Stoaty
Gold Member
Posts: 4460
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:50 pm
Delivery Date: 12 Jun 2011
Leaf Number: 3871
Location: West Los Angeles

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Sat Mar 18, 2017 10:16 am

RegGuheert wrote:
Stoaty wrote:
RegGuheert wrote: Climate scientists have a ridiculously bad track record at making ANY predictions about ANYTHING. Any trust and faith put in them is horribly misguided, IMO.

Well, there is that little thing they predicted 20 years ago about global temperatures getting warmer... which has come to pass.
Yep. And they got that wrong, as well. The peak of this El Niño was the same as the peak of the El Niño in 1998.

They didn't say anything about weather, this is about climate (30 year average). However, each decade has been warmer than the last, as predicted. If you are going to cherry pick, you should do a better job of hiding it.
2011 Leaf with 62,000 miles given to Nephew
2013 Tesla Model S85 with 251 miles rated range at full charge
Leaf Spy Manual
Battery Aging Model Spreadsheet

DanCar
Posts: 909
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:00 am
Delivery Date: 10 Mar 2013
Location: SF Bay area, 94043

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Sat Mar 18, 2017 3:10 pm

Stoaty wrote:
RegGuheert wrote:
Stoaty wrote:Well, there is that little thing they predicted 20 years ago about global temperatures getting warmer... which has come to pass.
Yep. And they got that wrong, as well. The peak of this El Niño was the same as the peak of the El Niño in 1998.

They didn't say anything about weather, this is about climate (30 year average). However, each decade has been warmer than the last, as predicted. If you are going to cherry pick, you should do a better job of hiding it.
Doesn't matter if they get the prediction wrong, because they will just change it. Global warming changed to climate change. Warming changed to oh the oceans got warmer.

lorenfb
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:44 am

Modelling climate change: the role of unresolved processes
BY PAUL D. WILLIAMS
Department of Meteorology, Centre for Global Atmospheric Modelling,
University of Reading, PO Box 243, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6BB, UK
(p.d.williams@reading.ac.uk)

Our understanding of the climate system has been revolutionized recently, by the development of sophisticated computer models.
The predictions of such models are used to formulate international protocols, intended to mitigate the severity of global warming
and its impacts. Yet, these models are not perfect representations of reality, because they remove from explicit consideration
many physical processes which are known to be key aspects of the climate system, but which are too small or fast
to be modelled.
The purpose of this paper is to give a personal perspective of the current state of knowledge regarding
the problem of unresolved scales in climate models. A recent novel solution to the problem is discussed, in which it is proposed,
somewhat counter-intuitively, that the performance of models may be improved by adding random noise to represent
the unresolved processes.

1. Introduction

It is difficult to think of a more complicated physical system than Earth’s climate. Governed by a combination of the laws
of fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, radiative energy transfer and chemistry, the climate system is composed of the
atmosphere, the oceans, ice sheets and land.
Each of these four subsystems is coupled to each of the other three,
through the exchange of immense quantities of energy, momentum and matter (Peixo´to & Oort 1984). Nonlinear
interactions occur on a dizzying range of spatial and temporal scales, both within and between the subsystems,
leading to an intricate and delicate network of feedback loops. But climate modellers must not be dismayed by the
enormity of the challenge facing them, for, though it is difficult to think of a more complicated physical system,
it is equally difficult to think of one that has a greater impact on all the people of the world.

4. Discussion
A general review of the problem of unresolved scales in climate models has been presented. Important unresolved
features include ocean eddies, gravity waves, atmospheric convection, clouds and small-scale turbulence, all of which
are known to be key aspects of the climate system and yet are too small to be explicitly modelled.
The law of large
numbers and an analogy with the microscale and macroscale in fluids have served to demonstrate the inadequacy
of conventional approaches to unresolved scales. The alternative stochastic approach, proposed relatively recently,
holds that a noise-based solution may be more appropriate.

Examples have been given of stochastic studies of midlatitude weather systems, El Nin˜o events and the ocean THC.
Noise-induced transitions between different stable states (§3a,c) are poorly understood at present, but they may play
a crucial role in meteorology, oceanography and climate. Indeed, one of the most important metrics with which
to assess the reliability of climate models must surely be their ability to predict the probabilities of such rapid transitions
accurately, since these are arguably the climatological phenomena that threaten us most.
Transition probabilities
are known to depend sensitively on noise levels, and yet we have seen that the sub-grid-scale noise is filtered out
of climate models as a necessity.

Given that the full spectrum of spatial and temporal scales exhibited by the climate system will not be resolvable
by models for decades, if ever, stochastic techniques offer an immediate, convenient and computationally cheap
solution. Yet much is still unknown about the potential of stochastic physics to improve climate models,
even though it is 30 years since Hasselmann (1976) first raised this possibility. So strong is the evidence that weather
forecasts are improved by random noise that it is now routinely added at the European Centre for Medium-range
Weather Forecasts (Buizza et al. 1999). Furthermore, a team at the UK Met Office is currently testing various
stochastic physics schemes in their weather forecasting model (Glenn Shutts 2005, personal communication).
But, if you look at the contents of any climate journal, you will find that almost none of the modelling studies
include noise.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5501
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:35 am

WetEV wrote:Amusing to quote measurement error of 0.1K for the MSU derived temperatures, when these have been revised multiple times by more than that.
The satellite measurements match balloon measurements. Satellites and balloons measure very little warming in the atmosphere while computer simulations predict a lot of warming in the atmosphere:

Image

And those are the revised, revised, revised predictions. The original predictions were much more inaccurate. In 1986, Dr. James Hansen predicted that the global average temperature would increase by 2 degrees by 2006:

Image

Perhaps his prediction was in Fahrenheit, so perhaps he was only off by a factor of SIX. So Hansen had a LOT of egg on his face. When he was director of NASA, the fiddling of the surface temperature record got into full swing. How bad have things gotten as a result? If you believe NASA's highly-fiddled ground-based temperature record, you are left with the conclusion that 1997 was 3.83 degrees Fahrenheit WARMER than 2015:

- In 1998, NASA told us that the global average surface temperature in 1997 was 62.45 degrees Fahrenheit.
- In 2016, NASA told us that he global average surface temperature in 2015 was 58.62 degrees Fahrenheit.

They had spent fifteen years cooling the past so much that the numbers have now become completely ridiculous. Believe the lies if you will.
WetEV wrote:Also, why pick two months out of the whole record at the peak of two El Ninos, when El Ninos are variable and we have exactly two strong ones to compare?
I didn't pick out two months from the two strong El Ninos. I picked out the the average temperature from the peak year from each. As I said, it didn't warm between the two peaks.
WetEV wrote:Why two months out of an ~18 year record?
As you said, those are the only two records of very-strong El Ninos on record. Since the last year on record was the peak of a very strong El Nino, I compared it with the only other very strong El Nino.
WetEV wrote:Stratosphere would cool. It has.
The stratosphere is hot because of the strong absorption of UV light by ozone formed there. The cooling of the stratosphere is due to the destruction of the ozone caused by the increase in cosmic rays hitting the Earth as the Sun goes to sleep:

Image

WetEV wrote:Surface would warm. It has.
About 1/5th of Hansen's ridiculous predictions. Lot's of cooling of the past temperature record causes NASA to tell us today that it is now 2K colder than at the end of the 2th century. Crazy!
WetEV wrote:Most mountain glaciers would retreat. They have.
Yep. NASA used to understand that the glaciers have followed the behavior of the Sun for the last couple of centuries:

Image

WetEV wrote:Ice doesn't care.
...about CO2.
WetEV wrote:Ocean would warm (more than 90% of heat goes into oceans). They have.
And as everyone knows, the heat in the ocean is put there by the Sun. And as the scientific measurements clearly show, CO2 has so little influence on the cooling of the ocean that it truly is a "don't care". Simply put, making the top micron of the ocean less cool by 0.0005K is NOTHING when compared with the 0.1K effect of cloud cover or the 2K impact of sunlight. In fact, water vapor will saturate the air immediately above the ocean surface in many locations, causing CO2 to have NO effect. You either do not understand this science or you prefer to deny the clear implications: CO2 has virtually NO EFFECT on the heat content of the waters of the ocean.
WetEV wrote:Some time between 2050 and 2100 the Arctic Ocean would melt to basically ice free in summer, some ice will remain near Canadian Arctic Archipelago for longer.
There is no sense in you spewing nonsense here because [url]we all know what the actual predictions were[/url]. Just in case anyone wonders what is actually happening:

Image

Predictions of ice-free Arctic in summertime by:

2008:
Expert: Arctic polar cap may disappear this summer_English_Xinhua
North Pole May Be Ice-Free for First Time This Summer

2012:
Star-News – Google News Archive Search
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’

2014:
Gore: Polar ice cap may disappear by summer 2014

Clearly our esteemed Nobel laureate and all those previous predictions were wrong. Here are some more which will certainly be wrong:

2018:
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1988&dat=20080624&id=7mgiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7qkFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5563,4123490

In fact, according to the article:
A google search for “sea ice disappearing” produces 546,000 fake news results

The inability of this many-times-falsified theory to predict anything dissuades most people from giving any credibility to ongoing dire predictions. But not WetEV! He's making his own belief-based prediction:
WetEV wrote:This prediction looks broken. The Arctic seems more sensitive to warming than predicted. The Death Spiral.

No, the temperature of the Earth is not controlled by CO2. The temperature of the Earth is controlled by the temperature of the surface of the global oceans. The oceans are heated by light from our Sun. That light is modulated by cloud cover (which also modulates the cooling rate of the oceans along with water vapor). The amount of cloud cover is modulated by many things. Among those things which modulate cloud cover are cosmic rays and aerosols released by trees. As CO2 causes additional greening of the Earth and as the Sun goes to sleep, thus reducing cosmic rays, the Earth will cool. No, the Arctic is not going to be ice-free this century. It's a ridiculous idea based on a ridiculous belief system. It's time we stopped giving any credence to such nonsense.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 30K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

Zythryn
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:49 am

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:30 am

Reg, your graph of the climate models vs observations is a comparison of surface temps vs high altitude temps.
That comparison doesn't tell us anything.

Are the rest of your points as off target as that?

Shouldn't we compare modeled surface temps to observed surface temps?
Previous owner of Prius, Volt & Leaf
Current owner of Model S
http://www.netzeromn.com

WetEV
Posts: 1728
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:19 am

RE: Christy's misleading graphs, I suggest reading this:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... f-numbers/
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

WetEV
Posts: 1728
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:36 am

RegGuheert wrote:The inability of this many-times-falsified theory to predict anything dissuades most people from giving any credibility to ongoing dire predictions. But not WetEV! He's making his own belief-based prediction:


I confess, I believe in physics. I believe in math. I believe in observations. I'm old fashioned, I tell it like I see it. So some sea ice:

Image

Image

Look carefully, the above graph doesn't have 2017's maximum in it yet. Looks like another record low maximum:

Image

Ice doesn't care.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

WetEV
Posts: 1728
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:39 am

RegGuheert wrote:What happens with sea ice is that it gets blown by the wind. When the wind blows strongly against the ice front, it compresses the ice into a smaller extent.


The line is the average of the 2000's. Where did the sea ice blow to, again?

Image
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5501
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:44 am

Zythryn wrote:Reg, your graph of the climate models vs observations is a comparison of surface temps vs high altitude temps.
You are wrong about that. The climate models were run to obtain the same conditions in the atmosphere as are measured by the satellites and the balloons.

If you think climate models ONLY simulate the surface, then don't you wonder how they determine those numbers?
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 30K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

WetEV
Posts: 1728
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:49 am

RegGuheert wrote:
Zythryn wrote:Reg, your graph of the climate models vs observations is a comparison of surface temps vs high altitude temps.
You are wrong about that. The climate models were run to obtain the same conditions in the atmosphere as are measured by the satellites and the balloons.

If you think climate models ONLY simulate the surface, then don't you wonder how they determine those numbers?


See the Real Climate link for more discussion.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... f-numbers/
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

Return to “Environmental Issues”