Subscribe: Comments for RealClimate
Preview: Comments for RealClimate

Comments for RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

Last Build Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 14:03:25 +0000


Comment on Nenana Ice Classic 2017 by Dan H.

Sun, 28 May 2017 14:03:25 +0000

Titus, Yes, we certainly have plenty of peanuts. Whenever we have a particularly hot or cold year, wet or dry, high or low sea ice, etc., the appropriate peanuts make exceptional claims, based on short term (1 year) data. They then retreat into their shells until the next event occurs.

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Dan

Sun, 28 May 2017 12:24:48 +0000

re:74. Wow. Quite reprehensible and puerile (oh sorry, look the word up). You are back to insulting the hosts who are far more educated about climate change than you? Clue for you: People have lives.

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Charles Hughes

Sun, 28 May 2017 09:59:00 +0000

224 Victor says: 24 May 2017 at 10:56 Weaktor, the borehole beckons your return. You're not providing any scientific enlightnment and, since Summer is just around the corner why don't you take a vacation. We deserve it.

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by MA Rodger

Sun, 28 May 2017 07:39:51 +0000

Dennis Coyne @222, The actual paper Krissansen-Totton & Catling (2017) 'Constraining climate sensitivity and continental versus seafloor weathering using an inverse geological carbon cycle model' is here. The article you link (or more correctly, the Uni of Washington article it repeats) is surely mistaken in saying-
"Their calculations also indicate a stronger relationship between atmospheric CO2 and temperature, known as climate sensitivity. Doubling CO2 in the atmosphere eventually triggered an increase of 5 or 6 degrees Celsius in global temperatures, which is about twice the typical projections for temperature change over centuries for a similar doubling of CO2 due to human emissions."
This is a bit odd as it should be well known that ECS does not take account of the sort of long-term effects (eg rock weathering) examined by the paper. That long-term effects do result in a higher climate sensitivity is surely quite well known (as per figure 7 of Hansen & Sato (2012)(PDF) and Krissansen-Totton & Catling simply confirms this finding, stating their work "supports the view that the long-term climate sensitivity of the Earth system is greater than the fast-feedback Charnay sensitivity captured by Global Circulation Models (GCMs)."

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Thomas

Sun, 28 May 2017 04:42:26 +0000

228 E. Swanson, PS

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Thomas

Sun, 28 May 2017 04:38:15 +0000

228 E. Swanson I agree. Especially about EV renewable electicity supply is concerned. A factoid, Car Production in China is avg 2 million units per month the last year or so. Then comes light trucks, heavy trucks and buses on top of that. While Car Production in the United States is avg 3.7 million units per MONTH. That's almost 70 million units per year from only two nations; and does NOT include other big producers Korea/Japan nor all those Corporations manufacturing in developing nations. That is not going to stop anytime soon. Neither will military hardware production which dwarfs car manufacturing as far as tax imposts, resources and energy use is concerned. re Trump may well be the best geopolitical opportunity climate science and agw/cc environmental activists have had for decades. Unfortunately people do not think or observe holistically what's right in front to their faces. They are all ignoring his driving motivation for being there in the first place which is his personal historical legacy. No one is more motivated or effective in challenging entrenched religious myths and the harm down by such fraudulent beliefs and faux ideologies than Apostates are. Trump has the potential to be the greatest Apostate to take up the cause of saving the planet ever seen. Why? Because he holds his beliefs and opinions very very lightly. He is not an ideological fanatic himself, he's there now for other reasons. Unfortunately there is probably no one in CS etc who has the ability to manipulate him toward the truth of AGW/CC and make him change his opinion and then self-motivate him to act on that. It would only take 3 wise men 10 minutes to do so, but alas, they either do not exist or do not believe they are up to the job. Sadly everyone has forgotten (or minimise) the fact that without Reagan and Thatcher there would probably never been a Rio Summit or an IPCC and the massive funding of climate science that followed. But people are generally stupid and much prefer "fighting someone" and being "right" than winning! And so here we are ... "Like it or not, we are all along for the ride as humanity heads toward the cliff. Pass the popcorn and another beer, it’s time for the TRUMP SHOW…" instead! (smile)

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Thomas

Sun, 28 May 2017 03:56:37 +0000

#229 Russell “What do you really think about geoengineering?" At the risk of repeating myself and the truth, it's just another mythical Ponzi Scheme for the Neoliberal Cult.

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Thomas

Sun, 28 May 2017 03:53:39 +0000

232 Scott Strough, it might be maths but it is still nothing but a Theory you're presenting that is utterly disconnected from the real world of how life and economics actually works in the world now, today, and next year, and in a decade and in 2 decades. Forecasting theoretical hypothetical mathematics into the future is useless when it does not accommodate the real world with real people living in it and how those with power actually think and what they believe. That you say that the whole thing can be solved by Ag carbon sequestration even if emissions are not cut dramatically is telling me you're just another Neoliberal fantasy merchantman pushing a barrow to no where. Your numbers may add up right, for you, but so what? That changes nothing.

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Thomas

Sun, 28 May 2017 03:44:08 +0000

#231 Alastair McDonald, "I had hoped it would make more impact than wait and see." Sorry you misunderstand me, it's wasn't a comment about yoru work. I am speaking from a pov of where I have been for over a decade already. It's a global experiment with an obvious result where the detailed specifics of who/what is "right" no longer matters. Most will freak out at the CO2 saturation point which I'm nonplussed about as well as what exactly is ECS, IPO, SLR etc. Past history cannot predict the experimental results because this experiment is unprecedented, it can only guide one's thinking about it for good or ill. That neg feedbacks in ARs of obvious coming changes in systemic climate dynamics are excluded from RCPs speaks volumes to me. So opinions including the consensus opinion does not matter one bit. What you present makes sense to me, at least your communication is clearer with explaining what you think is the key. That's a plus (even though no one with the power to drive change is listening or will listen) but still we are all at a point of having to wait and see because 1) no one really knows in the Climate science arena, and 2) nothing is being done (or will/can be done) to stop the key drivers of climate change now.

Comment on Unforced Variations: May 2017 by Theo van den Berg

Sun, 28 May 2017 01:49:15 +0000

You guys have been debating Climate Change for many years and obviously it is getting us nowhere, specially recently in the US, Australia and even EU. Might it be a good idea to accept that all life on our world, first grows slowly, then blooms and dies. Our bloom was the previous century. This century is NOT hopeful, but part of that natural cycle. Eventually we will also use ALL nuclear power, exhaust all our resources, fight with everyone for more and sex will require a special permit. In 60s, Kennedy gave humanity hope for a continued existence, but in the 00s, while slowly boiling in a pot of water, we mainly concern ourselves with our own current comforts. Climate Change activists are greatly to blame for that, attacking people's way of life and putting them on the defensive. I no longer enjoy nature documentaries, cause they always point out, how beautiful it was and how we are destroying it. The navel gazing in AUS includes a national apology for invading the place 200 years ago??? The EU has at least 2000 years of apologizing to do and the US should now apologize for dropping the ball. Maybe Trump is right and we should just make the most of what we've got left. But instead of letting that flower die, maybe we can use some seeds or clone it and plant it in someone else's garden. And no apologies needed, after all, survival belongs to the fittest !