Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
I read a Reviewer’s Comment on one of Richard Lindzen’s papers today, a paper about the tropics from 20°N to 20°S, and I came across this curiosity (emphasis mine):
Lastly, the authors go through convoluted arguments between forcing and feed backs. For the authors’ analyses to be valid, clouds should be responding to SST and not forcing SST changes. They do not bother to prove it or test the validity of this assumption. Again this is an assertion, without any testable justification.
Now to me, showing that clouds respond to the tropical surface temperatures, either on land or sea, is a no-brainer, I’m surprised that the Reviewer would question it. But before I discuss that, let me digress for a moment to say that I think there are two simple changes in the reviewing process that would help it immensely.
1. Double blind reviewing. Right now, reviewing is just single blind, with the reviewer knowing the identity of the author but not the other way around. This is a huge, huge violation of the scientific norms, and it leads and has led to problems. A recent proposal to use double-blind reviewing in the awarding of grants by the National Science Foundation makes for interesting reading … http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2011/meritreviewcriteria.pdf This would put the focus back onto the ideas rather than the author.
2. Publish the reviews and the reviewer’s names along with the paper when it is published. This sunshine, this transparency, will have several benefits. First, if a reviewer still has strong reservations about the paper, or if their objections have led to improvements or changes in the paper, this will be made visible when the reviews are published (presumably online) along with the paper. Second, we get to see who agrees that the paper is valid science, and who might not. Third, in the fullness of time, we will have a record of who was right and who was wrong. But I digress … the anonymous Reviewer wanted Lindzen to show that clouds respond to SST.
Not having read Lindzen’s paper, I don’t know what he said about the question. But for me, Figure 1 should convince even the most alarmist reviewer that clouds are responding to the surface temperature, both on land and over the ocean.
Figure 1. Monthly albedo averages from ERBE. Images show the N/S range of the geographical tropics (~ 23.5° N/S). Thin black horizontal line shows the Equator.
The upper panel shows the albedo for August (northern hemisphere summer) and the lower panel for February (southern hemisphere summer). The brighter areas show the regions with higher albedo, because there are more clouds. There are some things of note in the figure.
For example, look at Brazil and the Amazon in the lower panel (the bright spot in the lower left of the panel, below the Equator.). In February, in the southern summer, the heat creates lots of clouds. But in the upper panel, the southern hemisphere winter, Brazil has a much lower level of clouds.
The same thing is true about southern Africa. In the southern summer (lower panel) the albedo is high in southern Africa, with lots of clouds. In the southern hemisphere winter (upper panel), on the other hand, southern Africa loses its clouds, and above the Equator where it is summer we see increased albedo in the northern part of Africa.
Next, tropical Asia in August, when it is warm, has lots of clouds. But when winter comes, the clouds move with the summer down to the southern hemisphere.
Similar changes are generally occurring over the oceans as well, but in a more muted fashion. Again, this difference in effect shows that surface temperature is the driving factor, since the land temperatures change more with the seasons than do the ocean temperatures.
Now, we have three choices here:
1. Tropical clouds are increasing and decreasing in response to the changes in surface temperature resulting from the sun’s motion, which alternately warms the areas north of and south of the Equator, or
2. The clouds are just coincidentally in sync with the sun by random chance, or
3. The clouds are making the sun move north and south of the Equator.
Your choice, but to me, that should satisfy even the most recalcitrant reviewer. It’s clear that the clouds are responding to the variations in surface temperature, with more clouds forming as the surface warms and less clouds when the surface is cooler.
w.
PS: Since we’re discussing clouds as forcing and feedback, you’ll excuse me if I take this opportunity to re-post the following from my “Thermostat Hypothesis” paper. In it I am describing how the clouds and thunderstorms work as a governor to stabilize the temperature:
The problem with my thought experiment of describing a typical tropical day is that it is always changing. The temperature goes up and down, the clouds rise and fall, day changes to night, the seasons come and go. Where in all of that unending change is the governing mechanism? If everything is always changing, what keeps it the same month to month and year to year? If conditions are always different, what keeps it from going off the rails?
In order to see the governor at work, we need a different point of view. We need a point of view without time. We need a timeless view without seasons, a point of view with no days and nights. And curiously, in this thought experiment called “A Day In the Tropics”, there is such a timeless point of view, where not only is there no day and night, but where it’s always summer.
The point of view without day or night, the point of view from which we can see the climate governor at work, is the point of view of the sun. Imagine that you are looking at the earth from the sun. From the sun’s point of view, there is no day and night. All parts of the visible face of the earth are always in sunlight, the sun never sees the night-time. And it’s always summer under the sun.
If we accept the convenience that north is up, then as we face the earth from the sun, the visible surface of the earth is moving from left to right as the planet rotates. So the left hand edge of the visible face is always at sunrise, and the right hand edge is always at sunset. Noon is a vertical line down the middle. From this timeless point of view, morning is always and forever on the left, and afternoon is always on the right. In short, by shifting our point of view, we have traded time coordinates for space coordinates. This shift makes it easy to see how the governor works.
The tropics stretch from left to right across the circular visible face. We see that near the left end of the tropics, after sunrise, there are very few clouds. Clouds increase as you look further to the right. Around the noon line, there are already cumulus. And as we look from left to right across the right side of the visible face of the earth, towards the afternoon, more and more cumulus clouds and increasing numbers of thunderstorms cover a large amount of the tropics.
It is as though there is a graduated mirror shade over the tropics, with the fewest cloud mirrors on the left, slowly increasing to extensive cloud mirrors and thunderstorm coverage on the right.
After coming up with this hypothesis that as seen from the sun, the right hand side of the deep tropics would have more cloud than the left hand side), I though “Hey, that’s a testable proposition to support or demolish my hypothesis”. So in order to investigate whether this postulated increase in cloud on the right hand side of the earth actually existed, I took an average of 24 pictures of the Pacific Ocean taken at local noon on the 1st and 15th of each month over an entire year. I then calculated the average change in albedo and thus the average change in forcing at each time. Here is the result:

Figure 2. Average of one year of GOES-West weather satellite images taken at satellite local noon. The Intertropical Convergence Zone is the bright band in the yellow rectangle. Local time on earth is shown by black lines on the image. Time values are shown at the bottom of the attached graph. Red line on graph is solar forcing anomaly (in watts per square meter) in the area outlined in yellow. Black line is albedo value in the area outlined in yellow.
The graph below the image of the earth shows the albedo and solar forcing in the yellow rectangle which contains the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone. Note the sharp increase in the albedo between 10:00 and 11:30. You are looking at the mechanism that keeps the earth from overheating. It causes a change in insolation of -60 W/m2 between ten and noon.
Now, consider what happens if for some reason the surface of the tropics is a bit cool. The sun takes longer to heat up the surface. Evaporation doesn’t rise until later in the day. Clouds are slow to appear. The first thunderstorms form later, fewer thunderstorms form, and if it’s not warm enough those giant surface-cooling heat engines don’t form at all.
And from the point of view of the sun, the entire mirrored shade shifts to the right, letting more sunshine through for longer. The 60 W/m2 reduction in solar forcing doesn’t take place until later in the day, increasing the local insolation.
When the tropical surface gets a bit warmer than usual, the mirrored shade gets pulled to the left, and clouds form earlier. Hot afternoons drive thunderstorm formation, which cools and air-conditions the surface. In this fashion, a self-adjusting cooling shade of thunderstorms and clouds keeps the afternoon temperature within a narrow range.
Willis,
Look, if you choose to believe in conspiracies, that is your prerogative but not one I’m going to play along with. I’m only responding because I think this is a fascinating subject, and one that has generated a large interest in the climate dynamics (and paleoclimate) community. There are actually people interested in this independent of whether it means AGW will be “catastrophic” or whether it has any bearing on how radiative forcing projects onto temperature. But I’m not convinced you’re adding anything new to the puzzle. Further, many of the conclusions you and other readers are coming to can be confirmed or rejected on grounds one could pick out of elementary textbooks on the subject.
It is nice that are you are trying to develop your personal theories, but reading the history of this subject might be a good start. If you are still convinced you have something new, then try to publish it in a journal. The fact is that there are many papers discussing tropical thermostats of various sorts, as well as the regulation mechanisms for the observed skewness in SSTs and the existence of warm pool regions. The distribution of solar insolation, ocean dynamics, the Hadley cell, the moisture and cloud distribution, etc are all part of the story in some way, but clouds do not exert a fundamental control on the absolute value of the SST. Some useful references are Wallace, 1992; Hartmann and Michelsen, 1993; Pierrehumbert, 1995; Sud et al., 1999; Clement et al., 2005; Sud et al., 2008; Williams et al., 2009. Evidence for change in the threshold of deep convection has come from Johnson and Xie, 2010 (Nat. Geo), consistent with theoretical expectations developed in some of those papers.
Of course, deep convection sets in when the lower air column becomes buoyant relative to the free troposphere (driven by the instability of the vertical profile of moist static energy). We also know that the onset of deep convection is possible outside the tropics at temperature well short of 28 C, indicating that the overlying deep convection in the tropics is linked to a persistent vertical thermodynamical structure of the tropical atmosphere. Because of the low rotation effect in the tropics, tropical dynamics are subject to a weak free atmosphere temperature gradient constraint, and meridional heating gradients are eefficiently smoothed out by the atmospheric circulation, and convection regions of deep convection are moreso driven by horizontal SST gradients. The free-troposphere temperature can increase in response to increasing CO2 or solar forcing so the SST threshold for deep convection will shift to warmer values as the free-troposphere temperature increases, and the deep convection helps promote the skewness in observed SST diagrams. It has nothing to do with a magical mechanism that can keep ocean temperature from ever exceeding some certain value.
“””””…..Ulric Lyons says:
June 8, 2012 at 5:49 am
“But for me, Figure 1 should convince even the most alarmist reviewer that clouds are responding to the surface temperature, both on land and over the ocean.”
There is a big problem with that, less clouds in winter is a positive feedback further away from the tropics, reduced winter cloud cover would increase coldness in the mid and upper latitudes in winter……”””””
Um ! Increased coldness, is commonly caused by an increased lack of sunshine. The tropics generally get more sunshine than the “upper latitudes” do (per squ metre of surface); in fact they do that a year round, not just in winter time. This means that the tropics are often warmer than the upper latitudes, which may explain all the ice in those upper latitudes.
It is generally observed, that “less clouds”, almost anytime, results in MORE sunlight; not Less sunlight, and more sunlight with less clouds, would result in less coldness. This would be directly contrary to your thesis, that less clouds (with more sunlight) leads to more coldness.
“””””…..Philip Bradley says:
June 7, 2012 at 5:39 am…………………..clouds and rain in the late afternoon. …..”””””
Would clouds and rain in the LATE afternoon, be a weather event, rather than a climate change event, such as; for example, clouds and rain in the afternoon ?
“””””…..Philip Bradley says:
June 8, 2012 at 12:06 am
Rainfall over the tropical oceans peaks between 3 and 6 AM, ie before dawn. Clouds are at their maximum at this time.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0493(1994)122%3C2296:AEOTDC%3E2.0.CO%3B2
What happens is the sun heats the ocean during the day and this heat is mostly retained in the oceans as air temperatures are above or close to the ocean surface temperature. After nightfall, the air temperature falls and the ocean surface now warmer than the air loses heat to the air mostly through evaporation. The warm moist air feeds convection (or feeds into existing convection processes) and results in precipitation causing clouds forming late in the night…….”””””
You are NOT suggesting that a warm moist day leads to a warm moist night and forms clouds, as the night air cools; are you ?
All climate 101 texts teach, and all meteorologists announce that it is the clouds at night that cause it to be warm at night. Are you suggesting that this information is false ?
KR says:
June 7, 2012 at 11:25 am
in other words, L&C11 consider clouds a forcing, not a feedback.
A feedback is a delayed forcing. This is all semantics.
The feedback which Willis describes is surely an inevitable outworking of Hadley cell convection. Hadley cell convection redistributes heat from the equator to higher latitudes. If there is increased heat in the system, then the Hadley cell circulation will become more energetic as a consequence, meaning more air uplift in the tropical ITCZ, and more cloud. This is self-evident, where is the problem here?
Chris Colose says:
June 8, 2012 at 4:11 pm
Chris, you are the only person to mention conspiracies in this thread. I have said nothing about them in the slightest, and I generally don’t. So I haven’t a clue what you are on about, but it ain’t me, babe, no, no, no …
If you have an objection to something I’ve said, QUOTE MY WORDS so that we can at least guess what you are talking about.
w.
On being able to tell who the person writing something is by their style or whatever, without their name attached, I am reminded of the story of Johann Bernoulli’s Brachistochrone Curve Problem, to which a solution (one of five submissions from various big names in mathematics of the time) was anonymously offered by Issac Newton. Johann Bernoulli recognized the work of the master, though:
“tanquam ex ungue leonem”
I know the lion by his claw.
“If there is increased heat in the system, then the Hadley cell circulation will become more energetic as a consequence, meaning more air uplift in the tropical ITCZ, and more cloud. This is self-evident, where is the problem here?”
The problem is that global cloudiness decreases when the Hadley cell becomes more energetic despite the increased intensity of the ITCZ.
Hence my more complex scenario which seeks to provide a global solution and include a solar driven element.
George E. Smith says:
June 9, 2012 at 2:59 pm
“””””…..Ulric Lyons says:
June 8, 2012 at 5:49 am
“But for me, Figure 1 should convince even the most alarmist reviewer that clouds are responding to the surface temperature, both on land and over the ocean.”
There is a big problem with that, less clouds in winter is a positive feedback further away from the tropics, reduced winter cloud cover would increase coldness in the mid and upper latitudes in winter……”””””
Um ! Increased coldness, is commonly caused by an increased lack of sunshine. The tropics generally get more sunshine than the “upper latitudes” do (per squ metre of surface); in fact they do that a year round, not just in winter time. This means that the tropics are often warmer than the upper latitudes, which may explain all the ice in those upper latitudes.
It is generally observed, that “less clouds”, almost anytime, results in MORE sunlight; not Less sunlight, and more sunlight with less clouds, would result in less coldness. This would be directly contrary to your thesis, that less clouds (with more sunlight) leads to more coldness.
___________________________________________
I disagree.
I think it would be safer to say that the less water vapor (including clouds) the more violent the swings between day and night temperatures. Deserts are notorious for their violent swings in temperature. Water vapor has a modifying effect on the temperature decreasing day time temps and raising night time temps.
Cloud/precipitation also seems to be relegated to a band of temperature. If it is too cold it doesn’t snow. If it starts getting over 90F (32 C) you are going to see those afternoon thunderstorms build and cool things off if there is any sources of water vapor near.
@george E. Smith says:
June 9, 2012 at 2:59 pm
“This would be directly contrary to your thesis, that less clouds (with more sunlight) leads to more coldness.”
Well I did specify “in winter”, and at higher latitudes more cloud cover in winter can raise daytime temp’s and considerably raise night-time temp’s. My point though was hypothetical and is actually contrary to observation, as Jim Clark picked up on:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/07/forcing-or-feedback/#comment-1003814