Manmade Climate Change Discussion

[VillagePlank]

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-47#entry2879275

 

That statement is threatening to unbalance my chakras, disturb my aura and encourage a sudden extrusion of ectoplasm. Peer review is dangerous! Bah Humbug!

 

Well, he did provide the data for you, so you can replicate the chart (rather than with a bloated red-face point at some peer-reviewed piece saying 'it must be true he said so') His conclusions are erroneous, but welcome news, is it not? I wouldn't normally attribute such things to certain people, but empiricism always trumps theory. See my comment on the other thread for the caveats.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Sparkicle

[knocker]

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-47#entry2879458

 

Well according to Dr John Abraham quite a few respected scientists don't share that view.

 

A testament to Jim's impact is given by how he is viewed by others. His long-time colleague, NASA Senior Scientist Dr. Andrew Lacis, told me,

 

 

The basic facts remaining unchanged. What Jim Hansen has been saying all along, is that global warming is a matter of fact and physics, leaving no room for doubt or uncertainty. What makes climate change difficult to explain is that there is also natural variability that is superimposed on the steadily increasing warming trend. Explaining such complexities, and the gravity of continuing to delay in implementing meaningful action, will keep Jim fully occupied for the foreseeable future.

 

Another colleague, Reto Ruedy, who has worked with Jim for 35 years related,

 

 

For me, working with Jim was a great experience. His enormous interest in the subject, his eagerness to learn is intoxicating and led his collaborators to voluntarily and joyfully work long hours. His most outstanding feature however, is his unwavering optimism where his first reaction to a blunder is to dig up useful pieces of information from it rather than to blame the culprit who caused it.

 

But those outside NASA also recognize Jim's significance. Bill McKibben, who founded the worldwide 350.org movement says,

 

If 350.org has a patron saint, it is Jim. It was his 2008 paper that gave us our name, identifying 350 parts per million CO2 as the safe upper bound for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But as much for his science, we respect him for his courage. He is always willing to speak the truth bluntly.

 

While this blunt talk has made him one of the best known climate scientists, it has also made him a target of attacks. Inept attempts to impugn his science have forced his opponents to rely upon personal attacks as the Earth's climate has shown his predictions to withstand the test of time. Importantly, to other scientists, Jim has been a model – showing how to navigate a world where speaking truth about climate change guarantees vitriolic attack.

 

Someone who knows these attacks firsthand, Mike Mann says,

 

 

Jim has been an inspiration and a role model for me. As I discuss in my book 'The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars', Jim and a handful of scientists like Stephen Schneider helped pave the way for other scientists who would find themselves under attack simply because their findings and conclusions were inconvenient to powerful vested interests.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/apr/29/climate-scientist-james-hansen-legacy

 

And the best accolade of all from Mark Morano whose contact with reality is on a par with David Icke.

 

http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/04/01/nasas-james-hansen-to-retire-marc-morano-statement-celebrate-its-a-happy-day-for-science-hansens-sad-legacy-will-serve-as-a-cautionary-tale-for-future-scientists-hansen-ch/

Edited December 30, 2013 by knocker

[Gray-Wolf]

"Hansen, echoing work by other scientists, said that in five to 10 years, the Arctic will be free of sea ice in the summer."

 

This is taken from;

 

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/2008-06-23-1642922053_x.htm

 

That has been linked to in the other thread.

 

5 to 10 years? Written in 2008? Do correct me but is that from 2013 to 2018?

 

I've already committed to a pre 2020 date for our first ice free summer, with the 2017 possible return of the 'perfect melt storm' cycle being my current favourite, and post this winters AGU I find myself in increasingly esteemed company?.

[knocker]

The denial tango 2014:

 

[knocker]

Climate Change Misinformer Of The Year: The Daily Mail

 

The United Kingdom tabloid the Daily Mail could be dubbed "the Fox News of the Internet." It has a huge audience, a conservative slant and has a blatant disregard for the facts. The paper wields huge power in the UK, and with its website plotting a U.S. expansion and reportedly receiving about 154 million global unique browsers each month, it is increasingly gaining that traction in the U.S. as well.

 

http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/12/30/climate-change-misinformer-of-the-year-the-dail/197340

[Gray-Wolf]

The denial tango 2014:

 

 

I wish you could 'double like!!!'

[Gray-Wolf]

http://news.imau.nl/?p=1056

 

The above links to a newsletter from institute for marine and Atmospheric research in Utrecht. Nothing of too much not but then this 'P.S.'

 

"Based on anomalously low sea surface temperatures in the southwestern Indian Ocean north of Madagascar (see http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/index.shtml), I predict the evolution of a big El Niño in the Pacific that will peak around January 2015. We have an ongoing fight to get our analysis published. Predicting El Niño more then 1.5 yr in advance is considered as controversial. The 2015 El Niño will prove we are right…."

 

I think we've linked to research for long range ENSO forecasting before but this is the first mention of the upcoming 'Large Nino' (Super nino?). 

 

I have been asking whether we should be expecting a big Nino so as to shift out some of the heat the nina's put in the surface waters and the latest monthly ENSO report ( equal chance of neutral nino for summer 2014) hints at the move toward a forming Nino? Will this be a longer lasting event than the one that we saw in 2010 and how will global temps respond to it (2010 tied with the 98' 'Super nino' even though it was a very short lived event so what will a 'large Nino' bring us???)?

 

With the past 12 months global temps already being so high ( whilst in neutral) should we expect even more from the next 12 months with neutral moving into Nino?

 

EDIT:So how does this play out in terms of summer sea ice min in the Arctic in 2015? If we see peak global temps, from jan 2015 ,will this introduce more melting across the basin setting up the ice for the return of the 'perfect melt storm' synoptics ( earliest return 2017)? 

 

And what of the warmth in the other oceans? Will the extremes of a 'Strong Nino' year allow us to harvest some of that heat back into the atmosphere?

 

Though they rely upon the Super Nino of 98' for their 'cooling' rants I bet they insist that the record temps ,driven by this upcoming 'Large Nino' ,are removed from the series as they are 'ENSO driven'!!!

 

EDIT: Just found this at 'wood for trees'

 

http://woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1930/mean:120/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1930/normalise/mean:120/plot/jisao-pdo/normalise/from:1962/to:1983/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/normalise/from:1983/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/normalise/from:1939/to:1962/trend

 

Seems to suggest we are at the end of a 30yr PDO-ve???

 

Anyone care to take a look and see how they find the data? If it is as convincing to you as I find it then the upcoming Nino may well be signaling the switch back to the next positive 30yrs? 

Edited January 1, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[knocker]

On this quite depressing days looking for something to bring a smile. Strangely on this first day of the new year, when Colorado became the first place to allow legal marijuana sales to anyone over the age of 21 jogged a memory. I did find this a tad odd at the time.

 

Dr. Robert G. Brown, Duke University (elevated from a comment) AKA rgbatduke is today arguing that the greenhouse effect isn't real because marijuana is thought to have medicinal properties.  Or something like that.If you can't follow his argument, then you're not inhaling deeply enough.  Pass the joint.

 

Credit Torben Hansen

 

[Gray-Wolf]

Ah! Indian Ocean Dipole anom has a link to ENSO so the cool sst's off madagascar may well indicate ENSO phase in the offing? 

 

Like the paper on pot though! Who'da thunk I'd find something on WUWT so interesting? Maybe if some off their posters start to partake we'll see a differing slant emerge than the normal Rep redneck gibberish ( and far more entertaining!). We can only hope that both the medical usage ,and eventually, recreational usage will return to Europe now the U.S. is beginning to loosen it's grip on Mary J.?

 

Mary Jane is an excellent biomass resource, high grade oil producer, medical applications, paper manufacture, fiber for cloth, and fixes nitrogen into the soil via nodules on the roots. I'd live downwind from a pot biomass power station chimney any day ( if I would then be able to remember the day???).

[mikeworst]

That explains a few things.

[Gray-Wolf]

Indeed Mike! I think regular ingestion of Pot would give me the same 'couldn't care less about what science is telling us' attitude as it appears to me that others on this board have? It might even drive me into paranoid phases where I see some grand conspiracy on behalf of the science to delude the masses merely to keep their paychecks coming in!

 

As it is I'm stuck expecting us to face a Nino pretty soon and , with the last one of 2010 being so short in duration and yet able to drive global temps up to levels it took a long 'super Nino to do , I'm expecting a doozy!

 

We have the nina's run of temps to purge from the Enso ocean areas but then we also have a lot of ocean heat in the rest of the world oceans that could find release under strong Nino forcings? ( well it's kept on just being absorbed over the Nada/Nina years so would it make sense to expect the reverse under Nino conditions?).

 

Anyhows it's on our doorsteps now so when you see the ENSO monthly update begin to favour Nino conditions (beginning late spring/early summer?) you know that you'll either see my fears confirmed or blown away?

 

By that time we'll be entering another Arctic melt season and so can also focus on how well the 'recovery' is progressing?

 

To me I'm suddenly quite concerned that the worries I've voiced over the past 7 or 8 years here are now just about to explode in front of us and we are about to witness an extreme decade of weather weirding as the Arctic rapidly goes ice free and the climate system adjusts to the energy flooding into the system. Whether 'natural forcings' swing toward augmenting this warming or not we will see nasty changes to our world. In my mind the next twelve months are the entrance into this period of change so not long for my detractors to wait until it's open season on GrayWolf now is it?

Edited January 1, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[knocker]

Nations jockey for Arctic position, US not in lead

 

WASHINGTON — The U.S. is racing to keep pace with stepped-up activity in the once sleepy Arctic frontier, but it is far from being in the lead.

 

Nations across the world are hurrying to stake claims to the Arctic’s resources, which might be home to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30 percent of its untapped natural gas. There are emerging fisheries and hidden minerals. Cruise liners loaded with tourists are sailing the Arctic’s frigid waters in increasing numbers. Cargo traffic along the Northern Sea Route, one of two shortcuts across the top of the Earth in summer, is on the rise.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nations-vie-for-clout-in-arctic-us-far-from-lead/2014/01/01/44cccb18-72bd-11e3-bc6b-712d770c3715_story.html

[knocker]

Anyhows it's on our doorsteps now so when you see the ENSO monthly update begin to favour Nino conditions (beginning late spring/early summer?) you know that you'll either see my fears confirmed or blown away?

 

 

Perhaps a little later maybe GW.

 

ENSO-neutral state persists

 

Issued on Thursday 2 January 2014

 

The tropical Pacific has remained neutral with respect to the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) since mid-2012. All the main ENSO indicators remain well within neutral bounds; for example, sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific are very close to their long-term average.

 

International climate models surveyed by the Bureau of Meteorology indicate the persistence of this neutral ENSO phase through at least the austral autumn. This would then mean the tropical Pacific would have been neutral (i.e. in neither El Niño nor La Niña territory) for approximately two years.

 

The Indian Ocean Dipole is currently neutral. It typically does not influence the Australian climate during the months from December to April.

 

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi Knocks!

 

I was going off;

 

The CFS.v2 ensemble mean (black dashed 

line) predicts ENSO-neutral through the N.H. 

spring 2014 followed by El Niño during 

summer 2014. 

 

from:  http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf

 

I can't recall really but isn't it generally spring that gives us the best indicators for what's ahead in terms of upcoming cycles?

 

We seem to have been on the verge of developing a Nino for the past couple of years but it's doggedly stayed Neutral. after the run of Nina's , and long ones at that, we must be due a Nino phase!

 

It really has thrown me reading that long range prediction for a 'long Nino' as I've been referring back to that 'statement/comment' back in 05'(ish) about the current period of cooler global temps ending around 2015 probably with a 'Super Nino'  which would then return us to warming at a greater rate than the past surge.

 

​That was before we had seen the Arctic crash ( and it was not 'expected' back then?) or before we saw so much heat being taken down into the oceans? I'd mooted that the Asian energy boom would be causing a similar amount of global dimming to our own 'dimmed period' and that maybe it's reduction would allow more intense warming but now,with the stored heat ( in the oceans) and the Albedo flip across the north the potential to see even faster warming rates ( aided and abetted by the extra GHG forcings that have gone up since 05'?) ,once natural cycles flip to warm again, must be there? 

 

If we've also not been so clever spotting PDO phase changes, and it flipped before my 98' date, then we may well be on the verge of seeing it flip back positive again?

 

I'm concerned that the past decadal temperature surges, that we see in the paleo record, are similar to what we have in store for us over the next decade or so with global temps putting on a similar amount than we have already seen since warming commenced over this short period? To me this means the loss of the Arctic and the unleashing of the massive changes that this must drive. It means breaching the 2c 'safe' limit and it means entering into a period where weather weirding impacts all of us via crop disruption and water issues. This , in it's turn drives global financial market instability and..... well we all know the rest.

[knocker]

Hi GW

 

Spotting PDO changes is outside my remit except to say it would appear entirely possible we are near a negative/positive transition. A brief look at the PDO may be useful.

 

 

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is often described as a long-lived El Niño-like pattern of Pacific climate variability (Zhang et al. 1997). As seen with the better-known El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), extremes in the PDO pattern are marked by widespread variations in the Pacific Basin and the North American climate. In parallel with the ENSO phenomenon, the extreme phases of the PDO have been classified as being either warm or cool, as defined by ocean temperature anomalies in the northeast and tropical Pacific Ocean. When SSTs are anomalously cool in the interior North Pacific and warm along the Pacific Coast, and when sea level pressures are below average over the North Pacific, the PDO has a positive value. When the climate anomaly patterns are reversed, with warm SST anomalies in the interior and cool SST anomalies along the North American coast, or above average sea level pressures over the North Pacific, the PDO has a negative value (Courtesy of Mantua, 1999).

The NCDC PDO index is based on NOAA's extended reconstruction of SSTs (ERSST Version 3). It is constructed by regressing the ERSST anomalies against the Mantua PDO index for their overlap period, to compute a PDO regression map for the North Pacific ERSST anomalies. The ERSST anomalies are then projected onto that map to compute the NCDC index. The NCDC PDO index closely follows the Mantua PDO index.

 

 

[Gray-Wolf]

Whilst the PDO-ve serves those wishing to dispute AGW's impacts I think we will not see a reasoned debate? It appears , to me, as though the longer they can keep us under negative natural forcings the better it is for them ( as these will mask AGW forced temp gains) as it is the chance of them accepting a 98' start to the PDO-ve phase is near zero ( preferring the late noughties date as this promises them longer under subdued temps?) so anything that shows us nearing the end of this phase ( when they dream of another 15 years under it's influence) would be impossible to debate. Sadly this is not merely a debate ( for me at least?) as any change back to augmented warming brings real trouble for millions of people.

 

To me I see us as sitting on the edge of one of the greatest climate flips that humanity has seen in over 12,000yrs with the prospects of sudden Arctic Ice collapse throwing us into a period of weather weirding and rapid warming ( whatever the PDO phase!)that we have not seen since the Younger Dryas ended. The climate stability that allowed civilisation to flourish will be gone in a decade or less and, worryingly for me, the upcoming El Nino may well prove to be the trigger for these changes to commence?

 

To date I have not been allowed to debate the impacts of a seasonal Arctic with posters from the other thread, they appear content to deny that the changes in the Arctic Basin over the past two decades and declare that they are nothing to fret over? Sadly the flip to seasonal will take just 1 melt season. a period of just 5 months, to throw the global climate into chaos from which it will not settle until nature balances itself to a world with a seasonal Arctic ice cover. Should such a change have occurred under 'natural forcings' the changes would have been bad enough, with the peturbations to the global climate cycle such a change demands, but when mankind has already committed so much carbon into that system already? Well who can tell? What you can tell is that the type of global climate that allowed mankind to prosper will no longer be there.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

#poisonedweatherâ„¢

 

I'm not following Four? what does 'poisoned weather' even mean? Is this some reference to China's smog issues?

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

Nice to observe the alarmist tactics of whipping up hatred against anyone or any group which presents a more balanced view.It's all such standard activist fodder though any field -  from badgers to fracking and even local planning issues.Once you have their measure you can read the tactics like a book - it's all so naïve and formulaic.Maybe it worked quite well in the 1960s. I'm not sure it is an a calculated program from our regular posters but they think it's all for  #TheCauseâ„¢ to regurgitate the bile spewed from the hate blogs elsewhere.All jolly interesting stuff.

 and what is that all about? 

 

Has anyone one seen any 'whipping up hatred' around here ( I take it that it is this house that is being criticised?)? Anyone seen any 'activists' posting here ( active in what?) Anyone know of any 'Cause' being followed?

 

I can only suspect that Four is referring to the general positions we see folk take in the debate over whether what science, as a whole, is telling us to expect over the coming years ( and breaking it down into prospective scenarios if we do nowt to halt it, do a bit to halt it ,do all we can to halt it) and what Fossil fuel funded Misleader sites are peddling?

 

Now , unless I've got it all wrong, science is telling us to expect big bad trouble across the world should we fail to act and the Misleaders are telling us a mix of "They don't know what they're talking about" and " it's all a plot to support science/Big Govt./Commie greeny tree huggers"?

 

" Bile spewed from Hate Blogs"? Hate Blogs? Anyone care to name any "hate Blogs" not aligned to racist organisations that is ( which I'm sure we all equally condemn?).

 

I'm totally lost as to what the heck Four can be on about really?

 

What about climate science science then? Do we find climate science filled with hate? Again I must be getting it all confuzzled as the only emotion I come away with on reading the latest offering from the researchers is 'Fear'? I do not find myself all 'pumped' and looking for a victim to persecute...... I just look around and see all the victims of the changes we are told to expect......including myself.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[Devonian]

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-47#entry2881793

 

 Get a grip man! There ARE NOT reds under every bed...

[Devonian]

#poisonedweatherâ„¢

 

Wrong thread. I can stick to one thread, I'm sure you can.

[Gray-Wolf]

I think it's a squirrel Dev ( probably a Red one?)......... I take it you've seen the November global temp...........

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[knocker]

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-47#entry2882172
 

Ah

 

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/01/02/december-31-global-sea-ice-area-both-arctic-antarctic-ice-combined-was-the-largest-ever-recorded-for-the-date/

 

Well

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/arctic-antarctic-sea-ice.htm

[Gray-Wolf]

But that would mean that one of those posts is misleading Knocks? I know which I'd tend to believe though!

 

Maybe i need look at the CT 'tale of the tape;

 

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/sea.ice.anomaly.timeseries.jpg

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[Devonian]

More mistruths. The image is from Tamino, dated 2011 (according to the date at the top of the blog) - not up to date at all.

 

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/monckton-skewers-truth/

 

Still it exposes those who pretend that they're critical of the information they get on here - and shamefully exposes their failure to critically appraise data that confirms their bias. So, indeed, very helpful!

 

I think you'll find that it's Knocker's post that is misleading. Funny you didn't spot that.

 

S, if you're going to set yourself up as a honest broker (and you do, because of posts like the above and because you post to both threads) be seen do that would be my advice - http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-47#entry2879114 from 2010....

Edited January 3, 2014 by Devonian

[VillagePlank]

Yes, yes, Devonian. There was a little bit of schadenfreude involved. Just getting it in before the uptick in the natural variation of global temperatures returns the favour

Edited January 3, 2014 by Sparkicle