Yes, you can raise the question, but can you provide evidence that trumps evidence climate variability did not contribute significantly to the 1975-2000 warming.
Max ok You have no evidence that climate variability did not contribute significantly to the 1975-2000 warming.
There is no such EVIDENCE!
Only climate model output does that and it has not provided a skillful forecast in two decades.
Climate Model Output is NOT Evidence.
Judith,
I think your verbal remarks are brilliant, spot on, tells the truth as it is, doesn’t try to advocate in any direction. Spot on. (I haven’t read your written testimony yet).
I feel I can trust what you say!!!
JCH, I have wondered why there’s been no drop in average global surface temperature for 16 years. I agree with you. If natural cooling influences are trying to push the average down, man-made warming must be preventing the drop.
“Solar intensity vs. earth temperature. A great correlation. Adapted from Hoyt, D. V., and K.H. Schatten, 1997, The Role of the Sun in Climate Change: Oxford University Press, New York, 279 p.” ~Dr. Lee C. Gerhard
To Peter Lang. You cannot know that I am wrong. I have shown that the heat emissions are four times the amount accounted for in the actual measured rise in atmospheric temperature. That is a fact! Whether you are willing to accept this fact is up to you. You are entitled to your opinion of whether this fact is significant, but I intend to express it any chance I get, so why don’t you refrain from comment unless you can explain why this amount of heat has no effect on climate.
People keep talking about not being able to find the source for the President’s higher social cost of carbon emission than expected ten years ago.
There you go. When you’re next chatting with Jim Inhofe, you can set his mind at ease.
Nobody said that freedom of speech should not be allowed on a blog like this, mikey. You just made that up. I will have to put you on my list.
Overall, a well done testimony, and nothing coming from Dr.’s Curry & Dessler that was not predictable. This part of Judith’s testimony seems a bit of a stretch in the actual facts, and an important stretch:
“There is growing evidence of decreased climate sensitivity to atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations.”
____
To characterize the evidence as “growing” is where the stretch comes from. The most recent major paper (Sherwood) indicates quite the opposite, and absolutely none of the recent paleoclimate data indicates this, which is a big part of the data that we are looking at in detail to ascertain sensitivity. More troubling, the recent model, observational, and paleo data is all beginning to more tightly converge at sensivity at least back at the long-term estimate of around the 3C level, if not a bit higher.
And of course, the issue of the consistent rise in the best metric of Earth’s energy balance- ocean heat content and the closely related sea level rise, get’s ignored as though, through some miracle, a warming ocean holding in the bulk of the anthropogenic energy imbalance gives we troposphere dwelling creatures a free pass.
Overall, a quite predictable hearing, which probably confirmed that both sides “tapped” the right experts to testify.
Fun hearing them talk about the sun going to sleep when as far as I heard it is still emitting over 1360 watts/m^2 felt at the top of the atmosphere.
So on the one hand, climate sensitivity is oh-so-important when it comes to sunspots, but not so important when it comes to CO2.
This is the decomposition of factors when it comes to explaining the warming trend. The factors are staggered so you can easily separate them.
http://imageshack.com/a/img28/5309/2sqg.gif
When all these factors are put together, we get a composite model which matches reality:
http://imageshack.com/a/img28/1736/cewu.gif
Almost impossible to separate the data from the model except for the effects of a 3-year exponential smoothing at the beginning of the time series.
hahahah that measure stopped serving as well about the time it stopped warming for just a few years short of a full santer
I propose that we officially name a period of 17 years a ‘santer’
Tony B
Andrew Dessler is a devout disciple of the CAGW cause.
His testimony shows this devotion.
But it was not very convincing to anyone who has looked at all sides of this ongoing debate a bit.
And it was a long way from being as comprehensive, impartial and effective as the testimony of our hostess.
Some years ago Dessler used to blog on other climate sites occasionally, and I had the chance to joust with him. Good fun.
In 2004 he and Ken Minschwaner published a study on water vapor increase with rising temperature over the tropics, based on actual satellite observations. They showed that over a short-term period, WV does increase with surface warming, but only at around one-eighth the amount predicted by IPCC, based on maintaining constant relative humidity. IPCC cited this study in AR4, but nevertheless kept the myth of constant relative humidity alive in its estimation of water vapor feedback and 2xCO2 ECS.
Sometimes the facts on the ground get in the way of a good story – and we all know what happens then.
Max
I loved as much as you’ll receive carried out right here.
The sketch is attractive, your authored subject matter stylish.
nonetheless, you command get bought an nervousness over that
you wish be delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come more formerly again as exactly the same
nearly a lot often inside case you shield this increase.
[…] Judith Curry has spent 30 years studying the climate. She currently chairs the School of Earth and Atmospheric […]
[…] Testifying before a committee of the US Senate yesterday, this even-tempered, matter-of-fact professor made a number of remarks the public deserves to hear. For example, she referred to human-caused, greenhouse-gas related global warming as: […]
Sun vs. CO2?
CO2 goes up and down by as much as 600 ppm on a daily basis at Mauna Loa. That does make the temperature fluctuate. But, when the Sun gods down… it gets cold.
Ocean heat content for 2013 sharply upward breaking a new record
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index.html
The destructive moment for the skeptic narrative is imminent. The next El Nino? I only wonder how skeptics are going to explain the ongoing warming during a quiet sun and negative PDO. Out of options?
From the article:
Former Top NSA Official: “We Are Now In A Police State”
Posted on December 18, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog
32-year NSA Veteran Who Created Mass Surveillance System Says Government Use of Data Gathered Through Spying “Is a Totalitarian Process”
Bill Binney is the high-level NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information. A 32-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency, Binney was the senior technical director within the agency and managed thousands of NSA employees.
Binney has been interviewed by virtually all of the mainstream media, including CBS, ABC, CNN, New York Times, USA Today, Fox News, PBS and many others.
Last year, Binney held his thumb and forefinger close together, and said:
We are, like, that far from a turnkey totalitarian state.
But today, Binney told Washington’s Blog that the U.S. has already become a police state.
By way of background, the government is spying on virtually everything we do.
All of the information gained by the NSA through spying is then shared with federal, state and local agencies, and they are using that information to prosecute petty crimes such as drugs and taxes. The agencies are instructed to intentionally “launder” the information gained through spying, i.e. to pretend that they got the information in a more legitimate way … and to hide that from defense attorneys and judges.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/former-top-nsa-official-now-police-state.html
Huh, dirty pool like the way increasing confidence has been decidedly promoted over, lets say, the increasing divergence between observation and model prediction?
Of course I’m sick of the politics.
Matthew, your’s is the best example of wrong thinking I have seen in a long time. Nevertheless, there are fragments of truth in what you say. I would agree some kinds of growth are good (growth of wind power and solar power, and growth in motor vehicle mpg).
You asked how many companies in the S&P 500 Index will still be there in “20 – 80 years.” I would bet only between 0 and 5 of the current 500 companies will still be in the index 80 years from now, but if it’s 20 years I’m not so sure, showing again the longer the forecast horizon the greater confidence in the forecast.
BTW, since an index fund tracks the index, the change in the composition is not something the investor need worry about.
” if you go around fling ‘thermodynamics’ around, it helps if you understand the basics. Again, describe how the SOI is calculated and then tell us how this metric is a thermodynamic descriptor.”
Seriously, the SOI is an indication of a pressure difference, which in term is a measure of force in the thermodynamic terminology. The SOI also maps to the estimate of the global averaged angular momentum, also known as wind energy. Huge pressure differentials lead to a significant amount of kinetic energy held aloft which dissipates over the earth.
Thermodynamically, a free energy increase will get allocated to kinetic, thermal, potential, and latent terms and what CSALT does is book-keep the terms such that there are no discontinuous changes from year-to-year.
This is the decomposition of factors when it comes to explaining the warming trend. The factors are staggered so you can easily separate them.
http://imageshack.com/a/img28/5309/2sqg.gif
When all these factors are put together, we get a composite model which seems to match reality:
http://imageshack.com/a/img28/1736/cewu.gif
Almost impossible to separate the data from the model except for the effects of a 3-year exponential smoothing at the beginning of the time series.
Too good to be true, eh? That’s what makes this so much fun.
what Van said
“The basic mystery in thermodynamics is the universality. The validity of thermodynamic equations and theories regularly exceed the expectations. “
[1]P. Ván, “Thermodynamics of continua: the challenge of universality,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1305.3582, 2013.
