• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

Status
Not open for further replies.
One criticism of the IPCC is that it is too conservative (despite Richard Tol's rants). AR4 specifically excluded studies showing higher run-offs from Greenland ice-cap because studies showing that missed the publication deadlines.
The rather gruelling process has always resulted in that cut-off problem.

Personnally I'm now in favour of annual update reports on the science and implications. This should capture recent changes in understanding better and would give a more frequent nudge to the general public about the implications.
I think the IPCC reports have had their day. A more rapid process producing relevant reports on specific areas. This could be under the IPCC or some new construct.

The IPCC was a typical bureaucratic-diplomatic response to a potential problem : set up a committee and hope the whole thing goes away while they produce a report. Not a good basis, frankly. Five reports is flogging a dead horse.

The basics have been established; what it needs now is frequent updating on specific issues.
 
He did not say that - he said "perilously close to conspiracy territory here".
The problem is that you cite a UN meeting with politicians going on about the need to act soon (in 2008) in the battle against global warming. There are no "incorrect predictions of the IPPC" pointed out in that meeting. There is no mention of the IPPC or IPCC at all :jaw-dropp!
There are probably incorrect statements by the politicians in that meeting, e.g. "estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010" when the estimates in 2008 were about 50 to 250 million people by 2050.
..

The State of Environmental Migration 2010
http://www.iddri.org/Publications/Co...202010_web.pdf

...In 2008, extreme weather events displaced 20 million people
compared to 4.6 million people displaced within their own country by conflict and violence. Climate-related disasters are the main sudden onset trigger responsible for displacement in 2009 and 2010 causing the displacement of 15 million people in 2009 and 38 million people in 2010 (IDMC 2011).

20M + 15M + 38M = 73M "environmental migrants by 2010."
 
Sea Turtles face huge risk from rapid climate change.

Now they face another threat: climate change. Climate change is already affecting sea turtles, with tidal surges soaking their nests (the porous eggs are spoiled by water) and increased storm activity damaging their rookeries.
Yet other effects are more insidious, not to mention bizarre. "Successful embryonic development with sea turtles only occurs in a limited temperature range," says zoologist Dr David Booth, a lecturer at The University of Queensland. "That range is from 27 to 32 degrees. Much below 26 degrees can be lethal to the eggs. Above 36 degrees can also be lethal: the eggs just cook in the sand. Even at 34 degrees, the hatchlings may be smaller and weaker, slower at running and swimming."
Temperature also determines the turtle's gender: below 27 and almost all of the hatchlings will be male. Above 32 produces almost all females. In the middle and you get a mix. "If temperatures continue to rise as projected, then by 2070 we will get total feminisation of the Mon Repos rookery or even non-viability," says Booth.

Sea turtles are among the earth's oldest creatures. They have been around in various forms for 110 million years, since the age of the dinosaurs. During this time they have, of course, dealt with several changes in climate. The difference with today's climate change is its speed. "Compared to the past," says Booth, "this change is happening lightning fast." This is bad news for sea turtles, which are slow-growing and long-living (between 50 and 70 years), meaning they pass on adaptive traits only gradually. "Basically, if the turtles can't adapt fast enough, if they can't move rookeries or change breeding seasons, then they're doomed."

That's a major part of the problem. Idiots like Australia's PM Tony Abbott simply don't understand the scope what is happening. All he wants is the votes of deniers. The warming is happening in what is a blink of an eye in evolutionary terms. Evolution takes time, but many species that have survived for such a long time, could be made extinct by our simple minded ignorance and greed.
​
 
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

What We Know -
http://whatweknow.aaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AAAS-What-We-Know.pdf

The overwhelming evidence of human-caused climate change documents both current impacts with significant costs and extraordinary future risks to society and natural systems. The scientific community has convened conferences, published reports, spoken out at forums and proclaimed, through statements by virtually every national scientific academy and relevant major scientific organization — including the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) — that climate change puts the well-being of people of all nations at risk.

Surveys show that many Americans think climate change is still a topic of significant scientific disagreement. Thus, it is important and increasingly urgent for the public to know there is now a high degree of agreement among climate scientists that human-caused climate change is real. Moreover, while the public is becoming aware that climate change is increasing the likelihood of certain local disasters, many people do not yet understand that there is a small, but real chance of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes with highly damaging impacts on people in the United States and around the world.

It is not the purpose of this paper to explain why this disconnect between scientific knowledge and public perception has occurred. Nor are we seeking to provide yet another extensive review of the scientific evidence for climate change. Instead, we present key messages for every American about climate change:

The messages aren't original, but they are given the weight of mainstream science acknowledgement and support:


  • 1. Climate scientists agree: climate change is happening here and now.
    2. We are at risk of pushing our climate system toward abrupt, unpredictable, and potentially irreversible changes with highly damaging impacts.
    3. The sooner we act, the lower the risk and cost. And there is much we can do.

Love this analogy:
No matter where they live, Americans are experiencing the effects of climate change. Of course, extreme weather events of varied intensity have always occurred. Family photo albums, community lore and history books recount the big storms, droughts and floods that communities have borne. Against this backdrop of natural variation, however, something different is happening. Greenhouse gases from manmade sources such as smokestacks and tailpipes have altered our climate system. Greenhouse gases have supercharged the climate just as steroids supercharged hitting in Major League Baseball. Over the course of a baseball season in the steroid era, we witnessed more – and longer – homers, even though we cannot attribute any specific homer to steroids. Similarly, even though we cannot attribute any particular weather event to climate change, some types of extreme events such as heat waves are now more frequent.

It is helpful that they lay out the issues so clearly and plainly stated that they don't leave a lot of room for misunderstandings or confusions:

What steps society takes to meet the challenge of climate change — the questions of when, how and to what extent we respond — is a matter on which all Americans must decide. We urge that these decisions be guided by two inescapable facts: first, the effects of any additional CO2 emissions
will last for centuries; second, there is a risk of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes in the Earth’s climate system with massively disruptive impacts.

http://whatweknow.aaas.org/about-the-initiative/

The Three R's

  • •The first is Reality — 97% of climate experts have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening.
    •The second is Risk — that the reality of climate change means that there are climate change impacts we can expect, but we also must consider what might happen, especially the small, but real, chance that we may face abrupt changes with massively disruptive impacts.
    •The third R is Response — that there is much we can do and that the sooner we respond, the better off we will be.
 
AM made a factually incorrect statement without supporting evidence
If we are having a period of non-warming that is longer than the previous period of warming I see it as good news

what cooling would that be?....nothing you've mentioned shows any change in energy gain by the global ocean/atmosphere/cryosphere.

Did you answer the question?

"Does C02 trap IR"
Your dodging that simple science question in an international science forum just puts you right in the "crank" column.
All talk ....no evidence.

Tell us where your "cooling" is, tell us where your "plateau" is.....do you think repeating false statements furthers your argument.
This IS a science forum.

This is reality ...no pause, no plateau....care to explain??

heat_content2000m.png


Do you really understand how foolish you look in a science forum not answering the simple question put to you about the C02/IR absorption ??
would you really expect anyone to take anything you say seriously??? How many times have you dodged it now??
 
Update on the 'humungous' Equatorial Kelvin Wave (EKW): Incoming!

About one month ago, I made a post about an unusually large EKW that was slowly traveling toward equatorial South America and, given the right impetus by westerly winds, had the potential to tip the chaotic balance of the Pacific equatorial ocean-atmosphere system in the direction of an El Niño event. And furthermore possibly an unusually strong one, given the already 'humungous' proportions of this EKW (on both parameters of spatial extent, and temperature anomaly).

So, time for an update, in beginning with last news from the EKW:
picture.php

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ocean/weeklyenso_clim_81-10/wkteq_xz.gif
(A detail worth remembering: In this graph, the rendering of temperature anomalies maxes out at 6° C)

And plots recapitulating its evolution:

5336d2db53b31.jpg

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf


The unusual features of this EKW can be better apprehended with time-longitude plots of temperature anomalies at -155m:
picture.php


That's a ginormous pocket of anomalously warm salt water that is currently surfacing in direction of Ecuadorian and Peruvian coasts (analogy for our US friends and hosts: Its extent is roughly equivalent to the distance between Trenton [Maine] and Seattle [Washington]).


Several other data series suggest that the whole Pacific equatorial system is destabilized by this EKW:

Since February, the Pacific whole equatorial upper-ocean heat anomalies plot shows a rise in values unprecedented since the 1997-1998 last strong El Niño:
picture.php

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/heat-last-year.gif


Another one is the Southern Oscillation Index, in which "sustained negative values below −8 may indicate an El Niño event':
picture.php

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/monitoring/soi30.png


And finally the cloudiness in central-west Pacific, indicative of a change in the ocean-atmosphere-winds balance (notably of a warming of sea surface temperatures [more moisture], and of a weakening of the trade winds):
picture.php

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mjo/graphics/region.ts.dateline.gif


Will the Pacific ocean heat content strike back with an unprecedented El Niño in 2014 and 2015? Stay tuned...
 
Last edited:
The NoNo Nino?

Most of the world’s major seasonal prediction models now push the Pacific into an El Niño temperature regime by July. Researchers are watching the Pacific and making assessments of how likely El Niño might be. Currently the odds from various cues are trending between 60% and 80% for a moderately strong el Nino beginning in June/July and lasting through next winter.

picture.php

Even more impressive than these estimates are the sea surface temperature values seen March 17-18 — hitting a .99 C positive anomaly or +1.27 C above 1880s values. For comparison, the global sea surface temperature average for 2013, according to the National Climate Data Center, was .42 degrees Celsius above the 1880s average and the hottest year for ocean surface temperatures, 2003, was .52 degrees Celsius hotter than the 1880s average. The average for the past two days, should the GFS observation stand, is +.75 above the highest annual average on record!

picture.php

For those who were wondering where the heat that the ocean was trapping was at, we are now, even ahead of el Nino formation, seeing the ocean beginning to release some of that stored heat. With ocean surface temperatures higher than 2 meter air temperatures, it appears the ocean is now dumping some of its latent heat back into the atmosphere through radiative transfer. This is a situation opposite of what has been observed for much of the past 13-14 years running when Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) went negative and the oceans underwent rapid warming as they sucked up atmospheric heat.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/clim/sst.shtml

http://cci-reanalyzer.org/About/CR_about.php

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/13
 
The denier cadre seems to think physics is malleable to their delusions.
Bottom line...
It's getting warmer
We're responsible.


The scale of this particular event unfolding is mind-boggling - if we get a cyclone traversing this ..look out.

There are a couple pernicious ones looping around off our coast in tropical Aus tho looks like they have abated.

El Ninos are major weather drivers here and the ocean temperatures this portends would be very bad news for reefs.

Given Australia suffered its hottest year ever last year and that was NOT an El Nino year.....2014 could be dire.

the prospects for a hotter and drier than usual year for much of Australia are increasing, with the Bureau of Meteorology confirming more signs that an El Nino climate pattern is forming in the tropical Pacific Ocean.
Surface waters in the equatorial Pacific “have warmed significantly over the past two months”, with further warming expected in coming months, the bureau said in its fortnightly update.
Temperatures in some areas have risen half a degree in the past two weeks alone and are as much as 5 or 6 degrees above normal, said David Jones, head of climate monitoring at the bureau.
"Things are starting to move," said Dr Jones. "1997 was probably the last time we've seen such [a temperature] anomaly."
The increased chance of an El Nino will be the last thing many farmers will want to hear.
About 80 per cent of Queensland and much of northern NSW have already been declared to be in drought, prompting the federal government to earmark $280 million in low-cost loans to help farmers stay in business.
El Ninos are patterns that affect the global climate. Warming waters in the central eastern Pacific cause easterly winds to weaken and even reverse.
Rainfall patterns shift too, with eastern Australia among areas likely to see lower-than-normal rainfall, while regions such as California typically become wetter.
Temperatures globally, and for Australia, also tend to be higher in El Nino years. Eight of the 10 warmest years on record for Australia were El Nino years, according to University of Melbourne climatologist David Karoly.
"If it's an El Nino year, that tilts the odds much more to further record temperatures," Professor Karoly said, in comments about Australia's record hot year in 2013.
Climate scientists have also been concerned that southern Australia, including NSW, may be in for another long fire season if an El Nino sets in. The Sydney region was hit by early-season fires last September and October.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/w...bureau-says-20140325-35fua.html#ixzz2xNJJ1Huz

two more ranges of temperatures had to be added last year, 54 and 56 degrees to the temperature scale to reflect the increasing extremes.

Interesting times.
 
About one month ago, I made a post about an unusually large EKW that was slowly traveling toward equatorial South America and, given the right impetus by westerly winds, had the potential to tip the chaotic balance of the Pacific equatorial ocean-atmosphere system in the direction of an El Niño event.
Thanks for the update. Since westerly wind bursts have in fact occurred, is there anything that could stop this now? Could even easterly wind bursts turn that huge glob of ocean around?

There's a warm pool off Peru which seems to have connected; what the result of that might be I've no idea. It's likely I'll know more quite soon :).

I'm no expert on ENSO but it appears to me that a warm water cap is forming which could drastically reduce cold upwelling. That would knock out a significant portion of global air-conditioning this NH summer.

Will the Pacific ocean heat content strike back with an unprecedented El Niño in 2014 and 2015? Stay tuned...
It's second only to Game of Thrones on my current must-watch list. :eek:
 
Given Australia suffered its hottest year ever last year and that was NOT an El Nino year.....2014 could be dire.
We're a quarter of the way through now; have things cooled off much?

two more ranges of temperatures had to be added last year, 54 and 56 degrees to the temperature scale to reflect the increasing extremes.
The previous ranges were Nature's way of telling people not to live there. Melanoma and deadly fauna are just Nature nagging them about it.
 
Can we blame it on global warming? That's all that matters.
It matters a lot more than that.

An El Nino can't be attributed to AGW. El Nino's happen when circumstances allow. One of those circumstances is a pool of warm water in the West Pacific, and the recent La Nina's which contributed so much to the AGW deniers' mythical Pause built up a very large example. That's where a lot of the heat was going. You were told.

If an El Nino results in global temperatures significantly higher than 1998 then what else can we attribute it to but AGW? 1998 was itself an outlier, which contributed the rest of the mythical Pause, so "natural variation"would fall very flat.

Given that 2014 so far isn't significantly cooler than 1998 anyway, a significantly warmer El Nino year is guaranteed. With that the Pause is sunk, and down with that goes the whole AGW denier project. Would that matter? Well, it would to me; I've been looking forward to watching the writhing death-throes and the teasers have been very promising. They'll be chewing their own legs off in WattsUpMyButt before long.

An El Nino would matter because it would fill the news-streams with extreme weather footage. Again. People are already making a connection with AGW, and even denying one will help them make it. It's death-spiral time for AGW denial.
 
Even more impressive than these estimates are the sea surface temperature values seen March 17-18 — hitting a .99 C positive anomaly or +1.27 C above 1880s values. For comparison, the global sea surface temperature average for 2013, according to the National Climate Data Center, was .42 degrees Celsius above the 1880s average and the hottest year for ocean surface temperatures, 2003, was .52 degrees Celsius hotter than the 1880s average. The average for the past two days, should the GFS observation stand, is +.75 above the highest annual average on record!
Let's see if they stand. It does seem a bit excessive.

For those who were wondering where the heat that the ocean was trapping was at, we are now, even ahead of el Nino formation, seeing the ocean beginning to release some of that stored heat.
From what I've read, cyclonic activity which would normally bring up cool water from 100-200m depth is now tending to bring up warm water more often. This is more general than just the equatorial Pacific.

The Arctic Ocean temperatures look extreme. Are we quite sure about those?
 
Let's see if they stand. It does seem a bit excessive.

From what I've read, cyclonic activity which would normally bring up cool water from 100-200m depth is now tending to bring up warm water more often. This is more general than just the equatorial Pacific.

The Arctic Ocean temperatures look extreme. Are we quite sure about those?

Yes, those are accurate, they indicate Sea Surface Temperature anomalies over the baseline (average for March 18th) of 1979-2000. It should be noted that the graphic was a plotting of temperatures on the specific date of March 18, 2014, not an average of March's temperatures. I should be able to run a month long average within the next week or so and we can see how that looks.

I was struck, by the rate that March NH is deviating from the norms in advance of a potential el Nino. Most of this is coming from the extreme differences in the arctic ocean temps. NH warming anomaly in the middle of March was at nearly 1°C over '79-'00 averages, or real close to 1.3°C over 1880 averages. Like I said, another week or so and I can run some averages for the entire month.
 
I wonder if the Aboriginis are up in the air against modern society cooking them to death out in the outback?
 
Here, this winter where i live you`d think we had global,cooling as one of coldest winters AND lots of snow. Many many days below zero and quite a few colder than minus 20F. I can never remember water lines freezing like this before where cities having people run water fast. A couple places refroze with water running so they rethawed with pipe welder technique and doubled the water flow, and they are still running til frost layer recedes.
But....i guess if the overall planet is getting hotter, that`s where the proof lies. I guess we are in the polar vortex.
Barehl, JREF poster, on a thread was posting pics of the frozen Great Lakes and info regarding this.
Sure is interesting how global warming does not cause entire world to warm up. I wish it did some here so we could have palm trees, lol.
 
The entire world is warming - it does not do so evenly and overlays natural cycles But in this case there is good evidence the cold excursions are due to a much warmer Arctic and the resulting weakened jet stream

The reality of AGW is easy, the consequences not so straight forward and what to doabout it not straight forward at all.
 
Here, this winter where i live you`d think we had global,cooling as one of coldest winters AND lots of snow. Many many days below zero and quite a few colder than minus 20F. I can never remember water lines freezing like this before where cities having people run water fast. A couple places refroze with water running so they rethawed with pipe welder technique and doubled the water flow, and they are still running til frost layer recedes.
But....i guess if the overall planet is getting hotter, that`s where the proof lies. I guess we are in the polar vortex.
Barehl, JREF poster, on a thread was posting pics of the frozen Great Lakes and info regarding this.
Sure is interesting how global warming does not cause entire world to warm up. I wish it did some here so we could have palm trees, lol.

That's the point. Here we have had temperature records that were not "one of the hottest" but "the hottest ever".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom