Global Warming

[Gray-Wolf]

Mmmm, I can go with that. I'm not sure it's true, completely; I'm not sure two day's data, after 9/11 (except under the flight path of Bin Laden's escaping family, of course) and some studies of pollution plumes from Bombay, can really show us that, but I can certainly see the logic.

Paul

I'm sure there is a lot more info in the two areas of study than an Indonesian plume and the Bin laden debacle but if you wanted to 'cherry pick' undeniable (unambiguous) data sets to highlight the effect then you too would probably choose those events/areas. The modified graph does make for a very worrying temperature trend though.

[Dawlish]

I'm sure there is a lot more info in the two areas of study than an Indonesian plume and the Bin laden debacle but if you wanted to 'cherry pick' undeniable (unambiguous) data sets to highlight the effect then you too would probably choose those events/areas. The modified graph does make for a very worrying temperature trend though.

Good reply! I agree about the worrying trend.

[Devonian]

Goodness me, that's interesting. I think this belongs on here, but I've cut and pasted Mr. Sleet's graph from the Ice reports thread.

In replying to Big Bear's post, on the autumn and Winter thread, I've just realised that the only, remotely comparable, 15 year warm spell, in the whole of the Hadley series, was in the late 1930's and 1940's. That coincides exactly with the warmest period in the Arctic in the last 125 years. That coincidence, over a 15 year period has to be statistically significant.

If the Arctic warms, to the same levels as 1935-1950, which the present trend indicates could happen in the next 30-40 years, what will that mean for the UK climate? If the UK climate has warmed to these levels already, without a warm Arctic, maybe Hansen really is right. it certainly appears that a warming Arctic led to a warmer UK in 1935-50.

Coo, I've actually got goosebumps linking those two.

Paul

After a search I've found the graph. I for one think the data selection methods that went into it's production to be dubious. I think I know who produced it - but I'm not 100% sure. I'd like to know who produced it, who reviewed it and where on the net it's located.

Edited September 29, 2006 by Devonian

[Dawlish]

After a search I've found the graph. I for one think the data selection methods that went into it's production to be dubious. I think I know who produced it - but I'm not 100% sure. I'd like to know who produced it, who reviewed it and where on the net it's located.

OK, fair point Devonian. Well cautioned. I've taken the graph at face value in my comments and that could involve a little risk. Even though this seems kosher, the measurement of past Arctic temperatures could be in question here. Have you got a source, Mr. S? The use of sources with a good Internet provenance is dear to my heart, too.

Paul

[parmenides3]

OK, fair point Devonian. Well cautioned. I've taken the graph at face value in my comments and that could involve a little risk. Even though this seems kosher, the measurement of past Arctic temperatures could be in question here. Have you got a source, Mr. S? The use of sources with a good Internet provenance is dear to my heart, too.

Paul

Evening all. If you're talking about the graph from the Jones et. al. dataset (I think you are), then it has probably come from here:

Jones, P.D., New, M., Parker, D.E., Martin, S. and Rigor, I.G., 1999: Surface air temperature and its variations over the last 150 years. Reviews of Geophysics 37, 173-199.

That'll be Phil Jones, of the CRU, at UEA.

Enjoying the discussions.

:)P

[Dawlish]

Evening all. If you're talking about the graph from the Jones et. al. dataset (I think you are), then it has probably come from here:

Jones, P.D., New, M., Parker, D.E., Martin, S. and Rigor, I.G., 1999: Surface air temperature and its variations over the last 150 years. Reviews of Geophysics 37, 173-199.

That'll be Phil Jones, of the CRU, at UEA.

Enjoying the discussions.

:)P

Did I call you a datahound, or what! Looks kosher, Devonian. UEA is about as independent, academic, well-respected and non-agenda orientated as they come.

Thanks, P3, Paul

[parmenides3]

Did I call you a datahound, or what! Looks kosher, Devonian. UEA is about as independent, academic, well-respected and non-agenda orientated as they come.

Thanks, P3, Paul

You're welcome. Try this; I think you'll appreciate it: http://sciencepoliticsclimatechange.blogspot.com/

:)P Fergus

[The Penguin]

Did I call you a datahound, or what! Looks kosher, Devonian. UEA is about as independent, academic, well-respected and non-agenda orientated as they come.

Thanks, P3, Paul

Maybe, although it could be that the editorial slant imposed by the UEA team is driven by their ‘elevationaly challenged’ location and poor swimming ability.

[Devonian]

Did I call you a datahound, or what! Looks kosher, Devonian. UEA is about as independent, academic, well-respected and non-agenda orientated as they come.

Thanks, P3, Paul

Can someone post the graph into this thread?

Anyway, what's important is not the data set but the filter applied to the data set to obtain the subset that's graphed - the graph is not Phil Jones's work I'm sure...Again, I'd still like to know who that author of the graph is and where on the net I can find it.

[parmenides3]

Can someone post the graph into this thread?

Anyway, what's important is not the data set but the filter applied to the data set to obtain the subset that's graphed - the graph is not Phil Jones's work I'm sure...Again, I'd still like to know who that author of the graph is and where on the net I can find it.

Hmm. This is Phil Jones's work: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/

looks a bit different! Now, where has that graph come from?

:)P

[Dawlish]

Maybe, although it could be that the editorial slant imposed by the UEA team is driven by their ‘elevationaly challenged’ location and poor swimming ability.

Stop making me laugh, my mouth hurts!

Hmm. This is Phil Jones's work: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/

looks a bit different! Now, where has that graph come from?

:)P

You are right. maybe Mr. S can help here. It was his graph.

Paul

[Gray-Wolf]

You are right. maybe Mr. S can help here. It was his graph.

Paul

maybe that's why we can't find it ......."It was his (Mr S's) graph......."

[Dawlish]

maybe that's why we can't find it ......."It was his (Mr S's) graph......."

[parmenides3]

Another accidental discovery. This one is especially for BFTP. It's about the Norwegian current in particular, showing how it has got warmer and weaker over the last 10 years, resulting in no net change in ocean heat transport. Full of details, worth a read. I don't know it's implications, but it seems another useful bit of the jigsaw to throw in, especially after the recent ocean cooling paper showing a different trend in the Pacific.

Comments?

:)P

http://www.cicero.uio.no/fulltext.asp?id=3914〈=no

[West is Best]

Parmy 3 - forgot to say thank you for comment elsewhere with the final couplet from the Yeats. Terrifying indeed!

Which leads me neatly on to the fact that we're off to see An Inconvenient Truth tonight. No idea what to expect. I imagine the ones on here holding out against the scientific groundwell of AGW would have things to say, but I'm looking forward to seeing it!

[parmenides3]

Parmy 3 - forgot to say thank you for comment elsewhere with the final couplet from the Yeats. Terrifying indeed!

Which leads me neatly on to the fact that we're off to see An Inconvenient Truth tonight. No idea what to expect. I imagine the ones on here holding out against the scientific groundwell of AGW would have things to say, but I'm looking forward to seeing it!

Hi, WIB. Love Yeats, so just responded naturally. I'm not sure how much fun AIT is going to be; it's been so hyped in the States, it suggests to me that. like March of the Penguins, our perception of it will be something different. I'd be interested to know how they 'spin' the details, though, and also what they leave out. I expect a full review, 500 words, on my desk by Tuesday...er.. in the reviews section will do, come to think of it.

Meanwhile, an interesting fact to take with you. I was looking at the NOAA/NCDC monthly global temperature anomaly figures earlier on (I know, sad..) anyway, when was the last time there was a negative anomaly of 0.1C or more? I'll let you guess.

:)P

[Snowly does it]

Hi, WIB. Love Yeats, so just responded naturally. I'm not sure how much fun AIT is going to be; it's been so hyped in the States, it suggests to me that. like March of the Penguins, our perception of it will be something different. I'd be interested to know how they 'spin' the details, though, and also what they leave out. I expect a full review, 500 words, on my desk by Tuesday...er.. in the reviews section will do, come to think of it.

Meanwhile, an interesting fact to take with you. I was looking at the NOAA/NCDC monthly global temperature anomaly figures earlier on (I know, sad..) anyway, when was the last time there was a negative anomaly of 0.1C or more? I'll let you guess.

:)P

1991?

[Dawlish]

Another accidental discovery. This one is especially for BFTP. It's about the Norwegian current in particular, showing how it has got warmer and weaker over the last 10 years, resulting in no net change in ocean heat transport. Full of details, worth a read. I don't know it's implications, but it seems another useful bit of the jigsaw to throw in, especially after the recent ocean cooling paper showing a different trend in the Pacific.

Comments?

:)P

http://www.cicero.uio.no/fulltext.asp?id=3914〈=no

Thanks P3. Another really interesting article. When the Woods Hole research, into Atlantic currents further South is published, they may speculate on a link-up to the more Northerly currents. It is such a complex area though. In trwling through the woods Hole research papers, I came across this: a paper from 2006, by Peterson et al., saying that freshwater inputs into the Arctic, from rivers, sea attrition and glacial melt is increasing and may well be transported Southwards, with possible changes to the Atlantic currents, as a result.

http://www.whrc.org/resources/published_li...lScience.06.pdf

[West is Best]

Hi, WIB. Love Yeats, so just responded naturally. I'm not sure how much fun AIT is going to be; it's been so hyped in the States, it suggests to me that. like March of the Penguins, our perception of it will be something different. I'd be interested to know how they 'spin' the details, though, and also what they leave out. I expect a full review, 500 words, on my desk by Tuesday...er.. in the reviews section will do, come to think of it.

Meanwhile, an interesting fact to take with you. I was looking at the NOAA/NCDC monthly global temperature anomaly figures earlier on (I know, sad..) anyway, when was the last time there was a negative anomaly of 0.1C or more? I'll let you guess.

:)P

Mid to late 70's by the look of it? http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/resear...s.html#Overview

That graph is absolutely shocking ...

I believe, but will check, that the film does fairly raise the counter arguments before having them quashed. But I'll def send you a review. Has no-one done that yet on here? One thing I've tended to notice, without being too polemic, is that those on here who think the world will cooldown any day soon seem to ignore the programmes and articles that suggest the opposite. But perhaps that's unfair.

[Gray-Wolf]

Comments?

:o P

http://www.cicero.uio.no/fulltext.asp?id=3914〈=no

Wouldn't it be funny if the same thing was happening within other sections of the NAD?.

In the same way that global dimming may have mitigated the worst impacts of AGW for nearly 40 years then maybe any slowdown of flow would be compensated for by increased temps within the flow will this then would 'mask' the true impacts of an NAD slowdown/shutdown. Combine those two 'masking effects' over the latter part of the 20th century and you could effectively 'hide' some very disturbing developments/emerging trends, enough to bring into question the validity of any theory forwarding a case for change when none is being measured!!! .

Within both of these 'effects' (global dimming/industrial pollution cooling and the increased temp/decreased flow within warm ocean currents) you can plumb the possibility of 'abrupt climate change' as when the mitigating effects are removed from the system then the system rapidly shifts to it's new 'norm'. Instead of an almost steady year on year change highlighting global warming you are faced with a great leap in the rate of change as the masking effects stop 'masking' the change, not unlike some of the rapid climate changes in the paleo climatic records.

I still believe that the fundamentals of the system will remain constant through any 'period of change' which to me means that the heat from the equator will always be attempting to warm the cooler Poles whilst the cooler Poles are always trying to cool down the equator.Add more heat to the system and the poles loose the 'tug of war' and warm. No matter how the Fluids/gasses achieve this warming they will achieve it.

As I understand it in an ENSO setup the trades no longer 'hold in' the tropical heat in a belt around the tropical regions and the heat can travel on a more direct northerly route so retaining much more of its tropical characteristics with the shorter (in both time and distance) journey.It is postulated that in a 'warmer climatic setup' the El-Nino state becomes the norm and so accelerates the Poleward movement of heat.

The interface between these 'Tropical plumes' and the ambient environment will be interesting to live through and I feel and may result in the birth of particular, new, weather events/Types within the temperate belt.

[West is Best]

:o

Edited October 1, 2006 by West is Best

[parmenides3]

Thanks P3. Another really interesting article. When the Woods Hole research, into Atlantic currents further South is published, they may speculate on a link-up to the more Northerly currents. It is such a complex area though. In trwling through the woods Hole research papers, I came across this: a paper from 2006, by Peterson et al., saying that freshwater inputs into the Arctic, from rivers, sea attrition and glacial melt is increasing and may well be transported Southwards, with possible changes to the Atlantic currents, as a result.

http://www.whrc.org/resources/published_li...lScience.06.pdf

That's a belter, Paul, well done. Not for the beginner, probably, but fascinating.

My reading of it? There's a lot of extra freshwater in the Arctic waiting to come out; when the Arctic high SLP weakens, at the same time as a return to a positive NAO and NAM phase, it will all come rushing out...

How much? What impact? Enough to replicate the 'great salinity anomaly' of the late 60's-early 70's; enough to impact on the ocean circulation at two key spots; the Labrador deep overturning zone and the Nordic outflow area (hints of both already being affected in the short-term already). Enough to slow the THC? If, and only if, the Nordic outflow exceeds 15,000 km3, following Curry's 2005 calculations. Perhaps not much yet, then... the numbers still don't quite stack up, but some impacts must be expected, it's just hard to know what and where they will occur. Florida? HBCA? Shetland? All are possible.

I still don't buy into the 'sudden jump' scenario, unless we count a ten-thirty year period as 'sudden' (which it is in climate terms, if not human ones). I am concerned that the paper doesn't factor in the Bering inflow, though, as there is evidence that this has increased over recent years, and is highly likely to be contributing to the Arctic freshwater budget.

I appreciate what you are saying, G-W, but the problem highlighted by this paper, and others, is that the balance of Tropical-Polar heat interchange is, for want of a better word, scr@w&d up at the moment. Unfortunately, nobody knows for certain what the consequences of this will be.

:)P

[Guest Mike W]

WIB, don't show that pic to James Lovelock, he's already said we should use everything and anything to cause cooling including SO2 and soot. Seriously I agree that we should basically try evrything, but I tink instead of So2 their must be healthier ways of white cloud forming, or albedo effect in genral, at a equally cheap or realtively cheaper way. As far as mitigation goes.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Mike W

[Dawlish]

That's a belter, Paul, well done. Not for the beginner, probably, but fascinating.

My reading of it? There's a lot of extra freshwater in the Arctic waiting to come out; when the Arctic high SLP weakens, at the same time as a return to a positive NAO and NAM phase, it will all come rushing out...

How much? What impact? Enough to replicate the 'great salinity anomaly' of the late 60's-early 70's; enough to impact on the ocean circulation at two key spots; the Labrador deep overturning zone and the Nordic outflow area (hints of both already being affected in the short-term already). Enough to slow the THC? If, and only if, the Nordic outflow exceeds 15,000 km3, following Curry's 2005 calculations. Perhaps not much yet, then... the numbers still don't quite stack up, but some impacts must be expected, it's just hard to know what and where they will occur. Florida? HBCA? Shetland? All are possible.

I still don't buy into the 'sudden jump' scenario, unless we count a ten-thirty year period as 'sudden' (which it is in climate terms, if not human ones). I am concerned that the paper doesn't factor in the Bering inflow, though, as there is evidence that this has increased over recent years, and is highly likely to be contributing to the Arctic freshwater budget.

I appreciate what you are saying, G-W, but the problem highlighted by this paper, and others, is that the balance of Tropical-Polar heat interchange is, for want of a better word, scr@w&d up at the moment. Unfortunately, nobody knows for certain what the consequences of this will be.

:)P

....but does it come out at depth, or as a surface flow?

Paul

PS TY. I'd like membership of your Article Hound club please, with free doggie biscuits and a shredder thrown in for good measure.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Dawlish

[parmenides3]

....but does it come out at depth, or as a surface flow?

Paul

PS TY. I'd like membership of your Article Hound club please, with free doggie biscuits and a shredder thrown in for good measure.

You are now offically invited to join the exclusive Article Hound Society, member number 2. As an AHS you can enjoy such benefits as knowingly irritating people who don't like reading long articles, spending more time trawling through search engines for something nobody else has spotted yet, and subverting people's self-esteem. As you can only become an AHS by invitation, there is no charge. Get your own doggie biscuits.

Meantime: the freashwater comes out at Labrador at the surface, but a large proportion is drawn deep in the part of the current which circulates there. it comes out of the Fram Strait on the surface and tracks along the Greenland shelf before heading to other parts of the ocean and, according to Curry, it sits in the GIN waiting for a chance to pounce, just sort of mingling around. There is speculation that the strong deep convection which occurred to the SE of Greenland in the 80's could have been a sudden 'rush' caused by a saline/temp imbalance in this area.

:)P

Founder member and No 1 AHS.