sen. Vitter.
  49. Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
    This is way off topic, but do you have any aboriginal ancestry?
    Response: [JC] No, I'm half French, half Malaysian (and all Aussie).
  50. Models are unreliable
    muoncounter: So you have read the paper? Does it provide anything new that is worthy of paying the rental fee?

Prev  1499  1500  1501  1502  1503  1504  1505  1506  1507  1508  1509  1510  1511  1512  1513  1514  Next


The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us