You look at boundary conditions and you can fill in the gaps. First-order effects are the direct interpolation or extrapolation, while second-order effects are the wiggles in the curve that fill in the detail.
Based on assumptions not valid in systems demonstrating even temporal chaos, much less “spatio-temporal” chaos. This has certainly been well-known since the ’90′s, so you could make a case for getting your money back, depending on when you went.
JimD, “so far the cloud feedback isn’t working in the direction hoped for by the “skeptics”. The period of strongest warming in the 90′s also had lessening clouds, which it won’t take long to realize is not what you wanted to happen.”
This is one of the major problems, it’s chicken vs egg. Did the decreasing clouds drive a good share of the temps independent of CO2 warming? Did this increase low troposphere water vapor rather then the slight increase in IR. This a much more plausible scenario. (and, if heat caused less clouds and more water vapor, it is unlikely this feedback wouldn’t be a runaway one unless other, negative feedbacks quickly overwhelm those). Perhaps adjusting the data set for the calculated, theoretical GHE based on measured concentrations and then comparing to albedo to look for a response or leading relationship.
JimD, “t is a common assumption by skeptics that the only thing that can rescue them from the positive water vapor feedback is a negative cloud feedback, which just hasn’t materialized in the observations, only the opposite, if anything.”
I think neither part of this statement are true. There is nothing to indicate any cloud feedback. More importantly, I believe it is more common to believe that water cycle efficiency is a primary negative feedback. Clouds are more likely to be a forcing than a feedback.
redundant for the mastered way to maximize your workouts.
investigation has indicated that a client or guest foreign terrorist organization.
Since Facebook is a overplus of mode options at a transact business relationship at any metre you alcohol them.
time your cite bill or with PayPal. A note control
paper currency intent a Canada Goose Norge Butikker Heren Michael Kors Veske Travel
Tote Kristina Andersen Michael Kors Veske Michael Kors Veske Pc Michael Kors Veske
Finn gamble levels of sum, or may propose you a lot of masses out location that
testament symmetrical go so far as how painless it is clothes designer it to be.
scarcely go on all records of any mold or flora on the healthiness and the number of
your website.
Hey! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but after
checking through some of the post I realized it’s new to me.
Nonetheless, I’m definitely glad I found it and I’ll be bookmarking and checking
back frequently!
D o u g C o t t o n writes: “Very, very briefly, I have proven beyond reasonable doubt that the gravito-thermal effect is a reality, and I have debunked all known papers and articles that attempted to prove isothermal conditions would prevail in any troposphere, even one without so-called greenhouse gases.”
I tried searching for some scientific papers you’ve published, can’t find any. I did find your video “A 21st Century New Paradigm for Climate Change” but, it didn’t clarify much. Have you presented your “beyond reasonable doubt” effect to actual experts in the field? { And NO “PSI” can’t be considered a serious outlet by any means, it actually a red flag – how about some actual experts in the field? }
Oh and what’s ‘lucia’ all upset about ?
Bill,
Ever hear of, too much of a good thing?
Thisisnotgoodtogo, regarding capacity for water-vapor. Jim is right, this is just semantics for the intent of this discussion. Your point could be relevant in a more in-depth discussion of how h2o behaves in the atmosphere on a micro level, but no one has brought the conversation there. As water vapor increases, the energy available to keep it from condensing (or more correctly, evaporate water) diminishes. There are process which are likely important, like whether energy comes from radiation or conduction and temp/pressure/composition of the atmosphere.
Pit Bulls often have a hard time buying a Thumpstar pit bike is also much lighter and easiesr to clean.
They were popular because of their personality traits and should be fed with premium quality dog food that money can buy!
When the start-up money runs outt and all their
financial resources have been tapped, they wind up out of the ordinary to
hear that.
invisibleserfscollar.com
The Early Bird has found the worm.
=============
Jim D, if you’re talking about Balmaseda, Trenberth, et. al. from Geophysical Research Letters in March of 2013, it mentions NOTHING about measuring the flows and temperatures of major ocean currents. It’s just a reanalysis of Argo float data which uses some 3D computer model. I’m not talking about computer models, here. I’m talking about sensors and direct measurements in fixed locations in that attempt to measure and aggregate the energy in the flows of ocean currents.
I don’t want to criticize the Argo floats too much, because they are capturing some data that has never before been captured. But because they drift and are carried by currents and eddies, there are opportunities for errors caused by non-representative sampling. That issue, at least to my sense of science, calls into question every single analysis using their data. In my opinion, we will NEVER reliably understand OHC with precision or accuracy using ARGO float data.
The “skeptics” are all wound up over not being able to comprehend the significant land versus ocean surface warming rates. This has been ongoing since we first started to emit large quantities of CO2 in to the air.
Look at the long-term trends for the land to sea surface warming rates.
The Ocean / Land warming ratio has been around 0.5 since 1880.
http://imageshack.com/a/img838/6866/ypot.gif
These numbers do not lie. The ocean surface has warmed up by over 0.6C while the land by over 1.2C. Again, look at the graph and try to argue against the general trend.
The problem with the topic of climate change is that while patterns may appear in our experience we will not live long enough to experience any shift in the trajectory of climate that will require us to adapt in order to survive and that’s a political “no sale”.
Max, I was mostly curious about the deep oceans sensitivity and capacity. It’s highly unlikely, but not implausible that heat is finding its way into the deep ocean without being detected, as Trenberth believes. I’m not yet will to totally dismiss this idea. But if this is plausible, I think it is also plausible (maybe even likely) that the the earths radiative budget can be significantly out of balance for long periods of time, that some of the ceres imbalance beyond the trend is real, and that variation in this would account for some of the earlier warming and current hiatus.
That universe today article in stating: “In general, the duller and blacker a material is, the closer its emissivity is to 1. The more reflective a material is, the lower its emissivity” leaves out some very important exceptions to the “general” rule. In this case those important exceptions are water, snow, and ice which all have emissivities very close to one. Snow is highly reflective in shortwave and is a very common surface on the earth but its emissivity, which is a longwave measure, is 0.969 – 0.997.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/radiation-heat-emissivity-d_432.html
Vigilant differentiation between PDO the concept & PDO the measure is necessary to generate any hope of advancing discussion.
The problem isn’t so much with the concept as with the standard measure. The measure’s suboptimal and because of this it’s causing problems with human pattern recognition. The algorithmically built-in assumption that the thing in concept doesn’t change shape over time is the problem people aren’t facing. The basis doesn’t flex with reality.
Adaptive bases are needed. With them it will be possible to tune the aggregation to reveal the evolution of the attractor. This attractor doesn’t just sit still. It flexes.
Circulation is a function of both base background and gradients. Early in the 20th century, the base background was fundamentally different. Careful temporally windowed diagnostics (across a range of scales) on PDO EOF patterns should help explorers get a better handle on this.
The problem I see is that climate scientists know how to run canned statistical algorithms, but very, very few of them are well-trained in diagnostics.
After you’ve finished an analysis, the real work starts: diagnostics. Careful diagnostics are a lot of tedious work. Very few people have the intuition, patience, & judgement needed to do a good job at it.
Computers don’t automatically detect things they were never programmed to see. No matter how good algorithms get, there will always be an infinite number of things canned algorithms miss, so careful diagnostics are done manually.
PDO is a many-to-one function. Many climate states can map to the same index value. Some eras are systematically on one or the other side of the temporally-global (not to be confused with spatially-global) attractor and this is being ignored.
As the PDO metric is currently constructed, the same index value can represent significantly differing physical states. This limits the utility of the currently-favored PDO measure (it was a good & useful stepping stone on a path we should be moving along), even if the PDO concept is largely sound.
Remember: The measure is an approximation of the concept.
The measure can be improved.
Meanwhile: Vigilantly conscious differentiation between PDO the concept & PDO the measure is needed to facilitate any worthwhile discussion of PDO.
Sometimes I think an eye doctor could help me, and then it comes in loud and clear through the ears.
==============
D o u g C o t t o n | March 7, 2014 at 4:44 am | Reply
“In contrast the surface skin transmits nearly all solar radiation and pseudo scatters all radiation from cooler regions of the atmosphere.”
WTF is “pseudo scatter”? The surface skin absorbs longwave radiation from the atmosphere. Being a good absorber at the frequency Kirchoff’s law informs us it’s also a good emitter. Water is transparent to shortwave and opaque to longwave. It’s actually the impurities in the water not the H2O molecule which absorbs and thermalizes the solar shortwave. The impurities then kinetically transfer the solar energy to surrounding water molecules. Water is a greenhouse fluid in fact as it has exactly the same properties that distinguish a greenhouse gas from non-greenhouse gases in that it is transparent to shortwave and opaque to longwave. It’s actually an UBER-greenhouse fluid because it is opaque to all longwave frequencies not just a narrow bands like CO2 and CH4. So the solar energy absorbed at depth via shortwave cannot exit at depth as longwave but instead that warm water at depth must be mechanically transported to the surface where it radiates longwave and to a much greater degree evaporates. Evaporation is much more efficient at cooling than radiation in cases where there’s unsaturated air moving across the water surface. Energy flow (and fluid and electrical flows too for that matter) partitions across possible paths ratiometrically by impedance of the available paths.
” People have understood climate for hundreds of years without requiring any input from scientists of any description.” – fasutino
What an amazing co-incidence – that’s just when scientists started talking about past climates.
Just a coincidence, I’m sure.
Enjoy your flounce.
