This is just nuts, sorry, I just don’t have any other words for it.
Computer modeling and simulations are not hard data nor empirical proof, especially when trying to hindcast the upper atmosphere temperature back to 1860, well before radiosonde data exists. They can’t even calibrate the output against real-world upper air data for the majority of the time series. But, illogically, these authors claim that their method is sound. And, the timing is suspect. Look at the laundry list of names on the publication too. The fingerprint graphic seen on the second graph is downright corny, as if maybe the public just wouldn’t “get it” unless they put an actual human fingerprint on their graph. It’s like they threw this together as an insurance policy in case the IPCC AR5 report wasn’t convincing enough. -Anthony
(Phys.org) —A team of climatologists with members from the U.S., Australia, Canada and Norway is claiming in a paper they’ve had published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that they have found proof that global warming is being caused by human influences. They are basing their claims on computer simulations they’ve run and data obtained from three decades’ worth of satellite observations.
Most of the world’s scientists agree that our planet is experiencing global warming. Most also generally support the theory that the cause of global warming is due to an increase in greenhouse gasses, primarily carbon dioxide. And while many also support the notion that the increase in greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is likely due to human emissions, few are willing to go on record claiming that global warming is due directly to human activities. The researchers in this new effort are one such group and they claim they have proof.
Satellites, as most everyone knows, have been hovering over or circling our planet for over half a century. Over that time period they have grown progressively more sophisticated, measuring virtually every conceivable aspect of the planet below—from gas levels in the atmosphere to temperature readings on an averaged global scale, to the impact of natural events such as volcanic eruptions. It’s this data the researchers used in their attempt to root out the true source of global warming.
The research team conducted a two stage study. The first involved creating computer models that simulated climate evolution over the past several decades under three different scenarios: a world without human influence, a world with only human influence and a world without human emissions or naturally occurring incidents such as volcanic eruptions. The second stage involved gathering data from satellites and comparing it with what the team had found in creating their simulations. They say patterns emerged that prove that human influence is the cause behind global warming. One example they cite is data that shows that the troposphere (the part of the atmosphere closest to us) has seen a steady rise in temperature over the past several decades, even as the layer just above it, the stratosphere, has cooled slightly.
But what has the team really convinced that humans are the true source behind global warming, is that they were unable to produce the type of warming we’ve seen with just natural events—it’s only when human emissions are added to models that such a trend can be realistically simulated. That, they say, proves that human practices over the past several decades are responsible for global warming.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-satellite-global-humans.html#jCp
h/t to Dr. Leif Svalgaard
The paper:
Human and natural influences on the changing thermal structure of the atmosphere, PNAS, Published online before print September 16, 2013, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1305332110
Benjamin D. Santer, Jeffrey F. Painter, Céline Bonfils, Carl A. Mears, Susan Solomon, Tom M. L. Wigley, Peter J. Gleckler, Gavin A. Schmidt, Charles Doutriaux, Nathan P. Gillett, Karl E. Taylor, Peter W. Thorne, and Frank J. Wentz
Significance
Observational satellite data and the model-predicted response to human influence have a common latitude/altitude pattern of atmospheric temperature change. The key features of this pattern are global-scale tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling over the 34-y satellite temperature record. We show that current climate models are highly unlikely to produce this distinctive signal pattern by internal variability alone, or in response to naturally forced changes in solar output and volcanic aerosol loadings. We detect a “human influence” signal in all cases, even if we test against natural variability estimates with much larger fluctuations in solar and volcanic influences than those observed since 1979. These results highlight the very unusual nature of observed changes in atmospheric temperature.
Abstract
Since the late 1970s, satellite-based instruments have monitored global changes in atmospheric temperature. These measurements reveal multidecadal tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling, punctuated by short-term volcanic signals of reverse sign. Similar long- and short-term temperature signals occur in model simulations driven by human-caused changes in atmospheric composition and natural variations in volcanic aerosols. Most previous comparisons of modeled and observed atmospheric temperature changes have used results from individual models and individual observational records. In contrast, we rely on a large multimodel archive and multiple observational datasets. We show that a human-caused latitude/altitude pattern of atmospheric temperature change can be identified with high statistical confidence in satellite data. Results are robust to current uncertainties in models and observations. Virtually all previous research in this area has attempted to discriminate an anthropogenic signal from internal variability. Here, we present evidence that a human-caused signal can also be identified relative to the larger “total” natural variability arising from sources internal to the climate system, solar irradiance changes, and volcanic forcing. Consistent signal identification occurs because both internal and total natural variability (as simulated by state-of-the-art models) cannot produce sustained global-scale tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling. Our results provide clear evidence for a discernible human influence on the thermal structure of the atmosphere.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-satellite-global-humans.html#jCp
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Benjamin D. Santer, Jeffrey F. Painter, Céline Bonfils, Carl A. Mears, Susan Solomon, Tom M. L. Wigley, Peter J. Gleckler, Gavin A. Schmidt, Charles Doutriaux, Nathan P. Gillett, Karl E. Taylor, Peter W. Thorne, and Frank J. Wentz
The usual suspects.
They. Can. Not.be. Serious.
What’s wrong with what they are doing?
I once pretended what it would be like to fly the space shuttle above Civil War battles. How is this any different?
I wonder if that drawing will find it’s way into AR5 ?
So let me be sure I understand this. If we recreate the satellite data from 1860-1960, ie. assume it is constant because humans weren’t emitting CO2 yet. Then tune a model using natural forcings and a presumed CO2 effect to replicate the 1960-2010 data (omitting any of the new internal oscillation studies). Then we take out the CO2 and natural forcing data and the tuned model no longer fits the 1960-2010 data but does fit the 1860-1960 part where everything was assumed constant this proves CO2 forced warming. Really? I mean Really?
You can ‘vote’ for the paper here: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-satellite-global-humans.html
Be honest though!
I take an invalid model, use it to predict the past, take away one parameter (carbon dioxyde emmissions), recalculate it, re-predict the past, and guess what I get: the invalid answer that the parameter on which my original invalid model was based is the one causing the variation!
Quite circular!
Obama’s re-election proves without doubt that, there are millions of gullible people who will believe anything from anyone, over here in Blighty that egregious liar, public peculator and peerless charlatan Tony Bliar was re-elected 3 times. Then, God help us [because we need divine intervention] we selected his spiritual brother David Cameron.
Yep, there are lots and lots of very stupid people in the west and men like Schmidt, Santer, Wigley et al play on it for all it’s worth, this latest offering is fantastical; “computers prove it’s all mankind’s fault!”
Even then and all things being equal, that’s a bit of a stretch lads.
“Claim: simulated satellite data back to 1860 proves global warming caused by humans”
Let me fix that headline for you.
“Consensus: simulated satellite data back to 1860 proves global warming caused by humans”
Interesting that one of the authors is Nathan Gillet who recently co-authored Fyfe et al (2013), in Nature Climate Change. That paper said CMIP3 and CMIP5 simulations were out by 400% over the last 15 years and 100% over the 20 years since the IPCC’s FAR.
Just like climate forecasts for 100 years in the future are more reliable than weather forecasts for 10 days in the future. So too, these ensembles are hopeless at just 20 years but great for 160 years in the past.
It’s nature at work. Just like tree ring proxies are misleading for the past 50 years they shape up just fine for anything more than a century ago.
@Man Bearpig at 12:21 am: But you can’t vote a zero!
Well the IPCC AR5 Second Order Draft does mention the problem as the “limitations of satellite sensors” when used in climate modelling. “An alternative approach is to use is to calculate observation-equivalents from models using radiative transfer calculations to ‘simulate’ what the satellite would provide if the satellite system were ‘observing’ the model”.
La-la-land! A virtual earth with a virtual climate observed by virtual satellites sending back virtual data, because real satellite data doesn’t agree with virtual thermometers.
Why do they keep saying that the stratosphere has cooled as predicted by the alarmists’ theory? The stratosphere stopped cooling in the early 90’s. Its temperature has been pretty stable for the last 20+ years despite CO2 rising 40 ppm in that time.
They are desperate to find “proof” that humans are the cause of all woes. They just can’t find it in the here and now, so they have to go back. I’m sure they are also trying to doge the real scientists who keep pointing out the flaws in their attempts with anything recent.
Don’t worry, I’m sure this latest will be in tatters by the morning.
Sorry “dodge”
The degeneration of climate science simply knows no bounds. It publish any kind of stupidity of perish in this business. I hope this is a low point for a while at least.
I am sure somebody will try and defend this – like the made up Tornado data story – but the reality is, that there isn’t any !!
It is called desparation!
“Kev-in-Uk says:
September 18, 2013 at 12:57 am
I am sure somebody will try and defend this – like the made up Tornado data story – but the reality is, that there isn’t any !!”
Probably Luke over at Jennifer Marohasy’s blog will have a go IMO
Just another instance demonstrating real science and climate science are poles apart in their practices and methodology.
Just another instance of when you construct a computer climate model, using pre-determined results in order to get funding, you end up with a classic case of GIGO.
Just another instance in climate science where the word ‘proof’ means “unsubstantiated guess using dodgy criteria to satisfy my/our financial backers”.
And finally: “But what has the team really convinced that humans are the true source behind global warming, is that they were unable to produce the type of warming we’ve seen with just natural events—it’s only when human emissions are added to models that such a trend can be realistically simulated.”
1. Dick Lindzen showed us recently on WUWT that the global temperature anomalies (52 year periods) of 1895-1946 and 1957-2008 were almost identical. 2. No one claims to fully understand the magnitude and timing of natural climate cycles, so what gives these guys the right or rationale to say they do?
I was in William Hill’s yesterday with my hindcast of last year’s Derby winner but they wouldn’t pay up!
As can be seen in the graphic of the lower stratosphere temperature anomaly, the stratosphere cooling has nothing to do with CO2. The cooling has happened in just two steps: one after Chichón eruption and one after Pinatubo eruption, as rebounds from the temperature increases that those eruptions temporarily caused. The rest of the time, including the last 20 years of massive CO2 emissions, temperature there has been pretty flat,
Here the data, here the graphic.
Yay! Humans control the climate.
Quick, Mr Obama, tweet it.
So using a computer to realistically simulate something makes it true? OMG, they’ve just proved that ghosts, aliens, dragons and green ogres (who make candles from their ear wax), are real. ROTFLMAO.
To be fair, since they’ll continue their lucrative careers on the back of this rubbish, they have proved it’s possible to make gold out of base metal.
Good point, Tiny, it’s the closest thing to alchemy that we’re likely to see.