"We have been building models and there are now robust contradictions," says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research. "Data from observation says global cooling. The physical model says it has to be warming."
"The fundamental laws of physics say that as the temperature goes up, it has to get warmer," Liu says.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology Inc www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com Precision electronic instrumentation
Come on, John. Everyone knows the "science of global warming is settled". The vote is in and taxes must rise.
More funding is needed.
As Groucho said. "Who are you going to believe, me or your own lying eyes?"
-- John Larkin Highland Technology Inc www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com Precision electronic instrumentation
I'm not a believer in global warming, but this just *has* to be an attempt to make them look stupid. It's too gross to succeed even at that.
Jeroen Belleman
More Climate change studies are needed to find out why it's cooling.
Cheers
No "attempt" is needed.
Good point. It's going to be expensive to force the climate into alignment with the models.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Nah, the warmingists just fudge any data they don't like.
te.html
says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research. "Data from observation says global cooling. The physical model says it has to be warmi ng."
t has to get warmer," Liu says.
". The vote is in and taxes must rise.
?"
Actually, it's all a matter of interpretation. As Fred Bloggs has pointed o ut, the reporter is an English-language science journalist, and she didn't really understand what she was being told.
There's nothing new or controversial about the fact that global temperature s peaked earlier in the Holocene (though the temperature doesn't seem to ha ve got as high as it is now), and that sea levels were a metre or so higher (because the early peak was sustained long enough to warm more of the ocea n and melt a bit more ice).
Nor is it surprising that models that don't include volcanic activity and v egetation changes don't capture these changes. Liu doesn't even mention cha nges in ocean currents - both the El Nino/La Nina alternation and the Atlan tic Multidecadal oscillation are known to make a difference, and while the Argo project is beginning to tell us what is going on at the moment, it's n ot going to be all that informative about what was going on some five thous and years ago.
As usual, John Larkin and krw don't understand what's being said, and have decided that what they do understand does fit with their delusions. Nothing new there.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
John Larkin not paying attention again. The relevant chunk of climate is the last ten thousand years - the period from the end of the last ice age until now.
It's kind of difficult to force history into alignment with anything.
The interest was in why the models weren't fitting the history entirely perfectly, and the extra funding would go on better - more complete - models, and on finding more - and more detailed - historical evidence of what was actually going on back then.
While our climate models are a lot better than John Larkin and James Arthur are prepared to credit, they could still be quite a bit better.
They are plenty good enough to tell us that we are going to hell in hand-basket, but not good enough to tell us precisely how fast, nor exactly how much - and exactly where - we ought to be spending now to avoid higher expenditures in the future.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
alignment with the models.
Krw being as irrational as ever. The whole point of the paper is to point out that current climate models don't fit the historical data as well as the investigators would like.
The authors clearly are "warmingists" (as opposed to "denialists") and they would scarcely have written their paper if they weren't taking the historical data seriously.
Krw doesn't think clearly enough - if at all - to realise that there was a point in there for him to miss.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On 17/08/14 07.13, Bill Sloman wrote: ...
One big problem fitting climate models is, that organisms are "kicking back" - sort of Gaia Effect:
Photosynthesizing cyanobacteria (and other biota/life) has been messing with earths climate - and even terraformed, so higher complex life (including us!) could take foothold:
The oxydizing of the earths crusts, oceans... took at least 3 billion years [at least 16% oxygen in the atmosphere - we can not breathe at less]:
BBC News, 28 September, 2001: The microbes that 'rule the world':
May 23, 2008, nationalgeographic.com: Hot Life-Forms Found a Mile Under Seafloor:
Penn State. (2004, May 6). Missing Chemical Important To Air Pollution Estimates. ScienceDaily:
Max Planck Society (2004, February 26). Astonishing Discovery Over The Amazonian Rain Forest. ScienceDaily:
California Institute of Technology (2009, August 7). Organic Carbon Compounds Emitted By Trees Affect Air Quality. ScienceDaily:
And now the "smoking gun":
Carnegie Mellon University. (2014, May 15). Emissions from forests influence very first stage of cloud formation. ScienceDaily:
Another "smoking gun":
26 February 2014 Smell of forest pine can limit climate change - researchers. New research suggests a strong link between the powerful smell of pine trees and climate change:"We have an instrument that is as wall-less as can be, we have a very high flow of air and a very short inlet line so that it is almost sampled right from atmosphere."
The scientists stress that the new understanding is not a panacea for climate change as forests will stop emitting vapours if they become too stressed from heat or lack of water. ... "If you go into a pine forest and notice that pine forest smell, that could be the smell that actually limits climate change from reaching such levels that it could become really a problem in the world." ..."
-Third "smoking gun":
NOAA: Oceanic Dimethylsulfide (DMS) and Climate:
Dimethylsulfide Emission: Climate Control by Marine Algae? (Released November 2003):
Netherlands Organization For Scientific Research (2004, November 24). Plankton Cool The Southern Hemisphere. ScienceDaily:
At least one point in history, Life was "out of Gaia order":
Snowball Earth:
-
A big organism:
7 August, 2000, Fantastic fungus find:A smart organism:
BBCNews: 27 September, 2000, When slime is not so thick:
Glenn
This ongoing series of "astonishing" and "amazing" and "significant" and "new understanding" discoveries mean that old climate models, and new ones to be developed over the next few decades, are all junk science.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology Inc www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com Precision electronic instrumentation
"new understanding" discoveries mean that old climate models, and new ones to be developed over the next few decades, are all junk science.
Since none of the stuff Glen was posting had much to do with current climat e models, the "junk science" involved is all in your understanding, rather than the climate models you claim to be complaining about. In fact all you are doing is channeling denialist propaganda that you picked up from the Mu rdoch press and initially failed to recognise as the junk that it is.
When somebody as vain as you are makes such an utter fool of himself, he's stuck with his idiotic position - humiliating as it must be to keep on post ing these idiocies, it would be even more humiliating to admit that you'd b een suckered back when you started recycling this nonsense and have never h ad the guts to admit it.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
te.html
says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research. "Dat a from observation says global cooling. The physical model says it has to b e warming."
t has to get warmer," Liu says.
t to make them look stupid. It's too gross to succeed even at that.
The original paper - there's a link to it on the URL that John Larkin poste d - is perfectly sensible, even if the English-language science journalist who wrote it up hasn't got a clue about what it's talking about.
Modelling the earth's climate through the current inter-glacial - roughly the last 10,000 years - is a reasonable project. We haven't got quite enoug h historical information to get it all that right, and I don't think that t he authors pay enough attention to the sea level fluctuations that we do kn ow about, but it's a useful project.
Climate modelling is good enough to nail the gross differences between ice- ages and inter-glacials. The finer changes within the current inter-glacial are a bit harder to sort out - ocean currents moving around are a fairly o bvious problem, and not that easy to infer from the historical data we've b een able to find so far.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Ok, which US school did you go to? It took me about three years to get my MS:ECE at UCSB...
Charlie
I was speaking of the college of liberal arts and sciences, that's where cell biology is located.
ate.html
"
it
Easily fixed, for a terabuck or two, a bargain at twice the price:
And the roast pheasant is free...
Cheers, James
Balderdash. It's not true until Al Gore says it.
Cheers, James Arthur
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.