Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel


Embed this content in your HTML

Search

Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels


Showcase


Channel Catalog


older | 1 | .... | 4069 | 4070 | (Page 4071) | 4072 | 4073 | .... | 4134 | newer

    0 0

    "Imagine placing a $10,000 bet of your own money on whether global warming is real or not." A weak argument. How many extremists are there as a percentage? They're arguing against the weakest opponent. The question is one of policy. Money. Place the same bet on what the GMST will be for 2030. Or the annual precipitation average for 2025 to 2030 in Minnesota. My 2nd question is better. And policy is better served by my 2nd question than the writer's.

    0 0

    It's a case of an emergency and a government not listening to the scientists but to the likes of Exxon (through political funding and proxy advocacy) instead. Imagine if the scientists were saying a chemical is dangerous, but the industry lobby prevented the government from regulating it. The scientists who know about the subject need to speak up, and some would call them activists for doing so. This is where it is warranted.

    0 0

    A polar vortex may yet again bring 2018/19 winter snow storms to the N.E., despite global warming alarmist predictions that the children of Leftists would by now, never again know what snow is. Since global warming has been a Left v. right issue and not fake news and phony science, we now see that the children of conservative parents apparently were raised with a better understanding appreciation for nature and are more prepared for life in the real world.

    0 0

    "Abstract: This study examines changes in Earth’s energy budget during and after the global warming “pause” (or “hiatus”) using observations from the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System. We find a marked 0.83 ± 0.41 Wm^−2 reduction in global mean reflected shortwave (SW) top-of-atmosphere (TOA) flux during the three years following the hiatus that results in an increase in net energy into the climate system. A partial radiative perturbation analysis reveals that decreases in low cloud cover are the primary driver of the decrease in SW TOA flux. The regional distribution of the SW TOA flux changes associated with the decreases in low cloud cover closely matches that of sea-surface temperature warming, which shows a pattern typical of the positive phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Large reductions in clear-sky SW TOA flux are also found over much of the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans in the northern hemisphere. These are associated with a reduction in aerosol optical depth consistent with stricter pollution controls in China and North America. A simple energy budget framework is used to show that TOA radiation (particularly in the SW) likely played a dominant role in driving the marked increase in temperature tendency during the post-hiatus period." https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/6/3/62 Hiatus is entirely the wrong idea for what were climate shifts around 1912, 1944, 1976 and 1998. The next one is due soon - if it is not happening now. What are the chances of a shift to a cooler Pacific decadal mode and more cloud?

    0 0

    […] explained the problem in a post on “lukewarmer” Judith Curry’s blog. It’s not as if the error involved some deep, […]

    0 0

    Worth a thousends words: https://andthentheresphysics.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Risbey_etal_2018.jpg

    0 0

    Instead of trying to deny what the records show clearly, they should be making excuses for what is happening. https://i.imgur.com/yFrUbjs.png Since February 2016 we are assisting to the fourth greatest cooling since 1950, and the greatest since 1975. Global temperature is now 0.3°C below where it should be according to CMIP5 average and below 95% of CMIP5 model predictions. And it has lost those 0.3°C in just 20 years, since 1998. Natural variability is driving a ~60-yr oscillation so since 1950 global temperature follows a linear increase and temperature goes from being above the trend line to being below it, and back. CO2 obviously doesn't do anything like that. And the problem for these people is that what comes next is temperature being below the linear trend. After the expected La Niña of 2020-2021 that should be the natural result. By then the Feb2016 cooling should be the biggest in 70 years. They better get their excuses ready, because it is going to look a lot worse than it already does.

    0 0

    My favorite equation. This is my Cosmological Equation: a = C1 – G m/(L R^2) – (C2/L) R = 0 Where: a is cosmic acceleration, C1 and C2 are constants, G is gravitational constant, m is mass of ordinary matter in the universe, L is Lorentz factor, R is radius of universe. The fundamental theorem of algebra states that any n-degree polynomial has n roots. My Cosmological Equation has two roots of polynomial. The first root is the radius when the universe collapses into a black hole. The second root is the radius when gravity overcomes dark energy and acceleration of space expansion reverses into deceleration. This is from my Dark Force theory. It’s inevitable. The universe will collapse into a black hole. It will be one of the most important equations in physics. Hopefully before our universe collapses into a black hole :-0

    0 0

    A La Niña can't change the 30-year trend for anything longer than a moment, which is likely to be .2 ℃ per decade by the end of 2020.

    0 0

    Javier Personally I am waiting for the AMO to see what happens to Arctic Sea Ice extent. That will be observational evidence hard to refute. I can see the new mantra on the other side “ Oh, it’s just natural variability, we always projected a recovery.” Yeah, right.

    0 0

    "The ACA exists because of multidecadal Republican recalcitrance on single payor. Votes bought and paid for by the health insurance industry." The biggest lobbyist in favor of the California single payer plan was the nurses association. And we were told they were spending millions lobbying for it because they wanted the pay cut that comes from making it government run. California couldn't make the numbers work with a 15% payroll tax plus an income tax increase. Maybe because everyone understood that once you started charging $15,000 a year for health care to all those healthy 29-year-olds in Silicon Valley making $100k a year they'd catch on to the fact that single payer is really income redistribution from the young to Baby Boomers and anybody who wanted to stroll across the Mexican border. Allowing pre-existing conditions isn't "insurance". You can't wait to buy health insurance until the day after you're diagnosed with cancer for the same reason you can't purchase your first car insurance policy from the scene of your accident.

    0 0

    There are countries that have versions of single payor. https://i.imgur.com/62L2DMP.png

    0 0

    <blockquote>the 30-year trend … is likely to be .2 ℃ per decade by the end of 2020.</blockquote> The problem is going to be the 2000-2030 30-year trend, and afterwards. With the 2015 El Niño in the center or the first half of the data, the 30-year trend could very well be zero or negative.

    0 0

    The one in red is the only one that doesn't ration health care. And all the ones in blue have 20-25% VATs paid by people of all incomes. Plus they have middle class income tax rates 10-20% higher than those in the US. Plus they have populations unhappy with the level of spending on health care. Plus their doctors and nurses are paid less than those in the US. But up above, Jim is saying the US can have a 5% payroll taxes and charge only "the rich."

    0 0

    Javier Thank you for the updated temperature chart. In my opinion this is the most important chart available to the climate discussion. But alas skeptics do not realize it. It should be top and center of every skeptic, nuetral and CAGW web or blog site, updated at the first opportunity every month. No words are needed. Its all about the temperature - this is the central point of the issue - where are we at - what is the trend. The rest is jibber jabber. I will forward it to the relevant political Dumbo's immediately, especially those that have just returned from the indoctrination camp in Poland. A report card. My regards to you and yours for the festive season. Martin

    0 0

    Javier, I suggest to add an extra offset of 0.4 degrees to make a comparison easier with the '2 degrees and 1.5 degrees preindustrial' Paris targets See eg https://klimaathype.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/temp_sres.png?w=640

    0 0

    Yet scientists who speak out are pilloried for not singing from the endorsed hymnbook.

    0 0

    I agree with Javier - warmists better get their excuses ready. They will have to acknowledge the global multidecadal oscillation and that most (or at least some) of the late 20th century warming is non-anthropogenic. This will happen relatively soon (2020s). http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/mean:240/mean:192/mean:144/derivative/scale:1200/plot/hadcrut4gl/mean:360/mean:288/mean:216/derivative/scale:1200/plot/hadcrut4gl/mean:480/mean:384/mean:288/derivative/scale:1200/plot/hadcrut4gl/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1955/to:1980 The cyan is the prediction.

    0 0

    Oh my gawd, more 60-year oscillation nonsense. There is no camshaft. There is no pacemaker. There is no timing belt. There may not be a negative phase of the AMO before the end of this century, And nobody is actually talking about what the negative phase of the AMO may look like other than in the context of mid-century cooling. It could be multiple decades before the negative phase of the AMO looks like that. The negative phase of the AMO may have already happened. We could be at the end of the negative phase of the AMO.

    0 0

    DCV is decadal climate variability - it caused most early century warming, all mid century cooling and at least half of late century warming. Some 0.3C over the last 40 years in this study. "Irrespective of exact methodology used to infer the internal component of the observed DCV, it appears that climate model simulations tend to underestimate its magnitude and fall short of faithfully replicating its spatial patterns.15,16,18,20,21,22,23 These deficiencies may have substantially contributed to climate models’ apparent lack of skill in reproducing recent decadal slowdown, or “hiatus” in the near-surface global warming of the Earth, although multiple factors could be at play. 22,23,24,25,26,27 Similar decadal discrepancies between modelled and observed decadal climate trends are ubiquitous throughout the twentieth century. 14,15,16,17,18,19,20 In this paper, we use an objective filtering method to succinctly characterise such observed-vs.-modelled decadal and longer time scale climate differences over the entirety of the twentieth century and show that these differences are dominated by a pronounced global multidecadal signal with a distinctive spatiotemporal structure absent from any of the model simulations considered." https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0044-6 The global signal translates through the system with some 40-50% of Arctic sea ice loss in the satellite era due to the global stadium wave in this study. "Here, through analysis of large ensembles of fully coupled climate model simulations with historical radiative forcing, we present an important internal mechanism arising from low-frequency Arctic atmospheric variability in models that can cause substantial summer sea ice melting in addition to that due to anthropogenic forcing. This simulated internal variability shows a strong similarity to the observed Arctic atmospheric change in the past 37 years. Through a fingerprint pattern matching method, we estimate that this internal variability contributes to about 40–50% of observed multi-decadal decline in Arctic sea ice." https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0256-8?WT.feed_name=subjects_cryospheric-science The global energetics emerge largely from SW changes in the upwelling regions of the Pacific Ocean in this study. "Here we show that the subtropical signature of this warming, off Baja California, was associated with a record deficit in the spatial coverage of co‐located marine boundary layer clouds. This deficit coincided with a large increase in downwelling solar radiation that dominated the anomalous energy budget of the upper ocean, resulting in record‐breaking warm sea surface temperature anomalies. Our observation‐based analysis suggests that a positive cloud‐surface temperature feedback was key to the extreme intensity of the heatwave. The results demonstrate the extent to which boundary layer clouds can contribute to regional variations in climate." https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018GL078242 And in this. "This study examines changes in Earth’s energy budget during and after the global warming “pause” (or “hiatus”) using observations from the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System. We find a marked 0.83 ± 0.41 Wm−2 reduction in global mean reflected shortwave (SW) top-of-atmosphere (TOA) flux during the three years following the hiatus that results in an increase in net energy into the climate system. A partial radiative perturbation analysis reveals that decreases in low cloud cover are the primary driver of the decrease in SW TOA flux. The regional distribution of the SW TOA flux changes associated with the decreases in low cloud cover closely matches that of sea-surface temperature warming, which shows a pattern typical of the positive phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation." https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/6/3/62 This "pattern typical of the positive phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation" has reversed but short term changes in systems with large intrinsic interannual variance are not informative. But these recent studies are based on decades of patient scientific observation and analysis. It is no surprise - it has been known - but much of climate science has locked onto a paradigm with far too little explanatory power. The longer term evolution of the Pacific subsystem shows a 20th century peak in the intensity and frequency of Pacific warm states - likely modulated by solar variability. The natural element of modern era warming - manifesting as internal climate deterministically chaotic regime shifts - will be lost this century. The 'hiatus' is only just starting.

older | 1 | .... | 4069 | 4070 | (Page 4071) | 4072 | 4073 | .... | 4134 | newer