tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post6465639494281774878..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: About that tropical "hot spot"Souhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-7756371863907370992015-08-15T21:07:38.430+10:002015-08-15T21:07:38.430+10:00There's nothing to worry about. God will take ...There's nothing to worry about. God will take care of things. <br /><br />For details, see http://www.cornwallalliance.org/2000/05/01/the-cornwall-declaration-on-environmental-stewardship/ , the Cornwall Declaration to which Christy is a signatory. jgnfldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-36298818067865514492015-08-15T18:11:07.729+10:002015-08-15T18:11:07.729+10:00A slightly older article but worth a read:
Vertic...<br />A slightly older article but worth a read:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2013/09/vertical-human-fingerprint-found-in-stratospheric-cooling-tropospheric-warming/" rel="nofollow">Vertical Human Fingerprint Found in Stratospheric Cooling, Tropospheric Warming </a>Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-6992943696896625872015-05-25T02:17:26.509+10:002015-05-25T02:17:26.509+10:00Case in point - Professor John Christy, speaking t...Case in point - Professor John Christy, speaking to Congress on May 16 - "I was able to access 102 CMIP-5 rcp4.5 (representative concentration pathways) climate model simulations of the atmospheric temperatures for the tropospheric layer and generate bulk temperatures from the models for an apples-to-apples comparison with the observations from satellites and balloons … On average the models warm the global atmosphere at a rate three times that of the real world..." see http://climatecrocks.com/2015/05/22/information-is-the-antidote-to-congressional-stupid/comment-page-1/<br /><br />I'll bet a thousand dollars to a box of donuts that Christy isn't so stupid/ignorant that he doesn't know about the negative laps rate feedback, and that the "value in determining policy " of its absence is that climate sensitivity is HIGHER than we think, and that waiting to act until we get the models perfect is a foolishly dangerous course of action.<br />Brian Dodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10283294944944463293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-1456057817324106532015-05-21T11:50:37.995+10:002015-05-21T11:50:37.995+10:00If for some pseudoscientific reason(the Dodge Effe...If for some pseudoscientific reason(the Dodge Effect*), the environmental (observed) lapse rate declined faster than the modelled lapse rate (i.e. no hotspot), the positive feedback on climate sensitivity from more water vapor in the lower troposphere (Clausius Clapeyron) wouldn't be compensated for by as much latent heat transfer to the upper troposphere where it is more easily radiated away, and climate sensitivity will be higher.The point isn't that the physics dictates that the sum of negative lapse rate feedback and positive water vapor feedback is relatively invariant over different models, but that denialists will happily argue that models are wrong in ways that must make global warming worse, contradicting themselves.<br /><br />*Let me explain. The number of cloud nucleation centers in the upper troposphere is fixed by the rate of production from GCR, which vary inversely with solar output during the sunspot cycle. As we add more water vapor because of the CO2 greenhouse effect - downwelling IR from CO2 which gets absorbed in the top few microns of the ocean and pop water vapor into the atmosphere - the necessity for mass balance between evaporated water and rainfall means that at a given GCR CCN rate(varying slowly over the 22 year sunspot cycle), the droplets must be bigger. Bigger droplets fall faster, moving the water vapor condensed from the upper troposphere to the lower atmosphere faster. Cold fatter raindrops falling through warm moist lowerlayers suck more moisture from the rising air, which results in the environmental lapse rate being lower, no hotspot being observed, the lapse rate feedback being less negative, and the climate sensitivity being higher. QED. If I left out the part about climate sensitivity being higher, and said models got the lapse rate feedback "wrong" instead of less negative, and posted this on WTFUWT, I could convince the average commenter there that this is another "nail in the coffin of CAGW" (So that no innocent lurker is confused by "blog science", I just made most of that up &;>)Brian Dodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10283294944944463293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-70572428059122652322015-05-20T08:24:09.457+10:002015-05-20T08:24:09.457+10:00Here's at least 6 man made hot spots used for ...Here's at least 6 man made hot spots used for surveillance 24/7 http://www.ips.gov.au/Educational/5/2/3Jmorpussnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-73282227759102488772015-05-20T06:42:35.693+10:002015-05-20T06:42:35.693+10:00I'm not sure about that Brian.
You get negat...I'm not sure about that Brian. <br /><br />You get negative lapse rate feedback from a hot spot, because of the latent heat transfer from the surface to the upper troposphere. But you also get an increase in water vapour and its associated greenhouse effect.<br /><br />This isn't directly hot spot related, but climate models show a range of lapse rate feedbacks, and the water vapour feedback compensates for changes in lapse rate feedback.<br /><br />See, e.g. Soden & Held (2006) figure 3 here:<br />http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI3799.1<br />The more the tropics warm, the bigger the negative lapse rate feedback. But the bigger the negative lapse rate feedback, the bigger the positive water vapour feedback. Sensitivity doesn't seem strongly affected by this.<br /><br />Although they all show pretty moist-adiabatic behaviour iirc, if this is not true in reality then I'm not certain what the full implications are.<br /><br />MarkRAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-44470224939485639672015-05-20T03:40:49.875+10:002015-05-20T03:40:49.875+10:00My limited college dropout understanding of the ph...My limited college dropout understanding of the physics involved is that the hotspot is inextricably tied to (negative) lapse rate feedback on climate sensitivity. If models overestimate the magnitude of the hotspot, they must be underestimating negative lapse rate feedback, and climate sensitivity. One might think that the cognitive dissonance of deniers arguing for higher climate sensitivity would make their heads explode, but somehow they're immune(too hardheaded?).Brian Dodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10283294944944463293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-72407283722677662422015-05-19T09:12:58.487+10:002015-05-19T09:12:58.487+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10807913317731807617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-87988380809273700682015-05-18T14:55:46.753+10:002015-05-18T14:55:46.753+10:00Thanks, Alexander. I'm not sure I had discerne...Thanks, Alexander. I'm not sure I had discerned that properly, although what you wrote does sound very familiar to me. I'll change the text to clarify.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-54248169570833264922015-05-18T14:52:35.011+10:002015-05-18T14:52:35.011+10:00It's so difficult to wangle "warm-anomaly...It's so difficult to wangle "warm-anomaly spot" or "cool-anomaly spot" into a conversation...Bernard J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16299073166371273808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-51058797689298157452015-05-18T11:54:34.757+10:002015-05-18T11:54:34.757+10:00Hi Sou, I've recently started reading more of ...Hi Sou, I've recently started reading more of your blog in full and I enjoy it very much - I'll throw in a "clarification" that I didn't see very explicitly stated here, but which I've seen incorrectly assumed in Skydragon Slayer arguments about gravity/pressure induced warming. It is that the DALR and MALR are not lapse rates in atmospheric temperature, but the rates at which the temperature of an air parcel (dry or saturated) will rise or fall as it moves down or up in an adiabatic process. And the term "environmental lapse rate" describes the atmosphere and the temperature gradient across it. Maybe you knew that or had discerned that, but again it's not often distinguished.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02320395147911342848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-90207496396832373702015-05-18T09:40:33.294+10:002015-05-18T09:40:33.294+10:00And you finished it before midnight! Sou you shoul...And you finished it before midnight! Sou you should do a TED; <br /> <br /><i>Getting a stranglehold on on difficult stuff and getting to bed on time.</i>PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10807913317731807617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-43478576617486230142015-05-18T03:12:59.747+10:002015-05-18T03:12:59.747+10:00Thanks, Peter.
Now I'm a bit embarrassed tha...Thanks, Peter. <br /><br />Now I'm a bit embarrassed that although I included your paper as "further reading", I didn't discuss it in the text :(Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-64059800479368080852015-05-18T02:19:20.248+10:002015-05-18T02:19:20.248+10:00Sou,
you are correct if the surface were cooling ...Sou,<br /><br />you are correct if the surface were cooling in the tropics the tropical troposphere would cool (and at a greater rate). There is nothing unique about the tropospheric response to GHGs. The unique signature of anthropogenic influence is a warming troposphere and concurrently cooling stratosphere.Peter Thornehttp://www.surfacetemperatures.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-52102323879053433682015-05-18T01:29:07.529+10:002015-05-18T01:29:07.529+10:00This article gives a well-readable (I think) and i...This article gives a well-readable (I think) and interesting history of <a href="http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/gv219/classics.d/Hoinka-tropo97.pdf" rel="nofollow">the discovery of the tropopause</a> and stratosphere.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-2740894360820193342015-05-18T00:33:58.003+10:002015-05-18T00:33:58.003+10:00Thanks, Victor. It was your comment that prompted ...Thanks, Victor. It was your comment that prompted me to point out how cold it is up there :)<br /><br />Interesting point you make about the early observations in the stratosphere. I didn't know that.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-67918219816113838752015-05-18T00:30:11.970+10:002015-05-18T00:30:11.970+10:00If the world were cooling instead of warming, my u...<i>If the world were cooling instead of warming, my understanding is that this too would be magnified in the tropical troposphere. That is, instead of a "hot spot" there would be a "cold spot".</i><br /><br />Right. That is also how I understand it.<br /><br /><i>Although it's hot and it is in the troposphere, it's not really a "spot.</i><br /><br />No, it is not hot, it is one of the coldest places on Earth. <br /><br />As I wrote below the last post this makes measurements very hard. The limit of the temperature sensor. Icing which blocks ventilation. Low air pressure, which reduces ventilation. A strong sun, which may heat the sensor. When the first temperature increases in the stratosphere where found, scientists assumed it was just a measurement error. An indication how difficult measurements are up there. Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-19776600266137381312015-05-18T00:15:52.600+10:002015-05-18T00:15:52.600+10:00Great explanation, Sou!
Every explanation I'v...Great explanation, Sou!<br /><br />Every explanation I've ever seen has said the "hot spot" is not a fingerprint of greenhouse gas caused warming. But Mike Mann, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/MichaelMannScientist/posts/899451636777706" rel="nofollow">on his FaceBook page</a>, has explained that the existence of the hot spot actually is evidence against warming being due to one thing other than greenhouse gases. That FaceBook post was pointed to <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2015/05/nine-denier-101-techniques-anthony.html?showComment=1431725127823#c948298685743280274" rel="nofollow">by commenter Raoul on your previous post</a>, but here is the key quote from Mike Mann:<br /><br />"What's the punchline? Well, if global warming really *were* due to a (natural) decrease in volcanic activity over time (rather than due to an anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gases), then we would expect to see an increase in global surface temperatures WITHOUT any mid-tropospheric "hot spot"."<br /><br />"In the end, then, the confirmation of a "hot spot" in this latest study by Sherwood and Nishant isn't completely irrelevant to the issue of human-caused climate change. While it may not be a unique fingerprint of anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases, it does nonetheless potentially allow us to rule out at least one possible suspect (changes in volcanic activity). It turns out that anthropogenic changes in ozone (both tropospheric, as a surface pollutant, and stratospheric, as a result of stratospheric ozone depletion) are another potential "forcing" of climate change that does not have a clear "hot spot" signature as part of its fingerprint."Tom Daytonhttp://prestoinnovation.comnoreply@blogger.com