Project Astrometria:Global Cooling until 2100?

[Pixel42]

the last few summers and winters have been more in line to what Piers Corbyn and Abdussamatov have been saying

Evidence?

To be clear on this. If the Earth's climate has entered a period of cooling this is to be expected and they say the cooling will intensify.

What cooling?

2010 was the warmest year since records began. The last decade was the warmest decade since records began. Neither are what was to be expected if the Earth's climate has entered a period of cooling.

 

[Furcifer]

RC this is just the latest bad winter in a run of 3 or is it 4 bad ones and it aint over yet

Global Cooling is a sign of Global Warming dontcha know?

Any change in the climate is Global Warming, and if the climate doesn't change it's a sign of Global Warming.

The IPCC says so

 

[Pixel42]

From the PDF
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews11No3.pdf

Has Corbyn made any specific predictions for March and/or April that you want to add to my list? So far all you've shared with us is his prediction that spring and summer in both Europe and the USA will not be as the "warmists" expect, which I've interpreted to mean colder than the long term average.

I've already got his prediction for February. Changing it mid-month to be more in line with what conventional weather forecasters are predicting won't wash, I'm afraid.

 

[Pixel42]

Global Cooling is a sign of Global Warming dontcha know?

Any change in the climate is Global Warming, and if the climate doesn't change it's a sign of Global Warming.

The IPCC says so

You're obviously an intelligent man, capable of understanding how disruption to (for example) the established pattern of weather systems and prevailing winds in the NH (due, plausibly, to the vast expanses of open Arctic Ocean at the end of the summer which used to be ice-covered) can change things like the likelihood of the Arctic Oscillation going negative, and thus the likelihood of bad NH winter weather, so why are you pretending that you do not understand this?

Also are you sure you want to be seen supporting the likes of Haig, Corbyn and Abdussamatov? You've previously stated that you accept the existence of AGW, indeed you've argued that no-one seriously doubts that the world is warming. Well the three people just named do doubt it. In fact, they insist that it is actually cooling.

 

[Furcifer]

Also are you sure you want to be seen supporting the likes of Haig, Corbyn and Abdussamatov? You've previously stated that you accept the existence of AGW, indeed you've argued that no-one seriously doubts that the world is warming. Well the three people just named do doubt it. In fact, they insist that it is actually cooling.

I accept a anthropogenic source of CO2 has lead to an increase in average global temperature of the last 150 years if that's what you mean.

Isolated cases of cooling don't support that conclusion any more than isolated cases of extreme heat do.

I'm just cautioning against arguing under the pretense of GW because it's a no win situation.

 

[Haig]

Jerome Corsi?
When did he become a meterologist?
World Nut Daily!

The article and my post was about a speach by Abdussamatov!!!!!!! The point of the OP that started this thread. (my hilite)

In 2003-2005, Abdussamatov predicted a reduction of sunspot activity that would reach a new deep minimum of sunspot activity in 2042, resulting in a deep global temperature minimum to be reached in the years 2055-2060.

“My predictions are looking better and better with each passing year,” Abdussamatov commented.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=12914

Funny that you should say the least few summers and show YOU do not know what climate is at all.

Climate is weather viewed over a period of time
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html

Haig this is off topic and irrelevant, it belongs in the moderated Global Warming thread, please do not post this again to this thread.

Well your right to an extent DD but when NOAA (and others) are put up as the deciding authority in matters of weather and/or climate I'm entitled, IMO, to bring up the're past and current failings.

 

[Haig]

Evidence?

You live in the UK and you ask that!
Mystic Met Office abandons long range forecasts
They're rubbish, and they've run out of tea leaves

The Met Office has confirmed it is to abandon long range weather forecasts, finally acknowledging criticism. The most recent forecasts were so inaccurate, that even the BBC is reconsidering whether to appoint an alternative supplier, such as Accuweather, after 88 years of continuous service from the 1,700-strong MoD unit.

The Mystic Met predicted a barbecue summer for 2009, and the third washout in a row, with the wettest July since 1914, duly followed. A mild winter was then given a high probability, only for the UK to suffer its coldest winter for 30 years. Yet Met Office staff received performance-related pay bonuses worth over £12m over 5 years, it was revealed last week, in response to a Parliamentary question.

What cooling?

2010 was the warmest year since records began. The last decade was the warmest decade since records began. Neither are what was to be expected if the Earth's climate has entered a period of cooling.

That bring us back to "Well guys, who do you believe?" posted HERE

 

[Haig]

Global Cooling is a sign of Global Warming dontcha know?

Any change in the climate is Global Warming, and if the climate doesn't change it's a sign of Global Warming.

The IPCC says so

Yes it's IS funny looking back.

They keep moving the goalposts and the name of their movement.

Global Warming ..... became ....Climate Change .... became ..... Climate Disruption.....

What next?

 

[Haig]

Has Corbyn made any specific predictions for March and/or April that you want to add to my list? So far all you've shared with us is his prediction that spring and summer in both Europe and the USA will not be as the "warmists" expect, which I've interpreted to mean colder than the long term average.
I've already got his prediction for February. Changing it mid-month to be more in line with what conventional weather forecasters are predicting won't wash, I'm afraid.

Sorry, I haven't the time to keep you right as far as Piers Corbyn forecasts are concerned. I just look at his site, as anyone can do, but I don't have advance knowledge of them i.e. I don't pay.

You're obviously an intelligent man, capable of understanding how disruption to (for example) the established pattern of weather systems and prevailing winds in the NH (due, plausibly, to the vast expanses of open Arctic Ocean at the end of the summer which used to be ice-covered) can change things like the likelihood of the Arctic Oscillation going negative, and thus the likelihood of bad NH winter weather, so why are you pretending that you do not understand this?

like I said before, up to Climategate, I was on-board with mainstream views on AGW. Now I see the Skeptics have a point IMO.

Also are you sure you want to be seen supporting the likes of Haig, Corbyn and Abdussamatov? You've previously stated that you accept the existence of AGW, indeed you've argued that no-one seriously doubts that the world is warming. Well the three people just named do doubt it. In fact, they insist that it is actually cooling.

Well, I'll always support Haig (although he can be a right numbty at times) the other two is conditional on evidence/facts as I understand them. i.e. i'll judge what comes up.

You did mean to address that last point to me?

 

[Pixel42]

You live in the UK and you ask that!

What has where I live got to do with your claims?

Mystic Met Office abandons long range forecasts
They're rubbish, and they've run out of tea leaves

What has the Met office deciding not to publish long term weather forecasts got to do with your claims?

That bring us back to "Well guys, who do you believe?" posted HERE

I believe those who can support their claims with evidence.

You have yet to provide any evidence of your claims that Corbyn and/or Abdussamatov have made impressively accurate weather forecasts.

 

[Pixel42]

Sorry, I haven't the time to keep you right as far as Piers Corbyn forecasts are concerned. I just look at his site, as anyone can do, but I don't have advance knowledge of them i.e. I don't pay.

Then on what do you base your claims of his impressive (80%, wasn't it?) accuracy?

like I said before, up to Climategate, I was on-board with mainstream views on AGW. Now I see the Skeptics have a point IMO.

Then your opinion is not informed by facts.

Well, I'll always support Haig (although he can be a right numbty at times) the other two is conditional on evidence/facts as I understand them. i.e. i'll judge what comes up.

Then where is this evidence/facts? You appear to have already made that judgement in the absence of any quantifiable data to support it.

 

[Pixel42]

I accept a anthropogenic source of CO2 has lead to an increase in average global temperature of the last 150 years if that's what you mean.

Yes. Your position is therefore a long way away from the one being put forward on this thread.

Isolated cases of cooling don't support that conclusion any more than isolated cases of extreme heat do.

Agreed. They also don't disprove it, as some appear to believe.

 

[Dancing David]

The article and my post was about a speach by Abdussamatov!!!!!!! The point of the OP that started this thread. (my hilite)

You quoted Jerome Corsi, World Nut Daily.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=12914
Climate is weather viewed over a period of time

Climate is not 3-5 years.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html
Well your right to an extent DD but when NOAA (and others) are put up as the deciding authority in matters of weather and/or climate I'm entitled, IMO, to bring up the're past and current failings.

Still off topic and belongs in the AGW thread. No you are not entitled, your thread is about Project Astrometria. There is an moderated AGW thread for post about AGW. It will be up to moderation and reported from now on.

 

[Furcifer]

Still off topic and belongs in the AGW thread. No you are not entitled, your thread is about Project Astrometria. There is an moderated AGW thread for post about AGW. It will be up to moderation and reported from now on.

 

[Dancing David]

Ironic it may be, but the admins support the moderated thread and the mods move stuff to it. That is where the semantic squable about AGW belong.

The fact that you don't apparently have any data to support the idea of the OP, or Corbyn is also

 

[Hindmost]

Yes it's IS funny looking back.

They keep moving the goalposts and the name of their movement.

Global Warming ..... became ....Climate Change .... became ..... Climate Disruption.....

What next?

This is just poisoning the well. IPCC...the CC is "climate change."

Next: research the origins.

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/...s/English/ipcc-90-92-assessments-overview.pdf

glenn

 

[Furcifer]

The fact that you don't apparently have any data to support the idea of the OP, or Corbyn is also

While the TSI changes less than 0.1% the actual wavelength and the distance traveled by the radiation vary greatly. The whole process has considerable effect on the climate as the primary forcing and yet it is very poorly understood.

In order to make any serious considerations about the future climate we need to better understand the present one. Right now we don't understand that of the past very well.

Did I miss anything?

 

[Dancing David]

While the TSI changes less than 0.1% the actual wavelength and the distance traveled by the radiation vary greatly. The whole process has considerable effect on the climate as the primary forcing and yet it is very poorly understood.

In order to make any serious considerations about the future climate we need to better understand the present one. Right now we don't understand that of the past very well.

Did I miss anything?

The distance travelled by the radiation will vary slightly and does matter, as do the other factors, however the premise of the OP that somehow there is a magic way of telling that the radiation is dropping by a significant amount is lacking. Corbyn is totally vague and not very good at double blinding.

 

[Reality Check]

While the TSI changes less than 0.1% the actual wavelength and the distance traveled by the radiation vary greatly. The whole process has considerable effect on the climate as the primary forcing and yet it is very poorly understood.

What to you mean by "greatly"?
Can you give citations to "the actual wavelength and the distance traveled by the radiation vary greatly"?
I can see that the distance will vary annually by a "tiny" amount since the eccentricty of the Earth's orbit is tiny. However this will have no effect on climate.

What effect does the TSI being "very poorly understood" have?

 

[Dancing David]

Eccentricity is part of the Milkanovitch cycles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles#Orbital_shape_.28eccentricity.29

The relative increase in solar irradiation at closest approach to the Sun (perihelion) compared to the irradiation at the furthest distance (aphelion) is slightly larger than 4 times the eccentricity. For the current orbital eccentricity this amounts to a variation in incoming solar radiation of about 6.8%, while the current difference between perihelion and aphelion is only 3.4% (5.1 million km). Perihelion presently occurs around January 3, while aphelion is around July 4. When the orbit is at its most elliptical, the amount of solar radiation at perihelion will be about 23% more than at aphelion.