In The News

[loafer]

The journalist seems to be confusing climate with weather models.

Look back testing is very sensible - how much is it done?

[knocker]

Seaweed records show impact of ocean warming

As the planet continues to warm, it appears that seaweeds may be in especially hot water. New findings reported online on October 27 in Current Biology, a Cell Press publication, based on herbarium records collected in Australia since the 1940s suggest that up to 25 percent of temperate seaweed species living there could be headed to extinction. The study helps to fill an important gap in understanding about the impact that global warming is having on the oceans, the researchers say.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-10/cp-srs102111.php

[Alan Robinson]

The journalist seems to be confusing climate with weather models.

Look back testing is very sensible - how much is it done?

The journalist was quoting Jens Hesselbjerg, a senior climate researcher at the Danish Meteorologigical Institute.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Well, those who claim scince knows it all, read on;

http://www.dmi.dk/dm...kal_finjusteres

More from the climate conference in Denver;

CLIMATE MODELS NEED SMALL ADJUSTMENTS

Climate researchers are among the first to agree that mathematical models used to predict future climate need improvement.

One theme for debate during Wednesday’s WCRP conference in Denver was how climate models might be enhanced, and are they in fact so poor as some people imply.

“Briefly put, they are generally quite good” says DMI’s Jens Hesselberg. “They show consensus in many respects, and agree regarding overall tendencies. We ought not forget that current climate models are in fact based on algorithms used for our weather forecasts.”

Problems arise however when we go into details regarding localities, timing and types of phenomenon.

The method used to optimize climate models is to look back in time to well-documented situations, and to see if our climate models could predict their occurrence. If the phenomenon is not predicted – perhaps the position of a ridge of high pressure; a strong air current in the atmosphere, or sea surface temperatures – then investigations begin in order to understand why the model fails, and what is needed to make it work.

“But we should not simply create increasingly complex models”, says Sandrine Bony of Laboratorie de Meteorologie Dynamique. “We must understand the elementary physical science used to write the models. Only when we truly understand the science can we improve the models.

Sandrine Bony’s point is that many people nowadays use climate model predictions to guide them in future investments. Duty of care therefore demands that not only climate models be continuously improved, but our overall understanding of the climate.

Nothing really unexpected there. I think everybody knows that climate models need improving and only work off our current understanding, which is still quite limited. All the time new knowledge is being added, with more fine resolution to more powerful computers. I doubt that we'll ever have a 100% accurate model though.

Jens Hesselberg actually had this to say

New Confidence in Regional Temperature

Projections Despite Model Deficiencies

http://www.dmi.dk/dm...ver_bias_a0.pdf

Being happy with the progress made but looking for more improvements, can't fault that attitude.

[loafer]

An interesting analysis.

My read is that his conclusion is that the new European EC-Earth model is showing better accuracy, but that overall the old models are biased to produce overly high temperature predictions, and which get more exaggerated the longer the period of analysis.

I wonder what the long term European EC-Earth prediction looks like...

[Alan Robinson]

Jens Hesselberg actually had this to say

http://www.dmi.dk/dm...ver_bias_a0.pdf

No he didn't, that was Christensen and Boberg

Edited October 29, 2011 by Alan Robinson

[BornFromTheVoid]

No he didn't, that was Christensen and Boberg

Indeed, your right. At least they were from the DMI anywho.

[Alan Robinson]

Indeed, your right. At least they were from the DMI anywho.

Enjoy the banter

[knocker]

There is nothing new about this as western countries have been dumping waste in African countries for years along with ships to be broken up in India.

High toxic levels found at school, market neighboring informal e-waste salvage site in Africa.

Tests at a school beside an informal electronic waste salvage site in Ghana's capital Accra reveal contamination due to lead, cadmium and other health-threatening pollutants over 50 times higher than risk-free levels.

A produce market, a church headquarters and a soccer field are likewise polluted to varying degrees, all neighbours of the Agbogbloshie scrap metal site, where electronic trash is scavenged for valuable metals - especially copper. Schoolchildren as young as six work around bonfires of circuitry, plastic and other leftover high-tech trash.

http://www.eurekaler...u-htl102511.php

Photos Credit: Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology

Edited November 1, 2011 by weather ship

[Gray-Wolf]

I found this of interest;

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111027150213.htm

apart from the deep ocean link we also see that the rate of Co2 increase we have experienced took millions of years in past epochs. I wonder how fast the climate 'alterations' would be expected to take effect?

[knocker]

I found this of interest;

http://www.scienceda...11027150213.htm

apart from the deep ocean link we also see that the rate of Co2 increase we have experienced took millions of years in past epochs. I wonder how fast the climate 'alterations' would be expected to take effect?

I wondered the same thing when I posted the same article in the new rearch thread GW. I wonder whether the two threads should be combined.

[Gray-Wolf]

Oooopsie! My Bad! Yeah , move my post over to the New Research thread!

[jethro]

Seems the Berkeley study which was supposed to end the doubts and speculation about temperature trends has sparked its' own little debate:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2055191/Scientists-said-climate-change-sceptics-proved-wrong-accused-hiding-truth-colleague.html

[Alan Robinson]

Winter has a grip on Greenland.

http://www.dmi.dk/dm...eb_om_groenland

While Europe may expect no serious cold weather in the near future, winter is established in Greenland and large parts of Canada – and this tendency looks likely to continue.

“In our latitudes, large scale air movements are such that when warmth moves north in one place, somewhere else cold moves south. It is as though there passes a wave, with heat on its crest and cold in the troughâ€, explains meteorologist Jesper Eriksen.

“Such waves normally travel from west to east, and Denmark experiences periods of both mild and cold weather. Occasionally though, warm and cold air masses become so extensive that the waves are brought to a standstill. That is the case right now."

"The current weather situation is likely to continue for at least the next ten days", says the meteorologist. "These particular circumstances bring mild, grey weather to Denmark, while Greenlanders can expect normal seasonal temperatures, or perhaps slightly colder than normal."

In Greenland right now – where perpetual night has not yet begun – the weather is characteristically sunshine with isolated snow showers. Eastern parts will however experience periods of heavy snow, and particularly near Illoqqortoormiut there will be times with strong winds from the north and northeast. This is down to depressions passing along the boundary between the warm and cold air masses taking a north-northeasterly track along Greenland’s east coats in the coming days.

Edited November 5, 2011 by Alan Robinson

[Alan Robinson]

Seems the Berkeley study which was supposed to end the doubts and speculation about temperature trends has sparked its' own little debate:

http://www.dailymail...-colleague.html

That reads like a very dubious way of proceeding, and damages the reputation of science yet further.

[jethro]

That reads like a very dubious way of proceeding, and damages the reputation of science yet further.

Agreed.

Dearly wish we could turn back time to the days when scientists were seen as slightly dotty eccentrics who were happy to quietly publish their findings in journals. This culture of celebrity seems all pervasive and I'm not sure I like the impact it is having.

[Gray-Wolf]

A nice explaination as to why we should check the science and not rely upon news clippings;

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/11/05/the-real-problem-with-the-global-warming-debate/#more-4463

Looks like a bit of a Nelson moment? ( I see no stall in warming.....)

[pottyprof]

This culture of celebrity seems all pervasive and I'm not sure I like the impact it is having.

I think Simon Cowell is working on something. The Fudge Factor or something like that.... (Stands back and waits....)

[jethro]

A nice explaination as to why we should check the science and not rely upon news clippings;

http://tamino.wordpr...bate/#more-4463

Looks like a bit of a Nelson moment? ( I see no stall in warming.....)

Lol.

That's not relying on the science, that's a blog.

[Alan Robinson]

Lol.

That's not relying on the science, that's a blog.

And neither has it owt to do with Nelson in my view.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Seems a lot closer to the science than the daily mail page imo...

[jethro]

Seems a lot closer to the science than the daily mail page imo...

But you can't take the higher moral ground of 'checking the science' and then citing a blog.

I think Simon Cowell is working on something. The Fudge Factor or something like that.... (Stands back and waits....)

Do you reckon he's Bottoxed the graphs?

[jethro]

A book review....

http://www.londonbookreview.com/lbr0061.html

[BornFromTheVoid]

The guy uses scientific techniques to prove his point rather than just sweeping statements and accusations. Not ideal but the lesser of 2 evils at least.

I may have to check out that book, knew the IPCC had made mistakes a plenty but didn't think it was as bad as the review mentions.

[scotty_boy_winter]

His blog makes sense. End of

But you can't take the higher moral ground of 'checking the science' and then citing a blog.

Do you reckon he's Bottoxed the graphs?