Scientific Forums


Pages: (3) [1] 2 3   ( Go to first unread post )

Add reply Start new topic Start new poll


> Global Warming
Beer w/Straw
Posted: Jan 16 2011, 11:13 PM


Advansed Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2512
Joined: 4-March 08

Positive Feedback: 67.65%
Feedback Score: 146


One piece of information that I'd like some verification on is the correct interpretation of data obtained by satellites.

I've heard that originally they weren't in tune with data from ground thermometers. But when new calculations taking into account of time and altitude they were.

Yes, no, maybe? huh.gif


--------------------
Transcendental Ignorance!
Top
adoucette
Posted: Jan 17 2011, 02:35 AM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


QUOTE (Beer w/Straw @ Jan 16 2011, 06:13 PM)
One piece of information that I'd like some verification on is the correct interpretation of data obtained by satellites.

I've heard that originally they weren't in tune with data from ground thermometers. But when new calculations taking into account of time and altitude they were.

Yes, no, maybe? huh.gif

They have had to go through a lot of adjustments to account for how/what they measure, but the good news is that as they figure out all these adjustments they can actually go back and correct their interpretation of the data.

Secondly, they measure multiple layers of the atmosphere, with their lower troposhere the one that one would expect to most closely match the surface record (contrary to common belief, one would not expect them to be identical as they aren't measuring the exact seme thing)

Third there are two different groups that interpret the same satellite data, but come to different conclusions, so you pays your money, you take your pick.

The various surface measurements (US and UK) over the same timeframe (30 years) that the satellites have been in orbit has a warming trend of ~+0.17 C/decade

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) with their Version 3.2 algorithms says we are warming at +0.16 C/decade, while the original group to do this, the Univ of Alabama group at Huntsville (UAH) using their 5.4 algorithms finds a slightly cooler trend of +0.14C/decade.

NOAA hasn't seemed to decide on which is the better interpretation yet and publishes both results.

Arthur

This post has been edited by adoucette on Jan 17 2011, 02:49 AM


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
Beer w/Straw
Posted: Jan 17 2011, 02:57 AM


Advansed Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2512
Joined: 4-March 08

Positive Feedback: 67.65%
Feedback Score: 146


Do you have a link?


--------------------
Transcendental Ignorance!
Top
adoucette
Posted: Jan 17 2011, 03:10 AM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


QUOTE (Beer w/Straw @ Jan 16 2011, 09:57 PM)
Do you have a link?

Not handy, but the general purpose link I use is:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-monitoring/index.php

You can also get to UAH's site or RSS's site via links from the NOAA site.

NOAA updates their reports usually on the 15th of the month.

Arthur


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
jimlatta
Posted: Jan 17 2011, 04:07 PM


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 23-December 09

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


A site which has all the global temperature data sets arranged neatly and which is updated frequently can be found at:

http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Look.html
Top
El_Machinae
Posted: Jan 17 2011, 04:29 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2626
Joined: 17-January 06

Positive Feedback: 87.76%
Feedback Score: 54


Here's the one I watch.
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/

The interface is at the bottom left corner.

I found it through Dr. Roy Spencer's skeptical blog, way back, and figured it would be a decent source, since he was using it (back then) to augment his skepticism.

The main metric I like is the frost line. We can talk about thermometers near cities all we want, but the frost line seems to speak for itself.


--------------------
Stanford University's YouTube playlists, cleverly arranged by seminar topic. Free!
http://www.youtube.com/user/StanfordUniversity/playlists
Top
Capracus
Posted: Mar 2 2011, 10:37 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 5374
Joined: 5-October 06

Positive Feedback: 75.56%
Feedback Score: 41


New solution to stop global warming via periodic regional conflict.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/...ar-climate.html
Top
MagentoC
Posted: Mar 9 2011, 10:05 AM


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 23-February 11

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


The last link was very good...

Very nice information...

thanks.




[Moderator: Off-topic link deleted.]

This post has been edited by rpenner on Mar 9 2011, 03:56 PM


--------------------
NO SPAM PLEASE
Top
Capracus
Posted: Mar 9 2011, 11:01 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 5374
Joined: 5-October 06

Positive Feedback: 75.56%
Feedback Score: 41


QUOTE (MagentoC @ Mar 9 2011, 10:05 AM)
The last link was very good...

Very nice information...

thanks.




Magento themes

I think you meant Magnetosphere themes
Top
adoucette
Posted: Jun 2 2011, 03:34 PM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


Source IPCC TAR WG1

Consider just the East Antarctic ice sheet:

Thresholds for disintegration of the East Antarctic ice sheet by surface melting involve warmings above 20C, a situation that has not occurred for at least the last 15 million years (Barker et al., 1999), and which is far more than thought possible under any scenario of climatic change currently under consideration. In that case, the ice sheet would decay over a period of at least 10,000 years

Arthur


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
enord
Posted: Jun 2 2011, 03:47 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 400
Joined: 20-November 09

Positive Feedback: 38.46%
Feedback Score: -12


Top
adoucette
Posted: Jun 7 2011, 01:06 PM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


QUOTE
Current estimates of tropical cyclone intensity are highly dependent on a satellite imagery interpretation technique, known as the Dvorak technique (Velden et al, 2006). Consistent with this, a step-function change in methodologies for determination of satellite intensity around the globe occurred with the introduction of geosynchronous satellites in the mid to late 1970s.
Further changes in methodologies occurred through the 1980s as satellite
instrumentation changed and as the technique evolved. Klotzbach (2006) restricted his analysis to the last 20 years when there were consistent satellite imagery and found no significant change in global net tropical cyclone activity


QUOTE
Kamahori et al. (2006) using the Japanese Meteorological Agency (JMA) typhoon database found that there was a substantial drop in the amount of category 4 and 5 typhoon activity between the periods 1977-1990 and 1991-2004


QUOTE
Currently there is large overall uncertainty in future changes in tropical cyclone frequency as projected by climate models with future greenhouse gases. The most recent results obtained from medium and high resolution GCM indicate a consistent signal of fewer tropical cyclones globally in a warmer climate (Sugi et al., 2002; McDonald et al., 2005; Bengtsson et al., 2006; Oouchi et al., 2006) , with some regions showing increases in some simulations, though these findings are still not conclusive. Based on the model simulations, the broad geographic regions of cyclogenesis and therefore also the regions affected by tropical cyclones are not expected to change significantly.


QUOTE
The only observational study addressing tropical cyclone -rainfall variations is that by Groisman et al. (2004) for the United States, which showed substantial multidecadal variability but no long-term trend in total tropical cyclone-related rainfall, a metric which they stated was primarily related to the frequency of tropical cycloness.
QUOTE
In terms of global tropical cyclone frequency, ref 25 concluded that there was no significant change in global tropical storm or hurricane numbers from 1970 to 2004, nor any significant change in hurricane numbers for any individual basin over that period, except for the Atlantic (discussed above). Landfall in various regions of East Asia during the last 60 years and those in the Philippines during the last century also do not exhibit significant trends.

Thus, considering available observational studies, and after accounting for potential errors arising from past changes in observing capabilities, it remains uncertain whether past changes in tropical cyclone frequency have exceeded the variability expected through natural causes.


QUOTE
Based on existing modeling studies (Table S1) and limited existing observations, we judge that it is likely that global mean tropical cyclone frequency will either decrease or remain essentially unchanged due to greenhouse warming. Late 21st century model projections indicate decreases ranging from -6% to -34% globally, with a comparatively more robust decrease for the Southern Hemisphere (SH) mean than for the NH mean counts.


dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/62558

emphasis mine

Arthur


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
Capracus
Posted: Oct 22 2011, 09:28 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 5374
Joined: 5-October 06

Positive Feedback: 75.56%
Feedback Score: 41


I wonder if the Kock brothers will ask for their money back?

A skeptical physicist ends up confirming climate data
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-k...viC1L_blog.html
Top
Robittybob1
Posted: Oct 22 2011, 11:10 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 6588
Joined: 15-October 11

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


QUOTE (Capracus @ Oct 22 2011, 09:28 PM)
I wonder if the Kock brothers will ask for their money back?

A skeptical physicist ends up confirming climate data
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-k...viC1L_blog.html

Over 1300 views and only 12 replies suggests to me we need to liven the debate somehow!
Suggests to me people want to know about the topic and have no answers.
Top
brucep
Posted: Oct 22 2011, 11:57 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 3834
Joined: 3-October 09

Positive Feedback: 88.37%
Feedback Score: 146


QUOTE (Capracus @ Oct 22 2011, 09:28 PM)
I wonder if the Kock brothers will ask for their money back?

A skeptical physicist ends up confirming climate data
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-k...viC1L_blog.html

Good one. The real problem, for Americans, is a huge percentage of those educated in America don't know how to access the scientific literature and for the most part don't even know what it is. How brilliant is it to subject our children to 12 years of minimal exposure [like zero] to the scientific method and the literature [the fruit it bears]. Everybody should have been able to read the literature, on GW, and understand what's at stake. Instead they think it was Al Gore's idea supported by a bunch of socialist liberals. That's not surprising since they don't even know what those words mean. Usually I'm not in favor of making such generalizations but in this case I am.

This post has been edited by brucep on Oct 23 2011, 12:00 AM
Top

Topic Options Pages: (3) [1] 2 3 

Add reply Start new topic Start new poll


 

Terms of use