Register to Comment
Page 3349 of 6553 FirstFirst ... 234928493249329933393347334833493350335133593399344938494349 ... LastLast
Results 33,481 to 33,490 of 65530
Like Tree13903Likes
  1. #33481
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    38,196

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnotologist View Post
    First time I have seen the problems with satellite measurement spelled out. Not that it matters for this interesting development.
    Of course, we should not get prematurely credulous over the Cowtan & Way paper, it will I am sure be avidly read and critiqued by an army of scientists, including some whose work it throws into some disarray.

    For example:

    • Estimates of climate sensitivity based on the recent past will have to be revisited, like the Otto et al paper. The discrepancy between estimates from current climate and the paleoclimate may be explained.
    • Apparently, the climate models are more accurate than expected. The climate modellers, at least, will be smiling. Or will they?
    • Work that ascribed the "pause/ slowdown/ hiatus" to various factors - volcanoes, CFCs, El Nino's, ocean warming will have to be revisited.


    I am sure there are plenty of scientists out there whose emotions are running a gamut from excitement at the novelty to annoyance that they have to revisit old work in the light of new findings (probably both!). But, hey lads, that is science.

    A year or 6 months to get it all sorted out. I hope there are discussions at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, coming up soon.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #33482
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    38,196

    The "cosmic ray" theory of global warming gets another whack ...

    According to a paper, if the "cosmic ray origin" theory of global warming (by modulating the amount of cloud in the atmosphere) was true, the planet would be cooling not warming.

    A review of the relevance of the ‘CLOUD’ results and other recent observations to the possible effect of cosmic rays on the terrestrial climate

    A. D. Erlykin,
    T. Sloan,
    A. W. Wolfendale


    The problem of the contribution of cosmic rays to climate change is a continuing one and one of importance. In principle, at least, the recent results from the CLOUD project at CERN provide information about the role of ionizing particles in ’sensitizing’ atmospheric aerosols which might, later, give rise to cloud droplets.

    Our analysis shows that, although important in cloud physics the results do not lead to the conclusion that cosmic rays affect atmospheric clouds significantly, at least if H2SO4 is the dominant source of aerosols in the atmosphere.

    An analysis of the very recent studies of stratospheric aerosol changes following a giant solar energetic particles event shows a similar negligible effect.

    Recent measurements of the cosmic ray intensity show that a former decrease with time has been reversed.

    Thus, even if cosmic rays enhanced cloud production, there would be a small global cooling, not warming.


    A review of the relevance of the
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #33483
    Trainwreck Trainwreck is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    20,290

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    Two researchers have just published a paper using satellite data to estimate a hybrid temperature (adjacent ground && satellite) where there are no ground stations. Formerly these areas (like the Arctic) were ignored by HADCRUT. GISS used adjacent temperatures, which were not satisfactory.

    With the hybrid measurement, the "hiatus" so popular in the media, disappears.

    Here is a video explanation.


    Some interesting posts:

    Temperature trend over last 15 years is twice as large as previously thought

    The Disappearing Hiatus | Planet3.0

    RealClimate: Global Warming Since 1997 Underestimated by Half


    Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series and its impact on recent temperature trends - Cowtan - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society - Wiley Online Library

    I presume out of the combined satellite and ground station method we will see a more accurate temperature series since 1980 and a more accurate assessment of the rise due to global warming.
    OK, let's get this straight.


    They worry about the lack of coverage of surfaced based estimates so they "fill the gaps" with the satellite data and chango-presto they get a warmer trend over the last 15 years.


    What doesn't pass even my most basic sniff test is that the satellite data - in total - show an even smaller trend than HadCRUT or GISSS or any of the fudgy NDCC based temprature series.

    In fact, the RSS series has a NEGATIVE (but not statisticall significant) trend over the last 15 years.


    Talk about data manipulation.


    Let's put it this way. If RealClimate and the rest of the Alarmist industry are concerned that the station based temperature series have some material problems due to lack of coverage, let's just focus instead on the satellitwe measures - RSS and UAH.

    One show small positive trend, one show small negative trend. The most logical conclusion - no temeprature increase in the last 15 years.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #33484
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840



    Alexandra's Activit
    y
    Basic Information


    Statistics

    Total Posts

    Total Posts 0 Posts Per Day 0
    General Information

    Last Activity Yesterday 06:39 PM Join Date 1st September 2013



    Quote Originally Posted by Aggrotologist View Post
    Alexandra likes this.
    You're a very sad person, Aggy, with only Odious and an imaginary friend to like your posts.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #33485
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    Quote Originally Posted by Aggrotologist View Post
    It can also be argued that Eugenics might not have been such a bad idea after all. We would have been spared the crap that is being posted today!
    From the guy who calls me a callous racist, LOL.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #33486
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    38,196

    The slowed warming of average global surface temperature is not as significant as previously believed

    The "filling in" performed by Cowtan & Way on global temperature since 1979, using a hybrid method of satellite and ground stations. There is a certain irony in that they use Dr Roy Spencer's UAH temperature series for the satellite data.


    Global warming since 1997 more than twice as fast as previously estimated, new study shows

    These results indicate that the slowed warming of average global surface temperature is not as significant as previously believed.

    • Surface warming has slowed somewhat, in large part due to more overall global warming being transferred to the oceans over the past decade. However, these sorts of temporary surface warming slowdowns (and speed-ups) occur on a regular basis due to short-term natural influences.
    • The results of this study also have bearing on some recent research. For example, correcting for the recent cool bias indicates that global surface temperatures are not as far from the average of climate model projections as we previously thought, and certainly fall within the range of individual climate model temperature simulations.
    • Recent studies that concluded the global climate is a bit less sensitive to the increased greenhouse effect than previously believed may also have somewhat underestimated the actual climate sensitivity.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #33487
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    Thanks for including those.

    I do aspire to a higher class of insult on this thread.

    Deniers dish it out, too, but can't take it.
    Can you quote any "insult" dished out to you or Aggy?

    No?

    Thought not, because it's one way traffic.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #33488
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    Quote Originally Posted by Aggrotologist View Post
    You need a reality check. You should also learn to put context.

    And I do, indeed, equate those in power who will not act on climate change with the worst killers in history. The toll will be greater.
    Comments like that add to the proof that you are a seriously disturbed individual.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #33489
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    Quote Originally Posted by Trainwreck View Post
    OK, let's get this straight.


    They worry about the lack of coverage of surfaced based estimates so they "fill the gaps" with the satellite data and chango-presto they get a warmer trend over the last 15 years.


    What doesn't pass even my most basic sniff test is that the satellite data - in total - show an even smaller trend than HadCRUT or GISS or any of the fudgy NDCC based temperature series.

    In fact, the RSS series has a NEGATIVE (but not statistical significant) trend over the last 15 years.


    Talk about data manipulation.


    Let's put it this way. If RealClimate and the rest of the Alarmist industry are concerned that the station based temperature series have some material problems due to lack of coverage, let's just focus instead on the satellite measures - RSS and UAH.

    One show small positive trend, one show small negative trend. The most logical conclusion - no temperature increase in the last 15 years.
    It's called inventiveness.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #33490
    Trainwreck Trainwreck is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    20,290

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnotologist View Post
    It can also be argued that Eugenics might not have been such a bad idea after all. We would have been spared the crap that is being posted today!
    What makes you believe that you would have survived such a genetic purge and not valamhic?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment