Stratospheric water vapor decline credited with slowing global warming

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 6:18 PM GMT on January 29, 2010

Share this Blog
6
+

After a steep rise in global average temperatures in the 1990s, the 2000s have seen relatively flat temperatures, despite increasing levels of CO2 emissions by humans. This reduced warming may be partially due to a sharp decrease in stratospheric water vapor that began after 2000, according to research published yesterday in Science by a team of researchers led by Dr. Susan Solomon of NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder. Water vapor is a potent greenhouse gas capable of significantly warming the planet, and its potency is much higher when it is located in the lower stratosphere where temperatures are extremely cold. Greenhouse gases located in cold regions of the atmosphere are more effective at heating the planet because they absorb heat radiation from the Earth's relatively warm surface, but then re-emit energy at a much colder temperature, resulting in less heat energy lost to space. Even though stratospheric water vapor can exist at concentrations more than 100 times lower than at the surface, the 10% drop in stratospheric water vapor since 2000 noted by Solomon et al. acted to slow down global warming by 25% between 2000 - 2009, compared to that which would have occurred due only to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.


Figure 1. Stratospheric water vapor in the tropics, between 5°S - 5°N, as measured by the HALOE instrument on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS), between 1993 - 2005. The bottom portion of the plot shows the lower stratosphere, just above where tall thunderstorms are able to transport water vapor into the stratosphere. A strong yearly cycle is evident in the water vapor, due to the seasonal variation in heavy thunderstorms over the tropics. Once in the lower stratosphere, the waver vapor takes about 1.2 years to travel to the upper stratosphere, as seen in the bending of the contours to the right with height. Note that beginning in 2001, very low water vapor concentrations less than 2.2 parts per million by volume (ppmv) began appearing in the lower stratosphere, due to substantial cooling. Image credit: Rosenlof, K. H., and G. C. Reid (2008), Trends in the temperature and water vapor content of the tropical lower stratosphere: Sea surface connection, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D06107, doi:10.1029/2007JD009109.

The observations
We haven't been able to observe water vapor in the stratosphere very long--accurate global measurements only go back to 1991, when the HALOE instrument aboard the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS) began taking data (Figure 1). Stratospheric water vapor showed an increase of about 0.5 parts per million by volume (ppmv) during the 1990s. But after 2000, a sudden drop of 0.4 ppmv was observed, and this decrease has persisted into 2009. To see how these changes impacted the amount of global warming, Solomon et al. fed the observations into a specialized high-resolution model that computed the change in heat from the fluctuating water vapor levels. They found that the increase in stratospheric water vapor in the 1990s led to about a 30% increase in the amount of global warming observed during that decade, and the decrease of 0.4 ppmv since 2000 led to a 25% reduction between 2000 - 2009.

How water vapor gets into the stratosphere
The stratosphere has two main sources of water vapor: transport from the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) via tall thunderstorms, and the chemical breakdown of methane gas into water vapor and carbon dioxide. With regard to greenhouse effect warming, transport of water vapor by thunderstorms is the most important source, since this mechanism delivers water vapor to the lowest part of the stratosphere, where temperatures are coldest and greenhouse gases are more effective at warming the climate. There is a limit as to how much water vapor that can enter the stratosphere via thunderstorms, though. Temperature decreases with altitude from the surface to the bottom of the stratosphere, where they begin to rise with height due to the solar energy-absorbing effect of the stratospheric ozone layer. As moisture-laden air rises in thunderstorms towards the lower stratosphere, it encounters the atmosphere's "cold point"--the coldest point in the lower atmosphere, at the base of the stratosphere. Since the amount of water vapor that can be present in the atmosphere decreases as the temperature gets colder, and moisture being transported to the stratosphere must traverse through the "cold point" of the atmosphere, the air gets "freeze dried" and loses most of its moisture.


Figure 2. The departure from average of tropopause temperature (dark line) and Sea Surface Temperature (light dashed line) for the tropical Pacific Ocean between 10°S - 10°N, from 1981 - 2007. The tropopause is the bottom boundary of the stratosphere. The SST data is for 139°W - 171°W longitude, and is from the NOAA Optimal Interpolation v2 data set. The tropopause data is from balloon soundings, for the region 171°W - 200°W. The SST is plotted so that the anomalies increase as one looks down. Note that prior to about 2000, tropopause temperatures and SSTs increased and decreased together, but that beginning in 2000 - 2001, a sharp climate shift occurred, and the two quantities became anti-correlated. The sudden drop in tropopause temperature in 2000 - 2001 caused a sharp drop in stratospheric water vapor. Image credit: Rosenlof, K. H., and G. C. Reid (2008), Trends in the temperature and water vapor content of the tropical lower stratosphere: Sea surface connection, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D06107, doi:10.1029/2007JD009109.

Why did stratospheric water vapor drop in 2000?
Tall thunderstorms capable of delivering water vapor into the stratosphere occur primarily in the tropics, particularly over the Western Pacific, where a huge warm pool with very high Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) exists. In 2000, this region experienced a sharp increase in SST of 0.25°C, which has remained consistent though the 2000s (Figure 2). Coincident with this increase in SST came a sharp drop in the "cold point" temperature of the tropopause--the lower boundary of the stratosphere. This reduction in "cold point" temperature meant that less water vapor could make it into the stratosphere over the Tropical Pacific, since more thunderstorm water was getting "freeze dried" out. Did global warming trigger this increase in Pacific SST, resulting in cooling of the "cold point" and less water vapor in the stratosphere? Or was it random variation due to some decades-long natural cycle? This key question was left unanswered by the Solomon et al. study, and observations of stratospheric water vapor don't go back far enough to offer a reasonable guess. One factor arguing against global warming having triggered a negative feedback of this nature is that prior to 2000, increases in Western Pacific SST caused increases in "cold point" temperatures--behavior opposite of what has been seen since 2000.

If global warming has triggered the decrease in stratospheric water vapor seen since 2000, it could mean that the climate models have predicted too much global warming, since they don't predict that such a negative feedback exists. On the other hand, if this is a natural cycle, we can expect the recent flattening in global temperatures to average out in the long run, with a return to steeper increases in temperature in the coming decades. Climate models currently do a poor job modeling the complex dynamics of water vapor in the stratosphere, and are not much help figuring out what's going on. Complicating the issue is the fact that about 15% of all thunderstorms capable of delivering water vapor into the stratosphere are generated by tropical cyclones (Rosenlof and Reid, 2008), and tropical cyclones are not well-treated by climate models. We also have to factor in the impact of stratospheric ozone loss, which acts to cool the lower stratosphere. This effect should gradually decrease in future decades as CFC levels decline, though. The stratosphere is a devilishly complicated place that can have a significant impact on global climate change, and we are many years from understanding what is going on there.

References
Romps, D.M., and Z. Kuang, "Overshooting convection in tropical cyclones", Geophysical Research Letters, 2009; 36 (9): L09804 DOI: 10.1029/2009GL037396

Rosenlof, K. H., and G. C. Reid (2008), Trends in the temperature and water vapor content of the tropical lower stratosphere: Sea surface connection, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D06107, doi:10.1029/2007JD009109.

Portlight Haiti update
Paul Timmons, who directs the Portlight.org disaster-relief charity that has sprung up from the hard work and dedication of many members of the wunderground.com community, was interviewed by NBC yesterday. The reporter doing the story is planning to follow the Portlight-donated goods to Haiti and interview the people with disabilities that receive the donations. It is uncertain when the story will be aired, but I'll try to give everyone a heads-up.

Next post
My next post will probably be Tuesday (Groundhog's Day), when I plan to discuss Phil's forecast for the rest of winter. I'll throw in my two cents worth, too.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

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.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 453 - 403

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog Index

A bit off topic (if that is OK?), but interesting from yesterday :)

Dinosaur Discovery Helps Solve Piece of Evolutionary Puzzle
ScienceDaily (Jan. 29, 2010)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:
i don't much like that warm water from the yuc strait north ward still a couple of months of cooling left hopefully it cools some more
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
What in particular you refering to? Maybe you judge to much from your own state of knowledge.
you are not as smart as you think you are
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 176 Comments: 55519
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 427 Comments: 129419
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 427 Comments: 129419
448. P451
Quoting BDAwx:
BDA News on Storm This storm was the storm that moved off US east coast on 22nd and started to look slightly tropical. I think it is the same storm (or a previous life) that is now at about 30N, 30W.


Interesting. Thanks!
Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
447. P451
Presslord, Dr. M liked the photo.

Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
446. P451
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


A large portion of glaciers are well over 10,000 years old, and they do not restore that quickly after melting, if at all. Chacaltaya melted in 2009, and it was 18,000 years old.

That's called not-in-my-lifetime syndrome (NIMLTS). What if abprupt changes occur in our lifetime? What about the next generation (do you even care about the future after your own)?




Nah, you got me, I really don't give a crap what happens after I'm done here. Perhaps that's part of the problem? Probably.

Meanwhile I don't believe we're all going to die anytime soon due to "global warming". I just don't. I don't think we know enough to make that assumption. I think Global Warming is a theory. Unfortunately those who firmly believe in Global Warming don't want to listen to anyone but themselves. That's a shame because they don't have it right.

They might have the right idea but they don't have the right science.



Quoting AstroHurricane001:




Please, do not insult each other over conflicting interests. Disagreements are fine but there is no need to make them escalate into off-topic conflict.


This should not be directed at me but rather the person I directed it towards. We're all a bit headstrong here, and he has some interesting things to say, but he's attacking well respected posters. That usually means he's going to get a 'time out'.
Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
445. P451
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
You mean you will be gone, before you know about it?

World's glaciers continue to melt at historic rates

Latest figures show the world's glaciers are continuing to melt so fast that many will disappear by the middle of this century

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/25/world-glacier-monitoring-service-figures


I think we will all be long gone before we even know what it is that we're witnessing. Of which, might simply be business as usual, but we won't know.

Why? Because you can't predict climate based off of the 150 years of known records....let alone the 20 odd years of substantial records that we can trust.

We just can't. How can you predict thousands of years worth of records based off of a couple of dozen years?

We can't.

We're in the dawn of science of this planet. It would be foolish to predict it's future based off of this short period in time.

Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
444. BDAwx
BDA News on Storm This storm was the storm that moved off US east coast on 22nd and started to look slightly tropical. I think it is the same storm (or a previous life) that is now at about 30N, 30W.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
All of this climate change bickering is great fun, but regardless of your stance on the issue, if you've got clear skies right now, look east -- full moon with a very bright Mars directly above it. We are actually quite small and insignificant when you think about it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:
I'm pretty sure someone said climate change would be perfectly obvious within 2 months (that was said on Jan 28). So, either we will be witnessing something special by March 28, or...

Hey, wait. Hmmmm.

I hate to admit it, but he's right! It will be spring...

But if we aren't seeing anything special, outside if NORMAL spring can we go ahead and stop the chicken little stuff? One day (who knows?) a wolf might really be in with the sheep.

(Sry, tired of chasing the latest "Eeeek, this is wild and crazy and not normal for El Nino and/or winter")


I'm pretty sure most people in North America have already seen unusual weather this winter, and unusual weather patterns have occured in the previous few years as well. I have tried to make specific predictions, and some of them have been correct, while others have been wrong due to the erratic nature of weather. For example, I predicted that, while Typhoon Nida was spinning itself weaker, that the subtropical ridge would drift west in its absense, filling in the gap produced by Nida, allowing arctic air to sink into the Central Western Pacific, weakening the westerly winds in the Western Pacific, strengthening the Counter-Equatorial current, and allowing the West Pacific warm pool to drift east, becoming the El Nino warm pool (El Nino Modoki). This did occur, although I did not predict the sudden chain of North Central Pacific extratropical storms injected by Nida into the jet stream, strengthening the PNA, filling in the Hudson Bay low by strengthening it (this was early December), adding an extra boost into the North American storms, the first of which occured December 1, the day after I saw a mosquito in my house fly in from outside. Since this is such an inter-connected and complex system, specific predictions are possible, but they will usually be off by at least a bit. However, according to one of my peers, "supercomputers can't even do that".
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Check it. Has the correction from 2007 been changed back?

Top 10 GISS U.S. Temperature deviation (deg C) in New Order 8/7/2007
Year Old New
1934 1.23 1.25
1998 1.24 1.23
1921 1.12 1.15
2006 1.23 1.13
1931 1.08 1.08
1999 0.94 0.93
1953 0.91 0.90
1990 0.88 0.87
1938 0.85 0.86
1939 0.84 0.85

Here's the old order of top 10 yearly temperatures.
Year Old New
1998 1.24 1.23
1934 1.23 1.25
2006 1.23 1.13
1921 1.12 1.15
1931 1.08 1.08
1999 0.94 0.93
1953 0.91 0.90
2001 0.90 0.76
1990 0.88 0.87
1938 0.85 0.86


439- Then that would confirm the entire peer review process is the same. Same process different opinions :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I'm pretty sure someone said climate change would be perfectly obvious within 2 months (that was said on Jan 28). So, either we will be witnessing something special by March 28, or...

Hey, wait. Hmmmm.

I hate to admit it, but he's right! It will be spring...

But if we aren't seeing anything special, outside if NORMAL spring can we go ahead and stop the chicken little stuff? One day (who knows?) a wolf might really be in with the sheep.

(Sry, tired of chasing the latest "Eeeek, this is wild and crazy and not normal for El Nino and/or winter")
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:
Try some of these for a different flavor.

Note, some other blogger dismissed these peer reviewed papers for some dated back to the 80's. That is kinda like saying the theory of relativity would no longer be applicable because its old :)

L8R

500 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of "Man-Made" Global Warming


No it was early 2000's and it was solar flux. I did that list its a sham.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
You seem confused. Glaciers do not melt on a regular basis.


No not really even on a perceptible one in theory. Not most all of them. More study needs to be done there.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


You are looking at weekly measurements, while I'm comparing daily SSTs. The rate of retreat in the Gulf Stream near Scandinavia has been rapid, but it has been bobbing back and forth as the current rapidly changes course, and duing a period in late December to early January, the current weakened and broke into eddies, before restrengthening suddenly and plunging into the Labrador Sea. This cycle appears to be repeating itself.


You do realize why we look at weekly and monthly plots of SST, right? Most of our satellite sensors capable of giving us a SST value are not capable of seeing through clouds. If you use a filled-in SST map, it is a composite of multiple day's-worth of satellite passes and or an analysis using what available surface obs exist to adjust old satellite pixels. If it is cloudy in an area for a few days, that area will not update in most of those plots until the next clear pass. (and if you find out exactly what source the WU map has, I would really like to know)

So if you stare at one of those filled-in SST plots a few areas will stay the same from one day to the next, and then (especially in the case of long-term cloudiness spanning weeks or months) suddenly show drastic changes...of course.

I have seen official SST sources show 50 F for Lake Winnipeg through January, though it was frozen over, as it had been cloudy for 2 months during the satellite passes (last year).

Using a daily SST for anything must have a GOES IR plot side-by-side and has huge caveats.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
You mean you will be gone, before you know about it?

World's glaciers continue to melt at historic rates

Latest figures show the world's glaciers are continuing to melt so fast that many will disappear by the middle of this century

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/25/world-glacier-monitoring-service-fig ures


If my estimates are correct, some drastic climate shifts could occur by the mid-2010s.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting P451:


It really wouldn't surprise me to see a May tropical storm or a S.Atlantic system this upcoming year.

One thing I paid attention to was the fact that despite all the shear, dry air, and dust.... almost every system that formed this year was VERY tough. They seemed to almost not care about the hostile environment.

It wouldn't phase me to see some interesting events this coming season.


It would be very exciting to see hurricanes like this, but if some of my scenarios unfold then it would mean that something very serious is going on with the climate system. The North Atlantic Gyre is unravelling as previously stated, and this could have devastating effects on populations within hurricane-prone areas (and areas not previously prone to hurricanes). Anybody remember Cyclone Catarina? Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting P451:


I'll be in a hole long gone before we know what we're witnessing.
You mean you will be gone, before you know about it?

World's glaciers continue to melt at historic rates

Latest figures show the world's glaciers are continuing to melt so fast that many will disappear by the middle of this century

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/25/world-glacier-monitoring-service-figures
Member Since: September 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting P451:


Yes they do. They also evaporate. They also march to the ocean and break off because they have no where else to go. The grow in the winter and retreat in the summer. The grow during seasons of high snowfall and retreat during seasons of low snowfall.

They are a dynamic feature as is all of weather and nature.

They are not static as you want them to be.

Too many people analyze our weather and our planet as a static entity that does not change. So when they see it change they think they are witnessing some grand event. When in fact they are merely witnessing the ebb and flow of life.

But, well, none of this matters, I'll be in a hole long gone before we know what we're witnessing.


A large portion of glaciers are well over 10,000 years old, and they do not restore that quickly after melting, if at all. Chacaltaya melted in 2009, and it was 18,000 years old.

That's called not-in-my-lifetime syndrome (NIMLTS). What if abprupt changes occur in our lifetime? What about the next generation (do you even care about the future after your own)?


Quoting P451:


You really need to chill. You're being disrespectful to well respected members of this community. You will be the one getting banned before anyone else.


Please, do not insult each other over conflicting interests. Disagreements are fine but there is no need to make them escalate into off-topic conflict.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
432. P451
Quoting AstroHurricane001:
403:


422, 423:

Wow! That's the East Coast Nor'easter drifting south (due to the Bermuda High being displaced). Here's a link for more archives of satellite imagery: Link

The North Atlantic Gyre is getting messed up. If there's something truly unusual going on, we'll see when the Atlantic hurricane season rolls around. Some strange things that could potentially happen are early-season hurricanes, hurricanes in the Caribbean in June and July, a hurricane in the South Atlantic, a tropical storm entering the Mediterranean after going through warm waters north of the Bermuda High, extratropical storms curving west of Greenland, a hurricane diverting the Gulf Stream into New York, Cape Verde storms curving back east to hit Africa, tropical storms hitting France and England, storm remnants producing tornado outbreaks in the Midwest and Canada, storms being nearly stationary in the Gulf, cross-overs from Tehuantepec, tropical storms in Costa Rica and Panama, etc.


It really wouldn't surprise me to see a May tropical storm or a S.Atlantic system this upcoming year.

One thing I paid attention to was the fact that despite all the shear, dry air, and dust.... almost every system that formed this year was VERY tough. They seemed to almost not care about the hostile environment.

It wouldn't phase me to see some interesting events this coming season.
Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
431. P451
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
Reported for spam (you posted this already).


You really need to chill. You're being disrespectful to well respected members of this community. You will be the one getting banned before anyone else.
Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
403:

Milankovic cycles are one way to determine the causes of past glacial cycles. Remember that the two warmest years on record in terms of lower tropospheric measurements were 1998 and 2005, meaning that temperatures over the past decade were generally stable with an upward trend, not cooling. Since a rapid shift occured in water vapor trends in 2000, such a shift could easily occur again, as the increase in CO2 concentrations could mean more tipping points are passed. The water vapor content may be decreasing in the lower stratosphere, but the cooling in that area is a likely direct result of warming in the troposphere, as predicted by climate models, and water vapor in the lower troposphere is still increasing, reducing more of the greenhouse effect to the surface and oceans. We also only have data for a small portion of the upper atmosphere, so this may not represent the whole picture. The point is that while negative feedbacks are present, if we keep putting CO2 into the atmosphere, the likelihood of positive feedbacks overwhelming the system and accelerating the climate into a new state increases. More tipping points will be passed, along with more extremes in all directions, more long-term effects and more ecological damage. There is plenty of uncertainty as the climate system can be fairly erratic, but continuing to feed CO2 into the atmosphere is like feeding a patient a drug without knowing the long-term effects, similar to how we have seen the short-term implications but know little about the longer term.

405, 406:

Methane clathrate releases were observed in 2008 off the Lena river in the Siberian Arctic Ocean, and in 2009 west of Spitsbergen, in the Barents Sea and west of North America. I have only put together an archive of SSTs because I had a hunch that a major change in ocean currents was occuring, so I do not looked at a sequence of changes for other years. However, the shift in the Gulf Stream to west of Greenland is probably unprecedented, as is the disruption of the Humboldt from the southwest and northeast. More info: Link, Link, Link

Also, not all the ice on the planet currently melts. In East Antarctica, some of the ice is as much as four kilometres thick. Arctic sea ice melts easier if it is not several years old.





413:

You are looking at weekly measurements, while I'm comparing daily SSTs. The rate of retreat in the Gulf Stream near Scandinavia has been rapid, but it has been bobbing back and forth as the current rapidly changes course, and duing a period in late December to early January, the current weakened and broke into eddies, before restrengthening suddenly and plunging into the Labrador Sea. This cycle appears to be repeating itself. In your maps, I can see the "flatness" of the ~20C SSTs, the weakness of the Gulf Stream east of the US, and the fact that the Humboldt's current does not reach the equator shortly after turning westward.

In the anomalies map, the cold anomalies in the Gulf Stream and Kushiro currents show up shortly after turning eastward. In the Atlantic, the warm anomalies are over the cooler part of the North Atlantic Gyre and the cooler ones persist over the warm current. Only recently did warm anomalies reach Pine Island Bay in Antarctica. The warm anomalies from Ecuador currently stretch all the way to northern Chile, undermining the Humboldt from the northeast. The ENSO warm pool is now again almost entirely east of 180W, due to the gash in its western side and Nisha.

417:

There is no such thing as an "unskeptical scientist". Most climate scientists were skeptical of global warming at first, but became more convinced as time went on.

422, 423:

Wow! That's the East Coast Nor'easter drifting south (due to the Bermuda High being displaced). Here's a link for more archives of satellite imagery: Link

The North Atlantic Gyre is getting messed up. If there's something truly unusual going on, we'll see when the Atlantic hurricane season rolls around. Some strange things that could potentially happen are early-season hurricanes, hurricanes in the Caribbean in June and July, a hurricane in the South Atlantic, a tropical storm entering the Mediterranean after going through warm waters north of the Bermuda High, extratropical storms curving west of Greenland, a hurricane diverting the Gulf Stream into New York, Cape Verde storms curving back east to hit Africa, tropical storms hitting France and England, storm remnants producing tornado outbreaks in the Midwest and Canada, storms being nearly stationary in the Gulf, cross-overs from Tehuantepec, tropical storms in Costa Rica and Panama, etc.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting bean9357:
We should declare water vapor a pollutant like co2 & ban it. Hell, just kill all life & the world will be SAVED!

Actualy if you had read a little you would know that water vapor amount can be attributed to methane.
Member Since: September 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
428. P451
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
You seem confused. Glaciers do not melt on a regular basis.


Yes they do. They also evaporate. They also march to the ocean and break off because they have no where else to go. The grow in the winter and retreat in the summer. The grow during seasons of high snowfall and retreat during seasons of low snowfall.

They are a dynamic feature as is all of weather and nature.

They are not static as you want them to be.

Too many people analyze our weather and our planet as a static entity that does not change. So when they see it change they think they are witnessing some grand event. When in fact they are merely witnessing the ebb and flow of life.

But, well, none of this matters, I'll be in a hole long gone before we know what we're witnessing.
Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
we just dont really understand as much as we think we understand P451
What in particular you refering to? Maybe you judge to much from your own state of knowledge.
Member Since: September 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting P451:


It freezes and it melts. It builds up and it breaks down.

We simply don't quite know where we are in this pattern.

You seem confused. Glaciers do not melt on a regular basis.
Member Since: September 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
424. P451
Posted January 22nd....




The main system blew off the coast and is now wrapping up like a hybrid storm. Several systems have done this since Sept. This one is very impressive.










And later that day...


It's trying to go tropical. Amazing.




Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
423. P451
Quoting jipmg:
This is interesting "upper right"

http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/goes/east/catl/loop-ft.html


The blob?




Yeah, perhaps a bit hybrid. It isn't the first. Many systems have gone a bit hybrid this fall and winter. One went big time (I had posted loops of it) and most everyone ignored it. Had it been summer you would have had an outcry of "why wasn't it named! The NHC is ridiculous!"

I dumped the file though. Maybe I should have kept it. It was quite impressive.

Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
422. jipmg
This is interesting "upper right"

http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/goes/east/catl/loop-ft.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
All right I know that I can not post this in the blog that Portlight has, as there is no place for comments. Can someone get in touch with either Paul or Patrap about figuring out if there is anyway we as bloggers here can put our voices out there and get the Medical Airlifts restarted?

Apparently due to funding they have stopped airlifting injured Haitians to the US which is basically keeping what they are doing on the USNS Comfort at bay. We need to figure out how we can get that going again.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Unreasonable Skepticism is just as bad as anti science. When it stifles discovery it is the SAME.

IPCC attempted a holistic approach towards climate that has never been attempted before. And did a good job. IMHO.

We should assist them is getting it right.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:


Sience
(from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is, in its broadest sense, any systematic knowledge-base or prescriptive practice that is capable of resulting in a prediction or predictable type of outcome. In this sense, science may refer to a highly skilled technique or practice.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting bean9357:
We should declare water vapor a pollutant like co2 & ban it. Hell, just kill all life & the world will be SAVED!


No we should try and understand the whole process, make reasonable moves in the right direction.

Natural feedbacks including life is precisely why the globe is inhabitable and why we are here.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
We should declare water vapor a pollutant like co2 & ban it. Hell, just kill all life & the world will be SAVED!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
415. P451
Quoting atmoaggie:


SST Anomaly (with a 1982 to 1996 base period...yeah, that's a weird period)



Probably based off of the life of the satellite that generates the pic.

Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
And since we are having a little AGW funny-party...

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


Now THIS is what I call propaganda. While the whole world was so busy arguing and debating, did anyone bother to look at the real-time data and indicators (ie. SSTs)? If my conclusions are correct, then it means that the global Thermohaline is undergoing a rapid shift, and possibly a partial shutdown. The Gulf Stream's <8C zone has disappeared from the Eastern Hemisphere. The Humboldt's cold water has rapidly retreated, causing floods in Machu Picchu and worsening El Nino weather in South America while the ENSO warm pool weakens but expands. More information on posts 331 and 337.

Don't forget that if we look at one aspect for too long, we miss out on the bigger picture.

Ummm, gulf stream...Eastern (?) hemisphere?

North of England, maybe...

Latest weekly SST from NOAA:


SST Anomaly (with a 1982 to 1996 base period...yeah, that's a weird period):


So you are excited about some shutdown of thermohaline yet the SSTs around and north of England are showing positive anomalies of better than 1 C ?!? Come back with this after the SST around England is at least 5 C below normal and it will make sense...otherwise, this is called winter.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Try some of these for a different flavor.

Note, some other blogger dismissed these peer reviewed papers for some dated back to the 80's. That is kinda like saying the theory of relativity would no longer be applicable because its old :)

L8R

500 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of "Man-Made" Global Warming
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 176 Comments: 55519
Quoting P451:


It freezes and it melts. It builds up and it breaks down.

We simply don't quite know where we are in this pattern.

All we know is *maybe* we are helping it along this go around. How much, we don't even know that.

We're just scratching the surface in our knowledge of the planet. We would be fools to pretend we know so much as to be able to predict climate change.

Can't get my forecast correct 72 hours out but I'm going to be told they know the forecast 1,000 years out?

I don't think so....
we just dont really understand as much as we think we understand P451
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 176 Comments: 55519
409. flsky
Quoting dsauder:
That is right Dr Masters. You are beginning to sound sensible. Water vapor RULES the global warming scene! All this nonsense about carbon dioxide was a bunch of eco-terrorist baloney perpetrated by people who had no real understanding of what really goes on in the big picture. They are just evil schemers wanting to make a buck off of the rest of us.

Your arguments would be better received w/o "beginning to sound sensible," "nonsense," "eco-terrorist balony," "people who had no real understanding." "what really goes on," "evil schemers," "wanting to make a buck off the rest of us."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
408. P451
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
To my understanding, currently allmost all the ice on this planet seems to melt. And the current observation could just be short fluctuations of climate pattern getting out of order (as we can see). These are short term effects, not long term trends in climate.


It freezes and it melts. It builds up and it breaks down.

We simply don't quite know where we are in this pattern.

All we know is *maybe* we are helping it along this go around. How much, we don't even know that.

We're just scratching the surface in our knowledge of the planet. We would be fools to pretend we know so much as to be able to predict climate change.

Can't get my forecast correct 72 hours out but I'm going to be told they know the forecast 1,000 years out?

I don't think so....
Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
407. P451
And you know what it was. Wow I'm dumb.

PONY.

For, yes, Mustangs were called Pony's (ponies) back in the day. That's what had me tripping on "P".

Jeez. LOL.

Member Since: December 16, 2007 Posts: 7 Comments: 10202
To my understanding, currently allmost all the ice on this planet seems to melt. And the current observation could just be short fluctuations of climate pattern getting out of order (as we can see). These are short term effects, not long term trends in climate.
Member Since: September 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


Now THIS is what I call propaganda. While the whole world was so busy arguing and debating, did anyone bother to look at the real-time data and indicators (ie. SSTs)? If my conclusions are correct, then it means that the global Thermohaline is undergoing a rapid shift, and possibly a partial shutdown. The Gulf Stream's <8C zone has disappeared from the Eastern Hemisphere. The Humboldt's cold water has rapidly retreated, causing floods in Machu Picchu and worsening El Nino weather in South America while the ENSO warm pool weakens but expands. More information on posts 331 and 337.

Don't forget that if we look at one aspect for too long, we miss out on the bigger picture.

The bigger picture could mean methane forcing taken over ... Astro are there any similar observation from the past - since human ocean current obs took place?
Member Since: September 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:




Now THIS is what I call propaganda. While the whole world was so busy arguing and debating, did anyone bother to look at the real-time data and indicators (ie. SSTs)? If my conclusions are correct, then it means that the global Thermohaline is undergoing a rapid shift, and possibly a partial shutdown. The Gulf Stream's <8C zone has disappeared from the Eastern Hemisphere. The Humboldt's cold water has rapidly retreated, causing floods in Machu Picchu and worsening El Nino weather in South America while the ENSO warm pool weakens but expands. More information on posts 331 and 337.

Don't forget that if we look at one aspect for too long, we miss out on the bigger picture.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JeffMasters:


The models do an excellent job simulating the impact of volcanic eruptions on climate, such as Mt. Pinatubo's impact on climate in 1991 - 1992. They also do a pretty good job simulating past climates back several hundred million years, with the exception of some "hot house" climates where the poles were very warm. However, the models do a poor job handling how the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets will respond to significant warming, and we have very high uncertainty on how much sea level rise to expect this century. We can expect the models to miss many important climate change happenings, both for and against us. For example, no model predicted the record loss of Arctic sea ice in 2007, but no model predicted the slowdown of global warming due to a decrease in stratospheric water vapor. We are forced to make critical decisions regarding our future using tools inadequate for assessing the degree of risk, unfortunately.

Jeff Masters
If the models can reconstruct past climate, can they indicate what caused an ice age to develop? How do the models do in anticipating the effect of albedo? How do they do with the duration of non-peak temperatures? Is the average global temperature figured with only peak temps taken two times per day, or are more daily temperatures used too?

Is any move being made in historical temp data to remove the stations NOT included in today's data record, in order to then reconfigure the historical average temperature? In other words, only include stations in use today in historical data. Apples to apples comparison? It is unfair to compare a modern record with fewer cold stations to a historical record which contains colder stations which have been eliminated or "averaged out" via Hansen's 1200-mile averaging trick. Such a comparison will always find "warming".

Also, how is it that Dr M. responds to one of my posts, yet somehow both of my posts were deleted. If someone reserves the right to call me a "denier" that's fine, but allow me to speak my peace and debate on the facts. Dr M. bravely posted new information as to why no warming has occured in a decade even as CO2 has risen. Models indicated that CO2 would act as a forcing mechanism, increasing temps and increasing wator vapor content, yet we find out that WV has decreased in the stratosphere. In fact, we learned that the transition zone between the Troposphere and Stratosphere cooled unexpectedly, inhibiting water vapor transfer to the Stratosphere. I should call this a "fairly significant blow" to the AGW theorists, who have prior sworn that we're in runaway global warming. Where's that "greenhouse roof" again?

We've been told by Hansen that "it's still getting warmer". Also by Mann, et al. So, now there's one report out which says, "Uh oh, what happened?" I should think that more people would be interested in finding out the scientific truth? EVEN IF IT MEANS THAT PET THEORIES ARE DESTROYED in the process?

Or... does the elimination of my posts mean that only AGW cheerleaders are welcome here at Wunderground?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 453 - 403

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Light Rain
50 °F
Light Rain