Son of Mulder.

quote:

I can't take seriously such an article... there is no mention of clouds as a moderating factor.

That's one of the reasons that I thought you and muf would like to "get your 'teeth' into it"!

The "blog miester" at tamino is a statistical mathematician (to the best of my knowledge), and uses whatever material they find at hand. They also seem to support warmers (if this permits me to remain "PC"). However, the choice of material leaves the blog-spot in the category of "corrupted allegorical truth" by way of obfuscation!

The blog thread is about WV feedback, but the blogger introduced a graph that has little to do with any "feedback scenario" and is unconnected with the blog-thread subject (in fact the partner to the paper that the graph included advised of the graphs misuse). More to this, the legend that accompanies the graph describes an impossible observation (much to the regret of Isaac Held I would imagine [of Held & Soden]). My comment relating to this is at #14 in the "responses" que.

I'm glad that I'm an engineer and not a scientist!

Best regards, suricat.

quote:

Suricat

quote:
There is something that you and muf can get your "teeth into" on tamino! Look at this; http://tamino.wordpress.com/20...-lock/#comment-32836
It's all about WV feedback.

It would appear that it has disappeared into the ether now suricat

Muf

quote:

It would appear that it has disappeared into the ether now suricat

No it's still there. I think there's a bug in copying the URL see http://tamino.wordpress.com/20...-lock/#comment-32836

quote:

Originally posted by Son of Mulder:
Muf

quote:

It would appear that it has disappeared into the ether now suricat

No it's still there. I think there's a bug in copying the URL see http://tamino.wordpress.com/20...-lock/#comment-32836

They've taken my comment out!!
Obviously 'wankery' is a word that they take exception to

mufcdiver.

quote:

They've taken my comment out!!
Obviously 'wankery' is a word that they take exception to

There isn't much that they don't take exception to on that site muf.


Have you guys seen this on RC yet?
http://www.realclimate.org/ind...natural-variability/
I think the guest presentation is good, but what is the recent "variability"? All I can think of is a weaker solar cycle 23 that followed cycle 22, and our new solar cycle 24 that doesn't seem to "spark" much! I can't seriously believe that ice from the North Pole has kept Earth cool, so this must either be due to solar variability, or ocean to atmosphere temp hysteresis : insolation to ocean temp hysteresis (ocean insolation to atmosphere temp change lag : lead).

Surely, this must be either a forcing change, or a lead/lag variability?

What are your thoughts?

BTW, wasn't Skippy a kangaroo muf?

Best regards, suricat.

Suricat

quote:

I can't seriously believe that ice from the North Pole has kept Earth cool, so this must either be due to solar variability, or ocean to atmosphere temp hysteresis : insolation to ocean temp hysteresis (ocean insolation to atmosphere temp change lag : lead).

Try this.

I found the Realclimate article you quote a hoot. If you look at their 2nd chart that shows the record from continuously monitored sites from 1900 to 1998 where they have excised the 1998 "Super El Nino" (don't you love the evolving phraseology) the trend looks pretty flat from 1930 to 1997. When they show the first chart that has all the record (full hadcrut3 from 1950) it's pretty clear that the growth has been introduced by the non-continuously monitored sites. My scepticism just grows and grows.

They claim the continuous graph is not global but anthropic CO2 is meant to be a global signature so should be clear in the continuous non-global record.

suricat (just noticed the SoM spells your name with a capital 'S')

quote:

Surely, this must be either a forcing change, or a lead/lag variability?

Coming from a school of thought where by liquid bodies of water are by far and away the biggest climate drivers, then I'd hazard a guess at both (Though it depends on what your definition on 'forcing' is!)

Son of Mulder.

quote:

I found the Realclimate article you quote a hoot.

I only quoted it "a hoot" (as you say) because the region that the "red spot" is expected in is open to TOA where IR energy is "expelled" into space. Thus, it won't get warm (or red)! That is, unless the troposphere expands by a hitherto unforeseen extent (and in that event I'd expect that region to have chaotic tendencies also, unlike the "no weather strat analogy" that the tropo extends into).

quote:

My scepticism just grows and grows.

Hardly surprising SoM, but remember that language (use of the "tongue") is always evolving. Don't know about you, but I have trouble keeping up with it. This must be either the onset of senility, or the realisation that there is a need for a basic standard. Don't worry, I'm sure you are only looking for a basic standard (there doesn't seem to be one with climate science)!

quote:

Try this.

And.

quote:

They claim the continuous graph is not global but anthropic CO2 is meant to be a global signature so should be clear in the continuous non-global record.

I've linked these two together because it leads back to many moons ago when we were discussing a "pump hunt" scenario.

Unless centrifugal effects are accepted (as well as the coriolis effect) it is impossible to rationalise PDO, or AMO with the attractors that generate their existence (or to differentiate PDO and AMO as attractors, or separate systems). Earth is still "over-spun". Thus, is not in an equilibrium of any description in the long term.

Best regards, suricat.

mufcdiver.

quote:

suricat (just noticed the SoM spells your name with a capital 'S')

Yes, but I don't make issue of this anymore muf. Many word processors replace a lower case letter with upper case automatically when the word is at the beginning of a sentence, or paragraph. For example, I need to make exceptions in my "word pro" word processor to be able to address you with a lower case first letter in my response. That's life! Some people need to keep a log of things and word processors tend to just get in the way sometimes. I'm OK with this (but it reflects on the other part's ability to properly communicate on the site and I know this from "Tamino").

quote:

(Though it depends on what your definition on 'forcing' is!)

Well, that has to be mostly solar. Though "other disciplines" would include attractors as "forcings" as well.

Best regards, suricat.

suricat (notice the lower case, apols such sensitivity has never been my strong suit).

Anyway have you seen this interesting aerosol article . Makes one feel warmer and warmer as it cools.

Son of Mulder.

quote:

suricat (notice the lower case, apols such sensitivity has never been my strong suit).

No problemo! There isn't much comms traffic here anyhow.

quote:

Anyway have you seen this interesting aerosol article . Makes one feel warmer and warmer as it cools.

High five SoM! This brings back memories of ocean liner "smokestack IR tracings".

I've read the article, and most of the comments, now. How come nobody even mentions "global dimming" in conjunction with black carbon?

The 'global dimming' (GD) effect of 'black carbon' (BC) is an important factor for insolation biasing. Not only does BC prevent the landfall of insolation that interacts with Earth's surface, BC also prevents the landfall of insolation that doesn't interact with Earth's surface and would normally just "bounce in and out" through the "atmospheric window".

What is more, BC gets two chances of absorbing this "bounced" energy with both "incoming" and "outgoing" (after "the bounce") radiation. This makes BC one heck of an attractor for adding energy to the atmosphere and surface, whilst at the same time reducing "cloud cover" by way of increased local temp (CC relationship for humidity) it also supplies a CCN that won't facilitate precipitation. Thus, I believe, could be an attractor that increases the altitude of the tropopause (this is speculation on my part).

The "chemist joke" caused a wry smile. "Because you're worth it", or "that'll be the bounce" (based on UK adds)?


"Makes one feel warmer and warmer as it cools"? I presume you refer to ocean heat content!

This would also be a factor of the shorter wavelengths of insolation that would make Earth-fall being attracted to the atmosphere by BC and not being permitted to penetrate to ocean depths.

Astute comment!

Best regards, suricat.

Son of Mulder.

Cutting back to TSI variability, have you seen this?
http://jennifermarohasy.com/bl...-official/#more-5820
It's a pity there isn't a link to the paper yet. The nearest relevant paper I can find is this pdf (less than 300kB).
http://www.nasa-news.org/resou...Soden_manuscript.pdf
The graphs on page 10 & 12 are quite "illuminating". When read with TSI in mind, it does seem that the TSI level may well tip events in "NINO" terms (both for "pump hunt" [due to WV load] and cloud cover). What's your opinion?

Best regards, suricat.

suricat, it doesn't get more empirical than this

I don't see how the AGWers will answer this new Linzen paper unless the physical measured record is completely wrong.

It looks like it's through peer review and about to be published.

It will be fascinating to follow.

Son of Mulder.

quote:

suricat, it doesn't get more empirical than this

Ha (lol)! I do believe you've now taken the place of M Batchelor (only your posts are more realistic).

Yes, I saw this on WUWT earlier. Read the post, but haven't read the paper yet.

Well frankly, it could get more empirical if the source of the main forcing could be identified beyond doubt. However, it's just as well that I got cancer, got remission and then mum got ill, because I'd otherwise have a lot of capital invested in my concept car engine which looks like it isn't going to be needed! Though a road vehicle that can run at 90 MPH for an hour, then 40 MPH on petrol/diesel/paraffin/gas/whatever (coke if you like) until the battery is recharged/replaced still looks good on paper when the fuel economy is virtually doubled against contemporary vehicles.

Back to reality. Nice curves on the graphs and I notice that SW is more positive, whereas LW is more negative in the "feedback" category for observations. Bearing in mind trends that cover roughly a decade (a popular current subject), this looks like a positive feedback from SW "insolation" and thus the (11 year) "solar cycle" could well be involved (who am I kidding, I think this is it)!

quote:

I don't see how the AGWers will answer this new Linzen paper unless the physical measured record is completely wrong.

We've seen arguments on the physical measured record before. Be prepared for argument.

quote:

It looks like it's through peer review and about to be published.

More power to Lindzen et al for credibility?

I'm not one that puts confidence in published papers, though I think that this paper deserves to be published.

quote:

It will be fascinating to follow.

It'll certainly be interesting to see how this paper is received by the science community!


As an aside, you realise how it's virtually impossible to find a source for a global UV trend? Just look at this:
http://www.meteoschweiz.admin....ojekte/cost_726.html
The longest UV record known. I know this isn't a "global" record, but it's a local record of UV insolation. Let's face it, any "local record" is a record of TSI at surface and can be corrected for any local perturbations (like ozone and particulates) when the perturbation is known.

This source is a plump source for global UV levels to my mind.


Why am I interested in the UV factor of insolation? Because it factors in the deep ice and deep ocean part of insolation per se. This relates to the paper that you just posted for my awareness.

Can you see the relationship?

Best regards, suricat.

quote:

As an aside, you realise how it's virtually impossible to find a source for a global UV trend? Just look at this:

FFS tell me about it suricat

Me thinks the otherside don't take this seriously Lol
:sarcasm:

Global Temperature Increase Linked to 1976 Climate Shift in Pacific Ocean
Abstract

mufcdiver.

quote:

Global Temperature Increase Linked to 1976 Climate Shift in Pacific Ocean

Yes muf, this has diverted my attention from the paper by Lindzen et al.
Here's a copy of the paper:
http://nzclimatescience.net/im..._carter_jgr_2009.pdf
Kindly supplied by a poster at Tamino's site, which seems wholly dedicated to destroying the paper (Tamino's site that is). It seems they don't like Bob Carter there. If the download stops, just push your browser's refresh button (it happened to me).

Although the paper is quite short I haven't had time to digest it yet, but you can read my site comment @ 1:29 am. How do you feel about manipulating data to better present an effect?

Best regards, suricat.

Tamino seems to dislike me and keeps deleting my posts which wouldn't bother me if it weren't for some of the insanity that they let-by!
I think Tamino may have been either TS of LegJoints in a former life

mufcdiver.

quote:

I think Tamino may have been either TS of LegJoints in a former life

LegJoints? Perhaps! "True Sceptic" continues to post there, so can't be an incarnation. However, it's "weird" ain't it!

Best regards, suricat.

More of a question really but in This paper from Hansen et-al, what are the mechanics for the transference of heat caused by co2 from the 'airier' portion of the atmosphere into the oceans to cause [with hind-sight] the "increased ".." likelihood of strong El Niños"?