Climate Change - The Scientific Debate (Vol. II)
Discussion
Gadgetmac said:
Oh, quick update.
The WMO have just released a statement saying that 2019 had this far (Jan to Oct) been the second hottest on record.
Start spinning it into something else guys before the full years data comes in.
From here, my bold:The WMO have just released a statement saying that 2019 had this far (Jan to Oct) been the second hottest on record.
Start spinning it into something else guys before the full years data comes in.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/03/uk-wea...
"This year [2018] was the hottest summer on record for England, with average temperatures narrowly beating those seen in 1976.
But despite the weeks-long heatwaves, 2018 was only the joint-hottest summer on record for the UK as a whole, the Met Office has said.
UK temperatures for June to August 2018 reveal that this year is top of the league table in records dating back to 1910, along with 2006, 2003 and 1976, all of which are within 0.03C of each other.
To the nearest 0.1C, all four years - 2018, 2006, 2003 and 1976 - saw an average temperature for the summer of 15.8C (60.4F)."
So those temps are within 0.03C of each other (3 hundredths of a degree centigrade) so basically all the same yet in the Papers we get HOTTEST EVER YEARS
do you agree that is simple scaremongering with the sole purpose to sell those Papers? Yet at the same time all the "already scared people" get more scared ... TX.
Terminator X said:
Gadgetmac said:
Oh, quick update.
The WMO have just released a statement saying that 2019 had this far (Jan to Oct) been the second hottest on record.
Start spinning it into something else guys before the full years data comes in.
From here, my bold:The WMO have just released a statement saying that 2019 had this far (Jan to Oct) been the second hottest on record.
Start spinning it into something else guys before the full years data comes in.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/03/uk-wea...
"This year [2018] was the hottest summer on record for England, with average temperatures narrowly beating those seen in 1976.
But despite the weeks-long heatwaves, 2018 was only the joint-hottest summer on record for the UK as a whole, the Met Office has said.
UK temperatures for June to August 2018 reveal that this year is top of the league table in records dating back to 1910, along with 2006, 2003 and 1976, all of which are within 0.03C of each other.
To the nearest 0.1C, all four years - 2018, 2006, 2003 and 1976 - saw an average temperature for the summer of 15.8C (60.4F)."
So those temps are within 0.03C of each other (3 hundredths of a degree centigrade) so basically all the same yet in the Papers we get HOTTEST EVER YEARS
do you agree that is simple scaremongering with the sole purpose to sell those Papers? Yet at the same time all the "already scared people" get more scared ... TX.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office...
Can't fault the Telegrah here, but as an aside I think it's often pointless getting worked up about headlines which are written by anonymous sub-editors (so you can't even blame the journo who wrote the copy) who are indeed trying to sell newspapers/ get mouse-clicks etc (but obviously some are worse offenders than others when it comes to 'interpretive headlines')
Edited by kerplunk on Thursday 5th December 16:38
Jinx said:
Thanks, seem to recall reading that before. Two things to takeaway - the 'pause' being due to La Nina dominance in the pacific, which is what I said at the time (go me).
Reduced confidence for model runs with high sensitivity which would be good-ish news.
kerplunk said:
Jinx said:
Thanks, seem to recall reading that before. Two things to takeaway - the 'pause' being due to La Nina dominance in the pacific, which is what I said at the time (go me).
Reduced confidence for model runs with high sensitivity which would be good-ish news.
Jinx said:
hairykrishna said:
The Guardian doesn't seem to link it so here's the paper;
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10...
Is the full paper available for free anywhere? - and two of the links in the supporting documentation are broken (all the old model data). I'm interested as this paper contradicts other papers showing how the models have failed even taking into account the actual CO2 pathway.https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10...
Geophysical Research Letters banner
Research Letter
Evaluating the performance of past climate model projections
Zeke Hausfather Henri F. Drake Tristan Abbott Gavin A. Schmidt
First published: 04 December 2019 https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085378
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1029/2019GL085378
I see Gavin A. Schmidt is one of the authors.
I'm sure that will get some hackles up on how neutral this is
If climate models are so good over the last so many years how come they don't even seem to be able to take into effect the worlds biggest cold store / albedo effect ?
https://skepticalscience.com/interview-gavin-schmi...
From 2015
CB: Antarctic sea-ice has shown some quite unusual behaviour this year, tracking quite high for the first half and now dropping below average. Is that El Niño, or is there something else going on there?
GS: So, there is an El Niño response in Arctic sea ice. We’ve set up a kind of dipole pattern upon either side of the Antarctic peninsula, and we’re already seeing a weird pattern there because of the way that the ozone hole and the winds associated with the changes in the ozone have projected on to the sea ice as well. I think the key in the Antarctic is that there’s a lot of internal variability that we don’t have a great handle on. I mean if you look at the simulations of Antarctic sea ice they’re not very good. And so our ability to attribute changes in the sea-ice component of Antarctica is actually quite poor. So we’ve seen, you know, years that have been quite high, years that have been again below average, but the overall trends are much smaller and less significant than the ones in the Arctic. And, actually, that is predicted. It is predicted that the northern hemisphere and the northern pole region is going to respond faster than the south, basically, because there’s more land in the Arctic higher latitudes than there is in the Antarctic.
But given all that the model are pretty good !
Hmmm
https://skepticalscience.com/interview-gavin-schmi...
From 2015
CB: Antarctic sea-ice has shown some quite unusual behaviour this year, tracking quite high for the first half and now dropping below average. Is that El Niño, or is there something else going on there?
GS: So, there is an El Niño response in Arctic sea ice. We’ve set up a kind of dipole pattern upon either side of the Antarctic peninsula, and we’re already seeing a weird pattern there because of the way that the ozone hole and the winds associated with the changes in the ozone have projected on to the sea ice as well. I think the key in the Antarctic is that there’s a lot of internal variability that we don’t have a great handle on. I mean if you look at the simulations of Antarctic sea ice they’re not very good. And so our ability to attribute changes in the sea-ice component of Antarctica is actually quite poor. So we’ve seen, you know, years that have been quite high, years that have been again below average, but the overall trends are much smaller and less significant than the ones in the Arctic. And, actually, that is predicted. It is predicted that the northern hemisphere and the northern pole region is going to respond faster than the south, basically, because there’s more land in the Arctic higher latitudes than there is in the Antarctic.
But given all that the model are pretty good !
Hmmm
hairykrishna said:
kerplunk said:
Jinx said:
Thanks, seem to recall reading that before. Two things to takeaway - the 'pause' being due to La Nina dominance in the pacific, which is what I said at the time (go me).
Reduced confidence for model runs with high sensitivity which would be good-ish news.
Gandahar said:
Note that the huge drop in Antarctic sea ice in 2015 from satellite historic highs was later decided to be due to the South Atlantic Modulation. Then it turned out not to be, so the change in sea ice extent so rapidly is still unknown.
How does the 'recently' found geothermal heat affect this? - particularly for the Western ice sheet...jshell said:
Gandahar said:
Note that the huge drop in Antarctic sea ice in 2015 from satellite historic highs was later decided to be due to the South Atlantic Modulation. Then it turned out not to be, so the change in sea ice extent so rapidly is still unknown.
How does the 'recently' found geothermal heat affect this? - particularly for the Western ice sheet...jshell said:
Gandahar said:
Note that the huge drop in Antarctic sea ice in 2015 from satellite historic highs was later decided to be due to the South Atlantic Modulation. Then it turned out not to be, so the change in sea ice extent so rapidly is still unknown.
How does the 'recently' found geothermal heat affect this? - particularly for the Western ice sheet...As you know I love my arctic and Antarctic bell weathers of climate change. Or lack of it. Or just proving a point to the brainbox of that guy who needs a hammer to the head.
So.... this is why this is rather nice to extend that satellite record back from good old 1979 or so..
https://nsidc.org/about/monthlyhighlights/2013/04/...
So.... this is why this is rather nice to extend that satellite record back from good old 1979 or so..
https://nsidc.org/about/monthlyhighlights/2013/04/...
And getting on for a century later both amount of sea ice in the Antarctic and Arctic is at all time lows since then.
why? Well there is still no link to AGW but it's well worth keeping an eye on.
Perhaps Greta needs to get down there, or up there, pronto, give it some sort of newspaper worthy and to please me and my hobby .....
why? Well there is still no link to AGW but it's well worth keeping an eye on.
Perhaps Greta needs to get down there, or up there, pronto, give it some sort of newspaper worthy and to please me and my hobby .....
Edited by Gandahar on Monday 9th December 23:13
Chester35 said:
jshell said:
Gandahar said:
Note that the huge drop in Antarctic sea ice in 2015 from satellite historic highs was later decided to be due to the South Atlantic Modulation. Then it turned out not to be, so the change in sea ice extent so rapidly is still unknown.
How does the 'recently' found geothermal heat affect this? - particularly for the Western ice sheet...Gandahar said:
jshell said:
Gandahar said:
Note that the huge drop in Antarctic sea ice in 2015 from satellite historic highs was later decided to be due to the South Atlantic Modulation. Then it turned out not to be, so the change in sea ice extent so rapidly is still unknown.
How does the 'recently' found geothermal heat affect this? - particularly for the Western ice sheet...Some may find this fairly short video interesting and thought provoking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6tbyM8H60w
Energy numbers related to Global Warming and whether people think about them correctly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6tbyM8H60w
Energy numbers related to Global Warming and whether people think about them correctly.
Busy few days, not been able to keep up with things. Has the apocalypse happened?
Japs don't think so- https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/27/more-real-data...
For anyone interested in the debacle on that other thread between me and another person, I spoke to the author of the paper regarding 11602 papers which gave a 100% consensus. He didn't agree with me at all. He had no issue with papers having no mention of climate or global warming within them, because the authors of those papers 'obviously implied it', and because it came up within his search, he took it at face value.
The word 'climate' now only means anthropogenic climate change.
Japs don't think so- https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/27/more-real-data...
For anyone interested in the debacle on that other thread between me and another person, I spoke to the author of the paper regarding 11602 papers which gave a 100% consensus. He didn't agree with me at all. He had no issue with papers having no mention of climate or global warming within them, because the authors of those papers 'obviously implied it', and because it came up within his search, he took it at face value.
The word 'climate' now only means anthropogenic climate change.
jshell said:
Chester35 said:
jshell said:
Gandahar said:
Note that the huge drop in Antarctic sea ice in 2015 from satellite historic highs was later decided to be due to the South Atlantic Modulation. Then it turned out not to be, so the change in sea ice extent so rapidly is still unknown.
How does the 'recently' found geothermal heat affect this? - particularly for the Western ice sheet...stew-STR160 said:
Busy few days, not been able to keep up with things. Has the apocalypse happened?
Japs don't think so- https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/27/more-real-data...
For anyone interested in the debacle on that other thread between me and another person, I spoke to the author of the paper regarding 11602 papers which gave a 100% consensus. He didn't agree with me at all. He had no issue with papers having no mention of climate or global warming within them, because the authors of those papers 'obviously implied it', and because it came up within his search, he took it at face value.
The word 'climate' now only means anthropogenic climate change.
I wouldn't link to NotricksZone on the scientific thread if I were you as they are a bogus site fit for nothing scientifc. Ok on the political thread. They once took a Stein paper and put their own labels on his graph to show something, without talking to the original author.Japs don't think so- https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/27/more-real-data...
For anyone interested in the debacle on that other thread between me and another person, I spoke to the author of the paper regarding 11602 papers which gave a 100% consensus. He didn't agree with me at all. He had no issue with papers having no mention of climate or global warming within them, because the authors of those papers 'obviously implied it', and because it came up within his search, he took it at face value.
The word 'climate' now only means anthropogenic climate change.
Notrickszone actually is lots of tricks and bias.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff