tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post9097847772862624989..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: On Climate Sensitivity, Otto and Hansen - and Exaggeration from WUWTSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-91800010162102960502013-05-21T01:05:38.385+10:002013-05-21T01:05:38.385+10:00Another suspiciously low sensitivity (TCR/ECS) est...Another suspiciously low sensitivity (TCR/ECS) estimate heavily dependent on OHC data... <br /><br />OHC reconstructions are a work in progress. Sampling density (both area and depth) falls rapidly by the decade pre-2000. If OHC is under-estimated in the reconstructions (and this is a very real possibility indeed), sensitivity estimates using that data will be biased low.<br /><br />That's why you are correct to emphasise that such estimates need to be viewed in context with paleoclimate estimates, which by their very nature are more complete. <br /><br />BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-42950118865288568982013-05-20T21:22:01.756+10:002013-05-20T21:22:01.756+10:00I've a new question for all you climate sensit...I've a new question for all you climate sensitivity experts out there - how can the low end of the transient climate response be 0.9C? That seems awfully low.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-6233536645374742042013-05-20T21:02:32.603+10:002013-05-20T21:02:32.603+10:00Nature advised me the paper was peer reviewed befo...Nature advised me the paper was peer reviewed before publication.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-376394975610038582013-05-20T19:55:48.449+10:002013-05-20T19:55:48.449+10:00I've updated the article with a link to Nature...I've updated the article with a link to Nature GeoSciences' description of "Correspondence". (I previously and inadvertently looked at a description of same in another of their publications, which suggested peer review wasn't normal for correspondence.) <br /><br />Anyway, it says it's up to the editor whether or not it's peer reviewed - so maybe it was after all.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-65356567742597825372013-05-20T19:46:04.962+10:002013-05-20T19:46:04.962+10:00Sou, your comment reagrding Watts being beyond rat...Sou, your comment reagrding Watts being beyond rationality and morality is spot on. Such a pathetic, feeble-minded, nasty little bucket of bile. Ian Anoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-62339643415686514002013-05-20T19:39:35.917+10:002013-05-20T19:39:35.917+10:00I believe we need a new deal well in place before ...I believe we need a new deal well in place before 2020, though it's probably not going to happen.<br /><br />Thing is, many renewables are now on par if not cheaper than fossil fuels. The private sector is, as is often the case, ahead of governments on this issue. <br /><br />One issue is the high capital investment in power plants and distribution networks (smart grids etc) - and therefore the timing of shutting down ageing setups and replacing them with modern clean energy generators. If governments created the right policy framework older plants would be shut down sooner and the shift to clean energy would happen even more quickly.<br /><br />Australia's Climate Commission argues we've got till about 2020 to sort things out - that is, to set on a path to rapidly reduce fossil fuel burning etc. Here are their "<a href="http://climatecommission.gov.au/resources/commission-reports/" rel="nofollow">Critical Decade</a>" reports.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-30260511660104051232013-05-20T19:27:48.609+10:002013-05-20T19:27:48.609+10:00Comments by some of the authors (in NewScientist):...Comments by some of the authors (in <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23565-a-second-chance-to-save-the-climate.html" rel="nofollow">NewScientist</a>):<br /><br /><i>"If previous estimates [of how the climate will warm] were true, keeping the world below 2 °C would have been almost impossible however big our emission cuts," says Piers Forster of the University of Leeds in the UK, who contributed to the new study. "Now it looks like we have a chance, so we should take it." <br />"Prior to this, a lot of us were feeling quite gloomy that whatever we did, we'll go over 2 °C," says Forster's colleague Myles Allen of the University of Oxford, UK. "It's not a foregone conclusion any more." That means the UN climate negotiations could still succeed. If a deal comes into force in 2020, and leads to rapid emissions cuts, "there remains a good chance we could hit the 2 °C target", says Allen.</i><br /><br />You won't find Watts quoting that.Lars Karlssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158469980966810882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-86524106382527945562013-05-20T19:23:53.863+10:002013-05-20T19:23:53.863+10:00Observe how Nic Lewis' value -- based on recen...Observe how Nic Lewis' value -- based on recent data, which is prone to change, and vaunted at places like Bishop Hilll weeks earlier -- is lower even than this new research, conforming what James Annan wrote soon after, that although Nic's math is sound "some of his choices are dubious and will have acted to underestimate the true sensitivity". Another decade of data can alter the equation considerably, but let's hope things stay constant and politicians use the extra time to enact hard measures. Of course Watts & Co. will (ab)use the results to prevent the kind of action the co-authors stress is still necessary to avoid serious disruption. No surprise there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-33221864748801550062013-05-20T19:12:01.706+10:002013-05-20T19:12:01.706+10:00Indeed, this is the "Quote of the Week" ...Indeed, this is the "Quote of the Week" at WUWT:<br /><br /><i>“The influence of mankind on climate is trivially true and numerically insignificant.” Richard Lindzen [H/t Tom Sheehan]</i>Lars Karlssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158469980966810882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-40695459223133854292013-05-20T19:08:47.463+10:002013-05-20T19:08:47.463+10:00I don't disagree about taking it seriously, La...I don't disagree about taking it seriously, Lars. But only in the context of all the other recent papers on climate sensitivity using a variety of different approaches, <a href="http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?as_vis=1&q=allintitle:+climate+sensitivity&hl=en&as_sdt=1,5&as_ylo=2009" rel="nofollow">for example</a>.<br /><br />I am particularly concerned about what we learn from past climates. IMO that's much more relevant than the surface temperature record since since 1970, let alone since 2000.<br /><br />I also don't like it when people place too much emphasis on the transient response. (I'm not suggesting Otto et al do this, but the likes of WUWT most certainly do - when they acknowledge global warming is indeed real.) I like to think we will consider the needs of humanity over coming millenia, not just 50 years hence.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-14122672614925687832013-05-20T19:00:18.348+10:002013-05-20T19:00:18.348+10:00Yep. But highly conditionally: they'll accept ...Yep. But highly conditionally: they'll accept it for the five minutes needed to use it as a stick to beat somebody,anybody with...then they'll forget it,'cos after five minutes Anthony will throw another stick for them to fetch.Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09537772941984056434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-3746257992480532332013-05-20T18:51:30.848+10:002013-05-20T18:51:30.848+10:00The new paper has an impressive list of authors an...The new paper has an impressive list of authors and I think it deserves to be taken seriously.<br /><br />Does anybody really believe that Watts and his disciples would accept a climate sensitivity of 2 degrees?Lars Karlssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158469980966810882noreply@blogger.com