-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
What's really warming the world?
- Thread starter ALiberalModerate
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
And solar forcing has reduced over the last century, which should have triggered cooling. By every known natural forcing mechanism, we should be in a cooling trend, not a warming trend. The only way the current warming trend has been explained is through anthropogenic means.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Wrong. The sun was quite active in the 20th century.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Really? We are right now at some of the lowest levels on record, yet we are still quite warm:
In recent years temperatures and solar irradiance has diverged by quite a lot:
catch22
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2015
- Messages
- 363
- Reaction score
- 182
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Id say it's the flaming hot pile of bull**** know as politicians
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2012
- Messages
- 66,500
- Reaction score
- 22,159
- Location
- Portlandia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2012
- Messages
- 66,500
- Reaction score
- 22,159
- Location
- Portlandia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Not true.
If you are speaking of 1900 to 2000, then the TSI changed from 1360.8 to 1361.3 W/m^2 using an 11 year running average and using the data accepted from the site using SORCE and it's accepted reconstruction. It's 1360.5 and 1361.6 for 1900 and 2000.
http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/sorce/files/2011/09/TSI_TIM_Reconstruction.txt
I would like to see your information that show a decline.
Link please.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I worded that poorly. I only went with the time we had actual instrument data which is 1975 to the present. Prior to that is proxy data. See post: http://www.debatepolitics.com/envir...ts-really-warming-world-6.html#post1064771197
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2012
- Messages
- 66,500
- Reaction score
- 22,159
- Location
- Portlandia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Really? We are right now at some of the lowest levels on record, yet we are still quite warm:
In recent years temperatures and solar irradiance has diverged by quite a lot:
View attachment 67186475
Hansen claims ocean/atmospheric equalization coupling of 70% for 100 years. If we apply solar and use this 100 years, we get this:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 16,501
- Reaction score
- 3,829
- Location
- Sheffield
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Well, if it's that powerful and not smelly you have me at a disadvatage sir.
If I tried I'm sure there would be complaints.... just don't mix guinness and newcastle brown, ever.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Really? We are right now at some of the lowest levels on record, yet we are still quite warm:
In recent years temperatures and solar irradiance has diverged by quite a lot:
View attachment 67186475
Yes indeed. And as solar activity subsided in the 21st century we have The Pause.
[h=1]Recent paper finds 1950-2009 Solar Grand Maximum was a ‘rare or even unique event’ in 3,000 years[/h] Sun said to be “bi-modal” While many, including the IPCC, suggest the modern Grand Maximum of solar activity from 1950-2009 has nothing to do with the 0.4C global warming measured over that time frame, it does seem to be unique in the last three millennia. from CO2 Science: A 3,000-Year Record of Solar Activity What…
August 6, 2014 in Climate News, Solar. [h=1]Chinese study ‘implies that the “modern maximum” of solar activity agrees well with the recent global warming’[/h] From Science China Press [h/t to Mark Sellers] Has solar activity influence on the Earth’s global warming? A recent study demonstrates the existence of significant resonance cycles and high correlations between solar activity and the Earth’s averaged surface temperature during centuries. This provides a new clue to reveal the phenomenon of global warming in recent…
June 5, 2014 in Global warming, Solar. [h=1]Paper demonstrates solar activity was at a grand maximum in the late 20th century[/h] Solar activity measured by isotope proxies revealed the end of 20th century was the highest activity in 1200 years A 2010 paper (that I somehow missed) was recently highlighted by the blog The Hockey Schtick and I thought it worth mentioning here even if a bit past the publish date. The work by Ilya G.…
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Impact of AMO/PDO on U.S. regional surface temperatures
Posted on June 30, 2015 | 50 comments
by Judith Curry
The conclusion is that the oscillatory mode (mostly due to the AMO) is significantly more important than the monotonic mode (mostly due to increasing atmospheric CO2) in explaining the 1980–2000 U.S. temperature increase. – Bruce Kurtz
Continue reading →
The failure of global climate models to simulate regional climate variability on decadal time scales suggests that the multidecadal ocean oscillations such as the AMO and PDO might play a dominant role in determining climate variability on these scales.
This issue is addressed in an interesting new paper published in PLOS One:
The Effect of Natural Multidecadal Ocean Temperature Oscillations on Contiguous U.S. Regional Temperatures
Bruce Kurtz
Abstract. Atmospheric temperature time series for the nine climate regions of the contiguous U.S. are accurately reproduced by the superposition of oscillatory modes, representing the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation (AMO) and the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO), on a monotonic mode representing, at least in part, the effect of radiant forcing due to increasing atmospheric CO2 . The relative importance of the different modes varies among the nine climate regions, grouping them into three mega-regions: Southeastern comprising the South, Southeast and Ohio Valley; Central comprising the Southwest, Upper Midwest, and Northeast; and Northwestern comprising the West, Northwest, and Northern Rockies & Plains. The defining characteristics of the megaregions are: Southeastern – dominated by the AMO, no PDO influence; Central – influenced by the AMO, no PDO influence, Northwestern – influenced by both the AMO and PDO. Temperature vs. time curves calculated by combining the separate monotonic and oscillatory modes agree well with the measured temperature time series, indicating that the 1938-1974 small decrease in contiguous U.S. temperature was caused by the superposition of the downward-trending oscillatory mode on the upward-trending monotonic mode while the 1980-2000 large increase in temperature was caused by the superposition of the upward-trending oscillatory mode on the upward-trending monotonic mode. The oscillatory mode, mostly representing the AMO, was responsible for about 72% of the entire contiguous U.S. temperature increase over that time span with the contribution varying from 86 to 42% for individual climate regions.
Published in PLOS One [link]. . . . .
Posted on June 30, 2015 | 50 comments
by Judith Curry
The conclusion is that the oscillatory mode (mostly due to the AMO) is significantly more important than the monotonic mode (mostly due to increasing atmospheric CO2) in explaining the 1980–2000 U.S. temperature increase. – Bruce Kurtz
Continue reading →
The failure of global climate models to simulate regional climate variability on decadal time scales suggests that the multidecadal ocean oscillations such as the AMO and PDO might play a dominant role in determining climate variability on these scales.
This issue is addressed in an interesting new paper published in PLOS One:
The Effect of Natural Multidecadal Ocean Temperature Oscillations on Contiguous U.S. Regional Temperatures
Bruce Kurtz
Abstract. Atmospheric temperature time series for the nine climate regions of the contiguous U.S. are accurately reproduced by the superposition of oscillatory modes, representing the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation (AMO) and the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO), on a monotonic mode representing, at least in part, the effect of radiant forcing due to increasing atmospheric CO2 . The relative importance of the different modes varies among the nine climate regions, grouping them into three mega-regions: Southeastern comprising the South, Southeast and Ohio Valley; Central comprising the Southwest, Upper Midwest, and Northeast; and Northwestern comprising the West, Northwest, and Northern Rockies & Plains. The defining characteristics of the megaregions are: Southeastern – dominated by the AMO, no PDO influence; Central – influenced by the AMO, no PDO influence, Northwestern – influenced by both the AMO and PDO. Temperature vs. time curves calculated by combining the separate monotonic and oscillatory modes agree well with the measured temperature time series, indicating that the 1938-1974 small decrease in contiguous U.S. temperature was caused by the superposition of the downward-trending oscillatory mode on the upward-trending monotonic mode while the 1980-2000 large increase in temperature was caused by the superposition of the upward-trending oscillatory mode on the upward-trending monotonic mode. The oscillatory mode, mostly representing the AMO, was responsible for about 72% of the entire contiguous U.S. temperature increase over that time span with the contribution varying from 86 to 42% for individual climate regions.
Published in PLOS One [link]. . . . .
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
[h=1]Debunking Bloomberg’s ‘alarming’ climate graph: Are we really on track for 4°C global warming by 2100?[/h] By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley David Burton has already done a wonderful deconstruction of Bloomberg’s absurd global warming attribution graph, by Eric Roston and Blacki Migliozzi, contrived from data by the notoriously unreliable NASA GISS, purporting to demonstrate that 20th-century global warming was reely ’n’ truly all caused by our sins of emission, honest it…
Continue reading →
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Except temperatures did not pause. We had our warmest year globally on record last year and this year we are on track to blow all previous years out of the water.
2014 Officially Hottest Year on Record - Scientific American
2015 Hottest Year to Date, Could Top 2014 Record | Climate Central
This is despite a reduction in solar forcing. The extent to which deniers will ignore basic thermal physics in regards to CO2 PPM and human land use changes is astounding. By the way, wattsupwiththat is quoting trash journals like CO2 Science. Due to open access (which is a good thing in and of itself), there have been numerous trash journals out there that have popped up where you can pay to publish virtually anything you want (for example when journalists published a garbage study that showed eating chocolate caused you to lose weight).
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Since you're so eager to change the subject I'll have to conclude you are conceding the point on solar activity. As for The Pause, it's unfortunate for you that you can't wish it away.
El Niño strengthens: the Pause lengthens
Global temperature update: no warming for 18 years 6 months By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley For 222 months, since December 1996, there has been no global warming at all (Fig. 1). This month’s RSS temperature – still unaffected by a slowly strengthening el Niño, which will eventually cause temporary warming – passes another six-month milestone,…
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Since you're so eager to change the subject I'll have to conclude you are conceding the point on solar activity. As for The Pause, it's unfortunate for you that you can't wish it away.
El Niño strengthens: the Pause lengthens
Global temperature update: no warming for 18 years 6 months By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley For 222 months, since December 1996, there has been no global warming at all (Fig. 1). This month’s RSS temperature – still unaffected by a slowly strengthening el Niño, which will eventually cause temporary warming – passes another six-month milestone,…
I haven't conceded the solar activity argument. We are clearly in a period of reduced solar activity and you are cherry picking one single data set that is an outlier among many to argue that we are not warming. At this point its obvious we are not going to agree.
At any rate, using RSS is misleading because it is indeed an outlier. The problem with the RSS satellites is they are older and unable to maintain stable orbits and thus becoming more and more unreliable and thus their diverge from UAH measurements in recent years. Explanation is here: Seeing the environmental forest: What is the deal with RSS?
The fact is we are not going to agree. However there is a reason why the vast majority of the scientific community agrees with my position while a small minority agrees with your position and its not some conspiracy.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
RSS is a perfectly fine dataset. But if you want UAH, you get UAH.
UAH Lower Atmosphere Temperature Anomalies – 1979 to Present
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
RSS is a perfectly fine dataset. But if you want UAH, you get UAH.
UAH Lower Atmosphere Temperature Anomalies – 1979 to Present
Unless you pick the one outlier year of 1998 as a starting point, if you draw a trend line on that graph, you will find there is no pause to our climatic warming (but rather a reduction in the rate of warming from about 2000 through 2010 or so). Moreover, if you introduced confidence variability (its 95%) then its very hard to discern any kind of trend other than a generalized warming one.
Why do you discount surface temperature measurements entirely? It is not like satellite measurements don't have to extrapolate a lot of measurements as well. They don't have universal coverage and will be biased to the areas covered by their stationary orbits just like temperature measurements are biased to where we have greater coverage of surface measurement stations.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Which is why The Pause dates from just before 1998. Satellites vs ground stations? I trust satellites more.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Well there is your problem, you trust satellites more. To quote Roy Spencer:
"One might ask, Why do the satellite data have to be adjusted at all? If we had satellite instruments that (1) had rock-stable calibration, (2) lasted for many decades without any channel failures, and (3) were carried on satellites whose orbits did not change over time, then the satellite data could be processed without adjustment. But none of these things are true. Since 1979 we have had 15 satellites that lasted various lengths of time, having slightly different calibration (requiring intercalibration between satellites), some of which drifted in their calibration, slightly different channel frequencies (and thus weighting functions), and generally on satellite platforms whose orbits drift and thus observe at somewhat different local times of day in different years. All data adjustments required to correct for these changes involve decisions regarding methodology, and different methodologies will lead to somewhat different results. This is the unavoidable situation when dealing with less than perfect data."
Version 6.0 of the UAH Temperature Dataset Released: New LT Trend = +0.11 C/decade « Roy Spencer, PhD
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Nice try. Also Spencer:
In my opinion, though, a bigger problem than the spotty sampling of the thermometer data is the endless adjustment game applied to the thermometer data. The thermometer network is made up of a patchwork of non-research quality instruments that were never made to monitor long-term temperature changes to tenths or hundredths of a degree, and the huge data voids around the world are either ignored or in-filled with fictitious data.
Furthermore, land-based thermometers are placed where people live, and people build stuff, often replacing cooling vegetation with manmade structures that cause an artificial warming (urban heat island, UHI) effect right around the thermometer. The data adjustment processes in place cannot reliably remove the UHI effect because it can’t be distinguished from real global warming.
Satellite microwave radiometers, however, are equipped with laboratory-calibrated platinum resistance thermometers, which have demonstrated stability to thousandths of a degree over many years, and which are used to continuously calibrate the satellite instruments once every 8 seconds. The satellite measurements still have residual calibration effects that must be adjusted for, but these are usually on the order of hundredths of a degree, rather than tenths or whole degrees in the case of ground-based thermometers.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 32,483
- Reaction score
- 22,731
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
And once again, why do so few of his peers agree with him? Possibly because rural temperature stations show the same trends as urban ones:
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
And once again, why do so few of his peers agree with him? Possibly because rural temperature stations show the same trends as urban ones:
You are very agile at skipping from one subject to another. If Spencer is not credible why did you cite him? Regardless, I follow Einstein's dismissal of majoritarian science: If they were right one would be enough.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2012
- Messages
- 66,500
- Reaction score
- 22,159
- Location
- Portlandia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
How convenient you forget there is only something like a 38% chance it was the warmest, and that's with all the stretching of data the alarmists can do..
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2012
- Messages
- 66,500
- Reaction score
- 22,159
- Location
- Portlandia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
I trust long standing land sites more that have not been corrected or within a mile of urban growth. Satellites have a problem seeing through the layers accurately. I also trust the old mercury thermometers better than remote semiconductor probes.
There lies a problem now. Human readings, though more accurate, are not 24/7.
If we accept the facts, there are really no accurate data to the levels of which anyone is claiming, and the signal is inside the noise range.