Home > News > Climate Blog and News Recap 2011 01 22

Climate Blog and News Recap 2011 01 22

2011 January 22

Don’t know if I’m gonna make this a regular feature again, but there’s been some cool stuff going on out there.

Table Top Modeling

How Fast is Earth Warming? Tamino@Open Mind

Sharper Focus Tamino@Open Mind

Volcanic Solar Dimming, ENSO and Temperature Anomalies O’Day@Climate Charts & Graphs

Can Most Of The Rise In The Satellite-Era Surface Temperatures Be Explained Without Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gases? Tisdale@Climate Observations

And prompted by a thread Lucia @ The Blackboard, a quick chart with global anomaly input from NINO3.4. (lagged 5 months)

Natural Cycles and Feedbacks

A call out to Kate @ ClimateSight who questions the physical basis for natural cycles

Prof Curry questions the usefulness of the concept of ‘climate feedbacks’ Curry@ClimateEtc

Examining Mid 20th Century Warming Hausfather@The Blackboard

Mid 20th Century Global(?) Warming Webster@ClimateEtc

Some IPCC verification

2010 updates to model-data comparisons Gavin@RealClimate

Embedded into a thread of 10 year trends, another quick chart of IPCC -v- Observations. Lucia@The Blackboard

And a non-IPCC commentary on modeling: Can We Trust Climate Models?
Increasingly, the Answer is ‘Yes’
Lemonick@Yale e360
Meanwhile, on Survivor Island …

… The Tribe Has Spoken …

… and [T] is voted off the island.

[T] and Lifting Text Verbatim @ Climate Audit
[T]’s Bile @ Climate Audit
[T] and Lifting Text Verbatim #2 @ Climate Audit
[T]’s upcoming AMS meeting talk: ClimateGate Thoughts @ WUWT
[T]’s Communication @ The Blackboard
[T]’s reacts: edits speech to fix copying … @ WUWT
[T] and memes of the Post-Climategate Period @ Shub Niggurath
[T]’s Missing Heat Found | Real Science @ stevengoddard
[T] on “loudly proclaimed confindent statements @ Climate Sanity
New Paper: Repsonses to [T]’s AMS Bile @ The SPPI Blog
[T]’s weird opinions about the climate… @ Luboš Motl

Just in case you ever wondered who “The Tribe” is …

The Policy Lass has a relevant post on climate chumming: Denialist Chum: Curry Style

  1. Ned
    2011 January 23 at 6:32 am

    Nice compilation.

    The link to Tisdale’s site is broken (it just points back here).

    Re “[T]” … I have fond memories of wading through [T]’s massive doorstop “Climate System Modeling” fifteen years ago, when I was a grad student. At the time none of us would have believed how toxic and *personalized* this subject would become.

  2. 2011 January 23 at 2:12 pm

    At the time none of us would have believed how toxic and *personalized* this subject would become.

    Yeah. I despise it. The root of the issue is money and fear. An example I like to use is back when I was in school, the very first claims of extra-solar planets were coming out. There was much discussion of whether the claims were valid, whether the data was actually just a ghost caused by the resolution of the numerical resolution. No accusations of fraud, no assumptions of deceit. No one could have imagined phrases like shit, piss, puke, or bile entering the conversation. Because no industry was threatened, no big piles of money were at stake, no power-players were concerned.

    And then came Climate Science and McIntyre. Thanks Steve, for all that you have done.

    See Rule #11

  3. Paul Middents
    2011 January 23 at 9:57 pm

    What do you find compelling about Tisdale’s analysis?

  4. 2011 January 24 at 7:19 am

    There are three things in Tisdale’s piece that are of interest to me.

    1. Why treat MEI/NINO3.4/ONI as exogeneous, but not other sea surface temp indexes?

    2. The atmosphere holds little heat. Upper layer of sea surface much more. Whether you are looking at a 30 day “transient” response or a longer “lagged” response, sea surface-atmos interactions are key. Bob keeps a closer eye on those individual sea surface regions than anyone else. Building a better understanding of those “regions” will improve your intuition on regional climate change responses.

    3. Bob speaks of a “climate shift.” Tamino of a “breakpoint.” V of a unit root. Is the change from the late 60 – early 70s due to decreasing aerosols, increasing CO2, or a stoachastic strutuctual break? What about the 40s-50s cooling? A question I would like to understand better.

  5. Girma
    2011 January 26 at 8:59 pm

    Gavin writes: “global warming continues.”

    Let us verify Gavin’s statement.

    Let us look at the last 30 years data and compare the three decadal trends.

    Here is the plot for the data from the Climate Research Unit:


    It shows the following results:

    1) A global warming rate of 0.07 deg C per decade for the period from 1980 to 1990

    2) A global warming rate of 0.25 deg C per decade for the period from 1990 to 2000

    3) A global warming rate of 0.03 deg C per decade for the period from 2000 to 2010

    According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, Gavin’s “continue” means to “remain in a specified position or state.”

    According to the data above, to say “global warming continues” the global warming rate for the period 2000 to 2010 should have been 0.25 deg C per decade. However, instead, it is only 0.03 deg C per decade, which is nearly no global warming in the last decade.

    As a result, Gavin should have concluded “the global warming rate has significantly reduced.”

    (As Gavin does not let me post comments at his blog, I have posted it here)

  6. 2011 April 1 at 7:22 am

    It’s like a card trick right?


    Try entering the years 1975-1985; 1985-1995; 1995-2005

    eye balling the graph it looks like .27; .11; .25

  7. Chris S.
    2011 April 8 at 5:20 am

    @citizenschallenge That’s a pretty cool way to blow Girma’s argument right out of the water, and on April Fool’s Day too – classy.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.