"The reality of climate change" Mk 4

Discussion in 'Alpine & Snow' started by Sandy, May 10, 2006.

  1. daj

    daj First Runs

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 1970
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    The add is simply disturbing. No science, no facts, everything taken out of context. This is a warning to those who believe the public debate is really about the science.

    daj
     
  2. Taipan

    Taipan Old n' Crusty Ski Pass: Gold

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,979
    Location:
    NSW Mid North Coast
    Ridiculous add. Poorly thought out and implemented.

    Will set back the credibility of the skeptics group which continue to argue the issues based on science.

    It is SOP to label anybody who argues against the "global warming" science as in the pay of the fuel or coal companies. That is clearly not correct. Adds like this make good scientists who argue against the current accepted wisdom, more difficult to be accepted and prove their points.

    My interest has always been the science and the fact that some scientists are getting way ahead of proven facts. Daj i know you strongly disagree with this statement.

    But as Daj rightly says. There is a lot of media marketing from both sides on this issue.

    Daj - ive been really busy of late, so haven’t had a chance to come back on some of these issues.

    On the issue of acceptance of reports to IPCC 4, there certainly is some concern about late reports or reports which have not being peer reviewed being included in IPCC4.

    Now if you feel comfortable with IPCC 2001, your likely response will be, "no, we know this author, his work is good, we need to accept the work."

    However as has been seen, previous reports which have not been peered reviewed, have led us in one direction, without being based on solid and widely peer reviewed science.

    The question will be left in abeyance until IPCC4 is released and the reports are either included or excluded.
     
  3. daj

    daj First Runs

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 1970
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    >On the issue of acceptance of reports to IPCC 4, there certainly is some concern about late reports or reports which have not being peer reviewed being included in IPCC4.

    I would love to hear of an example. It would be extremely odd if someone tried to do this, as the reports are peer reviewed by 1000s of people, including the sceptics.
    >Now if you feel comfortable with IPCC 2001, your likely response will be, "no, we know this author, his work is good, we need to accept the work."

    Not at all. I know of papers which should be included (including one by myself) but which cannot because of the deadline cut off. The IPCC report is simply a summary of the science at a certain point. What possible motivation would there to include studies which are not acceptable according to the guidelines?

    The TAR report was an accurate summary of the science as we knew it in the early 2000s, but had two obvious imperfections. It devoted too much time to the error ridden MSU record, and not enough attention was paid to the error bars which are attached to the Hockey Stick. We have learnt more since the TAR, and more observations are falling into line with out models - the satellites show warming, global warming continues unabatted, sea ice (particularly in the northern hemisphere) disappearing at the rate of knots, sea level is rising, and we have established that the rate of rise is acceleratings etc etc.

    DAJ
     
  4. Taipan

    Taipan Old n' Crusty Ski Pass: Gold

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,979
    Location:
    NSW Mid North Coast
    Daj - you obviously seem extremly well clued into this stuff. Lets lead the issue about potential reports being included when they shouldnt be.

    Lets go to another issue. It has been claimed many times that we are now living in the warmest period in over a thousand years. Yet since IPCC 2001 we have seen a number of studies that have showed that the mwp was in fact warmer. How did they determine that?

    Kultti et al. [Holocene 2006] has just been published in Holocene, showing higher medieval treeelines in northern Finland (27 deg E). This is consistent with the more northerly distribution of oak in medieval Finland reported in Hulden [2001] discussed here and adds to the growing inventory of articles both demonstrating higher medieval treelines and using this to estimate MWP temperatures locally higher than at present, some of which I’ve posted about from time to time Medieval Category. These “local†results from treelines are not limited to the north Atlantic and Greenland, but extend to the Sierra Nevadas (117 W), Sweden, Finland, Polar Urals (65 E) and a Siberian transect (90-100E). I’ll add a comment on Chinese proxies of this type. Kultti et al. also consider information from other proxies and report similar results for all proxies EXCEPT the tree ring width chronology of Helama et al [2002]. Here are some extended quotes.

    Kultti et al. report that treeline is a proxy for July temperature, They state that:

    During the ‘Mediaeval Warm Period’ the distribution area of pine was 7200 km2 more extensive than at present, and pines were growing at 40-/80 m higher altitudes. For this period, the mean July temperature reconstruction shows /0.55 deg C shift compared with the present….

    Their survey of similar results mention:

    At the same time, presence of pine has been detected c. 100 m above the current pine limit in Sweden (Kullman, 1998) and 100/140 m above in the Kola Peninsula (Hiller et al., 2001). The same pattern at the upper larch (Larix sibirica) timberline on the Eastern side of the Ural Mountains has also been found; from c. 1000 cal. yr BP to c. 600 cal. yr BP numerous megafossils have been found from above the present tree limit (Shiyatov, 1993). Assuming a lapse rate 0.6 deg C per 100 m, these finds correspond with a shift of/0.6-0.8 deg C in temperatures.The conifer limit during the ‘Mediaeval Warm Period’ appears to have been well above the present conifer limit in extensive areas in Fennoscandia and Russia. This suggests that the climate during the ‘Mediaeval Warm Period’ was even warmer than during the twentieth century in northern Fennoscandia. Most of the quantitative reconstructions from Finnish Lapland (Figure 4) show warmer than at present at c. 1000 years ago (Korhola et al., 2000, 2002; Seppa and Birks, 2001, 2002, Seppa et al., 2002). Only reconstruction made from tree-ring widths suggests colder than at present mean July temperature (Helama et al., 2002)


    So im sure you will say its a load of rubbish, But were you aware of these studies and the implications.

    Quiet clearly they are showing that the freezing tundra line was in fact 400 - 500 feet higher during the mwp then it is now, even allowing for 30 years of warming since 1970.

    And one thing i cant get past is where is the real evidence that CO2 has directly caused the increase in temperatures above normal increase since 1970.
     
  5. daj

    daj First Runs

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 1970
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Taipan,

    you are mixing global signals with local signals, and forgetting the time lag in natural indicators. It is quite possible that some places were warmer in the MWP than the present, but the question is if you average all the place we have data for is the average warmer than the present? There is not a single global study which returns a yes to this question... Not one global study published in a peer reviewed journal since the TAR has come to this conclusion.

    The other issue is one of lags. Many natural indicators take decades to repond and are lagging far beyond the current warming. The obvious of these is glaciers which often take decades to equilibrate - I have been arguing this point with an "famous" sceptic who holds up 0AD glacier records in the Eurpoean Alps as evidence that it was warmer back then... in just 5 years the glaciers have melted so much that they are now as short as around 0AD, but have 10 to 100s of metres more melt to come as they are very far from equilibrium (that is the are missleading indicators of how warm it is).

    The same goes for trees. You can't move a forest at 20km a decade, or migrate one up a hill 20-40m a decade, which is the rate they would have to be moving now to keep up with climate change. These systems are far out of balance with our current climate, and have next to no chance of catching up in the forseeable future.

    DAJ
     
  6. hair-raiser

    hair-raiser Hard Yards

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why don't you two just email each other and save the rest of us from death by boredom.

    *************************************************

    Moderator's note:

    :rolleyes:

    Then don't post.
     
  7. Majikthise

    Majikthise Sage Moderator Ski Pass: Gold

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 1970
    Messages:
    31,199
    Likes Received:
    16,264
    Location:
    Blue Mts
    because other's may actually enjoy the exposition of the arguement. If you don't like this thread hair-raser here is a tip... DON'T OPEN IT!
     
  8. hair-raiser

    hair-raiser Hard Yards

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Control is one thing, but to be told by the powers that be that we musn't say a thread has become boring is, well, a bit, well, .... (daren't say!)
     
  9. adminvb

    adminvb First Runs

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    5
    The following short (and depressing) article is from Discovery in yesterday's Sydney Sun-Herald;

    "The belt of tropical climate around the planet appears to be widening, expanding the world's driest regions and reducing alpine snowfall.

    A study shows that the atmosphere is warming faster in subtropical areas. Scientists examining more than 25 years of satellite data also found that each hemisphere's jetstream had moved toward the pole by about one degree of latitude, or 112 kilometres, marking a worrying new feature of global climate change.

    These rivers of air mark the meteorological transition from tropical to subtropical climates. Scientists also predict that this could shift mid-latitude storm tracks polewards, cutting winter rain and snowfall in areas including southern Australian."
     
  10. Sandy

    Sandy Dark Sith Lord of the Pool Room Moderator Ski Pass: Gold

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 1998
    Messages:
    66,411
    Likes Received:
    17,570
    Location:
    Yokohama, Japan, Melb. Expat.
    ....and they can tell all of this with 25 years of satellite data??? :rolleyes:
     
  11. Taipan

    Taipan Old n' Crusty Ski Pass: Gold

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,979
    Location:
    NSW Mid North Coast
    Its a worry isnt it. :rolleyes:

    This thread has stalled for awhile, while the protaganists shake their heads. DAJ while he looks at some of us and shakes his head that we could be so stupid and some of us that Daj could be so dumb.

    Time will eventually answer this question, but only after a lot of scientific prestige blood has been spilt.
     
    #61 Taipan, Jun 5, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 17, 2013