Why put this on two threads?. It does not make it any more truthful.
Dealt with on its own thread. It is not worth doing twice.
Dealt with on its own thread. It is not worth doing twice.
Death knell for AGW
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
Climate models make 'very large' errors in determining solar radiation at Earth's surface, 'ignore the effect of clouds'
A paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research finds that current global climate models make "very large" errors in determining solar radiation at the surface of the Earth "due to ignoring the effects of clouds." According to the authors, these very large errors can exceed 800 Watts per meter squared, which by comparison is about 216 times more than the alleged effect of doubling CO2 concentrations [3.7 W m-2].
A paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research finds that current global climate models make "very large" errors in determining solar radiation at the surface of the Earth "due to ignoring the effects of clouds." According to the authors, these very large errors can exceed 800 Watts per meter squared, which by comparison is about 216 times more than the alleged effect of doubling CO2 concentrations [3.7 W m-2].
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, doi:10.1029/2012JD017557
Parameterization of instantaneous global horizontal irradiance at the surface. Part II: Cloudy-sky component
more
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Settled science update: Climate models make 'very large' errors in determining solar radiation at Earth's surface, 'ignore the effect of clouds'
h/t small dead animals
more
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Settled science update: Climate models make 'very large' errors in determining solar radiation at Earth's surface, 'ignore the effect of clouds'
h/t small dead animals
That is an excellent description of your posts. And here I didn't think you were that perceptive.
I hope the hat tip to "Small dead Animals" was derisive for it was one of their usual rotting carcases. You may not have noticed that the paper said "in the absence of consideration of clouds, where, of course, clouds are always part of the calculations. A couple of the authors of that paper have also written one on the effect of clouds in the Arctic. There they conclude that the increasing moisture leads to increasing cloud cover and that traps more radiation and contributes to further warming.
Like every investigator, they take clouds into account. With, of course, acknowledgement of the difficulty of accurately assessing the impact of cloud cover. They, as many more, are working on improving this kind of modelling. Odd that they do not note the great advance made by the National Science Foundations sponsorship of such a programme whose successful improvements were announced just months before the paper here was received. They are just a little out of date.
Here is some information on this topic and the subject of clouds.
nsf.gov - Clouds: The Wild Card of Climate Change - Special Report
Like every investigator, they take clouds into account. With, of course, acknowledgement of the difficulty of accurately assessing the impact of cloud cover. They, as many more, are working on improving this kind of modelling. Odd that they do not note the great advance made by the National Science Foundations sponsorship of such a programme whose successful improvements were announced just months before the paper here was received. They are just a little out of date.
Here is some information on this topic and the subject of clouds.
nsf.gov - Clouds: The Wild Card of Climate Change - Special Report
Suspicions confirmed. No whistle blower. CRU was hacked, and the perpetrators will very likely get away with their crime.
Police close investigation into hacked climate science emails | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Norfolk police on Wednesday formally closed the two-and-a-half-year investigation into the hacking of emails from the University of East Anglia's (UEA) Climatic Research Unit (CRU), and confirmed the hack was the work of "sophisticated" outsiders, not a whistleblower at the university.
The breach – dubbed "climategate" - led to thousands of private emails exchanged between climate scientists over the previous decade being dumped online in November 2009. A second tranche of emails was uploaded onto the internet late last year.
The incident led to numerous inquiries into the practices of the scientists, all of which cleared the scientists of wrongdoing. The university, however, was criticised for its data handling and response to freedom of information requests.
The breach – dubbed "climategate" - led to thousands of private emails exchanged between climate scientists over the previous decade being dumped online in November 2009. A second tranche of emails was uploaded onto the internet late last year.
The incident led to numerous inquiries into the practices of the scientists, all of which cleared the scientists of wrongdoing. The university, however, was criticised for its data handling and response to freedom of information requests.
Agency Fighting 'Climate Change' Operates 9,516 Vehicles for 11,605 Employees
The Natural Resources Conservation Service, a part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, operates 9,516 vehicles even though it only has 11,605 employees. That works out to one vehicle for every 1.2 employees.
The service promotes itself, in part, as a component of the federal government's effort to deal with climate change.
"Our goal is not just a sustainable, nutritious, abundant food supply, but also thriving ecosystems that support a diversity of life," the conservation service says on its website. "In the next century, NRCS will not only continue to tackle familiar challenges like ensuring clean water and healthy soil, but will also rise to meet new issues, such as clean air, clean energy, climate change, and new technology."
( cool story bro )
more
Agency Fighting 'Climate Change' Operates 9,516 Vehicles for 11,605 Employees | CNSNews.com
The Natural Resources Conservation Service, a part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, operates 9,516 vehicles even though it only has 11,605 employees. That works out to one vehicle for every 1.2 employees.
The service promotes itself, in part, as a component of the federal government's effort to deal with climate change.
"Our goal is not just a sustainable, nutritious, abundant food supply, but also thriving ecosystems that support a diversity of life," the conservation service says on its website. "In the next century, NRCS will not only continue to tackle familiar challenges like ensuring clean water and healthy soil, but will also rise to meet new issues, such as clean air, clean energy, climate change, and new technology."
( cool story bro )
more
Agency Fighting 'Climate Change' Operates 9,516 Vehicles for 11,605 Employees | CNSNews.com
I see nothing in the story that criticises the numbers.It does mention that the total has been reduced because of the cancellation of a programme and budget cuts.
Possibly that number of vehicles is appropriate for the services the Office is involved in. There is no suggestion that it is not.
Possibly that number of vehicles is appropriate for the services the Office is involved in. There is no suggestion that it is not.
Having never been on meds other than the occasional antibiotic, I don't see how. I still am curious as to when you will seek treatment, though.
Or is it a full blown paranoid schizophrenia that you have and will not get treatment for until you are forced in to it following a violent episode?
The Sound Of Settled Science
via sda
August 13th, 2012 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
guest post by John Christy, UAHuntsville, Alabama State Climatologist
Let me say two things up front. 1. The first 10 weeks of the summer of 2012 were brutally hot in some parts of the US. For these areas it was hotter than seen in many decades. 2. Extra greenhouse gases should warm the climate. We really don’t know how much, but the magnitude is more than zero, and likely well below the average climate model estimate.
Now to the issue at hand. The recent claims that July 2012 and Jan-Jul 2012 were the hottest ever in the conterminous US (USA 4_8 are based on one specific way to look at the US temperature data. NOAA, who made the announcement, utilized the mean temperature or TMean (i.e. (TMax + TMin)/2) taken from station records after adjustments for a variety of discontinuities were applied. In other words, the average of the daily high and daily low temperatures is the metric of choice for these kinds of announcements.
Unfortunately, TMean is akin to averaging apples and oranges to come up with a rather uninformative fruit. TMax represents the temperature of a well-mixed lower tropospheric layer, especially in summer. TMin, on the other hand, is mostly a measurement in a shallow layer that is easily subjected to deceptive warming as humans develop the surface around the stations.
The problem here is that TMin can warm over time due to an increase in turbulent mixing (related to increasing local human development) which creates a vertical redistribution of atmospheric heat. This warming is not primarily due to the accumulation of heat which is the signature of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Since TMax represents a deeper layer of the troposphere, it serves as a better proxy (not perfect, but better) for measuring the accumulation of tropospheric heat, and thus the greenhouse effect. This is demonstrated theoretically and observationally in McNider et al. 2012. I think TMax is a much better way to depict the long-term temperature character of the climate.
With that as a introduction, the chart of TMax generated by Roy in this post, using the same USHCNv2 stations as NOAA, indicates July 2012 was very hot, coming in at third place behind the scorching summers of 1936 and 1934. This is an indication that the deeper atmosphere, where the greenhouse effect is more directly detected, was probably warmer in those two years than in 2012 over the US.
Another way to look at the now diminishing heat wave is to analyze stations with long records for the occurrence of daily extremes. For USA48 there are 970 USHCN stations with records at least 80 years long. In Fig. 1.1 is the number of record hot days set in each year by these 970 stations (gray). The 1930s dominate the establishment of daily TMax record highs
more solids
Fun with summer statistics. Part I: USA « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.
via sda
August 13th, 2012 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
guest post by John Christy, UAHuntsville, Alabama State Climatologist
Let me say two things up front. 1. The first 10 weeks of the summer of 2012 were brutally hot in some parts of the US. For these areas it was hotter than seen in many decades. 2. Extra greenhouse gases should warm the climate. We really don’t know how much, but the magnitude is more than zero, and likely well below the average climate model estimate.
Now to the issue at hand. The recent claims that July 2012 and Jan-Jul 2012 were the hottest ever in the conterminous US (USA 4_8 are based on one specific way to look at the US temperature data. NOAA, who made the announcement, utilized the mean temperature or TMean (i.e. (TMax + TMin)/2) taken from station records after adjustments for a variety of discontinuities were applied. In other words, the average of the daily high and daily low temperatures is the metric of choice for these kinds of announcements.
Unfortunately, TMean is akin to averaging apples and oranges to come up with a rather uninformative fruit. TMax represents the temperature of a well-mixed lower tropospheric layer, especially in summer. TMin, on the other hand, is mostly a measurement in a shallow layer that is easily subjected to deceptive warming as humans develop the surface around the stations.
The problem here is that TMin can warm over time due to an increase in turbulent mixing (related to increasing local human development) which creates a vertical redistribution of atmospheric heat. This warming is not primarily due to the accumulation of heat which is the signature of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Since TMax represents a deeper layer of the troposphere, it serves as a better proxy (not perfect, but better) for measuring the accumulation of tropospheric heat, and thus the greenhouse effect. This is demonstrated theoretically and observationally in McNider et al. 2012. I think TMax is a much better way to depict the long-term temperature character of the climate.
With that as a introduction, the chart of TMax generated by Roy in this post, using the same USHCNv2 stations as NOAA, indicates July 2012 was very hot, coming in at third place behind the scorching summers of 1936 and 1934. This is an indication that the deeper atmosphere, where the greenhouse effect is more directly detected, was probably warmer in those two years than in 2012 over the US.
Another way to look at the now diminishing heat wave is to analyze stations with long records for the occurrence of daily extremes. For USA48 there are 970 USHCN stations with records at least 80 years long. In Fig. 1.1 is the number of record hot days set in each year by these 970 stations (gray). The 1930s dominate the establishment of daily TMax record highs
more solids
Fun with summer statistics. Part I: USA « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.
Math problem: 11,605 employees driving 9,516 vehicles is NOT 1.2 vehicles per person. It's 1.2 people per vehicle.
roflmao
Good point. This climate researcher brings up another aspect; other sources of human-caused increases in climate temps.
But either way, she is saying that human activities are boosting warming just by developing areas. Makes sense. Forests and such are usually cooler than parking lots and such.
Thanks, Loc.
