X –
==> “Koonins piece reflects climate sciences’ high degree of uncertainty,”
Does it really reflect the high degree of uncertainty as to whether ACO2 emissions might cause harmful climate change?
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
↧
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Climate Scientist
Why are the tropical oceans still cold in the depths? Why don’t they become isothermal like you think the troposphere would have been without that most-prolific of all greenhouse pollutants, water vapour sending all that warming back radiation back to the surface to warm it to a higher temperature than it was when it sent the original radiation and cooled in doing so.
Well the tropical oceans are colder in the depths because the poles act as a heat sink. Isothermals (such as 4 degrees C) are deep down in the tropics, but break out at the surface in the polar regions.
So too would the atmosphere be colder at the base for the same reason. If the whole globe were paved in black asphalt the surface would be about 235K – nearly 40 degrees below freezing. You can work it out yourself with an on-line Stefan Boltzmann calculator using solar radiative flux of 161W/m^2 and emissivity 0.93.
So there is a lot of thermal energy entering the ocean surface in non-polar regions, moving downwards through the thermocline and exiting in the polar regions.
But why is the thin transparent ocean surface so hot? Before you say it’s the back radiation, I have to tell you that radiation from colder regions does not penetrate the warmer ocean surface more than a few nanometres. It is “pseudo scattered” because it merely raises electrons to higher energy states and then those electrons immediately drop back and emit an identical photon. The electro-magnetic energy is not converted to thermal energy, and so it does not raise the temperature.
In fact there is a gravitationally induced temperature gradient (aka lapse rate) in any planetary troposphere, and thermal energy absorbed from solar radiation in the upper troposphere can flow up that sloping thermal profile restoring thermodynamic equilibrium as it does so, and even entering the oceans. Water vapour reduces the temperature gradient (fortunately) making the surface about 10 to 12 degrees cooler. Carbon dioxide makes it another 0.1 degree cooler for the same reason.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by fizzymagic
Joshua said: Does it really reflect the high degree of uncertainty as to whether ACO2 emissions might cause harmful climate change?
What does “uncertainty as to whether something might cause harm” even mean?
But yes, if you had bothered to read the editorial, you would see that he is very explicit about showing that modeling does an extremely poor job of making specific predictions about the impacts of climate changes.
Certainly any set of changes will include both positive and negative effects from the viewpoint of those being affected. However, the claim that the current climate is “just right” and any change will be catastrophic is not supported by the science.
That doesn’t mean it’s not true; it’s just that we don’t know. The conservative crowd (to which you belong) fears any change and attempts to maintain the status quo at all costs. That fear, though, is the fear of the unknown, not the fear of something well-understood scientifically.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by mosomoso
‘The recently appointed UN Messenger of Peace Leonardo DiCaprio stated “The debate is over. Climate change is happening now.”’
Leo di Caprio recently flew (super long-haul from Oz) to celebrate New Year twice in the same day. Really.
Now this from the Murdoch press:
‘Apple chief Tim Cook, days after launching the iPhone 6, travelled to New York to pledge that the tech giant would prioritise low-carbon growth.’
So Tim Cook would rather make a jet trail than email – though he does have access to a number of electronic devices. But I can’t say for sure that he made a jet trail this time because even Murdoch journalists (most of whom have as much green sludge on the brain as their Guardian counterparts) have at last been trained to say “travel” instead of “fly”.
As part of the struggle to save the planet thingy, it now seems there’s going to be a Peace Offensive on unflattering language.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
==> “However, the claim that the current climate is “just right” and any change will be catastrophic is not supported by the science.”
Although that is how many SWIRLCAREs characterize the arguments of the “consensus” climate scientists, that isn’t actually the argument I see being made very often by climate scientists. Characterizing one side of the debate as saying that is roughly the equivalent as saying that all SWIRLCAREs say that there is no GHE.
So it is an empty argument. It leads nowhere other than same ol’ same ol.’
Here, allow me to quote mwgrant:
mwgrant | September 21, 2014 at 2:24 pm |
IMO t purpose of the debate should have been to identify and characterize the issues and arrive/move toward a resolution (in the sense of actions/no action). The debate has failed because ‘minds are settled’ — sides are entrenched, lines between the science and the politics are blurred, the issues have not been characterized much less resolved, and rigor mortis has set in. Rational decision making is off the radar.
Bingo!
==> ” The conservative crowd (to which you belong) fears any change and attempts to maintain the status quo at all costs.”
Funny how a group to which I belong, based on my beliefs, has a set of beliefs that I don’t agree with and I don’t know anyone who does.
↧
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
Anyone else notice the uncanny resemblance of di Caprio to a squirrel?
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Rob Ellison
‘In a move that would likely make Jordan Belfort say, “Whoa, that is absurdly extravagant, bro,” Belfort’s Wolf of Wall Street portrayer, Leonardo DiCaprio, has reportedly taken over the fifth-largest super-yacht in the world for World Cup partying purposes. According to the Daily Mail, DiCaprio and 20 of his friends are going to be staying on the $678 million, 482-foot yacht—named Topaz—during the weeks-long sporting event.’
Vanity Fair
Of course you have to fly in 30 women and a copious supply of squirrel food – er – cocaine.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by mwgrant
Willard
Yeah. Anyway. Regards
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by PA
Hadn’t thought about it much… But I just looked a picture and you might be on to something…
↧
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
It’s like a litmus test – you have to be a SWIRLCARE to see it.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Bob
Joshua says, “Does it really reflect the high degree of uncertainty as to whether ACO2 emissions might cause harmful climate change?”
Of course not, because all of the data suggests otherwise. A little more CO2 is good for the soul, as well as for mankind. Historically, we are in a CO2 drought. Don’t you agree, Joshua?
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Peter Lang
PA, @ September 23, 2014 at 9:47 am
Thank you for this and many other informative, relevant, succinct and clear comments.
Can you post links for these statements from you comment:
1. Japan lofted an environment satellite to identify CO2 sources and sinks.
Canada is a big CO2 sink, the US is a moderate CO2 sink,
most of the first world is weak sinks, and the 3rd world is major sources.
2. The 20th century has featured increased plant growth of at least 30-50-77% (pick your number there is a study to support it, 11% since 1982 according to CSIRO).
3. Since we lofted satellites global foliage has increased, the statement that growth is increasing isn’t in contention.
4. Fishing/Forestry/Agriculture production is somewhere in the $9 trillion per year range or higher (I’m open to better numbers). 25-33% more or less is due to warming and CO2. That is a benefit not a harm.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
Bob –
I’m not going to go chase your squirrels until you weigh in here.
http://judithcurry.com/2014/09/21/an-unsettled-climate/#comment-632047
↧
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
Could you excerpt the the reference to decadal scale, Dave?
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by PA
A jet setter being the poster boy for global warming, is like a big game hunter shooting an ad for animal conservation while standing on his latest quarry.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by John M
So if we follow the green line, by 2020 the temperature should be about 0.4 – 0.5 deg higher than it is now? Are you taking bets?
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by PA
Apparently the rate of change is Mann’s core concern.
The 17+ year period of no change is apparently too fast for him.
Perhaps he will be happy after 20 years.
He might be right about it being unprecedented – climate usually changes faster than it has lately.
↧
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Steven Mosher
Bob.
the C02 control knob is just one knob.
the argument goes that if you want to understand long term climate change ( see paleo ) then you need c02 in the explanation.
Now, that has NOT been made clear by all the popularizations of the science.
That is the issue that VTG and others wont adress.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Joshua
Steven makes a good point:
==> "Now, that has NOT been made clear by <strong>ALL</STRONG> the popularizations of the science. That is the issue that VTG and others wont adress.
(emphasis mine)...
Because it is VTG's responsibility to address <strong>ALL</STRONG> "popularizations of the science" just as it is Judith's responsibility to address <strong>ALL</strong> popularizations of the science.
↧
Comment on An unsettled climate by Steven Mosher
frenando.
no climate modeler dares to touch the knobs that control sensitivity,
unless turning that knob raises the value.
most modlers will fiddled with all the knobs they can.. you know test stuff.
watch what never gets tested.
↧
