Introduction - Models are not All Wet: Models, Water and Temperature (2)
Introduction - Models are not All Wet: Models, Water and Temperature (2)
I am starting a series of blogs on models, water, and temperature.
A couple of entries ago, I wrote a somewhat muddled blog, Difference Between Night and Day. My major goal in that blog was to look at how water, especially water vapor, enters into the climate and climate change problem. I used some regional differences in climate, say Florida's and Arizona's, with the hope of suggesting that we have some intuition of how water vapor modifies regional climate. For example, due to the absence of water vapor, Arizona's extremes of daily temperature are larger than in a much wetter Florida.
This simple intuitive notion, however, quickly falls into complexity. It is the typical complexity of climate science, where the members of a set of simple physical processes combine in many different ways to produce a difficult-to-untangle knot of observations. I will come back to this later, but first, here are some of the other ideas I had in mind in that first blog.
At the end of that blog I referred to the paper by Kukla and Karl, 1993, Nighttime Warming and the Greenhouse Effect (from Rood’s Class Website). This paper investigates the observed decrease in the range between nighttime lows and daytime highs. At the writing of that paper in 1993, the models of 20 years ago did not simulate this observation especially well. How does one respond to fact that models don’t represent a particular observation? A common way to respond, sometimes put forward by commenters on this blog, is that the models fail to represent the observations; hence, the model is wrong, and to base any conclusions, actions or behavior on model results is grievous failure of reason.
I, of course, reject this conclusion. When I get the result that the model does not represent an observation especially well, then I take this as a piece of information that motivates further investigation. The scientific investigations of my career have been based on the process that we develop a model from a set of physical laws that are expressed as mathematical expressions. The physical laws and the construction of the original model are based in their most fundamental way on observations. If the model has been developed properly, then it offers an approximation of that observed behavior. If this is the case, then we have an experimental tool that can be used for further investigation. That investigation is motivated both by the shortcomings in the model’s ability to represent observations we already have and by new observations that come along. In this approach models evolve as a tool that help us explore and manage the complexity of the climate system. They also help guide our thinking about the future based on the projections that come from the models. Models are, therefore, devices to help us think; they do not provide the answer.
Another idea that I introduced in the Difference Between Night and Day was that large changes in the amount of water at the surface, for example, the Dust Bowl and irrigation in the Corn Belt, might have significant regional impacts on climate. The place I am going with this, ultimately, is the Midwest Warming Hole (2 MB if you click), and that requires thinking about water. The Midwest Warming Hole is an observed feature in the center of the United States that is not warming up as fast as the regions around it or as fast as the models predict. This is not a newly discovered feature, but it is a feature that I think takes on new interest as we think about this hot summer, the last hot summer, and how to use the observations today to think about the climate in the future and how to adapt to a warming climate. The Midwest Warming Hole, and the ability or inability to represent it in models, is also a great example to help people think about how to describe model uncertainty.
The last big theme that I want to follow from the original blog is the improvement of ways to discuss and understand the role of water – solid, liquid and vapor – in climate and climate change. I did a series Just Temperature ( one, two, three) which was motivated by the stunningly warm spring in 2012 in the continental United States and my thinking of extreme events as climate change case studies. The Just Temperature series used the fact that the warming of the Earth has become large enough that it is possible using temperature observations alone to make a compelling case the Earth is warming. But once we make it beyond that fact, we have to think about water to understand the complexity of both the spatial and temporal structure of the observed trends.
So here are three big themes that I want to organize around:
1) Doing science with models
2) Communicating the role of water in climate and climate change
3) Thinking about changes in land use and its impacts on water
These will be interspersed, of course, with some tangents to interesting subjects here and there. But those who know this blog know that eventually I get there.
r
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 — Blog Index
The eruption of Krakatoa in 1883 seems to have kicked off several years of anomalies extending to 1889-90. Perhaps a cooling of temperate latitudes and reduction of thermal contrast vs. the Arctic may have triggered jet stream anomalies similar to what we have now? Someone must have studied this in detail, though I can't find a good reference - does anyone know of a detailed study of this period?
near my sisters house.
This is why I built my Tunnels to prevent this and many other things.
You might fire that question to this site's weather history guy. Christopher C. Burt Link
------
eta: OK, kids. This is what happens when you don't read all the way to the bottom of the page prior to replying....
Has he found a job at another small market radio station?
Has one of his sycophants sent him a photograph of an AC unit within 100 feet of a thermometer?
Or did he finally pick up a physics book and finally decide to admit intellectual defeat and throw his weight onto the side of science?
Watt oh Watt can it be?
(My actual guess: hoping that the third time's the charm, yet another release of cherry-picked, out-of-context snippets lifted from stolen private emails sent between climate scientists. Or some "smoking gun" that's going to "once and for all" prove AGWT a hoax.)
I can hardly wait... ;-)
reliefweb.int
Headlines
Study identifies new ways in which private sector can play wider, more effective role in humanitarian action
Syria: UN human rights chief warns of consequences under international law as conflict escalates
Mali : Le'accs le'eau potable reste une preoccupation majeure pour les populations dans le nord du pays
DR Congo: UNHCR calls for protection of civilians in east as reported abuse cases reach 7,000
Zimbabwe: WFP estimates 1.6 million people will need food aid
South Sudan: Food security conditions deteriorate as lean season peaks; about 2.4 million people need emergency assistance
India: Tens of thousands of people to be without safe drinking water for months as flooding continues in Assam - NGO
Waddup wit Dat?, ooooooooo-weeeee,
He finally realized this proves him wrong.....
Or.....maybe FAUX News is going to hire him as their "Science Editor." We know hard it is to fight radical leftist conspiracies without the ability to invent new science on a daily basis.
Neap, have you seen the WU Mail I sent you??
More on the level of "Science Fiction" editor.....
He must be bombarded with good, strong data that shows him that his position is wrong. Even if he suppresses that data, doesn't let it see daylight on his site, it must get lodged in his brain.
Going out on a limb with the BEST study and then having it support warming must have shaken him.
I'm hoping he's going to publicly announce a change in his thinking. We've got a major job ahead of us and could use fewer people scattering marbles on the path.
Posted on July 27, 2012 by Anthony Watts
Something’s happened. From now until Sunday July 29th, around Noon PST, WUWT will be suspending publishing. At that time, there will be a major announcement that I’m sure will attract a broad global interest due to its controversial and unprecedented nature.
To give you an idea as to the magnitude of this event, I’m suspending my vacation plans. I weighed the issue, and decided (much to my dismay) this was more important. I can go on vacation trips another time, but this announcement is not something I can miss now and do later.
Media outlets be sure to check in to WUWT on Sunday around 12PM PST and check your emails.
If you wish to be automatically notified of the updates, click on the “Follow Blog via Email” button about midway down the right sidebar.
Comments are closed, and I will not be responding to emails until Sunday.
Thank you for your consideration and patience – Anthony Watts
Link
What happened anyone know what it is?
Perhaps he's discovered Al Gore grew a beard.
I was hoping that he would announce that he had found a proctologist capable of performing a lobotomy.
Unfortunately, this will probably be an announcement that will create a great deal of controversy and keep us busier than ever.
UPDATE: I've been advised by concerned friends that speculation on the nature of this announcement has gotten out of hand in the blogosphere, and that was not my intent. My intent was to give me time to work and something very important without the distraction of this blog, emails/twitter/facebook, etc.
As many of you know, running WUWT is a monumental task which I could not do without the help of many people. Even so, it still requires my constant attention.
First, I am well. This isn't a health issue for me or my family.
Second, my announcement has nothing to do with FOIA issues or other sorts of political or social theories being bandied about on other blogs.
It does however have something to do with one of my many projects, and it has important implications that I'm sure everyone will want to know about.
I greatly appreciate all the concern and interest, and I look forward to being able to share all my work on Sunday. Anthony
There's someone speculating on another forum Watts may be going to announce a commercial venture - possibly concerning solar power. Apparently Watts has installed solar at his house.
Anthony is getting a puppy for his birthday.
Feel free to embellish as you wish and pass it on....
Watch the Olympics Opening LIVE on Croatin TV
If it stops, jus refresh.
Watt gives Watts out with it now......
LOL, nice clip. Is that Andre the G man in there?
I can't resist an attempt at the interpretation of definition either, but perhaps from a different perspective :)
Weather Underground site visits dropped by 17% last year.
Can anyone say Facebook?
Though I doubt Dr. Masters will denounce his US citizenship and move to a foreign country.
Now, Watts may indeed bring up the Bain et al purchase of WU--though not many people will see it. According to Alexa, Little Anthony's site ranking has dropped nearly 10,000 places over the last two years. That is, he has roughly half the audience he did in 2010.
Ulp
No wonder he feels the need to tease his shrinking number of viewers with news of a colossalstupendousunprecedentedearthshattering announcement.
Hey, how about some comparisons?
Global ranking:
WUWT: 20,080
WU: 563 (35x more popular than WUWT)
TWC: 114 (176x)
US ranking:
WUWT: 8,229
WU: 144 (57x)
TWC: 24 (342x)
Poor boy. Why, he's practically withering away all alone out there on the end of the denialist vine. Say, I have a question: if he's the most visited denialist site on the web, that doesn't say much for the others, does it?
Very true! I don't usually keep tabs on Watts, but that "major announcement" thing caught my eye. I've always felt that rather than deny their denial, the denialists would figure out a way to make money by exploiting the changes coming down the road. In that post about his solar panels, when Watt's said: "The economics and out of control regulations that will make electricity prices “necessarily skyrocket” starting this fall were the main impetus." (see?..he can blame "out of control regulations and skyrocketing prices" on 'global warming alarmists' and maintain his bona fides with his followers.)
And then: "Details next week, along with instructions how how you can get one easily and put your own sweat equity into it and save a bundle…and have it paid off quickly and fully own it…unlike those lease programs that require 20 year payoffs…and by that time the company may be gone and the panels fading.
Bingo! The "next week" time frame is right, there's the obligatory slap at gov't programs, AND he (Watts) will be oh so happy to step in, save the day and sell you his solar system/plan. Cha-ching!
If this speculation is correct, that forum poster deserves a cookie for the insight. If Bob Wallace is right about the puppy, Watts gets a box of milkbones instead... ;-)
And for that we are vary Grateful.
: )
Yeah, it's almost certainly the solar panel thing.
--It's not about Watts' health, or that of his family.
--It's not about FOIA, or other political or social theories. That pretty much rules out the largest speculation: that this is 'climategate' part three
--It IS about one of his "many projects". I'm not sure how many irons he has in the fire, but he has discussed his DIY/OIY solar energy package a time or two
--It has "important implications". The term 'important' is subjective, of course. But to AW selling solar packages likely is.
--It's of a "controversial and unprecedented nature". I suppose there wouldn't be much more controversial than one of the leading disseminators of denialist blather selling something that could help reduce our use of fossil fuels.
It could be wrong, but I'd definitely go with that...
Get's bought out. Paid with stock in the new company.
Bain borrows heavily to "improve" the product. Pays itself massive fees for arranging the loans. Taps the WUWT bank account for a special payout for hardworking board members (of whom Anthony is not one).
Outsources distortion to a third world company.
Holds only those tinfoil-hatters who are so out of it that they provide no revenue for advertisers. Donates site to most active poster and writes off a large loss on paper.
Another Bain successful takeover goes on the books and someone gets another floor on their car elevator.
--
BTW the Arctic Sea Ice is looking very rotten. There's been no 'spectacular' weather to cause high rates of melting, but the melt rate is continuing along the 2007 rate.
And the water is hotter, which could easily drive the melt season longer.
New EPA regulations are causing inefficient coal plants to close.
Much of their output is being replaced with natural gas turbines and due to the low price of NG the resulting electricity cost will be less.
Additionally, the cost of wind generated electricity has dropped. The LCOE for wind is 33-45% lower than it was about 3 years ago.
So coal goes away. It's replaced by wind and dispatchable natural gas. Coal-produced electricity from inefficient plants can cost as much as $0.12/kWh. Wind and natural gas (combined cycle) are running about $0.05/kWh.
I see a skyrocket lit, but pointed downward....
Tsk, tsk, Bob...you are operating in a reality based free market world here. You must step into the job killng regulation, winner/loser picking government subsidy crushing innovation, carbon tax of doom World of Watts to fully understand the "facts" that will allow the denial folks to cash in. Come on...please get with the program!
Facetious Flag: ON
Ya know Bob, I've been trying to give you the benefit of the doubt on many of your opinions.
But, your scenario here shows your deep seated bigotry and ignorance of reality.
Ya need to get a handle on that one...or not.
If you want to stay "popular" on this blog, carry on.
Is that your epitaph? "I was popular".
You obviously have no idea how business works.
You might consider not speaking "off the monitor" and stick with posting factoids and seconding other's posts. Even my grandson could handle that.
Seriously though, stick with the easy stuff.
Well, apparently you aren't familiar with how the junk bond kings operated. We watched one of them take down our largest timber corporation and the county's economy here where I live.
I know how both good and evil businesses operate.
And apparently you don't have a very good humor-detecting function. Perhaps one of your grandkids can loan you a clue. Just return it to them in good condition, don't scuff it up.
*Sheph pushes chair back and walks away laughing*
If you don't know by now, Sir????
I don't "do" sophistry.
That's your department.
Carry on without me.
You've proven your propensity for fraud on more than one occasion.
Sheph doesn't "do" fraud.
We can't have this conversation.
You've sealed the lid on "that" bucket.
Play with your ilk here. You're much better off.
Stay away from the big dogs.
Nice try.
Carry on.
You're popular.
Edit:
Like the "good humor" I first injected and then got monkey-piled on????
I see..."that's different".
(Shep tucks tail and slinks away, tossing a claim that he can't support over his shoulder as he exits stage right....)
I've looked it up for all of us...
Bigot: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
Now, we generally don't apply the term "bigot" to someone who regards or treats science with hatred and intolerance, so perhaps there's another term you might suggest?
Analysis: Evidence for climate extremes, costs, gets more local
By Environment Correspondent Alister Doyle
OSLO | Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:53pm IST
(Reuters) - Scientists are finding evidence that man-made climate change has raised the risks of individual weather events, such as floods or heatwaves, marking a big step towards pinpointing local costs and ways to adapt to freak conditions.
"We're seeing a great deal of progress in attributing a human fingerprint to the probability of particular events or series of events," said Christopher Field, co-chairman of a U.N. report due in 2014 about the impacts of climate change.
Experts have long blamed a build-up of greenhouse gas emissions for raising worldwide temperatures and causing desertification, floods, droughts, heatwaves, more powerful storms and rising sea levels.
But until recently they have said that naturally very hot, wet, cold, dry or windy weather might explain any single extreme event, like the current drought in the United States or a rare melt of ice in Greenland in July.
But for some extremes, that is now changing.
A study this month, for instance, showed that greenhouse gas emissions had raised the chances of the severe heatwave in Texas in 2011 and unusual heat in Britain in late 2011. Other studies of extremes are under way.
Growing evidence that the dice are loaded towards ever more severe local weather may make it easier for experts to explain global warming to the public, pin down costs and guide investments in everything from roads to flood defenses.
"One of the ironies of climate change is that we have more papers published on the costs of climate change in 2100 than we have published on the costs today. I think that is ridiculous," said Myles Allen, head of climate research at Oxford University's Environmental Change Institute.
"We can't (work out current costs) without being able to make the link to extreme weather," he said. "And once you've worked out how much it costs that raises the question of who is going to pay."
Industrialized nations agree they should take the lead in cutting emissions since they have burnt fossil fuels, which release greenhouse gases, since the Industrial Revolution. But they oppose the idea of liability for damage.
Almost 200 nations have agreed to work out a new deal by the end of 2015 to combat climate change, after repeated setbacks. China, the United States and India are now the top national emitters of greenhouse gases.
Field, Professor of Biology and Environmental Earth System Science at the University of Stanford, said that the goal was to carry out studies of extreme weather events almost immediately after they happen, helping expose the risks.
"Everybody who needs to make decisions about the future - things like building codes, infrastructure planning, insurance - can take advantage of the fact that the risks are changing but we have a lot of influence over what those risks are."
FLOODS
Another report last year indicated that floods 12 years ago in Britain - among the countries most easily studied because of it has long records - were made more likely by warming. And climate shifts also reduced the risks of flooding in 2001.
Previously, the European heatwave of 2003 that killed perhaps 70,000 people was the only extreme where scientists had discerned a human fingerprint. In 2004, they said that global warming had at least doubled the risks of such unusual heat.
The new statistical reviews are difficult because they have to tease out the impact of greenhouse gases from natural variations, such as periodic El Nino warmings of the Pacific, sun-dimming volcanic dust or shifts in the sun's output.
So far, extreme heat is the easiest to link to global warming after a research initiative led by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the British Meteorological Office.
"Heatwaves are easier to attribute than heavy rainfall, and drought is very difficult given evidence for large droughts in the past," said Gabriele Hegerl of the University of Edinburgh.
Scientists often liken climate change to loading dice to get more sixes, or a baseball player on steroids who hits more home runs. That is now going to the local from the global scale.
Field said climate science would always include doubt since weather is chaotic. It is not as certain as physics, where scientists could this month express 99.999 percent certainty they had detected the Higgs boson elementary particle.
"This new attribution science is showing the power of our understanding, but it also illustrates where the limits are," he said.
A report by Field's U.N. group last year showed that more weather extremes that can be linked to greenhouse warming, such as the number of high temperature extremes and the fact that the rising fraction of rainfall falls in downpours.
But scientists warn against going too far in blaming climate change for extreme events.
Unprecedented floods in Thailand last year, for instance, that caused $45 billion in damage according to a World Bank estimate, were caused by people hemming in rivers and raising water levels rather than by climate change, a study showed.
"We have to be a bit cautious about blaming it all on climate change," Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the Met Office's Hadley Centre, said of extremes in 2012.
Taken together, many extremes are a sign of overall change.
"If you look all over the world, we have a great disastrous drought in North America ... you have the same situation in the Mediterranean... If you look at all the extremes together you can say that these are indicators of global warming," said Friedrich-Wilhelm Gerstengabe, a professor at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
(Additional reporting by Sara Ledwith in London; Editing by Louise Ireland)
Hey Patrap,
Did Little Anthony Watts give you permission to post this copy of his announcement tomorrow??
Me seriously doubts lil Anthony and I would ever cross paths intellectually, or socially.
I'm more the refined type you could say, Guv'na.
: )
Oh Darn......I was hoping that I could wrangle an invitation to the next WUWT Appreciation Dinner in New Orleans.
Bombshell: Koch-Funded Study Finds %u2018Global Warming Is Real
Link
That report will certainly set some portions of the Denialist Industry into a tizzy. In addition to announceing that he was suspending publication, comments and e-mails on his website, he said he was suspending his family vacation. I'm wondering if he's gotten himself into a situation that is involving lawyers. If he's planning on publishing something inflammatory, he may be locked up with his lawyers to word it in a way that is not libelous. Or, maybe he is being sued for previous libelous accusations and needs to stay home and plan his defense.
Just some uninformed thoughts on my part.
Viewing: 301 - 351
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 — Blog Index