mosomoso
You can’t have a prosperous green world if it isn’t a safe world. Obama has really taken his eye off the ball if he thinks that AGW is more important than keeping a lid on all the fanatics out there.
tonyb
Comment on Week in review by climatereason
↧
↧
Comment on Partisanship and silencing science by stevepostrel
Once, in young middle age, after abashedly admitting to not having seen a doctor in ten years I was told by a life insurance rep that that put me in the lowest risk category.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Shaun Lovejoy
All of England is 0.04% of the globe and the Central England Temperatures (CET) represent an even smaller part of the earth. It may be more reliable than multiproxies, but it isn’t very useful for our purpose which requires global scale values. The CET variability is very much larger than the global scale variability. For example, the “Friends of the Earth” tried to debunk my paper by refering to a 0.9o C change in CET from 1663-1763 (this is roughly the global change from 1880- 2004). However, over the same period, the global scale temperature change was only 0.21 oC (a typical century scale natural variation) which proved my point rather well. This is a much smaller variation because while the CET might have increased by 0.9o C, other regions decreased their temperature, partially offsetting the increase. The globe contains more than 2500 regions the size of the CET and many did not change temperature by the same amount – or even in the same direction during this period!
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Jim D
captd, 2 C per doubling works whether you start in 1950 or 1750, as Lovejoy showed. There is a fundamental upward curve that this captures.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Shaun Lovejoy
The equilibrium climate sensitivity is a theoretical/model concept, I do not pretend to estimate it. The fact that the effective climate sensitivity is not so different from estimates of the climate sensitivity to CO2 is presumably that contributions from methane and other GHG’s roughly cancel out the cooling due to aerosols.
But the nice thing is that all this is irrelevant to the conclusions (it just makes them more plausible since compatible with a totally different approach).
↧
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
Since he used NH the Ljungqvist, F.C. 2009.northern extratropics might be interesting.
Ljungqvist, F.C. 2009.
You know, with that land amplification and all.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by jim2
The link Judy included in the main post used the term “deniers.” I didn’t go looking for it.
But I agree, the piece should be judged on its technical merits. Of course, the use of that term in a scientific, in this case, letter, is questionable nonetheless.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by mwgrant
Rud
“Just an opinion. I do not think it is scientifically correct to categorize papers by their authors race, color, creed, or blog habits. They should be evaluated on their own merits, given their arguments, prior citations, and analytic methods used. And critiques should be couched in an equivalent manner.”
Absolutely. Thanks for staing that.
“since the summer surface differences arguably violate the underlying krigging assumptions.”
And [I am very curious] from your understanding what are those assumptions?* exactly what is being kriged? and the local estimates, are they from point kriging or block kriging? how are they /should they be interpreted?** …a lot of nitty-gritty.
but we are just talking estimation and more will follow.
—-
* people here seem to poke the assumptions a little and walk away…too mathish I guess.
** yeah, poking s a ‘physical boundary’ argument including pondering how sharp they are in the context of how the estimation is configured. Not wildly excited about it, though…finite shelf-life and all that.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by rls
Rob: Your comments in the past about the climate system being a complex interaction of many subsystems has always meant sense to me and seemed compatible with the stadium wave theory, but never saw you mention it before. I’m new here and may have missed it. Is the stadium wave an idea you’ve always held?
↧
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
JimD, “captd, 2 C per doubling works whether you start in 1950 or 1750, as Lovejoy showed.”
Right and both dates follow some cooling event and if you assume colder isn’t “normal” you get a lower sensitivity. Since he is using CO2 as a proxy for everything, a recovery from a cooler period would have a similar ln shape making it hard to distinguish “forced” from recovery and what “forcing” contributed what. Since we have no clue what ECS might be or even if it exists, we cannot “exclude” anthropogenic forcing but we cannot improve its estimate much either. Just another verse in the psalms of climate change.
HOWEVER, 2C from 1750 including ALL potential forcings is not greater than 2C which would have been considered low just a few short years ago.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
JimD, You should discuss that with the author, that was his/her splice :)
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Jim D
captd, well it becomes more than 3 C if you include a 10-20 year delay which correlates just as well, and I think we know that the response isn’t instantaneous anyway. Also 2/3 of the forcing has occurred since 1950, so most of the fit is in the later period and hardly any from the 1800s and before.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Jim D
It was NH extratropics, so the HADCRUT4 line is too. What was your complaint?
↧
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Ragnaar
About the dueling graphs from captdallas and Joshua, this looks like the original: http://agbjarn.blog.is/users/fa/agbjarn/files/ljungquist-temp-reconstruction-2000-years.pdf
on page 7, that stops at plus 0.4. That additional roughly 0.4 from the SkS graph, how did that get there?
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by SUT
If I’m extrapolating correctly from this chart:
– Trend: +0.2C / +0.1 log-Co2.
-> So if 2000 is at .4 on the X-axis, (the canonical 2050/2x-CO2 is 1.0) we’d expect 0.6 * 0.2 = +1.2C warming.
This is closer to Lindzen-estimates than AR4/5-estimates; isn’t warming *very unlikely* to be less than +1.5C ? In other words, why so skeptical? Maybe I’m reading it wrong?
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by ordvic
Josh, sometimes it’s better not to posf. Guilt by association ya know :-)
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Stephen Segrest
Today is an example of why I really like CE — Through Mosher, I learned about Ross McKitrick and went to his webpage and read some of his papers. McKitrick is an interesting person besides his views on the “Pause” — He is a person with conservative values advocating bottom-up actions rather than “Liberal” top-down/command-control.
Dr. Ramanathan’s “fast mitigation” (low level ozone, carbon black, methane, HFCs) is totally consistent with McKitrick’s views.
↧
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Rob Ellison
Why go back over the Holocene with a high resolution ENSO proxy? Why go back 1000 years? Because we can – and it is informative.
↧
Comment on How long is the pause? by Rob Ellison
Assuming the models are plausibly formulated – the ‘bases for judging are a priori formulation, representing the relevant natural processes and choosing the discrete algorithms…’
↧
Comment on Partisanship and silencing science by Eric
The last time the world was warmer than recent there was no electrical grid or indoor plumbing. Why do you want people to go without modern conveniences such as these kim?
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
