Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

[Trakar]

Wrong. Nobody has presented any evidence that would show Cohen et al to be in any way wrong. Their peer reviewed published science is still correct (in rergards to the trends), and you are still very wrong.

No one here is disputing Cohen et al. or the science they have presented, merely your distorted interpretation and demonstrated incorrect extrapolations and assertions based upon the science that Cohen et al. put forth.

 

[r-j]

....you will not find anyone but you nattering on about more snow in winter in the NH or colder NH winters and you have been called out any number of times on your misapprehensions.

You are completely wrong. Many many real scientists are not only aware of what I have pointed out to you, but they are researching it.

Jaiser et al, 2012; Smith et al., 2011; Honda et al., 2009; M Lockwood et al 2011; Budikova, 2009; Jones and Cohen, 2011; Francis et al., 2009; Overland and Wang, 2010; Fletcher et al., 2009; Hardiman et al., 2008; even Petoukhov and Semenov ... the number of people and already published papers on this is huge.

The only people who don't seem to know about these things, is the ones posting in this topic.

 

[Belz...]

When you duplicate their research

Have you ?

And while you're at it, could you finally admit that temperature does not directly correlate with precipitation ?

 

[macdoc]

and you know "they" just did not include the whales in the "colder NH winter" memo either....

Whales Moving Into Thawed Arctic Ocean
Tim Wall, Discovery News | February 27, 2014 07:54pm ET

Microphones submerged in the waters of the Bering Strait recorded an increasing number of whale calls from 2009 to 2012, including some from whales that normally live further south. The whales may have expanded north as the Arctic warmed and the animals’ populations recovered from hunting.

http://www.livescience.com/43744-whales-moving-into-thawed-arctic-ocean.html

 

[Trakar]

Little late for that back track.

Does this mean you finally did the research? Or did you just read their paper?

About time.

Again, personal insults aside; The dispute was always about your assertions, not Cohen's paper or findings. Cohen et al. make their points quite clearly in both that paper and the other related papers they produced in the same time frame. For instance:

...Record cold snaps and record snowfalls were numerous across the industrialized population centers of the United States, Europe and East Asia during boreal winter 2009–2010. Most notable were a series of U.S. East Coast snowstorms that buried the Middle Atlantic region. Snowfalls in a
number of locations exceeded 135 cm (54 inches) during the 17‐day period from January 29–February 15 (see Figure S1 in the auxiliary material).1 Many Mid‐Atlantic observing stations easily broke their prior seasonal snowfall records. Relatively frequent southern and East Coast snowstorms contributed to making North American snow cover in winter (DJF) 2009–2010 the most extensive on record (Robinson,personal communication).
[3] Though observed global temperature trends continue to warm with no observed reversals (according to NOAA, globally it was the fifth warmest December–February (DJF) period), public perceptions were clearly influenced increasing skepticism towards global warming (e.g., New York Times (Feb 10, 2010; Wall Street Journal Feb 16, 2010). Therefore, we would argue that attribution of the harsh winter weather is critical to the debate of anthropogenic climate change...

...Further, and somewhat counterintuitively, the severe cold winter weather may be attributed to boundary forcing changes consistent with an overall warming planet. A warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture and as the interior of the NH continents cool in fall, this can lead to increased snowfall. And as argued here, more extensive fall snow cover contributed to the extreme negative AO observed during the winter of 2009–2010. This hypothesis is being further investigated.

Cohen, J., J. Foster, M. Barlow, K. Saito, and J. Jones (2010), Winter 2009–2010: A case study of an extreme Arctic Oscillation event, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L17707, doi:10.1029/2010GL044256.

 

[Trakar]

I think this is what people are saying when they say "to cold to snow". With some exceptions like Orographic effects snow requires a warm and cold air mass. As you say it can snow when the "warm" air mass is below -10 to -15 deg C but the accumulation would be small and in practical terms be disregarded by most. Their not unaware of the light dusting of snow, it's just not significant enough the discuss. Like Orographic snow it's a corner case that isn't really relevant to the discussion on snow accumulation.

You are probably correct with the qualification that this is how most who have really looked at the physical issues involved consider the issue. There are many, however, judging from their usage of the phrase, who seem more anecdotal in their understandings than technical. I apologize if any felt slighted or insulted by my phrasing, I merely wanted to explain the technical reasons a bit more clearly for those whose understandings seemed more anecdotally oriented.

 

[macdoc]

Global warming felt to deepest reaches of ocean
Date:
March 2, 2014
Source:
McGill University
Summary:
A new study shows that the 1970s polynya within the Antarctic sea ice pack of the Weddell Sea may have been the last gasp of what was previously a more common feature of the Southern Ocean, and which is now suppressed due to the effects of climate change on ocean salinity.

In the mid-1970s, the first available satellite images of Antarctica during the polar winter revealed a huge ice-free region within the ice pack of the Weddell Sea. This ice-free region, or polynya, stayed open for three full winters before it closed.

Subsequent research showed that the opening was maintained as relatively warm waters churned upward from kilometres below the ocean's surface and released heat from the ocean's deepest reaches. But the polynya -- which was the size of New Zealand -- has not reappeared in the nearly 40 years since it closed, and scientists have since come to view it as a naturally rare event.
Now, however, a study led by researchers from McGill University suggests a new explanation: The 1970s polynya may have been the last gasp of what was previously a more common feature of the Southern Ocean, and which is now suppressed due to the effects of climate change on ocean salinity.
The McGill researchers, working with colleagues from the University of Pennsylvania, analyzed tens of thousands of measurements made by ships and robotic floats in the ocean around Antarctica over a 60-year period. Their study, published in Nature Climate Change, shows that the ocean's surface has been steadily getting less salty since the 1950s. This lid of fresh water on top of the ocean prevents mixing with the warm waters underneath. As a result, the deep ocean heat has been unable to get out and melt back the wintertime Antarctic ice pack.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140302143515.htm

Of course the knock one from the lid of freshwater is that it will freeze more easily leading to denier beloved Antarctic sea ice extent.

Which in reality are a combination of that salinity change and glaciers racing far faster to the sea as the ice shelves bust up...notably Pine Island and others.

Warming ocean could start big shift of Antarctic ice
Date:
September 19, 2012
Source:
University of New South Wales
Summary:
Fast-flowing and narrow glaciers have the potential to trigger massive changes in the Antarctic ice sheet and contribute to rapid ice-sheet decay and sea-level rise, a new study has found.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120919103610.htm

 

[r-j]

Your distortions/confusions are not supported by Cohen et al., nor any other compelling scientific evidences that I am aware of, and are in fact, contradicted by all mainstream climate science.

Then prove it. Just like I do, quote what you think is wrong, explain why, then cite the sources you base your opinion on.

It's easy and fun.

Just repeating something you made up over and over isn't going to help.

 

[CapelDodger]

Winter starts at the end of December and lasts until the end March

There are those such as myself who take NH winter to be Dec, Jan and Feb. It's now spring at this end. When I say winter, that's what I mean.

As a side note, some seem to be repeating the rather common trope regarding it being "too cold to snow," in actuality this is not true. What tends to prevent snow in extremely cold environments is the fact that extremely cold air simply cannot hold much moisture and will release that moisture long before it gets extremely cold.¹

My Dad was repeating folklore, of course. It's the common experience here for the two main reasons - easterlies off a cold dry continent or high pressure with clear skies and fairly still air.

 

[CapelDodger]

... temperature does not directly correlate with precipitation ?

In the context, ie local near-surface temperatures, this is of course correct.

On a global scale, I would expect precipitation to correlate to the average surface temperature of open water at any time, given that the residence time of water-vapour is, I think, a week or two? Not much more, I'm sure.

 

[CapelDodger]

Then prove it. Just like I do, quote what you think is wrong, explain why, then cite the sources you base your opinion on.

Trakar has done that. He thinks you are wrong about Cohen and has demonstrated why. Cohen's not wrong. You are.

Hope that clarifies matters.

 

[macdoc]

r-j bragged

Then prove it. Just like I do, quote what you think is wrong, explain why, then cite the sources you base your opinion on.

I have yet to see a smidgeon of evidence of that procedure from you.

In addition you are unwilling to either look at or accept mounds of support and explanations that clearly lay out where your errors of understanding lie.


••

Capel

On a global scale, I would expect precipitation to correlate to the average surface temperature of open water at any time, given that the residence time of water-vapour is, I think, a week or two? Not much more, I'm sure.

I think you may have some problems with this as wind speed will greatly enhance evaporation and lower surface temps.....that's exactly what happened in the Pacific with the overly strong westerlies.

 

[r-j]

Trakar has done that

I have yet to see a smidgeon of evidence of that procedure from you.

Once again, instead of taking the opportunity to simply state what you mean, you avoid. It's not hard to state something, then explain why you say it.

The large scale cooling of the the boreal winters, with much more snow, was unexpected. Climate models predict the most warming in winter, in the high latitudes, as well as reduced snow.

The cooling trend is evident going back decades. It's not that the winters (in large areas of the NH) just seem worse, they are getting worse. This is obvious at this point, and it can't be explained away as "natural variation" or an anomaly now and then.

This is the exact same thing I stated last year, during the extreme winter that was going on then. That yet another extreme and record cold winter is happening in the US, right now, with a lot of snow, that is just ironic. And very very funny, from a scientific POV

The human suffering is anything but funny at this point

 

[macdoc]

remarkable how often r-j's contention turns up in diverse articles.....of course showing his thesis of colder NH winters to be a figment of his imagination.

Scientists debunk climate change myths
Feb 25, 2014 by Kanina Foss

Category 4-strength Cyclone Favio was closing the gap between Madagascar and mainland Africa on February 21, 2007, preparing to strike Mozambique in coming days. This image from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on …more
Wits University scientists have debunked two big myths around climate change by proving firstly, that despite predictions, tropical storms are not increasing in number. However, they are shifting, and South Africa could be at increased risk of being directly impacted by tropical cyclones within the next 40 years.

Secondly, while global warming is causing frost to be less severe,late season frost is not receding as quickly as flowering is advancing, resulting in increased frost risk which will likely begin to threaten food security.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-02-scientists-debunk-climate-myths.html#jCp

Less frost, earlier flowering....of COURSE winters are getting colder....

 

[Reality Check]

That's not evidence of the cooling trend for the boreal winters. You know, the subject of Cohen et al(2012).

That is not quite the subject of Cohen et al(2012), r-j.
They found that there was no trend in the boreal winters that they defined as December, January and February. They found that there were some areas of colder winters and some areas of warmer winters (see figure 1c). The eastern United States, southern Canada and northern Eurasia had cooling winters, the rest warming winters.

So you need to qualify "boreal winters" to the above regions.

Also see this PDF for a good explanation.

 

[r-j]

That is not quite the subject of Cohen et al(2012), r-j.

The name of the paper includes these words;
INCREASING SNOW COVER AND WIDESPREAD BOREAL COOLING

I can see how you could be confused about the subject of the paper.

 

[r-j]

It was the cooling trend for the NH boreal winters that started off the discussion about global warming theory. After I pointed you to Cohen et al I reminded you that global warming theory predicted warming in the NH winters, especially in the high latitudes.

... It's the trend, the long term data that shows clearly, even now, that the warming we measure isn't warming from the AGW theory. At the present time, this does not mean it won't change of course.

But what we are seeing is the opposite of what is expected to happen. If it was one, even two extreme cold events, it's just weather. But when you have decades of data, in some cases thirty years of a cooling trend in the boreal winter, you can't handwave that away as "just weather", and still retain any credibility as a scientist.

...

The paper I mentioned clearly states what I had already discovered. the NH winters are not doing what the theory predicted. Not even close.

That entire thing was a fiasco of people trying to say there was no theory, all kinds of ridiculous claims.

Everyone notes that I stated the fact in the real world: there is no such thing as your "Theory of Global Warming" as you have actually shown with your searches.

But it was the cooling trend that started it off. Last winter. I've grown tired of reminding you why I stated what I did. For example

Here's a start.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9742816&postcount=1782

But I know you want the exact paper, which would be http://web.mit.edu/jlcohen/www/papers/Cohenetal_ERL12.pdf

It's the first line of the abstract.

That nobody here actually knows this is really surprising. Usually when somebody posts something obviously wrong the group is quick to correct. But for some reason certain things are ignored.

There's the link to the entire paper, once more. Just in case you don't have it.

The issue of the global means and the colder winter trend, now that is even more interesting.

Especially with Trenberth and others wanting to say the cooling is actually due to the Pacific. We have two different mechanisms to explain the same thing.

It's an interesting time for climate science.

Just in case you missed it, here is the link again to an extensive post with sources.

 

[macdoc]

Originally Posted by r-j
That's not evidence of the cooling trend for the boreal winters.

WHy do you conflate boreal with NH?? You were told that long ago that boreal is a limited area ...in addition - a major portion of the boreal region is Canada and Canadian winters have NOT been in a cooling trend which is 30 years.

Cohen et al have a contention.....it's not handed down in stone and as noted above there was NO TREND.

Move on - your argument is looking more puerile every time you post.

 

[Trakar]

There are those such as myself who take NH winter to be Dec, Jan and Feb. It's now spring at this end. When I say winter, that's what I mean.

Understood, that is why the line after the one you quoted continues on to explore the data presented from Dec., Jan., and Feb..

My Dad was repeating folklore, of course. It's the common experience here for the two main reasons - easterlies off a cold dry continent or high pressure with clear skies and fairly still air.

nothing wrong with that, in such discussions. I was merely trying to provide a bit more of a explanation of why such folklore holds solid technical rationales for why they approximate reality, even if some of the anecdotal details aren't strictly accurate. As I'm sure you could probably better explain many of the mechanisms for the various types of snow generating weather, I did not intend to discount or dismiss any of your discussions on this issue.

 

[Reality Check]

I can see how you could be confused about the subject of the paper.

I can see how someone who has made the decision to never read the paper itself could be confused about the subject and results of the paper, and obsesses on the title alone, r-j !
As I said:

That is not quite the subject of Cohen et al(2012), r-j.
They found that there was no trend in the boreal winters that they defined as December, January and February. They found that there were some areas of colder winters and some areas of warmer winters (see figure 1c). The eastern United States, southern Canada and northern Eurasia had cooling winters, the rest warming winters.

So you need to qualify "boreal winters" to the above regions.

Also see this PDF for a good explanation.

The subject of the paper is the cooling of the eastern United States, southern Canada and northern Eurasia winters.
The title uses "boreal" for brevity only (IMO).
The paper contents make it clear that they are only talking about cooling of the eastern United States, southern Canada and northern Eurasia winters.