From the University of California – Los Angeles
Research also helps unravel the mystery of retreating glaciers in the Pacific Ocean’s western tropics
Using a cutting-edge research technique, UCLA researchers have reconstructed the temperature history of a region that plays a major role in determining climate around the world.
The findings, published online Feb. 27 in the journal Nature Geoscience, will help inform scientists about the processes influencing global warming in the western tropical Pacific Ocean.
The study analyzes how much temperatures have increased in the region near Indonesia, and how ocean temperatures affect nearby tropical glaciers in Papua New Guinea and Borneo. Researchers also evaluated the accuracy of existing climate model predictions for that region. The findings illustrate that the region is very sensitive to climate change and that it has warmed considerably over the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age.
The team chose the specific area examined in the study because it is Earth’s warmest open ocean region and a primary source of heat and water vapor to the atmosphere. As a result, temperature changes there can influence climate not just regionally, but globally.
“The tropical Pacific ocean-atmosphere system has been called a sleeping dragon because of how it can influence climate elsewhere,” said lead author Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the departments of Earth, planetary and space sciences, and atmospheric and oceanic sciences.
Tripati and her team used a technique known as clumped isotope thermometry, which examines the calcium carbonate shells of marine plankton for subtle differences in the amounts of carbon-13 and oxygen-18 they contain. The researchers analyzed extensive modern and geological datasets, conducted theoretical calculations and examined climate model output. The group discovered that temperatures have changed by about 8 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit (4 to 5 degrees Celsius) over that span — more than scientists had previously thought, and more than most models have estimated.
“Most global climate models underestimate the average temperature variations that the region has experienced,” Tripati said, adding that the other models’ simulations may be incomplete or the models are not sensitive enough.
The UCLA team’s conclusions about temperature changes in the region also imply that there have been major fluctuations in the volume of water vapor in the atmosphere there.
As part of the study, Tripati and her colleagues also investigated what sets the past and present height of glaciers in the tropics, and why they have been retreating. To accurately estimate the height of tropical glaciers and average temperatures at altitude in this region, they found that atmospheric mixing, through a process known as entrainment, needs to be factored in.
“We found that the large amount of ocean warming goes a long way to explaining why glaciers have retreated so much,” said Tripati, a faculty member in the College of Letters and Science and a member of UCLA’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. “Throughout the region, they have retreated by close to a kilometer since the last ice age, and are predicted to disappear in the next one to three decades. Previously understanding this large-scale glacial retreat has been a puzzle. Our results help resolve this problem.”
Among the implications of the study are that ocean temperatures in this area may be more sensitive to changes in greenhouse gas levels than previously thought and that scientists should be factoring entrainment into their models for predicting future climate change.
The group has already begun a follow-up study, looking at sediment from Indonesia’s Lake Towuti to develop data that can be used to further improve models of climate and water cycling for the region. Researchers will also look at other places in the tropics, the Western U.S. and China.
Co-authors of the study are Sandeep Sahany, postdoctoral researcher in the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences, Dustin Pittman, graduate student in the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences, Robert Eagle, assistant researcher in the department of Earth, planetary and space sciences, Jonathan Mitchell, assistant professor in the departments of Earth, planetary and space sciences and of atmospheric and oceanic sciences, J. David Neelin, professor in the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and Luc Beaufort, a research scientist at the Center for Research and Teaching of Environmental Geosciences in Aix-en-Provence, France.
The research was supported primarily by the National Science Foundation.
=================================================================
Paper: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n3/full/ngeo2082.html
Modern and glacial tropical snowlines controlled by sea surface temperature and atmospheric mixing
Abstract
During the Last Glacial Maximum, tropical sea surface temperatures were 1 to 3 °C cooler than present1, 2, 3, 4, but the altitude of the snowlines of tropical glaciers5, 6 was lower than would be expected in light of these sea surface temperatures. Indeed, both glacial and twentieth-century snowlines seem to require lapse rates that are steeper than a moist adiabat7, 8. Here we use estimates of Last Glacial Maximum sea surface temperature in the Indo-Pacific warm pool based on the clumped isotope palaeotemperature proxy in planktonic foraminifera and coccoliths, along with radiative–convective calculations of vertical atmospheric thermal structure, to assess the controls on tropical glacier snowlines. Using extensive new data sets for the region, we demonstrate that mean environmental lapse rates are steeper than moist adiabatic during the recent and glacial. We reconstruct glacial sea surface temperatures 4 to 5 °C cooler than modern. We include modern and glacial sea surface temperatures in calculations of atmospheric convection that account for mixing between rising air and ambient air, and derive tropical glacier snowlines with altitudes consistent with twentieth-century and Last Glacial Maximum reconstructions. Sea surface temperature changes ≤3 °C are excluded unless glacial relative humidity values were outside the range associated with deep convection in the modern. We conclude that the entrainment of ambient air into rising air masses significantly alters the vertical temperature structure of the troposphere in modern and ancient regions of deep convection. Furthermore, if all glacial tropical temperatures were cooler than previously estimated, it would imply a higher equilibrium climate sensitivity than included in present models.
Looks like a pretty small and localized sample size:
Figure 1: Sites studied.
Shown are core locations (806B, MD97-2138, V24-109) and mountains that were glaciated at the LGM
“The findings illustrate that the region is very sensitive to climate change and that it has warmed considerably over the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age.”
Gosh. I’m so happy to know that things have warmed since the last ice age. Will send more grant money ASAP.
“Most global climate models underestimate the average temperature variations that the region has experienced,” Tripati said, adding that the other models’ simulations may be incomplete or the models are not sensitive enough.
oxymoron…………
I’m glad to report that my region has warmed considerably over the last 2 weeks. It’s nice.
glaciers in the Pacific Ocean’s western tropics – Yeah, I have to guess glaciers would NOT like the tropics.
As usual, climate scientists paid from my tax money publish behind a paywall.
That is a bit disturbing given the lack of accuracy of “climate models”.
Yeah, Like this is, you know, fantastic science, why didn’t anyone ever think? Oh California.
“………We found that the large amount of ocean warming goes a long way to explaining why glaciers have retreated so much,” said Tripati……..”
Well then, what caused the ocean warming??
It is simply amazing that the explanations advanced to “explain” the retreating glaciers really do not explain anything at all , but just use some other “observed” event as the reason that something else happened.
Just DESCRIBING what has been observed does not constitute an EXPLANATION for a subsequent event.
I have woken up considerably since 3am. LOL.
The Pacific region is so sensitive to climate changes that it has been very detrimental to humans. We must act then!
What about the other tropical glaciers? Are they sensitive to the considerable global warming since the last DE-GLACIATION as opposed to “the last ice age.” Are these people climate scientists? Time for bed.
For those who did not get my last comment we are still in an ice age I vaguely recall. My advanced apologies if I am wrong.
What sea level. Was not the sea level much lower or nonexistent at this time?
“The tropical Pacific ocean-atmosphere system has been called a sleeping dragon because…”
Repent CO2 sinners or face the desolation of Smaug! Doom! Doooooom!
Most logical people, skeptics and warmists, tend to agree that the Sun is the main source of energy for the Earth and the rest of the Solar System.
Similarly both skeptics and warmists seem to have questions about the causes of cycles or events that do not “fit” into any specific hypothesis.
Such situations require that we remember that the Sun and Solar System are part of a galaxy, which in turn is part of the Universe.
While the changes to the Sun’s activity may be the principal driver of weather and climate, who’s to say that extra-Solar events may account for inexplicable (at least presently) activity?
Yes Jimbo, we are experiencing an interglacial or interstadial. Volcanoes can heat up the sea, there are more undersea vents and volcanoes than terrestrial ones. One of my studies in post graduate forensic archaeology, was the ice man, or Ortzi. A volcanic eruption covered the mountain ranges where he was found with dust or ash. Because it could no longer reflect warmth from the sun, the region experienced a unseasonal melt. Didn’t last long though. They discovered other bodies too, even German troops from the second world war that had been covered by an avalanche and frozen in a glacier.
The models that are too sensitive to model the current climate are not sensitive enough to model the past?
Can’t even mock that.
The key conclusion and probably why this stuff got in Nature to start with: “Furthermore, if all glacial tropical temperatures were cooler than previously estimated, it would imply a higher equilibrium climate sensitivity than included in present models.”
Higher sensitivity… from a line of dedcution that is of course much, much more precise than let say, works from hyper instrumentalized observations from the present day.
In central and southern Ontario this winter, highs have been below 30 year historic lows. I am happy I am not there. I imagine that the north eastern US is much the same. Did they think they could fool people into thinking it was warmer than it was?
I say, do what these authors say you should do, change the models to make them MUCH more sensitive. Whichever group of scientists cooked this one up, let em loose on the modelers. Ratchet those things UP!!!!!! What’s not to like about that? Stew: Meet your own pot.
I don’t think they meant like climate sensitivity. Perhaps it is something else.
“The tropical Pacific ocean-atmosphere system has been called a sleeping dragon because of how it can influence climate elsewhere,” said lead author Aradhna Tripati,
==============
I always knew it was the “dragons”.
They’ve never been quantified.
“The tropical Pacific ocean-atmosphere system has been called a sleeping dragon…”
which has so far been quite beneficial to our climate system, agriculture, and civilization in general. Niiiiiice dragon. Maybe, like the Vikings in the Dreamworks film “How to Train Your Dragon”, some of us have badly misjudged this particular “dragon”. 🙂
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Train_Your_Dragon_(film)
Abstract:
….
“We conclude that the entrainment of ambient air into rising air masses significantly alters the vertical temperature structure of the troposphere in modern and ancient regions of deep convection. ”
Translation: the warm air goes up into the air and is warm in a warmly fashion.
We’ve made some remarkable tentative conclusions around here as well. We’ve discovered that as the temperature is freezing the air around us (to wit, near us) is likewise in a cold manner but as the temperature structure warms, so doth the airith around uth. As we travel into space, the entrainment drops to nothing, and it is freezing as hell, until you fly into the sun, which burns like the stupid.
Looks like shit; i.e. far beneath the dignity of Bull Shit.
“Among the implications of the study are that ocean temperatures in this area may be more sensitive to changes in greenhouse gas levels than previously thought and that scientists should be factoring entrainment into their models for predicting future climate change.”
Why am I not surprised by that assertion?
John Tyler says:
March 14, 2014 at 6:13 pm
Just DESCRIBING what has been observed does not constitute an EXPLANATION for a subsequent event.
————————————————————————————————
Right, where is the supposed connection to agw via co2? It is never stated.
“UCLA researchers have reconstructed the temperature history of a region that plays a major role in determining climate around the world.”
Amazing !!! Wow knew, the that earths climate is controlled by the temperatures in western tropical Pacific Ocean. So I guess all we have to do is control the temperatures in western tropical Pacific Ocean and then we can control world wide temps.
Glad to know the “Experts” still want to ignore the Sun’s influence
““Throughout the region, they have retreated by close to a kilometer since the last ice age, and are predicted to disappear in the next one to three decades. Previously understanding this large-scale glacial retreat has been a puzzle.”
Is she also puzzled when, upon removing a tray of ice from her freezer and leaving it at room temperature prior to her trip to Indonesia, and then returning from said trip one month later to examine said ice tray, she finds the ice in the tray has retreated?
SIGINT EX says:
March 14, 2014 at 7:41 pm
============
Is that all you got, you do realize you didn’t say s#it, right ?
( you might have said it twice, but you are a long way from the record).
Yawn!
latitude, that is not an oxymororb, that is ox-shiy
I didn’t notice where volcanism was an attribute to this study. Did they miss it completely?
I just knew that somebody would try to take the temp of under-sea volcanoes and blame mankind for the anomalies. Not that sharp. (cutting-edge)
” we demonstrate that mean environmental lapse rates are steeper than moist adiabatic during the recent and glacial.”
Duh.
20,000 years ago
# NOAA Paleoclimatology
“20,000 years ago, global mean temperature 4 degrees C cooler than today, although the North Atlantic was 14 degrees C cooler. Lower sea level allows large-scale migrations of people into the Americas”.
# Australian Institute of Marine Science.
“20,000 years ago, the world was starting to emerge from the most recent ice age. The sea level around the Australian coast was then about 120 meters lower than it is today.”
# From Wiki re the Island of New Guinea which limits the southern boundary of the Pacific Warm Pool, the largest body of warm ocean waters on earth.
Puncak Jaya, the highest peak in SE Asia located in Indonesia’s West Papua province
“While Puncak Jaya’s peak is free of ice, there are several glaciers on its slopes, including the Carstensz Glacier, West Northwall Firn, East Northwall Firn and the recently vanished Meren Glacier in the Meren Valley (meren is Dutch for “lakes”).[11] Being equatorial, there is little variation in the mean temperature during the year (around 0.5°C) and the glaciers fluctuate on a seasonal basis only slightly. However, analysis of the extent of these rare equatorial glaciers from historical records show significant retreat since the 1850s, around the time of the Little Ice Age Maximum which primarily affected the Northern Hemisphere, indicating a regional warming of around 0.6°C per century between 1850 and 1972.
The glacier on Puncak Trikora in the Maoke Mountains disappeared completely some time between 1939 and 1962.[12] Since the 1970s, evidence from satellite imagery indicates the Puncak Jaya glaciers have been retreating rapidly. The Meren Glacier melted away sometime between 1994 and 2000.[13] An expedition led by paleoclimatologist Lonnie Thompson in 2010 found that the glaciers are disappearing at a rate of seven metres thickness per year and should be vanished by 2015.”
____________
Seems like that quite a number of researchers have been there before this lot of tax payer funding miners hove to on the scene.
Yep! the climate has changed.
The climate will continue to change
The climate is always changing
The constant climate change is the very item that has forced adaption and new strategies to emerge in every aspect amongst every life form on this planet .
And that has constant need to adapt to the ever changing global and local climate has driven the rise of intelligence and has created the immense diversity of life on this planet as life of every stature and type strives to adapt and prosper in that always changing climate.
A steady state global climate would lead to stagnation and the eventual very slow extinction of nearly every higher life form as well as intelligence leaving only the lowest level of life forms, the bacteria, mosses and etc as the survivors.
Climate science unlike most other science disciplines has become a resource greedy, grabbing, passive, non productive,deliberately fear creating branch of science where the only “science” done consists of “studies” as above.
Which unlike say nanotechnology, medicine, physics, mathematics and etc and etc, climate science has not and never has provided any real contribution of any worth to society nor has it demonstrated any evidence of being a useful, viable constructive contribution to society.
1km retreat doesn’t sound like much, given there has been some warming over the last 150 years.
I think they like homing in on this area because they think it is not inhabited by anyone able to contradict what they say. However, there are oral traditions relating to land forms, coastline etc from Melanesian peoples in PNG that match events calculated to have occurred 12,000 years ago. We have some of this documented – maybe we’d better start looking for it.
The west Pacific is where a fair amount of our bad weather comes from, and yes it has been a relatively sleepy dragon in recent years. No reason for complacency of course.
“Extensive new datasets” which they then somehow feed into their crack-brained CO2 models ….
Wondering what “deep convection” is supposed to mean. They have finally discovered it is not all just conduction?
What is available in this post fits with the idea that a large committee cannot write clean and simple text despite having done interesting research. For example,
“ ocean temperatures in this area may be more sensitive to changes in greenhouse gas levels than previously thought . . .”
Who previously thought what and why? [Who’s on first? Look it up!]
And, just how do they think GHGs change the ocean temperature? They write as though the process is simple and direct. And why is the phrase “in this area” thrown in? Do I assume they know other areas where the ocean temperatures are less blah, blah …
Jimbo contributed another and there is more. But like Jimbo, I’m off for now.
Jimbo says:
March 14, 2014 at 6:21 pm
About clicking on that WUWT bookmark:
It is advised that skeptics take a blood pressure pill before any encounter with writings about the climate of Earth.
Using a cutting-edge research technique, UCLA researchers have reconstructed the temperature history of a region that plays a major role in determining climate around the world.
Cutting edge…. or cutting corners? Hard to tell, with the paper behind a paywall.
“The tropical Pacific ocean-atmosphere system has been called a sleeping dragon because of how it can influence climate elsewhere,” said lead author Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the departments of Earth, planetary and space sciences, and atmospheric and oceanic sciences.
Ahhhh, Dragons! The missing heat…. The computer models didn’t include dragons, an essential but little appreciated parameter in global warming models. It seems sooooo obvious now…….
Remember to stick to and follow your convections. Lol.
Crap, crap, and more crap. I was on Midway Island in 1963. It looked pretty much like it did in 1943. Elevation 3 feet. Guess what? It’s 2014 and the average elevation on Midway Island is 3 feet. Even more to the point, French Frigate Shoals (look it up) is just as much above and below the surface as it was 70 years ago. Please let me know when that beloved
westernmost hawaiian island sinks. I for one will fall off the wagon in desperate grief.
Oh, Polynesians and their SUVs…That explains everything.
“Most global climate models underestimate the average temperature variations that the region has experienced,” Tripati said, adding that the other models’ simulations may be incomplete or the models are not sensitive enough.
So, they are saying that the models for which we are supposed to bankrupt all the world economies and throw millions and millions of people into poverty may be incomplete.
CLIMATE DENIERS!!!
“Renaldo says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:01 pm”
Your post reminded me of this;
http://www.cookislands.travel/cook-islands/rarotonga/boat-cruises/x,1,4309/reef-sub.html
I saw it in 1995 on my way toNew Zealand. It’s still there, still roughly where it was in relation to sea levels when it sunk in 1916.
Miss Tripati, more monkey magic, I presume.
http://lovetripitaka.blogspot.co.uk/p/tripitaka-picture-to-download.html
wws says:
I’m glad to report that my region has warmed considerably over the last 2 weeks. It’s nice”.
Being from the land down under, I would like to confirm that the “climate” has cooled a little over the last few weeks (climate change and all that. y’know).
The “scorchers” that we always get in summer have eased off, and its just downright pleasant.
Fortunately, at this time of year, the ocean water is still warm, and off-shore breezes hold the waves up nicely.
Life is tough down here in Cronulla. 🙂
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronulla,_New_South_Wales
I would just like to add that the population of Australia has a high percentage of coastal inhabitants.
Anyone older than 15 years old will tell you that the seas haven’t risen that anyone can see, summers are still rather hot sometimes, thank goodness. Spring and Autumn are idyllic.
And in winter, you need a wetsuit.
All these fools preaching “climate change” either grew up in their mum’s basement or were never Aussies to start with.
Nothing has changed.. the climate down here is still REALLY NICE ! 🙂
And because I’m on a roll..
All you inner city Melbourne greenie luvlies that are hysterical about climate change.. if you don’t like the few days of the year than Melbourne gets rather warm.. Move to Tasmania..
You can inbreed down there.
ROM says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:37 pm
A steady state global climate would lead to stagnation and the eventual very slow extinction of nearly every higher life form as well as intelligence leaving only the lowest level of life forms, the bacteria, mosses and etc as the survivors.
————-
So the meek WILL inherit the earth !!
The findings illustrate that the region is very sensitive to climate change and that it has warmed considerably over the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age.
No. The only scientific finding in this work is that SST changed by 4-5 deg C since the last glacial minimum 20kya, instead of 3 C.
The climate has changed.
To describd this as greater sensitivity to climate change is a sign of dysfunctional logic or the deliberate intention to confuse and mislead. It is introducing redundant and fictitious logical clauses.
Observation: your child has grown.
CAGW narrative: your child has become more senstitve to size-change.
Observation: it is raining.
CAGW narrative: this location has become more sensitive to rain-making processses.
It makes no sense except as a deliberate atempt to deceive.
Come on. During the Last Glacial Maximum, which ended 19 thousand years ago sea level was 130 m lower. That means the geography of the region was entirely different, there was no Maritime Continent there, but two vast landmasses separated by narrow straits, the southern continent of Sahul, which included present day Tasmania, Australia and New Guinea and the Sunda subcontinent in the north, extending over Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Malay peninsula and the surrounding seabed up to southern China. There was not much room for a warm pool between Sahul &. Sunda, was there? The Indonesian Throughflow must have been pretty restricted as well, so the entire ocean circulation pattern was different in the region.
thegriss says:
March 15, 2014 at 1:51 am X 3
Very very funny and the Sydney Inner City Greens can join the Melbourne Inner City Greens in Tassie for a green luv in.
daddylonglegs on March 15, 2014 at 2:11 am
…”To describd this as greater sensitivity to climate change is a sign of dysfunctional logic or the deliberate intention to confuse and mislead. It is introducing redundant and fictitious …”
…”It makes no sense except as a deliberate atempt to deceive.”
—————
Having spent a decade grubbing for grants and writing academic papers , I do agree the process is somewhat is intended to deceive. As a researcher you’re interested in something that practically no one else is interested in, and you need to beg someone (usually the [government]) to pay for the study, so you make it sound much more important than it actually is.
My colleagues and I would laugh about the fact that the introductory paragraph in all our papers, and all papers in our field, would start off with [big] grandiose claims of being relevant to curing cancer. We knew the connection of out research to actually curing cancer was so remote it was downright ridiculous.
Ironically I’m now in BigPharma actually working on compounds that actually do cure cancer, so maybe it wasn’t a joke after all ? 🙂
Steve B says:
“Very very funny and the Sydney Inner City Greens can join the Melbourne Inner City Greens in Tassie for a green luv in.”
Actually, from the election results, there don’t seem to be many greens left in Tassie 🙂
Oh sooooo sweet !!!
More likely this will become part of the “missing heat found in the ocean” explaining the “pause” that’s been going on the last couple of decades. Since the models fail to include the ocean as some vast sink storing heat, actually sucking it out, much like recharging a battery. Thus, the next round of the climate shrieker industury will likely be how they’ve “adjusted” their models to include the heat battery and, gee, you better pay more ’cause when the battery gets full….
The last Ice Age finished 12,000 years ago are they now saying that it did not happen?
I always switch off now when i reach this point in these papers.,
“Among the implications of the study are that ocean temperatures in this area may be more sensitive to changes in greenhouse gas levels “
I guess the study was done before this last winter’s “ice age” onset!
(Any marine biologist know how the currently cool ENSO waters affect plankton there?)
I suppose the answer to my following question is that if “sustainability” is in your charter, any deviation from present conditions is bad by definition — but I have to ask it anyway: Why is it necessarily bad that glaciers are disappearing from tropical islands?
The researchers analyzed extensive modern and geological datasets, conducted theoretical calculations and examined climate model output.
mmmm did they check there theoretical outputs to observed data for validity by chance???
Berényi Péter says:
March 15, 2014 at 2:36 am
“Come on. During the Last Glacial Maximum, which ended 19 thousand years ago ………..”
I like your comment the best. A fact that probably never entered their minds..
“A sleeping dragon” Yikes! I’m sooo scared. Quck, somebody tell Obama and Kerry. ;^)
Just thought of something: This article smells like a computer generated one. You don’t suppose it is fake?
Mac the Knife says:
March 14, 2014 at 10:17 pm
______________________________
+1
If fake articles can be generated using random input jargon, articles loosely based on real data could also be generated via automatic computer generation. That technology, applied to actual research certainly saves time and would relieve poor writers of the task of generating their manuscript. hmmmmm. Regardless, something isn’t right here with the way the abstract reads, that’s for sure. The article is way to “jargony” and has that “look at all the big words and complicated sentences I use” computer language feel to it as I read it.
In order to estimate the ECS the authors had to assume how much warming was due to natural recovery from an ice age and how much was due to GHG’s. It seems they assumed all or most of the warming was due to GHG’s which would indicate a high ECS. I would have chosen a low ECS case so the study would be inline with modern data.
The findings illustrate that the region is very sensitive to climate change and that it has warmed considerably over the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age.
Warmed considerably when the glaciers melted, it has been cooling ever since. What crap!!
http://i45.tinypic.com/2yo1hsy.jpg
“The findings illustrate that the region is very sensitive to climate change and that it has warmed considerably over the last 20,000 years, since the last ice age.
The team chose the specific area examined in the study because it is Earth’s warmest open ocean region and a primary source of heat and water vapor to the atmosphere. As a result, temperature changes there can influence climate not just regionally, but globally.”
— I find those two statements curious when they are taken together. The region is sensitive to climate change, yet it seems to drive climate change? No wonder they picked that region!
So, they think the hockey stick is wrong? Other than that, it was reminiscent of the self-congratulatory Anne Elk skit on Monty Python.
I’d bet the authors would claim that their main point is that they may have discovered a more reliable paleo-climate proxy. Okay, that’s great (if it holds in other parts of the world, if other climate proxies are fairly accurate, etc etc), but they spend most of their press release talking about climate change in general, postulating about model and climate sensitivity, climate impacts, and the like. Why the f do our climate scientists do this to themselves???
For all the rhetoric about “climate denial” and all of the other psudonames for CAGW skeptics, this article only serves as evidence that it is the climate scientists, themselves, who are their own worst enemy.
“The tropical Pacific ocean-atmosphere system has been called a sleeping dragon because of how it can influence climate elsewhere,” said lead author Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the departments of Earth, planetary and space sciences, and atmospheric and oceanic sciences.”
I think we all know why the “sleeping dragon” analogy was used. Dragons are dangerous, and usually fire-breathing creatures, and as such, are better left sleeping. The implication being that man’s noisy CO2 just might wake the dragon and then, why, it would be “game over for our climate”.
The glaciers shrink, the glaciers grow
A measure of the falling snow
And worries that they come and go
Will only bring us pointless woe
For man can neither speed nor slow
Their ups and downs of endless flow
So what has been will still be so
No matter what we think we know
Eugene WR Gallun
Key point. During almost all of the period of time investigated, when temperature rose 4-5 degrees and glaciers retreated, CO2 was at pre-industrial (“safe”) levels; or did I miss something.
Renaldo says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:01 pm
“Please let me know when . . .”
Just one word to say to you: guyot
I don’t get why so many think the LGM was edenic. It wasn’t. The LGM was the coldest time on Earth since the Karoo Ice Age of 250,000,000 years ago. Far from being the “ideal” global temperature, the LGM was the all-time nadir.
And please note that today the globe is a mere 4degC warmer than rock bottom. We don’t live in a warm age but a very cold one, relative to the normative temperature for Planet Earth.
Warmer is better. Warmer means longer growing seasons, more rain, more bio-productivity, more biodiversity, more Life In General.
The “authorities” are paranoid as geese that it might get a degree or two warmer. But warmth is a boon, not a curse. Their paranoia is tragically misplaced.
Warmer Is Better. Fight the Ice
“Using extensive new data sets for the region, we demonstrate that mean environmental lapse rates are steeper than moist adiabatic during the recent and glacial.”
That statement in their paper demonstrates to me that they are assuming that the relative humidity was 100% during the last glacial maximum and that it is 100% today. The adiabatic lapse rate is how fast the temperature drops with altitude as a packet of air rises and does work on the surrounding air but has no increase in the internal energy due to heat. The moist adiabatic lapse rate is based on 100% relative humidity in the air and is ~ 5C/1000m. The dry adiabatic lapse rate is for unsaturated air (less than 100% relative humidity) and is ~ 10C/1000m. Their assumption of the moist adiabatic lapse rate is invalid because, in effect, they are assuming a constant relative humidity at 100%.
It is quite apparent, from examination of the differences in adiabatic lapse rates, that the temperature at different elevations is not only dependent upon the temperature at sea level, but on the relative humidity of the atmosphere at those locations. When you see that the sea level temperatures have changed less than 4C since the last glacial maximum, it is obvious that in order for the temperatures at higher elevations to have increased more than 4C, there must have been an increase in the relative humidity. Given that sea levels rose 120m during the interval, and covered previously exposed land, it is easily conceivable that the relative humidity of the air at the elevations where these tropical glaciers formed also increased, reducing the adiabatic lapse rate which led to an increased temperature at those elevations relative to the temperature at sea level.
lf there claim that this area in the western Pacific was 4C to 5C cooler is true.
Then this could give some clues to what the weather was like in this area during the ice age.
What it suggests to me is that there was a increase in rainfall / cloud cover and less sunshine in this area during the ice age. Also it was very likely that a powerful jet stream was forming over this area that was drawing a lot of warm and moist air from the area and pushing it up into the Arctic. The fact that there was wide spread ice sheets over North America but little over NE Russia during the ice age, would help to support this idea. As this jet stream pattern would likely to of been pushing warmer air up towards NE Russia, but then would risk bringing cold Arctic air down across North America.
Looks like a pretty small and localized sample size:
So was a single tree – YAD06 IIRC – on the Yamal peninsula, but that didn’t stop them basing the whole CAGW mass hysteria on it.
“During the Last Glacial Maximum, tropical sea surface temperatures were 1 to 3 °C cooler than present1, 2, 3, 4, but the altitude of the snowlines of tropical glaciers5, 6 was lower than would be expected in light of these sea surface temperatures. Indeed, both glacial and twentieth-century snowlines seem to require lapse rates that are steeper than a moist adiabat..”
Did they also consider sea level changes. For example, 20K YBP, the sea level was around 140m lower than today, meaning >1C cooler due to the lower air pressure. ?.
John F. Hultquist says guyot.
Nice John, it usually takes me three words to say “you are stupid” I appreciate your quick wit and use of language. While we can discuss guyots, the hawaiian hot spot, subsidcence, tectonics and such if you like. My point is that a subsiding sea mount tends to argue against a rising island. Thus, the question is, if man made climate change has raised the ocean in any substantial way, why are these places (in particular) not sinking under the sea these past 250 or so years. Also, as to Midway island (s), a guyot is a flat topped sea mount. There used to be some discussion about these islands being the remains of subsiding mountains and not neccessarily being flat topped at all but the tips of sinking mountains which have developed coral reefs as either they sank or the sea rose.(or both) as they sailed into the northwest. I don’t mind being wrong as then I know I am learning. But then maybe I am getting cranky in my 7th decade. Sorry for awkward typing as I am nearlly blind.
Berényi Péter says:
March 15, 2014 at 2:36 am
“Come on. During the Last Glacial Maximum, which ended 19 thousand years ago sea level was 130 m lower.”
This is the pearl of this discussion. It suggests at least one other adjustment necessary. Assuming the lower reaches of the glaciers are on a slope of (say) 20 degrees. Bringing the ocean up 130m closer to the glaciers, they should shrink by at least 130/sin 20, which equals 350 m retreat with no change in ocean temps. Also, with the much broader shallows at the lower sea level, I would expect it would be a degree or two higher on this account. See Berényi Péter above re the much larger land mass that existed at these lower sea levels. The paper is a piece of junk. Gosh, don’t you love the internet ready availability of every kind of expert across the world. I have been worrying that this is the next big target of the sinistral distropians.
I am currently working on a photographic project. I have a kitty litter box with a capacity
of 14 pounds of cat crap sand. It is now about half full with 6,000 pennies. When I
finish going through my stash of coins, it will contain 9,996.5 cents.
I am going out of my friggen’ mind counting pennies, but I will take a high resolution dSLR
image of a huge stack of pennies and compare that to the 3.5 cents that represent the
total concentration of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. If volume were weight, this
would result in a difference of 68.54 pounds vs 24/1,000 Lb.
CO2 is a trace level gas. How is it that 3.5 parts per 10,000 could have any effect whatsoever?
My Jr Hi school science teacher taught me better than this!
[One dime on front of hundreds of thousands of pennies? Mod]
Don’t be upsetting those sleeping dragons now . .
Christiana Figueres from the UNFCCC has those pesky dragons under control. She’s already invoked the ancient jaguar goddess Ixchel . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiana_Figueres
So they want to attribute the ocean warming to CO2? Good luck with that. Somebody archive their data before NOAA gets at it.
For John H. Hultquist,
Just looked up guyot and if it sticks out of the water, it is NOT a guyot. Actually knew about flat topped UNDERWATER sea mounts. A good place to find lots of swimming things wherever they are found. Also looked up Midway geology and found that two bores drilled in 1965 found volcanic basalt at plus or minus 510 feet below surface. They also showed high elevation (700 ft or more above sea level) snail shells. Seems to be some variation in theory over whether or not there is a single hawaiian hot spot or a series of volcanic sources along the hawaiian mountain range.. Ideas change with time. Sometimes they go from one to 10 and in the end come back to one. I am not smart enough to know anything for certain. But, most happy to “meet” you.
I find in a general sense that people who use lots of big words are more interested in impressions than education. It’s an intellectual oppression, really. Since you used only one word and it’s application was incorrect, I am at a loss to explain your expression of superior knowledge.
Renaldo,
During the LGM the top of Midway would have been nearly 400 feet above sea level and quite a bit colder, accounting for the snail shells.
OK, I will try one last time. The snail shells are from a snail that lives at more than 700 feet above the then (and the now, where found) sea level. They were found more than 500 feet down. Unless my math teacher in 1950 was wrong, that is a 1200 foot, plus diffence in elevation and who knows how much higher than the lowest possible.
A guyot is not an island. A guyot is a SUBMERGED, flat topped sea mount. That would be one that is under water. You can tell it’s an island because you can walk on it. (sarc) You can tell these ones are subsiding because there is phsical evidence as well as geologic theory that it was at one time quite a bit higher (relative to the center of the earth) than it is now. At a minimum, 1200 feet and probably 6 or 7 thousand. The newest of the Hawaiian islands is scheduled to appear in about 100,000 years, give or take. Barring changes in the mantle that is.
The underlying question remains, if human caused global climate change has caused the oceans to rise SO much and SO fast that the world is in danger, how is it that places such as Midway Island(s) which, however slowly, are subsiding and are quite low lying, why is it they are still there? And yes, I know about coral reefs, sand infills and such. Such being the case, the seas are rising at a leisurely pace which should be managable by this allegedly smart ape specie. THAT was the point of my initial post.
All of the hawaiian islands drift first mostley west and then nothwest. as the plate upon which they sit, drifts and sinks. Thus, they subside all along the chain, not withstanding erosion, these past 25 million years, in the case of Midway. Give or take.
I love Warmist logic. Modern global average heat content and atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations suggest climate sensitivity to CO2 is too high in climate models. Paleoclimate data shows models underestimate past climate variance and the only possible explanation they can think of is that modeled climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases is too low. The Warmists will be stumped over this conundrum for awhile.
I was handing out how to vote cards once at a Federal election. It was freezing only 8 C with a chilling wind blowing and I got a chapped face and wind burn afterwards. The Green volunteer was talking to me, and I mentioned the Medieval mini ice age. He said that had not been confirmed and didn’t exist. He was a science degree holder. What discipline? I replied that I was an archaeology and palaeoanthropologist major and the MIA definitely existed, and had a marked affect on peoples lives particularly the Northern Hemisphere. Wine presses not being used were turned into printing presses. Then I added we are an ice planet, and we are lucky at the moment as we are experiencing a warm period or interglacial. It warms up always before an impending colder period that can last 100s of years. But either way, surface water would be OK but precipitation levels would drop in an ice age as there is less evaporation.