Speedy Gonzales gives us the truth about July and global warming in nanoseconds. Love it, wish the powers that be would listen rather than to Lier Lier. Many thanks.
If I used a hairdryer as indicated the atmosphere (air above the bath) would indeed get warm but the the bath water would remain cold. So I don’t get your point.
Precisely. The point is that you can't go using the temperature of the bath water to make a case about top-down atmospheric warming but this is exactly what the C3S mob have gone and done by using the global mean.
Ah, I was confused too: a claim that the ocean is warmer due to the atmosphere being warmer is not supported, per the hair dryer example. I do imagine a warmer ocean would contribute some heat transfer to some air, which does tend to move. Perhaps a claim that air moves and generally circulates globally is a wild assumption on my part. Just running with that madness for a moment more, one might expect any oceanic contribution to warmer air to be reflected in air-over-land measurements.
Yes, the oceans lead the warming of the atmosphere and thus offer a monster confounding factor; then there's the role of bacteria, geological processes and much else - all contributing to atmospheric heat content. At some point I shall be tackling oceanic warming and using temporal causal modelling to reveal a few things.
You’ve rightly pointed out that land air temperatures (max) offer the relevant metrics for our daily living. Due to the lag, any analysis of ocean water temperature may be interesting for land air only in a predictive context.
I wonder whether establishing the contribution of ocean temps to land air temps may require a dynamic model, i.e. differential equations.
The specific heat of water (4.18 at 25C) is much higher than air (1.01), as is its mass, so the top layers of the ocean have to absorb a lot more energy to rise a little bit and transfer energy to air. Or said another way, it doesn’t take much of an ocean temp rise to imply lots of energy available to transfer to air. To wit, hurricane intensification with increasing water temperature.
I imagine there may be ocean sensor bias as well.
Certainly a bag with plenty of non-trivial walnuts to be cracked. As with other fronts, looking forward to what you do with this one. Thanks for your work.
Abrupt changes are a thing and they can cause havoc. The question is what is causing the current warming and the answer is we don't really know, but different camps have made different guesses. One thing seems pretty certain and that is CO2, as a GHG, is subject to saturation, which is probably why we didn't have runaway global warming back when it was up at 4000ppm. Here's a fave talk of mine...
I came across this paper which, while not directly relevant, has a short section on climate. Some weather events in the period could potentially be attributed to a transition period from the medieval warm anomaly to the little ice age. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110719628/pdf
LOL, yep, it was the '90s for me too! Waitrose do Simmers Abernethy at a bargain 80p for a 250g pack, though are currently sold out online. A nice biccy to have with a single malt if you want a change from shortbread and/or your sporran is in the wash.
". . . our household voted to put the central heating back on . . . "
Gosh! You had a vote? In the Dozer household there have been neither hustings nor any other hint of democracy. On the several days in July when Mrs DD declared that the heating should go on, I was given no such opportunity to show a preference.
Any sign of demurral on my part, mention of our Micawberesque situation and potential financial misery or the suggestion of, perhaps, a thicker jumper or vest fell upon deaf ears. The sight of her trim and determined figure striding to the switch crushed any opposition.
And yet whenever I look at the Temperature Global real time data - which I often did in July - it says around 14.17°c, it was 14.25 just, never seen it anywhere near 16° or even 15. That's been my thermometer most of July though.
They are using gridded anomaly products rather than actual temperatures attained - I'm about pen an article called 'A Lesson In Lying From NASA' that reveals the con a bit more clearly.
John, the last 3 years, for me, have been a huge lesson on lying with data. I had many suspicions but no idea of the extent. It truly boggles the old brain.
Quite! One of the more engaging modules of my stats training concerned scientific fraud and how to detect this using various techniques. We were treated to source data and examined lab books for some of the most famous experiments in history, from Gregor Mendel and his peas to Thompson and the electron and beyond. We were astonished to discover they'd all fudged the data - and this was before financial incentives were a thing! Later, as a section head, I was expected to lead a team of scientists into producing contrived results under the direction of policy division suits and keep my mouth shut. There were times I'd sit down with research contractors and tell them what HMG did and did not want to see in any scientific reports, and this extended to the grant approval process under SERC for projects both big and small. Then there's the farce that is scientific publishing and peer review, incorporating fake research of breathtaking proportion, not to mention lack of reproducibility of one third of all submissions. And all the while the public are led to believe that science and scientists are beyond reproach. The fraud that is climate change is merely indicative of a greater malaise that has plagued us for over 200 years. Here is a totally fabulous talk by Sheldrake that gets to the root of the matter...
Speedy Gonzales gives us the truth about July and global warming in nanoseconds. Love it, wish the powers that be would listen rather than to Lier Lier. Many thanks.
Got a load of oceanic temps now downloaded and will conjure part 2 in a day or so.
If I used a hairdryer as indicated the atmosphere (air above the bath) would indeed get warm but the the bath water would remain cold. So I don’t get your point.
Precisely. The point is that you can't go using the temperature of the bath water to make a case about top-down atmospheric warming but this is exactly what the C3S mob have gone and done by using the global mean.
Ah, I was confused too: a claim that the ocean is warmer due to the atmosphere being warmer is not supported, per the hair dryer example. I do imagine a warmer ocean would contribute some heat transfer to some air, which does tend to move. Perhaps a claim that air moves and generally circulates globally is a wild assumption on my part. Just running with that madness for a moment more, one might expect any oceanic contribution to warmer air to be reflected in air-over-land measurements.
Yes, the oceans lead the warming of the atmosphere and thus offer a monster confounding factor; then there's the role of bacteria, geological processes and much else - all contributing to atmospheric heat content. At some point I shall be tackling oceanic warming and using temporal causal modelling to reveal a few things.
Things are as confusing as they are so I have removed the bath water experiment!
You’ve rightly pointed out that land air temperatures (max) offer the relevant metrics for our daily living. Due to the lag, any analysis of ocean water temperature may be interesting for land air only in a predictive context.
I wonder whether establishing the contribution of ocean temps to land air temps may require a dynamic model, i.e. differential equations.
The specific heat of water (4.18 at 25C) is much higher than air (1.01), as is its mass, so the top layers of the ocean have to absorb a lot more energy to rise a little bit and transfer energy to air. Or said another way, it doesn’t take much of an ocean temp rise to imply lots of energy available to transfer to air. To wit, hurricane intensification with increasing water temperature.
I imagine there may be ocean sensor bias as well.
Certainly a bag with plenty of non-trivial walnuts to be cracked. As with other fronts, looking forward to what you do with this one. Thanks for your work.
My thinking exactly! A lot to do and more ideas to test than I have eaten hot dinners.
I looked up Jøgern Peder Steffensen, and in 2017 he also said this. What do you make of it? I'm confused now! https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?n=3905
Abrupt changes are a thing and they can cause havoc. The question is what is causing the current warming and the answer is we don't really know, but different camps have made different guesses. One thing seems pretty certain and that is CO2, as a GHG, is subject to saturation, which is probably why we didn't have runaway global warming back when it was up at 4000ppm. Here's a fave talk of mine...
https://youtu.be/CqWv26PXqz0
Thank you, I'll watch it.
Here's a cracker of a paper to go with it...
https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.03098
Ta muchly
Oh - I just took a peep at that one - beyond my level of science education :(
I came across this paper which, while not directly relevant, has a short section on climate. Some weather events in the period could potentially be attributed to a transition period from the medieval warm anomaly to the little ice age. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110719628/pdf
https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110719628/html
"Anybody chewing reflectively on a hobnob"
My usual thought when chewing on a Hobnob is 'Bring back Abbey Crunch!'.
Now that was a biscuit! I am also partial to Abernethys though they are harder to find these days.
I think I was addicted to Abernethys for a while during the late '90s. Hearing that they're hard to find now has brought me out in a cold sweat.
LOL, yep, it was the '90s for me too! Waitrose do Simmers Abernethy at a bargain 80p for a 250g pack, though are currently sold out online. A nice biccy to have with a single malt if you want a change from shortbread and/or your sporran is in the wash.
https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/products/simmers-abernethy/043806-21592-21593
". . . our household voted to put the central heating back on . . . "
Gosh! You had a vote? In the Dozer household there have been neither hustings nor any other hint of democracy. On the several days in July when Mrs DD declared that the heating should go on, I was given no such opportunity to show a preference.
Any sign of demurral on my part, mention of our Micawberesque situation and potential financial misery or the suggestion of, perhaps, a thicker jumper or vest fell upon deaf ears. The sight of her trim and determined figure striding to the switch crushed any opposition.
And yet whenever I look at the Temperature Global real time data - which I often did in July - it says around 14.17°c, it was 14.25 just, never seen it anywhere near 16° or even 15. That's been my thermometer most of July though.
They are using gridded anomaly products rather than actual temperatures attained - I'm about pen an article called 'A Lesson In Lying From NASA' that reveals the con a bit more clearly.
John, the last 3 years, for me, have been a huge lesson on lying with data. I had many suspicions but no idea of the extent. It truly boggles the old brain.
Quite! One of the more engaging modules of my stats training concerned scientific fraud and how to detect this using various techniques. We were treated to source data and examined lab books for some of the most famous experiments in history, from Gregor Mendel and his peas to Thompson and the electron and beyond. We were astonished to discover they'd all fudged the data - and this was before financial incentives were a thing! Later, as a section head, I was expected to lead a team of scientists into producing contrived results under the direction of policy division suits and keep my mouth shut. There were times I'd sit down with research contractors and tell them what HMG did and did not want to see in any scientific reports, and this extended to the grant approval process under SERC for projects both big and small. Then there's the farce that is scientific publishing and peer review, incorporating fake research of breathtaking proportion, not to mention lack of reproducibility of one third of all submissions. And all the while the public are led to believe that science and scientists are beyond reproach. The fraud that is climate change is merely indicative of a greater malaise that has plagued us for over 200 years. Here is a totally fabulous talk by Sheldrake that gets to the root of the matter...
https://youtu.be/sF03FN37i5w