Earlier this week I to reported on some of the poster sessions at the American Geophysical Meeting but was told the next day that I’m not allowed to photograph such posters to report on them. However, when the authors send me the original, for which they own the copyright, there’s nothing AGU can complain about related to me violating their photography policy.
This poster from Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger builds on their previous work in examining climate sensitivity differences between models and reality.
Recent climate change literature has been dominated by studies which show that the equilibrium climate sensitivity is better constrained than the latest estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA) and that the best estimate of the climate sensitivity is considerably lower than the climate model ensemble average.
From the recent literature, the central estimate of the equilibrium climate sensitivity is ~2°C, while the climate model average is ~3.2°C, or an equilibrium climate sensitivity that is some 40% lower than the model average.
To the extent that the recent literature produces a more accurate estimate of the equilibrium climate sensitivity than does the climate model average, it means that the projections of future climate change given by both the IPCC and NCA are, by default, some 40% too large (too rapid) and the associated (and described) impacts are gross overestimates.
A quantitative test of climate model performance can be made by comparing the range of model projections against observations of the evolution of the global average surface temperature since the mid-20th century.
Here, we perform such a comparison on a collection of 108 model runs comprising the ensemble used in the IPCC’s 5th Scientific assessment and find that the observed global average temperature evolution for trend lengths (with a few exceptions) since 1980 is less than 97.5% of the model distribution, meaning that the observed trends are significantly different from the average trend simulated by climate models.
For periods approaching 40 years in length, the observed trend lies outside of (below) the range that includes 95% of all climate model simulations.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Nevertheless the same criteria was used for the start of sunspot cycle 24 as was used for other cycles therefore this is on track to be one of the longest in contrast to those other cycles which could be significant.
One has to be consistent in using the same criteria for each sunspot cycle to see how it ranks.
Sunspot cycle length are NOT based on neutron counts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cycles
Dr Norman Page here it is, this is the official records for sunspot cycle lengths.
My main interest is climate forecasting , The most useful solar activity proxy for this purpose is the neutron count and the 10Be record for pre-instrumental times . I’m happy to use the time between the neutron minima
as the most useful measure of solar cycle length for my purposes.If others wish to spend their valuable time counting sunspots they are free to do so.
To clarify the last comment it is actually the solar minima ie neutron count maxima we are talking about.
On the exchange just above: IF one believes that cloud cover variations produced by variations in cosmic ray flux in Earth’s atmosphere is the major cause of a solar influence on global temperature, then the neutron counts are superior. This is because the neutron flux directly monitors the cosmic ray flux, whereas individual sunspots are not a direct measure of total solar output of wind and electromagnetic fields.
Donb Exactly though I would say a major cause rather than the. What I say about all this in the post at
http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com/2014/07/climate-forecasting-methods-and-cooling.html
is
“NOTE!! The connection between solar “activity” and climate is poorly understood and highly controversial. Solar “activity” encompasses changes in solar magnetic field strength, IMF, CRF, TSI, EUV, solar wind density and velocity, CMEs, proton events etc. The idea of using the neutron count and the 10Be record as the most useful proxy for changing solar activity and temperature forecasting is agnostic as to the physical mechanisms involved.
Having said that, however, it is reasonable to suggest that the three main solar activity related climate drivers are:
a) the changing GCR flux – via the changes in cloud cover and natural aerosols (optical depth)
b) the changing EUV radiation – top down effects via the Ozone layer
c) the changing TSI – especially on millennial and centennial scales.
The effect on climate of the combination of these solar drivers will vary non-linearly depending on the particular phases of the eccentricity, obliquity and precession orbital cycles at any particular time.”
This is where you are not quite correct. It is just not cloud cover changes due to cosmic ray flux which by the way is also influence by the strength of the earth’s magnetic field which is going to determine the climate outcome. If it were only that simple but it is not. That is part of the puzzle however.
Just as important are the amounts of EUV light the sun is generating which can be shown to be tied to ozone concentrations which impact the atmospheric circulation and thus have a big impact on the climate.
A zonal atmospheric circulation at times of high solar activity is NOT going to result in N.H. cooling at the unset .
In addition there are many studies which show a pretty good correlation between sustained prolonged solar activity and major volcanic activity which does/will influence the climate. The AP index being a very important indicator of how much/little influence the sun may have upon the climate.
Then the initial state of the climate plays a big role in determining how much GIVEN solar activity may or may not change the climate. If the land /ocean arrangements are favorable (as they are now) this will promote solar changes effecting the climate. If the climate is close to interglacial/glacial conditions this will promote effect given solar changes effects upon the climate.
Then for the big picture Milankovitch Cycles have to be considered .Obliquity playing a big role as well as precession.
I also believe there are climate thresholds out there which could be activated if given solar conditions change enough in degree of magnitude and duration of time which could cascade the climate into a different regime through primary solar effects and all of the associated secondary solar effects.
The atmospheric circulation can impact oceanic circulations if extreme enough which would have a major impact on the climate. One thought is a more meridional atmospheric circulation could promote sea ice build up in the North Atlantic(Nordic Sea) which would melt when brought southward slowing down the thermohaline circulation and thus promoting N.H. cooling.
Also some suggest that lunar tides may exert an influence upon oceanic circulation patters.
I did not notice you had mention this. Correct.
b) the changing EUV radiation – top down effects via the Ozone layer
c) the changing TSI – especially on millennial and centennial scales.
The effect on climate of the combination of these solar drivers will vary non-linearly depending on the particular phases of the eccentricity, obliquity and precession orbital cycles at any particular time.”
Dr. Norman Page we are quite close in our thoughts.
@SDP.
The Earth’s magnetic field has essentially nothing to do with the cosmic ray flux entering the atmosphere. The average cosmic ray proton energy is about 3 billion electron-volts. To significantly bend such energetic particles away from the inner solar system, as the Sun’s magnetic field does, requires that a magnetic field act over very large distances. Compared to the solar field, which acts over most of the solar system, the Earth’s field is weaker and of lesser extent.
The Earth’s field does act some on solar energetic protons (up to several million ev in energy, and dramatically bends away solar wind protons of 1 kilo-volt energy. Even if these lower energy particles got into the atmosphere, they would be stopped by nuclear or kinetic reactions before entering the troposphere.
The thought that an atmospheric climate model can produce a hyperbolic curve without either the removal of the heat source or a change in gravitational force is laughable. The moment the curve appears it proves the entire premise of the model wrong.
http://iceagenow.info/2012/10/scientists-link-magnetic-reversal-climate-change-super-volcano-time-period/
Donb others see the earth’s magnetic field (as I do) having a much bigger role in the climate.
If the earth had no magnetic field the earth would have no atmosphere. The point being there are degrees of weakness and duration of that weakness in the field which must have some significant impacts upon the earth. What level of weakness that is I do not know.
@SDP
Reversal of the Earth’s magnetic field and its likely diminished state during that process can have a significant effect on magnetic field interactions with solar flare protons and corona mass ejection particles, solar protons of lesser energy than cosmic ray protons. In the absence (or nearly so) of Earth’s magnetic field, energetic solar particles could enter the upper atmosphere. BUT, solar wind protons have a mass interaction distance of micrograms, and energetic (>5 MeV) solar protons have mass interaction distances of only several grams. The Earth’s atmosphere has a column mass of a bit over one kilogram (14.7 lbs. per sq-inch). So even in the absence of Earth’s magnetic field, very few solar particles would penetrate to the lower atmosphere. In contrast, the secondary particles produced from nuclear interactions of cosmic ray protons penetrate to Earth’s surface.
Power Cord is a type of an American wire, and is permanently fixed to the electrical equipment or appliance from one end. They do it with the aim that they give you the best possible deal so that they get the most number of customers and therefore are able to maximize their profits. I wanted to cry, I thought there was something wrong with the HDTV.
2 Flexible Flat Cable (FFC) Production Line Marketing Channels Characteristic. Blade rotates 90 degrees by activating blade lever, allowing easy mid-span preparation (ringing and slitting). Some connections carry analog signals and some carry digital signals.
Power Cord is a type of an American wire, and is permanently fixed to the electrical equipment or appliance from one end. Effectual functioning, superior performance, high strength and longer service life are synonyms to the range of Wire and Cable Machinery provided by them. Regular or switch, inside or out, you see plenty of spins, 313s, roll to blinds, KGB’s and each mobe or Raley trick you would never think of.
Donb what is your general stance on the climate? What do you see as the main factors that govern it? thanks
@SDP
I suspect that natural factors and greenhouse warming are all involved. Which natural factors are more important, I don’t know. Exactly how CO2 feedbacks (and clouds) are involved, I don’t know. I am interested in the science and try not to be biased in my thinking.
Related to this, even IF significant future global warming will occur, I do not think rapid change from fossil fuel to green energy will work without disrupting economies. The world will have to make a gradual evolution in its energy sources and take actions to mitigate negative effects of warming.