Dr. Ricky Rood's Climate Change Blog

Still Following the Heat

Posted by: Dr. Ricky Rood, 04:08 GMT le 07 mai 2010

Still Following the Heat - Bumps and Wiggles (5):

Introduction: This is the fifth in a series on understanding climate variability, global warming, and what we might do about it. The series focuses on the past 30 years and the next 30 years. There has been so much going on it has become a bit of a ramble, but it’s a blog – so.

The basic idea in this series is that climate model projections and observational verifications are precise enough to tell us with extremely high confidence that the Earth’s surface will warm because of increasing carbon dioxide. With this knowledge in hand, a new standard is evolving in climate modeling, which is more in the spirit of traditional weather predictions. That is, more specific information about what is going to happen at a certain place at a certain time. To reach this new standard, it becomes imperative that we better quantify the bumps and wiggles in the observations for the last 30 years and use this information to develop our prediction skills for the next 30 years. It is no longer adequate to simply say that – given the observed natural variability, that any discrepancies between existing projections and observations are, formally, small. That is, they are noise.

Improving our ability to diagnose the discrepancies between model projections and observations challenges all aspects of the scientific investigation of the climate. Better observations are needed to sample climate variability. Better models are needed, and in particular, we will have to quantify better how pieces fit together and interact. Pieces? When we develop hypotheses, theories and predictive models, we break the climate system into pieces. One piece might be the type of convective cloud that causes thunderstorms, and that piece has to fit together with all of the other pieces that make up the atmosphere. Then the atmosphere has to fit together with the ocean and the land and the glaciers and the ice sheets and the sea ice and the trees and the people – it is a big problem. An important and understudied (I assert) part of climate science is “how do the pieces fit together.” While we know a lot, if we are going to understand the bumps and wiggles, then we are going to have to know more. (And for those who want to say it’s just a theory.)

So we break down the problem, and so far in this series (all linked below), we have talked about the Sun and the carbon dioxide that comes from volcanoes and “following the heat.” Of these the most important is following the heat. This is important because if you take a simple look at the warming due to carbon dioxide, the observed warming of the Earth’s surface is not as high as predicted. So what is wrong? In the second blog of the series we followed the heat into the ocean. Broadly in the last 30 years the heat content of the ocean has increased, and that is a far more convincing measure of a warming planet than the surface air temperature measurements. I want to revisit this because of a recent perspective by Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo, who, investigating the recent bumps and wiggles, ask the question - why isn’t the ocean warming even faster? There is still missing heat. But first a diversion.

In the third entry of this series I introduced Simple Earth. Read that entry if you want the full description of the figure. Below is the same figure, but there has been one thing added to the figure. Namely, the blurry, reddish line on the surface. What this line represents is that if greenhouse gases increase, then there will be warming at the surface. (There will also be cooling in, say, the upper troposphere.)

Figure 1: Simple Earth 2: Some basic ingredients of the Earth’s climate and surface heating.

I also argued in that third entry that in the end, we were truly concerned about climate, climate change and humans. Sure we can dismiss the current warming as some cycle, but that takes humans and human-care out of the picture, and it is in our best interest to always think about climate and climate change in a human context. So when we think about it in the human context, we start to wonder about the warming at the surface, and especially, at the surface over land. Of course most of the Earth’s surface is ocean, and heat goes into the ocean. That’s what I represent in this figure:

Figure 2: Simple Earth 3: Some basic ingredients of the Earth’s climate. There is heat going into the ocean. (This is simple Earth, so this is vastly over simplified heat transport.)

So this brings us back to Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo. In Science Magazine on April 16, 2010, they have a Perspective, where they discuss missing heat. The point of their article is that if you look at the heat budget of the Earth from satellites in space, we can measure that the Earth is not currently in balance. Heat is staying on the planet; hence, it must be warming. If you focus on the past five years, then the planet is just not warming as fast as it should. They do not say that the basic conclusions that the surface of the Earth is warming and will warm more are incorrect. Again, neither they nor their data challenge those foundational results, but if you look at the details, the bumps and wiggles, then we have some work left to do to fully understand what is going on. They conclude that now that geoengineering is entering our discussion, we really must be able to understand these bumps and wiggles.

This heat will be found, probably in the deep ocean, where we don’t have such good observations. The discrepancy will be explained. It is, ultimately, better observations that Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo call for. (The discussion of the paper in blogs amongst both scientists and politically motivated sorts is pretty interesting. ( 1 , 2 , 3))

During my career, I have been fortunate enough to have some scientific successes – figured out something new, helped build an algorithm that got some use, or figured out a technique that mattered. Each time the result seemed big and significant in the moment. It’s not long after getting such a result that it seems mundane, perhaps almost self-evident – why did it take so long to figure that out? This is a little of what we are talking about here. So when Trenberth and Fasullo say,

“So, although some heat has gone into the recordbreaking loss of Arctic sea ice, and some has undoubtedly contributed to the unprecedented melting of Greenland and Antarctica, it does not add up to anywhere near enough to account for the measured energy difference at the top of the atmosphere.” (Emphasis mine.)

They are looking at the next problem, the bumps, the wiggles. They, their analysis, their observations offer no serious relief from the warming, the sea level rise, and the changing weather.

r

Bumps and Wiggles (1): Predictions and Projections

Bumps and Wiggles (2): Some Jobs for Models and Modelers (Sun and Ocean)

Bumps and Wiggles (3): Simple Earth

Bumps and Wiggles (4): Volcanoes and Long Cycles

And here is

Faceted Search of Blogs at climateknowledge.org

Permalink | A A A

Top of Page

Reader Comments

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200

Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 201 - 251

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 — Blog Index

201. atmoaggie 23:54 GMT le 11 mai 2010
Quoting crucilandia: Analysis of Antarctic temperature change showed a strong warming of the Antarctic Peninsula and cooling of the Antarctic continent Turner, J. et al. Antarctic climate change during the last 50 years. Int. J. Climatol. 25, 279%u2013294 (2005). cruc, you need to provide a source. And a peer-reviewed one, at that. LOL. I see this joint is about the same. Member Since: 16 août 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12461

204. cyclonebuster 01:08 GMT le 12 mai 2010
No different than smoking! Evidence Growing of Air Pollution's Link to Heart Disease, Death ScienceDaily (May 11, 2010) — The scientific evidence linking air pollution to heart attacks, strokes and cardiovascular death has "substantially strengthened," and people, particularly those at high cardiovascular risk, should limit their exposure, according to an updated American Heart Association scientific statement. Link Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

205. cyclonebuster 01:15 GMT le 12 mai 2010
NOAA Dispatches Northeast Science Chief to Lead Rapid-Response Contamination Testing System May 11, 2010 NOAA is sending one of its top fisheries science directors to the Gulf this week to lead its effort to rapidly assess, test and report findings about risks posed to fish in the Gulf of Mexico by contaminants from the BP oil spill and clean-up activities. Nancy Thompson, Ph.D, director of NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC), will head to Pascagoula, Miss., to lead NOAA’s response team. Thompson will work closely with Bonnie Ponwith, Ph.D., director at the agency’s Southeast Fisheries Science Center, who is leading an intensified effort to monitor and assess the spill’s effects on important species in the Gulf of Mexico. “From her experience working on contaminant testing after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, Nancy understands the science and knows the Gulf region,” said Eric Schwaab, NOAA assistant administrator for NOAA’s Fisheries Service. “Her leadership in running our contaminant testing system is an important step in ensuring NOAA can continue efforts related to fisheries management priorities in the Gulf.” Link Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

206. cyclonebuster 01:36 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Oil Industry Executives Stress Standard Operating Procedure, Pass Blame for Gulf Spill FOXNews.com Executives from the three companies involved with the April 20 Gulf of Mexico rig explosion told lawmakers on Tuesday they're doing everything they humanly can to stop the massive oil spill and figure out why the rig blew in the first place, but while insisting that a collaborative effort is the only way to determine the cause of the explosion, cooperation seemed elusive. Link Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

207. cyclonebuster 01:39 GMT le 12 mai 2010
52 dead in Russian mine blasts Moscow, Russia (CNN) -- The death toll from a Russian coal mine accident has reached 52, with 38 people still missing, the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry said Tuesday. "The rescue operation to locate and recover the missing people is being carried out around the clock," Veronica Smolskaya, spokeswoman for the ministry, told CNN. More than 80 survivors are currently in hospitals, according to the Russian State Health authorities. Emergency Situation Minister Sergei Shoigu said more than 700 rescue workers are now combing numerous underground tunnels of the mine, and the plan is to complete the operation within the next 24 hours, according to the ministry's website. He was speaking at a special meeting of the rescue headquarters in Kemerovo region, which was also attended by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who traveled to the region Tuesday. Russian officials are still displaying hope and optimism in public, but several sources at the mine told Russian reporters on conditions of anonymity that finding anyone underground who survived the explosions would be a miracle. Link Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

208. cyclonebuster 01:48 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting martinitony: They will make the data support. Everyone here knows there has been more ice down there than before. So, they turn to ice volumes. Reality never seems to matter. Volumes of ice would be more related to precipitation in the Antarctic than temperature because antarctica is pretty much a dessert and certainly doesn't get warm enough to lose continental ice by melting. They can't explain why the planet hasn't gotten any warmer for the last 11 years. If they could, they would. Dr.Rood talks about wiggles, but even he only cares if work against Global Warming. There have been too many unaddressed questions and posts here that go contra to AGW and even warming. In the next few hours Florida will ask for peer reviewed references for the above statements as though an opinion or a question require reference. Some of you know the case if tried before a jury would be lost. And yet you persist with wild ideas of spending trillions and doing whatever is necessary to take mankind back to, well back to when there were so few of us, you'd have to ride your horse for days to see another man's campfire. You guys are very nuts. LOL! You guys are nuts however you think Antarctica is a desert! LOL! Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

210. cyclonebuster 01:57 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy: So many falsehoods posted in here! Martinitony in 179: They can't explain why the planet hasn't gotten any warmer for the last 11 years. NASA says differently, 2005 was the warmest year across the globe: Link Crucilandia claiming the data do not support the South Pole having its warmest year ever. Yes, it has. From the data. And I'll take ground observations by highly trained meteorologists over a vague, low resolution graphic. In fact you took your graphic from a blog. Not a scientific publication, but a blog. With no peer review, and no standards of accuracy. And no date on the graphic either. And no proof the graphic wasn't altered. And Jennifer Marohasy? She's not even a meteorologist or a climatologist. She is a biologist. There is nothing in her record to indicate that she ever took a course in meteorology or climate science in college. The fact is, she lists no qualifications in climatology or meteorology whatsoever. Her published papers are biological weed control and plant and insect taxonomy. Not climate science. In short, Jennifer Marohasy has no qualifications in meteorology or climate science whatsoever. And crucilandia posts in #186 some pretty graphs, which end 9 years ago. Really out of date. I wonder if any denialists can explain why the earth's temperature is soaring to new record highs at the same time we've been going through the deepest solar minimum in our instrumental record. Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy: Crucilandia's graphic ganked from a biologist's blog: It has no dates---comparing one specific time to another. If it supposed to reflect temperature trends, what time period is covered? It has no scale. What is the temperature increment between the blue, white and red? In fact the graphic has no information whatsoever. Given the graphic's zero information content, it is likely that the graphic was falsified or made up completely, with the NOAA/NESDIS/USGS added to the bottom to give it respectability. And the logos for those U.S. agencies are omitted from the attribution. Odd. No wonder you didn't use a climate science publication as a source. No serious scientist would ever use such a graphic. Sounds like Crucilandia is a FOX news reporter! Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

211. sirmaelstrom 01:58 GMT le 12 mai 2010
№ 208 Actually Antarctica is technically considered a desert with between two and eight inches of water equivalent precipitation per year depending on location. Link It is not considered to be a dessert however—Mmmmm....dessert. Member Since: 19 février 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568

213. cyclonebuster 02:05 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting skepticall2: Any people that believe in global warming want to tell me what the temperature of the Earth should be right now? Sure it should be what it was prior to the industrial revolution. Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

215. sirmaelstrom 02:09 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Apparently the details of the proposed climate bill have been leaked here. Link Figured everybody would be interested. I have no comment on it myself; it will take too long to download until I get somewhere with a more favorable broadband signal. Member Since: 19 février 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568

216. cyclonebuster 02:09 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting skepticall2: Which was what? Look it up! Member Since: 2 janvier 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 18782

218. sirmaelstrom 02:10 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster: Sure it should be what it was prior to the industrial revolution. Should it be the same as it was during the Little Ice Age? Member Since: 19 février 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568

219. crucilandia 02:55 GMT le 12 mai 2010
201 the citation is right there, I dont understand Turner, J. et al. Antarctic climate change during the last 50 years. Int. J. Climatol. 25:279-294 (2005). Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

221. sirmaelstrom 03:02 GMT le 12 mai 2010
№ 219 @crucilandia I think atmoaggie was looking for a link. I'm pretty sure this is it. Correct me if I'm wrong. Member Since: 19 février 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568

222. atmoaggie 03:02 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting crucilandia: 201 the citation is right there, I dont understand Turner, J. et al. Antarctic climate change during the last 50 years. Int. J. Climatol. 25:279-294 (2005). Dude, I was yanking your chain and mocking the warmies! (at least just a little) Member Since: 16 août 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12461

223. crucilandia 03:04 GMT le 12 mai 2010
all I see posted here is cut and paste from news and magazines. no primary literature. Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

225. crucilandia 03:05 GMT le 12 mai 2010
all figures were from official NOAA stations figure from antarctica was from NASA Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

226. crucilandia 03:08 GMT le 12 mai 2010
"Antarctica has been cooling, and one could argue some regions could escape warming, but this study finds this is not very likely," Shindell said. Drew Shindell and Gavin Schmidt of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS), Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

227. sirmaelstrom 03:13 GMT le 12 mai 2010
To the best of my knowledge, Atmoaggie is the only person openly skeptical of AGW whose posts aren't grey on all the blogs. He certainly deserves some sort of prize for that. I don't think I have posted anything remotely personal on this site in the short time I've been here, yet my posts have been grey since the first day (I've had personal attacks directed at me, however). It's an awesome achievement to be sure. Atmoaggie, for your diplomatic prowess—I salute you! Member Since: 19 février 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568

228. crucilandia 03:14 GMT le 12 mai 2010
222 sorry bro Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

229. crucilandia 03:19 GMT le 12 mai 2010
world climate report and cited work on the picture Monaghan, A. J., D. H. Bromwich, W. Chapman, and J. C. Comiso (2008), Recent variability and trends of Antarctic near-surface temperature, Journal of Geophysical Research, 113, Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

231. atmoaggie 03:28 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting sirmaelstrom: To the best of my knowledge, Atmoaggie is the only person openly skeptical of AGW whose posts aren't grey on all the blogs. He certainly deserves some sort of prize for that. I don't think I have posted anything remotely personal on this site in the short time I've been here, yet my posts have been grey since the first day (I've had personal attacks directed at me, however). It's an awesome achievement to be sure. Atmoaggie, for your diplomatic prowess—I salute you! Ehh, a little tact mixed with a sprinkle of wide open, is my MO. Seems that more than a couple of someones are hitting the "-" on a regular basis purely based on a point of view, rather than it's intent of classifying those that denigrate and/or are truly droll. I thought we all had the pleasure of learning through debate, yet, apparently that is a benefit those someones prefer to forfeit. Their loss? Not unreasonable to think so. Member Since: 16 août 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12461

232. crucilandia 03:32 GMT le 12 mai 2010
230 figure of west antarctica peninsula (not representive of the continent) whereas East Antarctica seems to remain in balance or slightly gain mass with estimated rates of mass change in the range of −4 to 22 Gt yr−1 Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

235. sirmaelstrom 04:43 GMT le 12 mai 2010
№ 233 Quote: This also disproves something else - that a negative PDO means cooling I don't know about disproves. There is definitely a correlation between extended periods of predominantly positive (negative) PDO and global warming (cooling). 1900-1945, predominantly positive PDO, corresponding global warming trend; 1945-1975, predominantly negative PDO, corresponding global cooling trend; 1975-1998, predominantly positive PDO, corresponding global warming trend; 1998-present, PDO equally positive and negative, no significant warming/cooling trend. From here. From here. Note: I am including the GISS data to show the temperature trends because it is the only data available before 1979. I still think that this data set has serious problems with accuracy and homogenization adjustments. From here. Member Since: 19 février 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568

236. crucilandia 04:48 GMT le 12 mai 2010
what is the source of #230? differs from more recent publication Volume Volume 41 Book Polar Oceans from Space Pages 295-363 year 2010 Josefino Comiso Mesoscale and large scale characteristics and interannual variability of the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice cover are described and evaluated using geophysical data derived from visible, infrared, and microwave sensors. Thirty years of satellite data were used to assess global, hemispherical, and regional trends and to gain insights into the changing sea ice cover in the two hemispheres. The extent of the sea ice cover in the Arctic is shown to be declining at −4%/decade, whereas in the Antarctic, it has been increasing unexpectedly at 1%/decade. The most intriguing result, however, is the rapid decline in the Arctic perennial ice cover area of about −13%/decade and possible connection with greenhouse gas warming. Equally intriguing is the relative stability of the Antarctic sea ice cover and associated effects of the ozone hole, the Southern Oscillation and the Antarctic Circumpolar Wave. Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

237. crucilandia 04:52 GMT le 12 mai 2010
source: Comiso and Nishio, 2008 Comiso, J. C., and F. Nishio, 2008. Trends in the sea ice cover using enhanced and compatible AMSR-E, SSM/I, and SMMR data. Journal of Geophysical Research, 113 Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

239. crucilandia 04:59 GMT le 12 mai 2010
source: The National Snow and Ice Data Center Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

241. crucilandia 05:13 GMT le 12 mai 2010
what is the relevance of comment 155? Member Since: 6 Mars 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

246. martinitony 09:19 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Antarctica is a desert: "Antarctica is the coldest place on Earth. The coldest natural temperature ever recorded on Earth was −89.2 °C (−128.6 °F) at the Russian Vostok Station in Antarctica on 21 July 1983.[31] For comparison, this is 11 °C (20 °F) colder than subliming dry ice. Antarctica is a frozen desert with little precipitation; the South Pole itself receives less than 10 cm (4 in) per year, on average. " Therefore posting that ice mass has dropped (the abstract posted below) is like posting that the Sahara has had some really dry years. It is a bogus concept because there is no loss do to higher temperatures. It could only be due to lack of precipitation and ice evaporation, sublimation. Member Since: 29 juillet 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 928

247. martinitony 11:52 GMT le 12 mai 2010
Quoting sirmaelstrom: Apparently the details of the proposed climate bill have been leaked here. Link Figured everybody would be interested. I have no comment on it myself; it will take too long to download until I get somewhere with a more favorable broadband signal. I couldn't copy from the link, but the first point says that consumers will come out on top. These people, Kerry/Lieberman, believe in magic. All energy will cost more and be taxed higher, but the consumer will be unaffected. Yeah, sure. They'll just get the money from the energy companies who will gladly give up all their profits and even operate at a loss so that the consumer pays less. On top of that there will be plenty of extra money for the trading scheme guys to rake off the top, like GE and Al Gore and Goldman. What a wonderful world. Member Since: 29 juillet 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 928

Viewing: 201 - 251

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 — Blog Index

Top of Page

New Comment

Community Standards Policy Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

About RickyRood