A Culture of Checking: Open Climate Models (4)

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 04:01 AM GMT on Ιανουάριος 25, 2011

Share this Blog
4
+

A Culture of Checking: Open Climate Models (4)

This is a continuation of my series on community approaches to climate science and, specifically, climate models. I am exploring the ideas of open innovation and open source communities. This article will be on verification, testing, evaluation, and validation. I know that this is, perhaps, a bit off the path of what I imagine is my main audience, but these ideas are at the core of climate science, and also part of the politicization (or de-politicization) of science. Before I dig into the arcane, I wanted to reference Jeff Master’s post on the major floods of the past few months. This combination of warm seas, warm air, water vapor and rain and geography and people is difficult to ignore, and I plan to revisit these floods in the context of the recent guest blog by Christine Shearer. Now, deeper into the world of how we build climate models. Here are links to the previous articles in the series: #1 in series, #2 in series, #3 in series

Verification, Testing, Evaluation, Validation: Validation is an important part of the scientific method. The scientific method always relies on observations, in concert with the development of testable hypotheses, and experiments or predictions which provide the tests for the hypotheses. In practice the validation process includes not only a scientist evaluating the results of the experiment or prediction, but providing written documentation which describes their work and their methods of validation. Using this documentation other scientists are able to evaluate the work and design independent experiments or predictions and methods of validation. It is not until there is independent confirmation of a scientist’s work that the work is accepted into the scientific body of knowledge. Once in the body of knowledge, work is not recognized as fact - rather it sits as a contribution that is, often, continuously challenged. It is a harsh, competitive process – not sublime.

By the very definition of scientific practice, a certain level of transparency is required. The transparency allows those who are, essentially, competitors to examine, reproduce, and independently confirm or refute the work of the scientist who initiated the original study. This general process of validation, reporting, and independent certification is a remarkably conservative process. It is slow to interject major shifts and changes into the knowledge base. This conservativeness impacts strongly the way scientists speak to each other and the public; there are always nuances of uncertainty and equivocation (again, see this entry). If you think about this culture of validation, a culture of checking, it has a lot in common with how markets are run and governance. Governance? A set of rules, buy in by participants, and a system of checks and balances. I have a number of previous articles on validation and transparency in a more general sense: Opinions and Anecdotal Evidence, Trust, but Verify, Uncertainty.

Verification, testing, evaluation, validation, I am grouping these words together to describe the culture of checking that is pervasive in the good practice of science. When I went to school, the idea of checking my arithmetic was taught again and again. It had to be taught again and again, because I was not smart enough to understand the value of checking as an abstract concept. As problems get more and more complex, strategies for checking get more and more sophisticated. When I used to hire a lot of new graduates at NASA, during the interviews we explored how they checked their work. During the first year of employment we were often coaching, teaching, and training people in how to check.

How do we translate the skills of checking to climate models? I have been laboring over the words verification, testing, evaluation, and validation. What is the difference? To start, it is important to realize that climate models are computer codes, programs, software. And though many scientists object to the following categorization, the product that climate modelers produce is software. It is software for a purpose – the scientific investigation of climate. As suggested by the previous entries in this series; the software is complex; it represents individual sub-processes (like cloud formation), it represents an approximation to those sub-processes; it is developed by geographically dispersed individuals, who are generally not managed as a coordinated group.

I will start with the easy one. Verification is the process of assuring that the software you have written or implemented is doing what you intended for it to do. Suppose you are writing a simple computer program to calculate how long it will take you to drive from Limon, Colorado to DeKalb, Illinois. This is a simple equation of motion represented by distance traveled equals speed multiplied by time traveled. You might check your program (your model) by seeing how long it takes to drive 100 miles at 20 miles per hour – a simple problem for which you can confidently state the answer. Maybe you try different pairs of speeds and distances. If you are thoroughly scientific, you might collect some data with your car. Of course, that might raise questions of determining the accuracy of your speedometer and your odometer, another requirement for checking. With some confidence you can develop a program that, without driving from Limon to DeKalb, you can make a very good approximation of how long it will take at a given speed. You can perhaps add another question – how fast do I have to drive to make the trip in 24 hours? 18 hours? With this example you can imagine the process of verification, checking that your program is doing what it is supposed to do. You might also say that you are testing your code. Testing is another word in the culture of checking, which takes on more specific meaning in different processes.

Evaluation and validation are more difficult to explain. Both words are linked with a comparison with independent information, specifically, observed information. At the risk of being tedious, when I worked at NASA, there were different sub-cultures represented by those who made instruments and those who made models. Validation at NASA often defined the process by which people who took measurements from space assured that those measurements, say, measured temperature. This would require deploying different types of temperature measuring devices, like thermometers, to take concurrent measurements at the same place. The point here is that a new way to measure temperature was being evaluated with an accepted, established way to measure temperature. Within NASA, it was a widely held belief that models could not be “validated,” because in general there was not such a clean comparison to a standard of accepted knowledge. Hence, the word “evaluation” emerged as the way to state that the model was being compared with observed information.

I will ultimately maintain that models can be validated in a formal sense. This remains an assertion that many of my colleagues disagree with. While, I accept the nuances of evaluation and validation and testing, it is important that climate science embrace the rigor implied by “validation” of models. Before I go on, I provide a link to couple of papers that were provided to me by Doug Post some time ago. These papers drew largely from the experience in the U.S. National Laboratories responsible for assuring the robustness and safety of our nuclear weapons through the use of computational models (think about that application!). These papers generated transient discussion in the climate community: Computational Science Demands a New Paradigm and Software Project Management …..

As happens with my blogs, they sometimes, get a bit long, so in the spirit of the medium, I am going to search for the take away message. The existence of the semantic arguments concerning the words evaluation and validation suggest that defining measures of quality assurance of climate models is a difficult process. It is not uniquely defined. It depends on what you are trying to do, for example, predict El Nino or how the ocean melts the bases of glaciers in Antarctica. The evaluation or validation process also depends on how a modeling system performs. This system is constructed from sub-components developed by individual scientists, in practice, spread all over the world. The migration of individual components is sometimes performed by those reading the literature and reproducing work as described in the literature; local adaptation of algorithms is often performed.

As I stated above, there is a culture of checking in our field. Individuals check their work at multiple levels. But as the components are brought together, the ability to check gets more and more difficult. Remember, these pieces are, themselves, neither unique nor absolutely accurate. As we consider the Earth’s climate, the question becomes, what do we check against? We get to the question of the quality of measurements - just how good are they? And we get to the social problem that as the climate model is built from its pieces developed by individuals how do we define and codify a process that rises to the standard of validation? As this process becomes more and more complex, we are often moved to using the word “art” to describe the process of building models (see The Art of Climate Modeling ).

The final point that I want to make in this entry is that the culture of checking that scientists intuitively accept as individuals extends as an essential ingredient to the collective development of complex software systems. There are, in the development of these complex software systems, tensions that are not rationalized by convergent, deductive reasoning. These tensions might represent the choice of the quality of the oceanic circulation versus the quality of the atmospheric circulation in a computationally and human resource constrained environment. These tensions might abstract to conflicts between oceanographers and meteorologists, perhaps even the program managers that fund oceanographers and meteorologists.

The description and codification of a validation plan for a climate model, therefore, extends far beyond the definition of a set of observations that uniquely or adequately define the Earth’s climate. There are judgments and decisions that need to be made. There are tensions, perhaps conflicts, which need to be reconciled. There are even philosophical discussions about whether or not climate models can be validated. If the open innovation communities I am exploring in this series are to be realized, then the description and codification of the validation process is necessary. Beyond the narrow world of scientists, we need to be able to point to the elements and measurements of validation in order to provide the foundation of the use of models in mitigation, adaptation, and geo-engineering.

r





Figure 1. From Online Math Tutor.


Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 141 - 91

Page: 1 | 2 | 3Blog Index

141. HaloReachFan
02:13 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
Quoting cyclonebuster:


I know. For some reason you folks have a hard time distinguishing global from regional.


I understand Global Agenda. LOL. That is all this is. Even if it does get cold the next few years which many people have come out and said because they don't have an agenda COUGH COUGH *THE GOVERNMENT* COUGH COUGH and will you still be pushing your controlling agenda then?
Member Since: Σεπτέμβριος 15, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 563
140. cyclonebuster
03:48 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
Quoting HaloReachFan:


But when you control freaks want to push a global agenda on the U.S. when it is actually a little cooler out these past few days and apparently to the graph MichaelSTL posts its been a colder year so far it is kinda hard.


I know. For some reason you folks have a hard time distinguishing global from regional.
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
139. cyclonebuster
03:44 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
Quoting HaloReachFan:


Canada=Regional CAN'T YOU GRASP THAT LOL. LOL. LOL.


Correct. LOL!
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
138. HaloReachFan
03:18 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Regional < Global! Can you grasp that?


Canada=Regional CAN'T YOU GRASP THAT LOL. LOL. LOL.
Member Since: Σεπτέμβριος 15, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 563
137. HaloReachFan
03:17 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
Quoting weatherboy1992:
The weather in Houston is not important when it comes to global warming. It's a global phenomenon. Which means that you look at the climate of the whole earth instead of one insignificant point.

I'm sorry that concept is so difficult for you.


But when you control freaks want to push a global agenda on the U.S. when it is actually a little cooler out these past few days and apparently to the graph MichaelSTL posts its been a colder year so far it is kinda hard.
Member Since: Σεπτέμβριος 15, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 563
136. cyclonebuster
02:31 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
Quoting HaloReachFan:
I like how you can post something about Canada and then somebody else posts something about Mexico and you people spout "Typical regional event again. I like how you spin it to sound as if it is a global event." But then again didn't you people just bring up Canada. Oh on a side not I think Houston has been 30 degrees colder than the average temperature the past few days interesting. But again regional. Even though its freezing hard to pass your control freak agenda with this weather.


Regional < Global! Can you grasp that?
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
134. HaloReachFan
01:36 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 05, 2011
I like how you can post something about Canada and then somebody else posts something about Mexico and you people spout "Typical regional event again. I like how you spin it to sound as if it is a global event." But then again didn't you people just bring up Canada. Oh on a side not I think Houston has been 30 degrees colder than the average temperature the past few days interesting. But again regional. Even though its freezing hard to pass your control freak agenda with this weather.
Member Since: Σεπτέμβριος 15, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 563
133. cyclonebuster
10:50 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Is the kinetic energy in the gulfstream greater than all the power that fossil fuel/nuclear power plants create?
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
132. cyclonebuster
06:34 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Is using Gulfdstresm kinetic energy one of those alternative energy sources?
How much energy can it produce compared to the others over a given time period?
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
130. cyclonebuster
03:45 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
129. cyclonebuster
03:44 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
128. cyclonebuster
03:42 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011




Figure 5. These images show high and low atmospheric pressure patterns for January 2011 (left) and the January 1968-1996 average (right). Yellows and reds show higher pressures; blues and purples indicate lower pressures, as indicated by the height of the 850 millibar pressure level above the surface, called the pressure surface. Normally, the pressure surface is nearer to the surface around the pole, winds follow the pressure contours around the pole (the polar vortex), and cold air is trapped in the Arctic. This year, the pressure pattern is allowing cold air to spill out of the Arctic into the mid-latitudes.
—Credit: NSIDC courtesy NOAA/ESRL PSD


Link
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
127. cyclonebuster
03:34 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Tunnels reverse this trend.


February 2, 2011
Arctic Oscillation brings record low January extent, unusual mid-latitude weather

Arctic sea ice extent for January 2011 was the lowest in the satellite record for that month. The Arctic oscillation persisted in its strong negative phase for most of the month, keeping ice extent low. February 2, 2011
Arctic Oscillation brings record low January extent, unusual mid-latitude weather

Arctic sea ice extent for January 2011 was the lowest in the satellite record for that month. The Arctic oscillation persisted in its strong negative phase for most of the month, keeping ice extent low. Conditions in context

Air temperatures over much of the Arctic were 2 to 6 degrees Celsius (4 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal in January. Over the eastern Canadian Arctic Archipelago, Baffin Bay/Davis Strait and Labrador Sea, temperatures were at least 6 degrees Celsius (11 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than average. Temperatures were near average over the western Canadian Arctic Archipelago and Scandinavia.

As in December 2010, the warm temperatures in January came from two sources: unfrozen areas of the ocean continued to release heat to the atmosphere, and the wind patterns accompanying the negative phase of the Arctic oscillation brought warm air into the Arctic. Near the end of January the negative Arctic oscillation pattern broke down and turned positive, which usually favors ice growth. It is unclear how long it will remain in a positive mode. January 2011 compared to past years

January 2011 had the lowest ice extent for the month since the beginning of satellite records. The linear rate of decline for the month is –3.3% per decade.

Ice extent for the Arctic as a whole increased at an average of 42,800 square kilometers (16,500 square miles) per day through the month of January, which is about average.Slow regional ice growth

In contrast, regional ice growth has been particularly slow compared to past years. Hudson Bay did not completely freeze up until mid-January, about a month later than normal according to Canadian Ice Service analyses. The Labrador Sea region is still largely free of ice, except in protected bays along the coast. Normally at this time of year, ice extends a few hundred kilometers from the coast all the way from Hudson Strait to Newfoundland.Potential links with mid-latitude weather

While the Arctic has been warm, cold and stormy weather has affected much of the Northeast U.S. and Europe. Last winter also paired an anomalously warm Arctic with cold and snowy weather for the eastern U.S. and northern Europe. Is there a connection?

Warm conditions in the Arctic and cold conditions in northern Europe and the U.S. are linked to the strong negative mode of the Arctic oscillation. Cold air is denser than warmer air, so it sits closer to the surface. Around the North Pole, this dense cold air causes a circular wind pattern called the polar vortex , which helps keep cold air trapped near the poles. When sea ice has not formed during autumn and winter, heat from the ocean escapes and warms the atmosphere. This may weaken the polar vortex and allow air to spill out of the Arctic and into mid-latitude regions in some years, bringing potentially cold winter weather to lower latitudes.

Some scientists have speculated that more frequent episodes of a negative Arctic Oscillation, and the stormy winters that result, are linked to the loss of sea ice in the Arctic. Dr. James Overland of NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) recently noted a link between low sea ice and a weak polar vortex in 2005, 2008, and the past two winters, all years with very low September sea ice extent. Earlier work by Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University and colleagues also suggested a relationship between autumn sea ice levels and mid-latitude winter conditions. Judah Cohen, at Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc., and his colleagues propose another idea—a potential relationship between early snowfall in northern Siberia, a negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation, and more extreme winters elsewhere in the Northern Hemisphere. More research on these ideas may shed light on the connections and have the potential to improve seasonal weather forecasting.

Link

Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
126. cyclonebuster
02:49 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Hot is cold and cold is hot. LOL!
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
125. cyclonebuster
02:48 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


I think he thinks all of the yellows on the map I posted represent colder than average temperatures... it is plainly obvious that the extreme cold is only in a very small area and there are MUCH larger areas that are warm.


The deniers have it "ALL" backwards don't they? Black is white and white is black! LOL!
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
123. iceagecoming
02:18 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
And it was Not Joe B.
who brought this cold cast.


by Jonathan Erdman, Sr. Meteorologist TWC

The planet has a fever?

The coldest weather in 60 years blanketed the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez with snow Wednesday, forcing dozens of people into shelters and businesses to close as power failed in some areas.

Link
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 27, 2009 Posts: 23 Comments: 1028
122. cyclonebuster
02:17 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Quoting iceagecoming:


Snow ... in Mexico? Rare Winter Dusting Shuts Down Ciudad Juarez
Feb 3, 2011 – 10:02 AM

Link

When the snow collapses the roof, they will be outside spouting IT MUST BE AGW!


Typical regional event again. I like how you spin it to sound as if it is a global event.
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
121. iceagecoming
02:12 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Link





That's what I call climate change.
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 27, 2009 Posts: 23 Comments: 1028
120. iceagecoming
02:06 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 04, 2011
Quoting martinitony:


Michael, yeah, you're right again. Those Russian climate guys who predicted this are just nuts. Of course if that temperature doesn't go back up above where it was on average, about .4 C, well then, that sort of creates another problem for you doesn't it? No warming for over 15 years.
Here's the situation, Michael, it appears there is no continued warming beyond a trend that started out over 150 years ago. Cap and Trade is dead and the world is cooling. You can keep posting the graph of choice and keep misleading all who want to believe, but your comet has faded out and the train just ain't leaving the station.


Snow ... in Mexico? Rare Winter Dusting Shuts Down Ciudad Juarez
Feb 3, 2011 – 10:02 AM

Link

When the snow collapses the roof, they will be outside spouting IT MUST BE AGW!
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 27, 2009 Posts: 23 Comments: 1028
119. martinitony
11:14 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:
This is amazing, and shows how extreme the current pattern is:



Parts of western Canada are 20°C warmer than areas 30 degrees further south, with the difference in anomaly around 40°C (72°F)!


What a maroon
NOAA
Member Since: Ιούλιος 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
117. crucilandia
08:31 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
#110

why are you showing the temperature of the 600mb level?

#111

nothing more than the oscillation due to primary productivity seasonal variability
Member Since: Μάρτιος 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
116. cyclonebuster
08:05 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
Quoting JohnTucker:



As Punxsutawney Phil is occasionally correct and the Deniers have been predicting sustained global cooling upon several occasions I believe that within stated qualifications the rodent, belonging to the group of large ground squirrels known as marmots, is indeed a more accurate forecaster, probably more professional and displays greater level of expertise at his craft.


Yes indeed ole Punxsutawney Phil is smarter than ole John Spencer. At least he knows when to crawl back into his hole!!
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
115. cyclonebuster
08:02 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:
By the way, in that same comment that I referenced, I also said that Arctic sea ice hadn't gotten the message that catastrophic global cooling was occurring. Well, guess what?

Arctic Oscillation brings record low January extent, unusual mid-latitude weather

Arctic sea ice extent for January 2011 was the lowest in the satellite record for that month. The Arctic oscillation persisted in its strong negative phase for most of the month, keeping ice extent low.


Also, the warming trend over the past three years (2008-2011) is an incredible 1°C per decade! Never mind that the current La Nina is much stronger:

Strong La Niña event persists in the Pacific

The Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) has declined slightly over the past two weeks, yet remains strongly positive. The latest (31 January) 30-day SOI value is +21, comparable to the highest January monthly SOI value on record (20.8), recorded in both 1974 and 1890.


Lets melt more ice!
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
113. cyclonebuster
08:00 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Remember this (comment 166 here)?





YOU LOSE! (of course, I don't think you actually took it on)

Even Roy Spencer is smarter than you:

...although this, too, shall pass, when La Nina goes away.


Not sure about the Roy Spencer comment. Two peas in the same pod if you ask me????
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
112. HaloReachFan
07:25 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
I have a question about the temperature picture you posted Michael.

Why is it for the average it is 20.84 Degrees Celsius and the 2011 average so far is 21.06 Degrees Celsius but yet the red line (2011) is below the orange line (average) in almost every aspect and the one time it was above the orange line it was there for a very limited time? Am I missing something?
Member Since: Σεπτέμβριος 15, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 563
109. martinitony
02:02 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Remember this (comment 166 here)?





YOU LOSE! (of course, I don't think you actually took it on)

Even Roy Spencer is smarter than you:

...although this, too, shall pass, when La Nina goes away.


Michael, yeah, you're right again. Those Russian climate guys who predicted this are just nuts. Of course if that temperature doesn't go back up above where it was on average, about .4 C, well then, that sort of creates another problem for you doesn't it? No warming for over 15 years.
Here's the situation, Michael, it appears there is no continued warming beyond a trend that started out over 150 years ago. Cap and Trade is dead and the world is cooling. You can keep posting the graph of choice and keep misleading all who want to believe, but your comet has faded out and the train just ain't leaving the station.
Member Since: Ιούλιος 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
105. martinitony
02:37 AM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 03, 2011
Quoting Neapolitan:
It's funny that despite Blow Jastardi's over-hyped prediction that January would be the coldest month out of the last 300, record daily highs across the U.S. still outnumbered record daily lows. It was close--684 record highs to 651 record lows--but warmth won out. And that happened despite two very powerful Arctic blasts from Jan. 8-14, and Jan. 21-25.

So, now I wonder whether WUWT or Jastardi will publicly admit they were wrong. Again. Don't worry; I won't hold my breath. ;-)


Start explaining this:

Global Temperatures in freefall
Member Since: Ιούλιος 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
104. crucilandia
11:01 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
Member Since: Μάρτιος 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
103. Neapolitan
11:01 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
It's funny that despite Blow Jastardi's over-hyped prediction that January would be the coldest month out of the last 300, record daily highs across the U.S. still outnumbered record daily lows. It was close--684 record highs to 651 record lows--but warmth won out. And that happened despite two very powerful Arctic blasts from Jan. 8-14, and Jan. 21-25.

So, now I wonder whether WUWT or Jastardi will publicly admit they were wrong. Again. Don't worry; I won't hold my breath. ;-)
Member Since: Νοέμβριος 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13281
102. crucilandia
10:51 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
95

nothing more than the well known vertical profile of the water masses at the equatorial pacific

the warm water intrusion is nothing more than the equatorial under current

the downwelling of warm water is mostly controlled by Kelving waves.



Member Since: Μάρτιος 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
101. crucilandia
10:28 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
cooling was due to large energy loss to space (OLR) despite atm CO2 concentration increase





due to decrease in global cloud cover

Member Since: Μάρτιος 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
100. cyclonebuster
06:43 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


LOL, you come up with some of the craziest ideas! Post some proof that there is a semi-regular (2-7 years) cycle in volcanic activity which correlates with ENSO! You don't seem to understand how insignificant geothermal heat is when compared to the ocean heat storage or Earth's annual energy budget.



Not even close - less than 0.05%! The solar cycle has a greater effect than that, over twice as much, but do you see any obvious 11 year cycle in the temperatures (see comment 92)? No?


We are discovering more thermal vents all the time so who knows how much heat it is? Also, where did I say it correlates with ENSO?
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
98. cyclonebuster
04:49 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:
In other words, overall global heat content is very likely INCREASING right now since all of that warm water stores a lot of heat. In fact, over 3,000 times higher for the same volume (the specific heat of water is 4.18 J/G*K and air (at sea level) 1 J/G*K and the density of water is 1,000 kg/cubic meter and air 1.275 kg/cubic meter).

Incidentally, I believe this is also why global temperature anomalies are usually the greatest during the decay phase of ENSO, due to all of that water cooling down (El Nino) or heating up (La Nina).


Oceans are a huge heat sink. It takes air a long time to remove that heat. It takes a longer time if that heat can't make it to space because it is trapped near the surface which will make the oceans warmer and cause more ice to melt.
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
97. cyclonebuster
04:42 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Right, how do you stop the oceans from overflowing with heat? You ALWAYS evade this question with some claim about how it isn't possible for the deep ocean to warm! But here is DIRECT PROOF:





Observe that the warm anomalies are BELOW the surface - even where it is COLDER than average (note that the subsurface is still cooler than the surface - so much for the "heat rises" theory you use to disprove this)! And have clearly been growing over the past six months - actually, ever since El Nino dissipated and La Nina developed - overall heat content is at a minimum at the transition point from El Nino-La Nina and increases until the next El Nino (although heat can be discharged without an El Nino, like in 2008, but a La Nina doesn't occur during this time).


How do we know volcanic action on the sea floor is not responsible for that? That heat will flow to the surface eventually by way of convection currents. The problem is,that heat can't make it to space because of the GHG blanket which my idea removes.
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
93. cyclonebuster
03:51 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


They think that ANY cold weather is proof of global cooling... nor do they understand concepts like La Nina/El Nino - and just wait for the announcement of January temperatures - we are certain to see something like this again:

Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.


But see what happened over the next few years as the Pacific turned back to El Nino, to be repeated in the next year or so - but with warmer temperatures overall, both for La Nina and El Nino, compared to the same phases a few years before:



It is likely that 2012 will reach a record high global temperature.

Given the dominant effect of El Nino-La Nina on short-term temperature change and the usual lag of a few months between the Nino index and its effect on global temperature, it is unlikely that 2011 will reach a new global record temperature.

In contrast, it is likely that 2012 will reach a record high global temperature. The principal caveat is that the duration of the current La Nina could stretch an extra year, as some prior La Ninas have (see Nino 3.4 index at the bottom of Figure 3). Given the association of extreme weather and climate events with rising global temperature, the expectation of new record high temperatures in 2012 also suggests that the frequency and magnitude of extreme events could reach a high level in 2012. Extreme events include not only high temperatures, but also indirect effects of a warming atmosphere including the impact of higher temperature on extreme rainfall and droughts. The greater water vapor content of a warmer atmosphere allows larger rainfall anomalies and provides the fuel for stronger storms driven by latent heat.


We can keep La Nina conditions in both oceans (Atlantic and Pacific oceans) for as long as we want to restore our North arctic ice??
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
91. cyclonebuster
03:12 PM GMT on Φεβρουάριος 02, 2011
Quoting MichaelSTL:


How about on this map? The one you posted was ONLY for the U.S. - less than 2% of the global surface area:



Also, LOL @ the posting of a WIND CHILL map as if WIND CHILL was meaningful! Wind chill is only how cold it feels to a human being, not how cold it really is (water will not freeze with a wind chill below zero if the air temperature is above zero).


These guys need to chill out! They think this storm is proof of global cooling.
Member Since: Ιανουάριος 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219

Viewing: 141 - 91

Page: 1 | 2 | 3Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
43 ° F
Νεφελώδης