Recent Comments

Prev  1623  1624  1625  1626  1627  1628  1629  1630  1631  1632  1633  1634  1635  1636  1637  1638  Next

Comments 81501 to 81550:

81501. Eric the Red at 04:21 AM on 24 June 2011
       How would a Solar Grand Minimum affect global warming?
       Albatross, In a way, yes. I would place the blame more on the sensationism of the media. Afterall, what makes a better headline, "A return to the temperatures of the 70s," or "Another Little Ice Age is on the horizon?" The media is largely scientifically ignorant. Most reporters cannot distinguish between a scientific expert and a science fiction writer (no slam intented towards those writers who are science experts). The same does occur in the other direction; remember the big media portrayal of the "Barbecue Summers?" Incremental changes, even over long periods, are too mundane for the average reporter. But someone making a claim of extraordinary proportions (regardless of the probability) raises the excitement of the media.
81502. Albatross at 04:00 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       EricR @175, Your opinion regarding the shift may be correct. You are, however, overstating the importance of cold fronts in triggering severe storms, and understating the importance of the great plains low-level jet (a barrier-type jet attributable in part to the sloping terrain and differential heating of the terrain, not a baroclinic jet). Severe storms can be triggered by outflow boundaries, drylines, trofs, sea breezes, lake breezes etc., just read the SPC mesoscale discussions. Wilson and Schreiber (1986) found that 80% of that of all thunderstorms in their study area were triggered close to mesoscale boundary layer convergence zones. Other researchers have made similar findings on the importance of mesoscale surface features in triggering severe storms. It is worth noting though that the great plains low-level jet is modulated to some extent by synoptic-scale features. "While an increase in moisture would serve to enhance development, any decrease in the cold, dry air would counter that effect, and simply produce heavier rains." Again you are placing undue focus on cold fronts. Care to back it up with something from the reputable scientific literature? To some it up, while I admire your efforts to speak to this stuff (and you do appear to be making a sincere effort), your unsubstantiated musings do not carry much weight I'm afraid.
81503. JMurphy at 03:50 AM on 24 June 2011
       The Last Interglacial - An Analogue for the Future?
       To a so-called skeptic, the immediate reaction will be : "See, temperatures have been higher in the past - where were the SUVs ? That 'proves' that it's not us." Or : "See, things weren't that bad - 'we' got through it then, we'll get through it now." Or : "All that lovely warmth. Cold kills, you know."
81504. Eric (skeptic) at 03:40 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Eric (the other): seasonality of strong tornadoes would also be a key CC indicator for me. That's the first thing I looked at this year and there was nothing particularly early. My first link in 166 shows no seasonality change either. Unlike other CC impacts I think we are very early in the game. When we see heat and humidity like the deep south up in Canada, then we could see a new tornado alley up north.
81505. michael sweet at 03:40 AM on 24 June 2011
       Websites for Watching the Arctic Sea Ice Melt
       Eric: Please provide citations for your outrageous claim that 'Most effects appear to be reversible ". Comments made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
81506. michael sweet at 03:35 AM on 24 June 2011
       The Last Interglacial - An Analogue for the Future?
       One degree C higher than today and sea levels were 5 meters higher. How much warming did you say was already in the pipeline? Too bad for the people of Bangladesh (and Florida where I live).
81507. Rob Honeycutt at 03:28 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Albatross... I actually avoid them most of the time but sometimes my curiosity gets the better of me.
81508. Tom Curtis at 03:27 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Rob Honeycutt @23, Lubos Motl is very full on, actively endorsing both the Nazi comparison and the use of imagery, which he attempts to emulate. Interestingly he cites Tony Abott as making the same points as making the same points as Monckton, though presumably without the direct reference to Nazism. Anthony Watts position is more subtle. He approves the Nazi comparison, but disapproves the use of the image of the swastika and saying "Heil Hitler". In other words, make as odious a comparison as you like - just don't give people adverse talking points. Of the two opinions there is little to be said in their favour. The most that can be said is that at least Motl retains the virtue of honesty.
81509. Eric the Red at 03:24 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Albatross, The Great Plains are definitely ripe for tornadoes, as they bring together the warm, humid Gulf air and cool, dry Rocky Mountain air. A weakened of the jet stream or a shift northward would lessened the impact of these two air masses. While an increase in moisture would serve to enhance development, any decrease in the cold, dry air would counter that effect, and simply produce heavier rains. Not that I am claiming that we know enough aobut tornadoes, but temperature and moisture gradients are very important to tornadic updraft development. My opinion (note word choice) is that the timing of othe tornado season may shift based on changing temperatures, but that the tornado locations are unlikely to move much. (FWIW)
81510. Albatross at 03:19 AM on 24 June 2011
       How would a Solar Grand Minimum affect global warming?
       Eric @94, "I was not aware that anyone was predicting an ice age" I can only assume that you are feigning ignorance here. Of course the reputable scientists and people who know what they are talking about are not making such silly assertions, but you and I both know that is sadly irrelevant for the denial/"skeptic" misinformation machine. The very existence of this post is because of the ludicrous claims being made by "skeptics", contrarians and deniers of AGW. From the main post: "This has climate skeptics speculating that solar 'hibernation' may be our get-out-of-jail-free card, cancelling out any global warming from our CO2 emissions." Also watch this video by Hadfield and follow some of the links in this article.
81511. Albatross at 03:08 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Thanks Rob, I do not know how you stomach those vile forums. That is interesting-- you see, they try and maintain this nano thin veneer of integrity up front, but the longer they "talk" the more apparent their true leanings (which are contrary to their initial condemnation).
81512. Eric the Red at 02:59 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       While Rahmstorf is convinced that his findings represent global changes, Schroter and Latif are not. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,769687,00.html
       Response:

       [DB] Perhaps in your quote-mining efforts you could read Latif's whole quote:

       Satellite images offer proof, though, that sea levels have risen significantly in recent decades. And this development occurred exactly at the same time as industrialization and the rise in air temperature.  It would be "hard to argue" that that could be accidental, Latif says, thus siding with Rahmstorf.

       Emphasis added.
       

81513. Rob Honeycutt at 02:49 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Albatross... It's interesting because initially Watts condemns Monckton for what he's doing here. But as you read down into the comments you realize that that condemnation is very thin at best. Lubos Motl has a long comment on how Monckton is actually correct in his statements, which Anthony follows up to confirm.
81514. Albatross at 02:45 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Rob and Sphaerica, agreed. Who would have thought that,in the very distant past, Fourier and Arrhenius were plotting to use the radiative trapping properties of CO2 in forward their agenda establish world governance and fascism? ;) Unless Anthony Watts unequivocally condemns Monckton, I think it safe to assume that Watts agrees with Monckton's position. In short: MONCKTON = AFA = WATTS = LINDZEN Remember too that Watts in the past has on a couple of occasions allowed Monckton to use his site to launch vitriolic attacks and threats against scientists.
81515. Albatross at 02:36 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Tom @164, Thanks for that interesting post. I followed the link to your top graphic and the links therein. Here is the link to the Munch Re report for others who are interested. And that led me to this interesting paper by Kaltenböck et al. (2008). They conlcude: "2) Low level moisture can be used as a predictor to distinguish between significant tornadoes or non-severe convection." And "While deep-layer shear discriminates well between severe and non-severe events, the storm-relative helicity in the 0–1 km and especially in the 0–3 km layer adjacent to the ground has more skill in distinguishing between environments favouring significant tornadoes and wind gusts versus other severe events." These findings corroborate other research for the United States on tornadic environments, and the increase in low-level moisture is particularly pertinent to AGW, as we know that (globally) low level atmospheric moisture is increasing and will continue to increase, and that lower cloud base heights are typically associated with tornadoes. Some are of the opinion that the predicted weakening of the jet stream will weaken storm potential, and in some regions it may. But as I have argued elsewhere, tornado alley is unique because of the presence of the great plains low level jet which is oftentimes critical in producing the high low level critical wind shear (0-3 km and 0-1 km AGL) which are typically observed in environments that produce tornadic supercells. So the predicted weakening of the tropospheric jet stream may not be as significant over this region as some might think. Brooks and Dotzek (2008) noted a marked increase in the incidence of hail reports since the early eighties for hail having a diameter of 7 cm or more.
81516. Argus at 02:24 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       #50, What is so bizarre about that? The ocean basins themselves must be shrinking because of the enormous amount of eroded material that is transported daily into the oceans by all major rivers. So the question is valid. The volume of the silt should be compared to the volume of melted glaciers, before we call the idea bizarre, but who can find the figures?
       Response:

       [DB] Argus, is this a Poe?

81517. Rob Honeycutt at 02:18 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Albatross... Ken's comments are pretty indicative of the comments taking place over at WUWT. They're essentially castigating him for stooping to such a level but then in the very next breath saying, "...but what Monckton is trying to say is correct." In general everyone seems to be complaining about using the swastika image as a powerpoint slide but saying that the fascism analogy is correct. It's freaking surreal.
81518. Tom Curtis at 02:17 AM on 24 June 2011
       Websites for Watching the Arctic Sea Ice Melt
       Eric, the longer you delay the more expensive action becomes. At present effective action will cost between -1 and 3% of global GDP. If you wait five years that will shift downwards. If you wait ten years it will shift further down, and you will need to undertake geo-engineering to bring CO2 levels below 450 ppm and to keep temperatures down while you do it. At that rate it does not take long before costs exceed 5% of GDP, ie, the World will have a significant negative net economic growth which will be needed to be sustained for decades. That is another way of saying it just won't happen and we will bear the brunt of even greater overall costs because some people are fortunate enough to avoid them.
81519. Bob Lacatena at 02:11 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       19, Albatross, Oh, my goodness. I didn't take your warning to heart, and watched both videos. Now I have to go shower. Really, this is a champion of the denial movement? How is his behavior not disowned by every rational person on the planet? How is a quick and remorseless apology in any way acceptable considering this is his third such (taped) offense? (I say remorseless because while he throws the words "unreserved apology" in there, he immediately goes on to the attack, as if he and his are the victims of a crime even more heinous... his words were "[those] who say we should be tattooed with our opinions, or imprisoned, or barred from Australia, or tried for ‘high crimes against humanity’?” At the same time, he repeatedly accuses "greenies" of killing millions through pushing renewable energy policies, while ignoring the deluge of science that says the drought and other aspects of climate change really could do just that, and more, if left unchecked for too long.) Who here, or anywhere, considers themselves to be rationally skeptical and yet can listen to his stuff and not simply be embarrassed to be even remotely associated with his positions? [Waiting for the usual suspects to eagerly raise their hands... or to have the courage to do the right thing.]
81520. Albatross at 02:05 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       EricR, I think that you misunderstood the purpose of my post. I was simply pointing out that there had been the first documented F5 in Canada, nothing more, nothing more. I was hoping that we could use the NEXRAD data to quantify any trends in mesocyclones, but even those radar data are not without issues, not to mention the huge computing resources required to process the data. The UofOklahoma started something but it seems to have gone nowhere.
81521. Bob Lacatena at 01:52 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       48, JBob,

       One final point, while the land surface can be measured for uplift, what is the sea floor surface doing?

       42, Ken,

       Therefore the volume of the tub must be accurately known for sea level changes to be an accurate measure of warming.

       You've got to be kidding me. Is this really going to become a serious "skeptical" argument for doubting sea level rise? That the ocean basins themselves may be shrinking? This is just getting too bizarre for words.
81522. Eric the Red at 01:52 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       The Elie tornado was the first confirmed F5. A couple others may have reached f5 status, but were unconfirmed. If we started seeing one a decade, that would be a significant increase. Since there has not been an increase in violent tornadoes in the US, I suspect that we will not start seeing one in Canada either.
81523. Albatross at 01:47 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       So Ken miraculously somehow manages to conflate Monckton's latest Nazi stunt (he has done it before, also watch this if you can stomach it) with Al Gore. The mind boggles. And as others have pointed out Ken's gratuitous and fallacious statements that he has attributed to some prominent figures who realize the seriousness of what lies before us. And Ken forgets that there are many Hockey Sticks out there, derived form independent data and data analysis techniques. The fact that he has to resort to this sort of BS just speaks to the vacuity of his 'arguments'. It would have been quite simple for Ken to unequivocally dismiss Monckton's latest BS. Telling that he could not bring himself to do that. And last but not least, note the venue at which Monckton was delivering his propaganda and slurs, the American Freedom Alliance. This is the same group that Lindzen has recently associated himself with. And these guys have the audacity and gall to accuse scientists of making AGW political.
81524. Bob Lacatena at 01:47 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       48, JBob, What does a temperature versus CO₂ graph possibly have to do with sea level rise, especially one containing such a cobbled together "NH" temperature estimate? Beyond this... exactly why should anyone trust your homespun science over all of the more thorough and complete data that is available? And, last but not least, why do you continue to be wedded to the false logic that temperature increases must mirror CO₂ increases, or that a failure to do so says anything whatsoever of value in reference to climate science? Your inability to get past that logical hurdle is preventing you from properly understanding the science. I would suggest that you shelve it, and move on with studying other things until you've learned enough to understand exactly why your premise is flawed. As long as you cling to it, you will be unable to advance your understanding of climate science, where we're all heading, and why.
81525. CBDunkerson at 01:39 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       Riccardo, Michael Crichton used to make the Wegener connection... though he incorrectly credited Wegener with the theory of plate tectonics. However, even that isn't really a good comparison. Wegener's ideas were not accepted because his suggested mechanisms for 'continental drift' (e.g. centrifugal force from the Earth's rotation) could be proven false. Once plate tectonics was worked out, and shown to match the available evidence, it was quickly accepted. Indeed, the acceptance of AGW is actually a much better analog to plate tectonics than its rejection would be. Arrhenius's (in place of Wegener) AGW theory was initially rejected for various reasons (e.g. poor measurement of CO2 absorption spectra, incorrect ideas about ocean uptake of CO2, et cetera) until sufficient evidence and new understandings of the mechanisms involved were developed. For AGW to be rejected now would be the equivalent of overturning the theory of plate tectonics... actually, it'd be even more remarkable given that there is much more evidence accumulated and confirmed over a longer timeframe.
81526. J. Bob at 01:36 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       Some time ago I started looking at sea levels, using tidal gauge info, to see how it correlated to temperature. The So. & East coast of the US was chosen, since that seemed to have the least seismic activity, including uplift. I would have preferred the East coast of S. America, but the data records were not as good as US records. Looking at the records, noted in the figure below: US SE Tidal records Seven stations were selected, to form a composite anomaly. These included Galveston, Pensacola, Key West, Charleston, Baltimore, Atlantic City & New York. The composite was filtered with a 10 yr. Fourier filter, and compared to a Least Sq. Trend line: US SE Composite Tidal Anomaly It was noted that, after ~1915, the trend line held fairly close to the filtered composite, in spite of increasing CO2. The HadCRUT3 global anomaly was also included as a comparison. An addition, some long term records were evaluated, comparing temperature to CO2. These were from stations that began recording prior to 1800: Central England – 1659-2010 Debilt Netherlands – 1706 – 2010 UPPSALA (LÄN)Swed. – 1722-2010 BERLIN (TEMPELHOF), Ger – 1701-2010 PARIS (14E PARC MONTSOURIS) Fr, 1757-2010 GENEVE (NASA), Switz. – 1753-2010 BASEL (BINNINGEN) Swiz.- 1755-2010 PRAHA (KLEM.-RUZYNE) Czech – 1775-2010 STOCKH (GML-LAN) Sw – 1756-2010 BUDAPEST (Hungary) – 1780-2009 HOHENPEISSENBERG, Ger – 1781-2010 MUNCHEN, (RIEM FLUGHAFEN ), Ger – 1781-2010 EDINBURGH (SCOTLAND), GB- 1785- 1993 WROCLAW (SOUTH WEST), Pol – 1792-2010 CEL & Debilt were from: CEL Link Debilt Link The rest were from the Rimfrost site: Rimfrost Link The anomaly of each site was computed (1969-1999 base) & a composite average was formed for each year. The data set was then filtered with a 50 yr. Fourier Convolution filter, and compared to the CO2 Mauna Loa & Law Dome (DE08 & De08-2) ice core data. The result is shown below: NH Temp vs. CO2 Since all the long term temperature data was taken from central & western Europe, the HadCRUT3_NH anomaly was also included. A few items noted were: On a long term basis, there was little CO2 change, while Europe went through some temperature swings, comparable to the present. While the Ave14 & HadCRUT3_NH seem to follow each other (especially the post 1900 rise, 1940 dip & subsequent rise), CO2 seems to have little correlation. Ave14 seems to lead the HadCRUT3_NH curve by about 10 years, so we may be in for a NH dip, or are already in it. One final point, while the land surface can be measured for uplift, what is the sea floor surface doing?
       Response:

       [DB] Your final linked graphic you have posted here repeatedly.  And just as repeatedly, it has been pointed out the issues with conflating regional data to global data.

81527. KR at 01:32 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       Ken Lambert - Ocean area is about ~3.6×10^8 km^2, with an average depth of 3790 meters. Sub-meter changes in sea level will not change ocean volume appreciably - well below the 2-3 digits of sea level rise rate accuracy; I believe they can safely be ignored until we look at meter+ total rises. In fact, to the extent that sea level rise increases the total volume available (via slope of shoreline transitions) this would decrease the observed rate of sea level rise with thermal and melt volume change, reducing the "hockey stick" slopes - meaning the problem could only be worse than the current paper shows. Your objection, Ken, is not valid - more of a red herring.
81528. KR at 01:21 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       Camburn - You say you've read the paper; what particulars in the compensation for regional vs. global adjustments in the Results and Discussion section do you have issues with? You've complained, but not detailed why. Kemp et al show what they did at considerable length. In other words - what parts of the global/regional compensation and calibration do you think Kemp et al did wrong? Complaints about regional sea level changes elsewhere are, as others have noted, not valid objections to a calibrated and compensated data set.
81529. Eric the Red at 01:10 AM on 24 June 2011
       Websites for Watching the Arctic Sea Ice Melt
       Tom, I am not of the belief that there is an expiration date for action. Most effects appear to be reversible - action will just become harder.
81530. quokka at 00:45 AM on 24 June 2011
       IPCC Report on Renewable Energy
       #45 Marcus, Checking the IEA figures on fossil fuel subsidies, it seems that they are overwhelmingly in developing countries. Of the top forty nations providing subsidies, the only OECD member seems to be Mexico. There are reasons for these subsidies and removing them may well have serious adverse economic consequences. Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies
81531. Eric (skeptic) at 00:31 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Albatross, I just did, thanks. We will be plagued with a small sample size for a while trying to find trends with this type of event.
81532. Albatross at 00:27 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Eric @169, "One more caveat is that we could see violent tornadoes shift into Canada. Hasn't happened yet, but it seems plausible to me." Interesting that you should say that. Canada recorded its first F5 tornado in 2007 (Google 'Eli Tornado').
81533. les at 00:16 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       I have a request - if anyone is up to it; because, having tried, I'm not. We have the hockey team ... to me they are sufficiently similar that I'm inclined to attribute a common underlying phenomena. However, folks then come along and say one is caused by plate tectonics, another by sun-cycles, another by natural climate variations, that one is only local, another by my great aunts bath time... So, would it be possible to itemise the opposing hockey team? Seems like there's only one star player on the AGW team but many in the opposition. Team-AGW is bound to loose unless, of course, the opposing players get in each others way.
81534. Eric (skeptic) at 00:13 AM on 24 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Rob, thanks for that correction. I presume that figures 5a, 6a and 7a depict that background state or some sort of average? Then I can't use 5a or 6a for any projection about tornadoes. 7a, however, suggests a lot fewer storms in lower latitudes that are right now causing tornadoes.
81535. Bob Lacatena at 00:12 AM on 24 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       43, skywatcher, Yes, but Ken's conjectures add "serious" doubt to the equation. Who knows what sort of tectonic shifts are happening in the unreachable ocean depths? Who could know? While one might be able to prove that the volume of the water is increasing, one would never be able to prove that the volume of the tub isn't decreasing. ( -Snip- )
       Response:

       [DB] Let's focus on the science, not the person.

81536. Tom Curtis at 00:09 AM on 24 June 2011
       IPCC Report on Renewable Energy
       Marcus @46, when I worked at a power station in Mt Isa, they had four boilers. Two were needed to supply the town and mines. One was always down for routine maintenance, and one was kept operating on standby in case of failure by either of the two operational boilers. That way, in the event of failure, they could have a new boiler up to full power in 15 minutes rather than the several hours it would take for a cold start. That practise may well be fairly general, and may account for a significant fraction of the unused power.
81537. Bob Lacatena at 00:06 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       15, Ken,

       Robyn ... despite his eccentricities on climate change.

       Citations, please. Your first statement about him has been demonstrated to be 100% false. Do you have any others to support the repetition of your classification of his statements and position? Do you have any defensible examples of "outrageous claims and distortions" from anyone on the scientific side of the debate?
81538. Bob Lacatena at 00:03 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       9, CBDunkerson, And that, in a nutshell, is the problem with so many deniers. Every single time, without fail, that I go back to a source, I find what seems to be an eye-opening argument to be totally and completely devoid of any substance whatsoever, so much so that one has to stop and ask "who the heck took the time to even make this stuff up? Who was this mind bogglingly stupid (or evil) to kick off this misrepresentation (to put it kindly)?" There is no counter-response to something like what you posted in response in response to lame, whining allegations, and I doubt you'll see one. I would hope, though, that it would teach whomever uncritically believes that sort of thing to be just a little more skeptical, and go to the sources themselves, rather than having an "ah ha, I knew it" sort of moment, and stopping their investigations (and their own critical thinking) right there.
81539. Ken Lambert at 00:01 AM on 24 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       DM #11 Happy to comply with your rules as long as they are applied fairly to both sides of the debate. My "gratuitous insult snipped" was a commment about Monckton - not Garnaut as could be implied by your edit. "People like Monckton make me sick" and "nasty habit of his" is OK but my suggesting that he is 'barking mad' is not OK? BTW - I first carried on a correspondence with Robyn Williams over 30 years ago - and occasionally still do. I pointed him to the scepticism of Prof Don Aitken which resulted in a two part ABC Ockham's Razor broadcast here: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2008/2226464.htm Robyn can take anything I have to say about him - he is someone we all treasure despite his eccentricities on climate change.
       Response:

       [DB] Note:  You have been counselled repeatedly over your failure to comply with the Comments Policy.  So be it.  The next personal attack or gratuitous insult will result in a revocation of your participation privileges in this forum.  When your comments are formulated to comply with the Comments Policy, they definitely add to the discussion here.  Others reading this: no baiting.

81540. Rob Painting at 23:56 PM on 23 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       Eric (skeptic) - "the models project more "El Nino-like" conditions" Actually Eric that's a common misconception, it simply means that the central and eastern tropical Pacific warms more than the western Pacific. See figure 5a in the Meehl paper you link to. ENSO events are still expected to happen, but the background state changes.
81541. Eric (skeptic) at 23:48 PM on 23 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       I should have also added that the trend in violent tornadoes has little to do with an apparent increase in tornadoes in general which I would expect to increase and widen in coverage. One more caveat is that we could see violent tornadoes shift into Canada. Hasn't happened yet, but it seems plausible to me.
81542. les at 23:47 PM on 23 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       13 - Riccardo ... If anyone is interested in a good read which makes this point about Galileo very nicely, may I recommend The Sky's Dark Labyrinth, a novel by Stuart Clark.
81543. Eric (skeptic) at 23:43 PM on 23 June 2011
       Linking Extreme Weather and Global Warming
       No trend in violent tornadoes, see fig 5 and section 5: http://www.flame.org/~cdoswell/publications/Sigtor_climatology.pdf Two main ingredients for a strong tornado are rising air and fallng air. The first ingredient is obviously going to become more abundant, and with it, the risk of more tornadoes in general. The second ingredient requires mid-level dry air pushed by a strong jet. The rain hits the dry air creating a strong downdraft. If there is no downdraft, then there will be no strong tornado. The strong jet will likely be further north, see http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/jyin/IPCC_paper_GRL_Jeff_Yin_final.pdf Also for a better argument about the "extreme ENSO" that Tom brought up earlier, the models project more "El Nino-like" conditions, see http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JCLI3746.1 Whether extreme or not, the lack of La Nina will be less conducive to low latitude storm tracks. Likewise in the same paper they point out the projected upward trend in AO which will also be less conducice to low latitude dry air and low latitude jets.
81544. Riccardo at 23:35 PM on 23 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       "Is he some Galileo shouting truth from the rooftops? Many use Galileo to justify their being alone against the scientific consensus. My impression is that none of them know history, otherwise they couldn't do such a baseless comparison. Those who make the comparison only prove their ignorance of the facts of history, together with the facts of science. A suggestion to the skeptics, name Alfred Wegener, a much more pertinent analog, and not Galileo. But also keep in mind that Wegener intuition just happened to be right, he couldn't prove his theory of continental drift in any reasonable way. It took several decades for the now accepted plate tectonics theory to develop.
81545. skywatcher at 23:24 PM on 23 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       Ken, do you actually have any evidence to suggest that the volume of the ocean basins (your 'bathtub') is changing in such a way as to provide the illusion of a rising sealevel? Of course you also have to account for why thermal expansion and observed ice mass loss are not contributing to the total volume of water in the bath as well... Otherwise your conjectures are nothing more than wild guesses, especially if, as I suspect, the increase in water volume is happening at a much higher rate than any change in the shape / volume of the basins.
81546. skywatcher at 23:17 PM on 23 June 2011
       The chief troupier: the follies of Mr Monckton
       I love the way the phrase 'hockey stick' is used by some as if it's a demeaning term. The 'hockey stick' is an excellent, well-validated result of some very thorough research. I suppose that makes it incompatible with the anti-science crowd? 'Hockey sticks' turn up all over the place not just in temperature records. I'd be very happy to be associated with the hockey stick, and even though Gore is by no means the originator of the research, I'm sure he's happy too... People like Monckton make me sick. They have been informed time and again by good people such as Abraham that what they spout is rubbish, yet they continue to knowingly spout disinformation. Having seen him on TV in Scotland in his UKIP guise spouting similar rubbish against renewable energy projects, it seems to be a nasty habit of his. I'm glad to hear that at least some in Oz are waking up to Monckton's misinformation.
81547. Ken Lambert at 23:17 PM on 23 June 2011
       Sea Level Hockey Stick
       The issue of sea level rise is a tricky one. I tend to think of it in two simple parts. 1. The total volume of water in the bath. 2. The volume of the bathtub. The volume of the water is defined by its mass and its temperature. Add mass - more volume. Add temperature - more volume and visa versa. The volume of the bathtub is influenced by the movement of the seabed, silting, rivers and dams and coastlines etc. Both volumes interacting together will determine the level of water measured on the side of the tub. However only the total volume of water is a direct measure of global warming via ice melt and thermal expansion. Therefore the volume of the tub must be accurately known for sea level changes to be an accurate measure of warming.
81548. Tor B at 23:10 PM on 23 June 2011
       Arctic sea ice has recovered
       This Cryosphere Today graphic has been updated through 2010.
81549. Marcus at 23:09 PM on 23 June 2011
       IPCC Report on Renewable Energy
       I've also noticed something quite disturbing....though maybe I shouldn't be surprised. Countries like Australia & the US generate a *lot* of surplus energy which isn't getting used. Australia generates around 30TWh of electricity per year more than what it uses (& given how inefficiently we currently use electricity, that's *REALLY* saying something), & the US generates around 250TWh of surplus electricity (minus exports). I wonder if this is a legacy of large, centralized generation facilities that are incapable of properly matching supply to demand and/or which are losing energy during transmission & distribution. Renewable Energy systems tend to be better in this regard because they can be built closer to the site of demand, & tailored better to energy demand at different times of the day & night!
81550. Marcus at 23:06 PM on 23 June 2011
       IPCC Report on Renewable Energy
       Lets not forget that even as late as 2009, global subsidies for the fossil fuel industry totaled just over US$300 billion per annum, whereas global subsidies for renewable energy is little more than US$20 billion-yet even with this massive discrepancy, renewable energy has made massive inroads in their production costs. Imagine where they would be by comparison if they halved fossil fuel subsidies & transferred them to renewable energy instead?

Prev  1623  1624  1625  1626  1627  1628  1629  1630  1631  1632  1633  1634  1635  1636  1637  1638  Next