How would you model it? With some difficulty.
http://www.geomar.de/en/news/article/klimavorhersagen-ueber-mehrere-jahre-moeglich/
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by Rob Ellison
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by Tonyb
Miker613
I don’t know if you responded to my comment on this subject and several replies?
http://judithcurry.com/2014/09/26/week-in-review-28/#comment-633637
Paleo climate proxies are a very mixed bunch which can probably prove whatever you want. They miss out on the considerable annual and decadal variability and therefore make it appear the climate is stable which it isn’t
Tonyb
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by JustinWonder
Rob Ellison – “There are versions of the science is settled everywhere you look.”
Especially if you are looking for it! Ye old confirmation bias.
↧
Comment on Lewis and Curry: Climate sensitivity uncertainty by niclewis
No, the model result is only used to estimate ocean heat uptake in the base period, which is before observational data was available. The estimate of ECS is not particularly sensitive to the scaling used, and the TCR estimate is completely unaffected by it.
↧
Comment on Lewis and Curry: Climate sensitivity uncertainty by GaryM
” So it is important to clarify the uncertainties in this parameter, even if i am concerned in a meta sense that this parameter may not be very meaningful scientifically.”
And there is the rub in the climate debate. That which “may not be very meaningful scientifically” is passed off as the settled scientific consensus, as grounds for massive policy shifts.
The real reason it is “important to clarify the uncertainties in this parameter” is precisely to prevent its use in the policy debate.
↧
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by DocMartyn
In the original klingon ClimateBall is muD-gho
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by TJA
That was kind of a cool hypothesis to play around with, but honestly, it was warmer in the last interglacial without large scale human agriculture.
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by DocMartyn
‘hot polished silver lamp cover can be transferred to the adjacent air molecules by the collision process called diffusion (similar to conduction). The emissivity of silver is very low so we do not expect much radiation and, indeed, the fingers on my left hand do not feel any warmth. But the fingers above the lamp do feel considerable warmth. This means that the heat is being transferred to air molecules by diffusion and then the warm air molecules are rising straight upwards by convection’
Doug, I have an incandescent bulb. I have tungsten filament at 3000 °C, a vaccum, a thin glass shell and a black painted thermometer.
How does the glass of the bulb warm?
Why is my black thermometer warmer than the glass?
↧
Comment on Week in review by Walt Allensworth
The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about! – Oscar Wilde
↧
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by Tomas Milanovic
All I was saying is the pre-defined “oscillations” limit the analysis the W&C can do without redefining indexes.
Well of course.
That’s what I was saying right in my first post where one of the 2 points I was challenging was the index choice.
Now there are solutions to this kind of problems. The only thing to show is that one can reconstruct the whole spatial field with a single function (index).
As I already wrote too, EOF answers typically this kind of problems.
Again this is like reconstructing N dimensional dynamics with a single one dimensional time serie where I explained how and why it works for temporal chaos.
It is not because spatiotemporal fields are more difficult to handle that it is not feasible.
↧
Comment on Lewis and Curry: Climate sensitivity uncertainty by Bendy Boundaries | Skeptical Swedish Scientists
[…] get back to Earth & not forget our save-the-worlder’s moving tipping points too. Future temps are now decreasing; Antarctic ice is again at record highs; Arctic ice is increasing & […]
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by Matthew R Marler
Brandon Shollenberger: I could also point out MSE is a bad measure of “accuracy” in a number of situations. Its quadratic utility function does not accurately represent many of loss functions we’d encounter when judging models, and its susceptibility to outliers could be similarly problematic
Sure. And you can measure precision by some other measure than variance. I used MSE, variance and squared bias as examples. With those, the discussion is unambiguous. You can make the discussion unambiguous by specifying other measures of accuracy and precision. For whatever measures you choose, achievement of a sufficient level of accuracy requires achievement of a sufficient level of precision.
Given two models of equal accuracy, you have a choice between the one with the smaller bias and the one with the greater precision. I think that accuracy is the first consideration, and precision is the second, when evaluating both in the choice of model.
↧
Comment on Lewis and Curry: Climate sensitivity uncertainty by Per
Thank you for the reply, that is actually how I read the paper (I understand you only model where you have to), I should have been more clear in my question. If it’s only a small effect I suppose it doesn’t matter, but I’m not sure I would have scaled anything unless I knew the ocean heat uptake was where the model erred. That the model fails of course puts you in a bad spot regardless. Anyway thank you for a good read and good luck with future publications
↧
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by Wagathon
Now we're headed into Solar Cycle 25, after the sun has just recently undergone, <em>one of its oddest magnetic reversals on record… the sun's magnetic poles are out of sync… Several solar scientists speculated that the sun may be returning to a more relaxed state after an era of unusually high activity that started in the 1940s (See, Robt. Lee Hotz, </em>WSJ</em>: ‘Strange Doings on the Sun’). Perhaps we will come to understand what solar quiescence means: <em>Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries</em> (Science@NASA: ‘Long Range Solar Forecast’). Compared to the past, what if solar activity will for a while be as still as a butterfly's wing? What might the repercussions be for the future of a civilization if we fear global warming more than cooling when possibly a rapid cooling is on the way?
<blockquote><em>Global warming (i.e., the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.</em>
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by Ulric Lyons
“If AMO is linearly detrended, is there, or is there not, a vestige forced signature imprinted upon the residual, thereby exaggerating the perceived role of internal processes? ”
Detrending the AMO signal exaggerates the cooling rates and reduces the warming rates. The critical issue though is the sign of climate forcing in respect to the AMO. Increased forcing of the climate is directly associated with positive NAO/AO conditions, and positive NAO/AO conditions are associated with a cold AMO mode. This naturally separates a warm AMO mode from theoretical GHG forcing, but begs for a solar explanation for the increase in negative NAO/AO since 1995.
↧
Comment on Week in review by D o u g C o t t o n
There is nothing mankind can do to control climate. Climate is governed by natural cycles which are based on the scalar sum of the angular momentum of the Sun and the planets. The correlation is too good to ignore.
If the greenhouse conjecture were correct then moist rain forests would be about 40 degrees hotter than dry regions at similar latitudes and altitudes. They aren’t: they’re cooler.
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by John S.
No matter how sophisticated the mathematical technique of data analysis may be, it’s results can be no better than the quality of the data allows. And it always behooves the analyst to demonstrate that the data satisfy the underlying (often tacit) analytic assumptions.
With global historical data in many regions being more the product of numerical guesswork than of reliable measurements prior to the satellite era, the indications of multi-decadal oscillations provided by various SST indices, in particular, are tenuous at best. Reliable records an order of magnitude longer would be required to establish the physical claims made under the “stadium wave” rubric. Just because MSSA may be useful in analyzing synchronization of temporal chaos doesn’t mean that the indexed variables truly manifest such behavior. And there’s no credible indication that a physical wave of any kind propagates coherently around the globe at some fixed phase speed.
No doubt, there are real multi-decadal oscillations in various climate variables that show various levels of cross-spectral coherence and different phases in different frequency ranges. But, with many regions showing little variance in the multi-decadal range, that’s a far cry from the ambitious claim of a truly global “stadium wave.”
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by jim2
Hi Fernando. I was a chemist in the oilfield on the production side for several years. Given the connection, I am interested to hear your explanation. Hopefully, it will be more than just the word “diffusion.”
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by jim2
Your point about historical data is well taken. OTOH, Dr. C. makes predictions, so those can lend credence or detract from the hypothesis.
↧
Comment on Two contrasting views of multidecadal climate variability in the 20th century by HR
Nerd!
It’s also an anagram of Meatball Lic
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
