Subscribe: Comments for RealClimate
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/hurricane-heat/feed/
Preview: Comments for RealClimate

Comments for RealClimate



Climate science from climate scientists...



Last Build Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:50:32 +0000

 



Comment on Joy plots for climate change by SellaTheChemist

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:50:32 +0000

Joy plots? In chemistry we've plotted data like this for years, such as for the time evolution of NMR spectra. They've always been called "stack plots", in which in addition to the y-offset there is a small x-offset to allow changes in peak intensity to be clear. An example is shown here. http://www.process-nmr.com/pdfs/Reaction_Monitoring/tBuOH%20Reaction%20-%20Whitewashed.jpg There's nothing new under the sun, it seems.



Comment on Red team/Blue team Day 1 by Brian Dodge

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:35:15 +0000

MAR - To their credit, the Heartland Institute did run a billboard pointing out that one had to be crazier than Ted "Unabomber" Kaczynski to doubt AGW. They were reportedly planning billboards featuring Pol Pot and Fidel Castro, but for some reason abandoned the project.....&;>)



Comment on Joy plots for climate change by Brian Dodge

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:39:17 +0000

What rough beasts, their hour come round at last, Slouch towards Bethlehem to be born, bringing the destruction of the heavens by fire, and melting the elements in the heat? https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/04/07/no-slouch/ biblehub.com/2_peter/3-10.htm



Comment on The climate has always changed. What do you conclude? by Brian Dodge

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 07:56:14 +0000

Victor https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/slide05.png http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1930/scale:110/offset:310/mean:12/plot/esrl-co2/plot/gistemp/from:1937/to:1970/scale:110/offset:310/trend/plot/gistemp/from:1970/scale:110/offset:310/trend/plot/gistemp/from:1992/scale:110/offset:310/trend You will note from the first graph that there was a flattening of the rise in CO2 from ~1930 to ~1950, which "correlates" with a delayed decrease in temperature between ~1937 and ~1977. about 20 years after CO2 starts rising again ~1950, the rise in temperature resumes. As the rise in CO2 accelerates, the rise in temperature accelerates. The correlation coefficient for monthly CO2 versus temperature is 0.886. If one takes a 12 month running average to remove noise before calculation the correlation, it rises to 0.948.



Comment on Unforced variations: July 2017 by Susan Anderson

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 06:29:32 +0000

Should have occurred to me to look at Neven's Forum. Several relevant observations about currents and stresses near A68 (Antarctica) about here: http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1175.msg120954.html#msg120954



Comment on Climate Sensitivity Estimates and Corrections by Russell Seitz

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 03:44:34 +0000

"Others have identified the lags in the southern ocean (which warms more slowly than the northern hemisphere, and northern land in particular) as the source of this time dependence of feedbacks, and we’ve demonstrated that different forcings have subtly different impacts – ' It might help Peter Huybers and his collegues if we understood more about the temperature response of the albedo of the calcite belt, and other bioogically variable components of radiative equilibrium that impact SST in both the southern ocean and the arctic seas



Comment on Joy plots for climate change by Hank Roberts

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 02:46:30 +0000

Good grief, look where Richard Hood works: http://bestcarboncapture.ca/



Comment on Climate Sensitivity Estimates and Corrections by Andrew

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 02:19:08 +0000

47 - "I view the ESS models as academic exercises..." There is no such thing as an "ESS model". Again, ESS and lag are "emerging properties" in GCM models. I refer you to past discussions of ESS here on realclimate. "... and the regression models as relevant to policy..." Regression models? Regression analysis is a fine tool for many things, but it's of limited value to determine a relevant value of ESS, compared to GCM models. "... since in practice the only policy being discussed is limiting CO2." Nope. While CO2 atmospheric concentration undeniably remains the main driver of climate change, CO2 is not the only GHG, and peaking and reducing CO2 emissions is not the ONLY policy being discussed. Climate change mitigation and adaptation policies discussions go way beyond discussing just CO2 atmospheric concentration numbers. Sorry, but it seems you have got it all wrong.



Comment on Joy plots for climate change by Digby Scorgie

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 01:25:45 +0000

Richard Hood @25 The temperature distributions shift to the warmer side by about a degree -- and this is not showing an increasing temperature? I'm stunned.



Comment on The climate has always changed. What do you conclude? by Thomas

Fri, 28 Jul 2017 00:42:41 +0000

Explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074959780700060X Lots of graphs and data here for Victor to 'analyze' for their scientific rigour and critical thinking or lack thereof: Refs http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2017/20170718_BurdenCommunication.pdf Received: 22 Sep 2016 – Discussion started: 04 Oct 2016 Revised: 29 May 2017 – Accepted: 08 Jun 2017 – Published: 18 Jul 2017 - Abstract https://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/8/577/2017/esd-8-577-2017.html Paper in full https://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/8/577/2017/esd-8-577-2017.pdf --- Or better still, Mount Stupid should 'analyse' these Papers for 'critical thinking skill' and 'logic' and 'evidence' and 'cognitive bias'??? https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=dunning+kruger+effect http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect (sigh)