tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post3722900419732017233..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: To be certain sensitivity is still uncertain...Souhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-78054281651097896982014-10-07T03:37:15.619+11:002014-10-07T03:37:15.619+11:00Real Climate have addressed this here Climate resp...Real Climate have addressed this here <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/10/climate-response-estimates-from-lewis-curry/" rel="nofollow">Climate response estimates from Lewis & Curry</a>.<br /><br />It seems that Robert Way and Deep Climate are having issues over at The Auditor's place.<br /><br />Now with the revised Hadcrut4 things could become even more interesting.Lionel Ahttp://lionels.orpheusweb.co.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-26944292727109414682014-09-30T05:32:05.478+10:002014-09-30T05:32:05.478+10:00Looks like the "order of magnitude" is f...Looks like the "order of magnitude" is for underestimation of ocean warming's contribution in particular, not the whole ECS.Coraclenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-11750084321921790702014-09-29T09:25:50.931+10:002014-09-29T09:25:50.931+10:00It seems to me as a burnt out old Physicist that t...It seems to me as a burnt out old Physicist that to evaluate TCR and/or ECR by cherry picking the time interval to estimate simplistic measures of heat flow and temperature response of a very large complex system and then claim that the resultant lower numbers have any relevance to other estimates by different methods is at all real is delusional. Especially when the confidence levels are over a rather large range.<br />To put it very simply. We have a cherry picked method leading to a cherry picked number for TCR and that is the one that the scientific ignorati then cherry pick as evidence against all other estimates of TCR.<br />My best estimate is that both the TCR and more so for ECR is far worse than the median value by all methods. There are feedbacks that are potentially irreversible when they start that have not been taken into account. Methane Clathrates and thawing permafrost are two. <br />Just look at what we now know about the Permian Extinction event. Bert<br /><br /><br />Bert from Elthamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-20295741334422349382014-09-29T03:38:51.487+10:002014-09-29T03:38:51.487+10:00TCR appears to be specifically about the case wher...TCR appears to be specifically about the case where you increase CO2 by precisely 1% a year, then measure the temperature at the start year and the year when you've doubled.<br />http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/345.htm<br /><br />If you change the rate, then you're not measuring the same thing -- the slower the increase, the less difference there is between transient and equilibrium. So we're doomed never to know the TCR exactly, given we haven't been increasing at that 1% rate exactly.numerobisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-23040277171982462352014-09-28T15:57:16.747+10:002014-09-28T15:57:16.747+10:00The paper did state that their calculation wasn...The paper did state that their calculation wasn't of equilibrium sensitivity. Interesting you think it's an order of magnitude difference. Did you mean to say that? I'd have thought maybe some degrees but not that much. I'd not be too happy to be corrected - that would be a big worry :( <br /><br />Also, I doubt that the other Dave will be back. This site is about science. The other Dave was, I think, a flyby 8 per-center.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-43040099650554314752014-09-28T14:50:04.900+10:002014-09-28T14:50:04.900+10:00I've spent the last couple of days learning R ...I've spent the last couple of days learning R and doing a line by line analysis of the source code. I have been a professional programmer for around 15 years, so I quite enjoyed the challenge of a new language. Once I managed to get the code to run, this is what I have found.<br /><br />There is very little 'wrong' with the source code, and yes it will compute the EFFECTIVE climate sensitivity quite well. But to call it an Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity is a gross deception of the highest order. <br /><br />You can't compute the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity using observational data that only goes back to 1850 and while the earth still hasn't reached equilibrium. There is still about a 0.7w/m2 TOA imbalance, and only when that has approached 0, can an ECS using observational data be computed. Yes, the code does use ocean warming data, but the oceans haven't reached equilibrium yet, there is still a long way to go before that happens. The end result is that the code underestimates ocean warming at equilibrium by an order of magnitude. Basically, because there is still warming in 'the pipeline', even with the current forcing, the current code grossly underestimates the ECS.<br /><br />For a much better analysis of how to compute an ECS see this.<br />http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/the-co2-problem-in-6-easy-steps/<br /><br />BTW. I notice that someone else has been calling themselves Dave, so I will now be changing my moniker to DJ, to avoid any confusion.DJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-85178630192368311912014-09-28T02:09:37.592+10:002014-09-28T02:09:37.592+10:00Er, yes. That relativity too! :)
Er, yes. That relativity too! :)<br /><br />Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-55069867314157325522014-09-28T01:53:34.533+10:002014-09-28T01:53:34.533+10:00The speed of light is a limiting barrier in good o...The speed of light is a limiting barrier in good ol' special relativity, too.palindromnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-15842733369113691512014-09-28T00:21:44.476+10:002014-09-28T00:21:44.476+10:00Thanks. I've added your link to the above.Thanks. I've added your link to the above.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-67818654668948797402014-09-28T00:03:07.232+10:002014-09-28T00:03:07.232+10:00Here is a compilation of early 20th century warmin...Here is a compilation of early 20th century warming papers.<br /><br />http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2013/08/29/papers-on-early-20th-century-warming/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-52700552580649809942014-09-27T21:56:13.730+10:002014-09-27T21:56:13.730+10:00I think you will find that morphed into meta-force...I think you will find that morphed into meta-force X.Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-23899300730332039932014-09-27T21:39:58.886+10:002014-09-27T21:39:58.886+10:00Well I just can't keep up: whatever happened t...Well I just can't keep up: whatever happened to force X?<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVXk-iK5GgUMillicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-35470923698015886012014-09-27T19:56:01.335+10:002014-09-27T19:56:01.335+10:00Dr Curry's new motto;-
Fac meta-dubitans.
ize...Dr Curry's new motto;-<br />Fac meta-dubitans.<br /><br />izenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-80641631159467658262014-09-27T17:35:12.284+10:002014-09-27T17:35:12.284+10:00Don't you know, Jammy, the meta-monster is muc...Don't you know, Jammy, the meta-monster is much more wicked than the plain vanila uncertainty monster. It is meta-wicked :)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-39553547249222104432014-09-27T17:33:34.707+10:002014-09-27T17:33:34.707+10:00Konrad says:
No paper using the “basic physics” o...Konrad says:<br /><br /><i>No paper using the “basic physics” of the “settled science” can ever break the “0.0 barrier”.</i> <br /><br />I think Konrad is getting confused with general relativity and the limiting barrier of c, the speed of light. <br /><br />Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-47867828615772393792014-09-27T17:28:20.049+10:002014-09-27T17:28:20.049+10:00Judith Curry may have tackled her uncertainty demo...Judith Curry may have tackled her uncertainty demon. <i>but "there remains considerable meta uncertainty,,,"</i> There is still the meta-uncertainty demon to be slain.<br /><br />Meta uncertainty! Now there is a slippery little eel that all sorts of meta-uncertainty and meta-doubt can be built around. <b>Meta-uncertainty.</b> I can hear it echoing around the denialosphere now as the new sciencey undefined term. "Show me your meta-error meta-bars!!!"<br /><br />What a load of pseudo-intellectual rubbish. <br /><br /><br />Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.com