Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 03:42pm PT
|
Why haven't defined "EVER!", yet.
 The Chief
Do you think he's senile?
Sketch
Two peas in a pod.
Think coral reefs — many of them are thriving, some of them are not, ...
Sketch, it's not I who is having trouble with the definition of "many" and "some." I believe it's the author of the blog you adore.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 03:54pm PT
|
“There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.”
Sea level rise
Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.
Global temperature rise
All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.
Warming oceans
The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.
Shrinking ice sheets
The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.
Declining Arctic sea ice
Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.
Glacial retreat
Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.
Ocean acidity
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent. This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans.
Decreased snow cover
Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and that the snow is melting earlier.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 04:06pm PT
|
Why haven't defined "EVER!", yet.
Doesn't follow the rules of grammar, KaveMAN? |
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 04:19pm PT
|
Gosh The Chief, you got me. I made a mistake in semantics, I said "ever," when I should have said "in recorded history." Even though I thought it was pretty well understood, and a fact that should be well understood by now, I made a slip by being casual on a climber's forum.
And you can dance and sing as if you landed a marlin with 3 lb. test. I suppose you have to take your victories where you can get them.
Surely this proves all climate scientists are wrong and that you, an uneducated sailor who is on the dole for the rest of his life, know more about science than seasoned scientists who perform on an international stage.
Now go have another coke and show the world your brilliance.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 04:19pm PT
|
Ocean acidity
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent. This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans.
The pH of the oceans are alkaline, about a pH of 8.
The mass of the oceans is something on the order of 270 times that of that of the atmosphere and only 0.04 percent CO2.
If all of the CO2 miraculously disappeared into the oceans it would have an insignificant and probably not even measurable effect on the pH.
If the oceans are warming they can't hold as much CO2 in solution and would outgas CO2.
Pretty crappy data set from Santa Monica bay but the line, still is going the wrong way for the warmists.
Similarly, carbon dioxide from a carbonated drink escapes much faster when the drink is not cooled because the required partial pressure of CO2 to achieve the same solubility increases in higher temperatures. Partial pressure of CO2 in the gas phase in equilibrium with seawater doubles with every 16 K increase in temperature.[6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry%27s_law
So you can't have it both ways. If the oceans are warming they can't hold as much CO2 and must become more alkaline.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 04:24pm PT
|
Yes The Chief, you certainly are one to talk about "far fetched realities."
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 07:03pm PT
|
TGT,
If your ocean pH sample was anything more than a cherry picked troll,
please explain why the rest of the world agrees on the FACT of ocean acidification.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/oceans/acidity.html
As you can see, in all locations pH cycles with the season and the clear trend is downward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification
Between 1751 and 1994 surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.25 to 8.14,[5] representing an increase of almost 30% in H+ ion concentration in the world's oceans.
Since then it has dropped by another .06 or so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbonic_acid
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Ocean-acidification-Global-warmings-evil-twin.html
"Future acidification depends on how much CO2 humans emit over the 21st century. By the year 2100, various projections indicate that the oceans will have acidified by a further 0.3 to 0.4 pH units, more than many organisms like corals can stand. This will create conditions not seen on Earth for at least 40 million years."
Why do oysters no longer hatch in the US Northwest?
CO2 Partial pressure has increased far more (280 >> 400 ppm and rising) than any effect from changed ocean temperature. (some small fraction of a degree).
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 07:25pm PT
|
CA is a desert and the long term trend of drought/s is the norm.
in the past droughts, the ground water didn't get pumped out... it stayed there (don't forget, it isn't until recently that the people and the energy to do it existed).
what do you think this will do to the biome? there is no historic event that is equivalent.
how do you know about those droughts, by the way?
TGT, what do you think that R²=0.0328 means?
what do you think the uncertainty is in the slope parameter of your trend line?
and how do you expect that particular location and that time period would behave in terms of the PH? (e.g. why the big excursions and what's causing them?)
finally, it's 2 years worth of data... how does that have anything to do with climate?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 07:27pm PT
|
To be blunt, Malemute is a liar.
As well as illiterate, innumerate, arithmetic challenged, science ignorami, and an all around nincompoop.
This from the honorable and widely respected Sketch.
Go get 'em!
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 07:27pm PT
|
Malnuts is at least the second propaganda spewer today, Chiloe being the first. At least Chiloe admitted he lied, however cleverly he thought he termed his response.
Lets get it straight people. NCDC and GISS are outliers, mere government propaganda organs. The satellite temp indices RSS and UAH, and to a lesser extent Hadcrut, show sept 2014 , as well as the whole year to date, no where near the hottest month or year on record. Not even close, not even among the top 5 hottest years of the recent past.
Please dont prove yourselves to be ignorant dumbasses by parrotting third rate propaganda.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 07:31pm PT
|
third rate propaganda from NOAA and NASA?
you have jumped the shark, rick.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 07:36pm PT
|
Why is it soooooooo difficult for you and your AGW people to come up with any such "solid" evidence to explain the warming of 1910-1945?
what is acceptable evidence? you dodged answering that upthread, you'll dodge it again,
why is it so difficult for you to come up with a criteria?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 07:43pm PT
|
Hell Eddy I would believe Bagdad Bob's asessment before the current embarassment that is NASA. Come to think of it, wasn't pleasing islamic nations one of nasa's new missions. Perhaps Bob needs a job. It might give the agency new credibility.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 09:51pm PT
|
you did notice that it was a paper published in 2000? didn't you?
Further details regarding this study were published by T. Delworth and T. Knutson of NOAA/GFDL in the 24 March 2000 issue of Science (vol. 287, pp. 2246-2250).
perhaps you might update your citations... a lot of research has happened in 14 years.
I'll show you how do to it...
go to the Science Magazine web page: http://www.sciencemag.org
next to the "current issue" tab you'll see a tab called "archive" click that an at the bottom of that frame click on the link "see all previous issues"
in this instance we're looking for vol. 287 page 2246, go down and click on the Table of Contents, you can do a browser search-page using the author "Delworth"
The title of the paper is: "Simulation of Early 20th Century Global Warming"
if you click on the Full Paper link you'll run into a paywall, it's unlikely you have a subscription or a membership to the AAAS but once you have the title go to Google Scholar
http://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en
and past in the title in the search box.
It is the only reference that pops up... now you can click on the link "All 10 versions" and see if there is a version that you can get at...
in this case there is a researchgate.net link that will download a .pdf file of the article... so you can actually read it. The last paragraph of the article outlines a program to resolve the uncertainties you have pointed to in your post.
"If the simulated variability and model response to radiative forcing are realistic, our results demonstrate that the combination of GHG forcing, sulfate aerosols, and internal variability could have produced the early 20th century warming, although to do so would take an unusually large realization of internal variability. A more likely scenario for interpretation of the observed warming of the early 20th century might be a smaller (and therefore more likely) realization of internal variability coupled with additional external radiative forcings. Additional experiments with solar and volcanic forcing, as well as with improved estimates of the direct and indirect effects of sulfate aerosols, will help to further constrain the causes of the early 20th century warming. Our results demonstrate the fundamental need to perform ensembles of climate simulations in order to better delineate the uncertainties of climate change simulations associated with internal variability of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system."
so how did it turn out?
one way of tracing out the subsequent history is to look at the papers citing this one... on your Google Scholar hit there is a link "Cited by 247" (the number may also change... but that's what your looking for)...
click that and you'll get a list of all the papers that cite the paper in question.
This list is in order of citation, and usually a paper's citation list grows with time so the most cited papers are going to be longer ago, we're looking for more recent papers with research results addressing the program of the concluding paragraph...
you can find this article, for instance:
Journal of Climate 20.4 (2007): 650-666.
Detection of Human Influence on a New, Validated 1500-Year Temperature Reconstruction
GABRIELE C. HEGERL, THOMAS J. CROWLEY, MYLES ALLEN, WILLIAM T. HYDE, HENRY N. POLLACK, JASON SMERDON, AND EDUARDO ZORITA
ABSTRACT
Climate records over the last millennium place the twentieth-century warming in a longer historical context. Reconstructions of millennial temperatures show a wide range of variability, raising questions about the reliability of currently available reconstruction techniques and the uniqueness of late-twentieth- century warming. A calibration method is suggested that avoids the loss of low-frequency variance. A new reconstruction using this method shows substantial variability over the last 1500 yr. This record is consistent with independent temperature change estimates from borehole geothermal records, compared over the same spatial and temporal domain. The record is also broadly consistent with other recent reconstructions that attempt to fully recover low-frequency climate variability in their central estimate. High variability in reconstructions does not hamper the detection of greenhouse gas–induced climate change, since a substantial fraction of the variance in these reconstructions from the beginning of the analysis in the late thirteenth century to the end of the records can be attributed to external forcing. Results from a detection and attribution analysis show that greenhouse warming is detectable in all analyzed high-variance reconstructions (with the possible exception of one ending in 1925), and that about a third of the warming in the first half of the twentieth century can be attributed to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. The estimated magnitude of the anthropogenic signal is consistent with most of the warming in the second half of the twentieth century being anthropogenic.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106.38 (2009): 16120-16123.
Long-term natural variability and 20th century climate change
Kyle L. Swanson, George Sugihara and Anastasios A. Tsonis
Abstract
Global mean temperature at the Earth's surface responds both to externally imposed forcings, such as those arising from anthropogenic greenhouse gases, as well as to natural modes of variability internal to the climate system. Variability associated with these latter processes, generally referred to as natural long-term climate variability, arises primarily from changes in oceanic circulation. Here we present a technique that objectively identifies the component of inter-decadal global mean surface temperature attributable to natural long-term climate variability. Removal of that hidden variability from the actual observed global mean surface temperature record delineates the externally forced climate signal, which is monotonic, accelerating warming during the 20th century.
Journal of Climate 26.22 (2013): 8709-8743.
Multimodel Assessment of Regional Surface Temperature Trends: CMIP3 and CMIP5 Twentieth-Century Simulations
THOMAS R. KNUTSON, FANRONG ZENG, AND ANDREW T. WITTENBERG
ABSTRACT
Regional surface temperature trends from phase 3 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP3) and CMIP5 twentieth-century runs are compared with observations—at spatial scales ranging from global averages to individual grid points—using simulated intrinsic climate variability from preindustrial control runs to assess whether observed trends are detectable and/or consistent with the models’ historical run trends. The CMIP5 models are also used to detect anthropogenic components of the observed trends, by assessing alternative hypotheses based on scenarios driven with either anthropogenic plus natural forcings combined, or with natural forcings only. Modeled variability is assessed via inspection of control run time series, standard deviation maps, spectral analyses, and low-frequency variance consistency tests. The models are found to provide plausible representations of internal climate variability, although there is room for improvement. The influence of observational uncertainty on the trends is assessed and is found to be generally small in comparison with intrinsic climate variability. Observed temperature trends over 1901–2010 are found to contain detectable anthropogenic warming components over a large fraction (about 80%) of the analyzed global area. In about 70% of the analyzed area, the modeled warming is consistent with the observed trends; in about 10% it is significantly greater than simulated. Regions without detectable warming include the high-latitude North Atlantic Ocean, the eastern United States, and parts of the eastern and northern Pacific Ocean. For 1981–2010, the observed warming trends over only about 30% of the globe are found to contain a detectable anthropogenic warming: this includes a number of regions within about 40º–45º of the equator, particularly in the Indian Ocean, western Pacific, South Asia, and tropical Atlantic.
so while the research continues, the explanation of 20th century global mean surface temperature anomaly becomes better and better understood...
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2014 - 10:08pm PT
|
To be blunt, Sketch is a liar.
As well as illiterate, innumerate, arithmetic challenged, science ignorami, and an all around nincompoop. and he's a little pussy
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 10:10pm PT
|
so while the research continues, the explanation of 20th century global mean surface temperature anomaly becomes better and better understood...
... by the people who actually want to (or are able to) understand it.
The first step in understanding something is to have an actual desire to understand it, because as has been said, you ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 10:30pm PT
|
Which btw, you have not answered either.
The Chief, you make all these demands to have Ed answer your questions.
I get it. You want to know these things, and are asking somebody who can help you understand.
BUT,
How come you don't answer a simple question that Ed has asked you a few times already?
I too am curious to know your answer: What is your definition of evidence?
You keep saying you want it, evidence, but keep saying that what's provided is not it.
So... What is the evidence you want?
Please be specific.
Thanks,
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2014 - 11:04pm PT
|
not ONE valid response ...
You throw off scientific studies that you don't understand then claim there is no evidence.
For example, the paper Chiloe cited says:
Assuming the simulated variability and model response to radiative forcing are realistic, the results of the present study demonstrate that the combination of greenhouse gas forcing, sulfate aerosols, and internal variability could have produced the early 20th century warming, although to do so would take an unusually large realization of internal variability. A more likely scenario for interpretation of the observed warming of the early 20th century might be a smaller (and therefore more likely) realization of internal variability coupled with additional external radiative forcings.
Additional experiments with solar and volcanic forcing, as well as with improved estimates of the direct and indirect effects of sulfate aerosols, will help to further constrain the causes of the early 20th century warming. The results of the present study clearly demonstrate the fundamental need to perform ensembles of climate simulations in order to better delineate the uncertainties of climate change simulations associated with internal variability of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system.
I'm no scientist, but I get the jist of what's being said here. And to me, it answers pretty clearly your question--to the degree of what we currently know.
But this obviously isn't good enough for you because you continue to ask the same question.
So again, what would you consider evidence? Obviously not a scientific paper--it's clear you don't understand them.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!