The Daily Albedo Cycle

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

I discussed the role of tropical albedo in regulating the temperature in two previous posts entitled Albedic Meanderings and An Inherently Stable System. This post builds on that foundation. I said in the latter post that I would discuss the diurnal changes in tropical cloud albedo. For this I use a marvelous dataset called the TAO dataset. It is measurements from a number of moored buoys in the tropical Pacific.

tao triton buoy location plus sstFigure 1. Locations of all of the TAO buoys ever in operation. Background shows the sea surface temperature.

Sadly, despite the billions spent on “global warming”, the TAO buoys don’t have funds for maintenance. As a result, the records from some have ceased entirely. But I digress … the great thing about the TAO buoy records is that they are either hourly, or every ten minutes, or even every two minutes in some cases. This lets us accurately reconstruct the daily cycles.

To refresh your memory, my hypothesis is that variations in the timing and strength of the emergence of tropical cumulus and tropical thunderstorms act to regulate both the amount of incoming energy and the tropical surface temperature. I say that whenever there is a hot day or a hot area, we get earlier and more dense cumulus and thunderstorms. The cumulus clouds act solely by reflecting the sunlight. Thunderstorms, on the other hand, cool the surface in dozens of ways. This prevents the surface temperature from overheating.

So with that hypothesis in mind, let me start by looking at the daily air temperature cycles. Because of availability of data, I’ve used data from a string of buoys along the Equator. The buoys I used stretch from 95°W (buoy just to the left of the “E” in “Equator”) to 165°E (on the Equator northeast of Australia). Conveniently, the average temperature increases steadily along the line. Figure 2 shows the daily variations in surface air temperature for those Equatorial buoys:

TAO daily cycles temperatureFigure 2. Average daily air temperatures measured at ten minute intervals at eight different buoys. Colors represent temperatures.

Using just locations along the Equator gives me a peculiar advantage. All of the locations receive exactly, precisely, the same amount of top-of-atmosphere solar energy every single day. This means that the differences between them can’t be from different solar forcing. It eliminates a variable from the equation.

Now, there is an oddity about these records, which no doubt you’ve noticed. The temperature doesn’t warm steadily during the day. Let me show you what I mean. Here’s a chart I made a while back showing temperatures at Santa Rosa, California, the met station nearest to where I live.

santa rosa diurnal temperatureFigure 3. Hourly temperatures averaged over a year in Santa Rosa, CA. About 20 miles (30 km) from the ocean. The photo shows wine grape trellises.

As you might expect in a generally marine climate that usually doesn’t get much in the way of afternoon clouds or thunderstorms, the graph is simple. As the solar energy increases the earth warms. It continues to warm until around 2:00 and then starts to drop. It cools rapidly at first, then more slowly towards early morning.

However, that’s not the pattern we saw in Figure 2. Instead of a steady straight rise from dawn to noon, there is a bend or a “dip” in the rate of temperature rise. This can be seen more clearly when we look at the same records shown in Figure 2 as anomalies (variations about their individual averages). Figure 4 shows the same data as in Figure 2, but with each individual average subtracted from its respective record.

TAO daily cycles temperature anomalyFigure 4. Same data as in Figure 2, but expressed as anomalies about the individual means (averages). Colors indicate buoy average temperature as shown in Figure 2.

Here we see a most interesting progression. The cyan (light blue) colored trace of 95°W, the coolest buoy, shows only a slight bend in temperatures from 6 am to the afternoon peak. It’s nearly straight. But as we look at warmer and warmer buoy locations, the bend becomes more and more pronounced. In the warmest five locations, there is an actual “dip”, a reduction in temperature as the day progresses.

In addition, the peak temperature anomalies start decreasing with warmer temperatures. Since there is identical solar input to all of the buoys, this must reflect some local phenomenon.

To me, the “dip” in the morning records is the clear sign of the phenomenon I described in my last post—the emergence of the cumulus clouds starting in mid-to-late morning. Through variations in their emergence time, as soon as a certain temperature threshold is surpassed these clouds “throttle” the incoming solar energy by reflecting some of it back to space. This cloud throttling effect is so strong and comes on so suddenly that in the warmer locations, the temperature actually drops despite the continually increasing morning sunshine.

However, in no case is the throttling effect of the morning albedo change sufficient to overcome the full strength of the tropical sun. This is because there is no way for these cumulus to cover the entire sky—there needs to be clear descending air around each cumulus cloud to maintain circulation. As a result, there is only so much the cumulus reflections can do … and so past noon the day continues to warm. The later reduction of the peak afternoon temperature values is due not to increased albedo but to the emergence of afternoon thunderstorms. These “chop the top” off of the temperatures, imposing a high temperature limit and preventing further surface temperature rise.

Having seen that, let me move on to another way that we can see the effect of the morning-time cloud albedo. Note that the clouds that create the reflective albedo which helps regulate the tropical temperature only emerge in response to the surpassing of a temperature threshold. Once that threshold is passed and the increased cloud albedo has come into existence, it acts to reduce the high temperatures by cutting way back on the incoming solar energy.

Given the nature of the regulation, which depends on reflecting the sun’s rays, we can make the following predictions.

The regulation of the temperature will be stronger in the day than in the night. No sun, no reflection …

The regulation of the temperature will be greater in the morning than the afternoon. This is because the early morning is often clear and the late morning is cloudy, whereas there are generally clouds throughout the afternoon. As a result, controlling the onset time of the cloud formation will provide powerful regulation, and generally that happens in the morning.

The regulation of the temperature will be greater up at the warm end of the scale than down at the cool end. This is because the emergent phenomena act to reduce peak temperatures.

With those predictions in mind, I cast around for some way to visualize the effects of the thermal regulation due to clouds and thunderstorms. Figure 5 shows my solution. It is the record of the hourly air temperature from the TAO buoy on the Equator at 165 East. This is the warmest of the buoys in the graphs above (red line in those graphs).

TAO buoy air temperature by hour 0N 165EFigure 5. Boxplots of the hourly air temperatures at 0N165E. There are 59,429 observations, or about 2,500 for each hour of the day.

A “boxplot” gives various information about the distribution of the data, including outliers. The green boxes show the range that contains half of the data (the “interquartile range” or IQR). The heavy black line is the median of the data, which is the point with half the data above it and half below. The dotted “whiskers” show a distance from each green box of 1.5 times the IQR for that data. Black crosses show “outliers”, which are data points that are further from the boxes than the extent of the whiskers.

An examination of Figure 5 shows that the predictions of the distributions are borne out by the data. First, daytime regulation, from 6 AM to 6 PM (18:00 hours), is much stronger than night-time regulation. Daytime temperature regulation is so strong that there is not one single outlier on the warm side from dawn until noon, and only one (or in one instance two) outliers in each hour from noon to sunset. In fact, daytime regulation is so strong that there are many night-time temperatures that are greater than the record noon-time temperature … go figure.

Second, the regulation is stronger in the morning than the afternoon. The variations in the timing of the albedo changes are able to oppose the sun successfully until about noon (see Figure 4). After that, the continued solar input starts driving the temperature higher, and the regulation is not as certain.

Third, it is clear from the number and distribution of the outliers above and below the row of boxes that there is extensive downward pressure on any warm temperatures. This shows the cloud/thunderstorm control system is pushing back at the hot spots, cooling them down. Nor does this downward pressure only exist on the warmest temperatures. A close examination of the location of the median line shows that the median is in the middle of the green box from midnight to dawn. But during the day, the median is high up in the green box, showing that downwards pressure from the regulatory mechanisms extends well down into the body of the data.

My conclusion is that this downward pressure is the combination of cumulus clouds throttling back solar input in the morning, and thunderstorms and squall lines moving heat from the surface to up near the tropopause in the afternoon. It is this regulation of each day’s maximum tropical temperature via a host of inter-related mechanisms that keeps the earth from overheating on a daily basis.

And as I mentioned in my previous post, my insight was that if there are mechanisms that reliably keep the earth from overheating for a single day, they would keep the earth from overheating for a million years …

I may return to these topics in a future post, I’ve only scratched the surface of the TAO data.

My best wishes to each of you,

w.

My Customary Request: If you disagree with someone, please quote the exact words you disagree with. That way, everyone can understand your objection.

Data and Code: I’ve been wrestling this for too long, I’m burnt. I’ll post up the code when I get time if someone wants it. This code a dog’s breakfast, no order, functions used before they’re defined, sections of dead code exploring blind alleys. The data, on the other hand, is from the TAO website.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
171 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
climanrecon
June 9, 2015 4:39 am

Besides cumulus clouds the other thing that starts in the morning is local wind driven waves, which will also help to cool the surface by mixing the surface heat with deeper cooler water.

M Seward
June 9, 2015 4:43 am

Willis, Willis, Willis. You poor naive fool you. This sort of stuff is way, way too close to actual climate mechanisms to be considered climate science. I mean if the models don’t do this sort of mechanism then it can’t be real!
Sarc off.
What a refreshing articulation of what is probably a critical mechanism in the actual global climate. The point you make about the small size of the material cloud formations is probably the very reason the ‘models’ don’t bother with them.

June 9, 2015 4:47 am

Willis, with respect to Karl et.al I tried to find a difference between the TAO-SST data and the HadSST3 -SST in the same area of Pacific… Without great success, the trend between 1992 and April 2015 is very, very similar: almost zero. If Karl et.al are right there should be a difference because the buoys have a negative offset?

June 9, 2015 4:50 am

Excellent!

June 9, 2015 5:23 am

Willis, here is another piece of the puzzle.
When the clouds form they block the suns shortwave radiation which is absorbed into the ocean, but they increase the long wave radiation which is not absorbed by the ocean.
What the long wave radiation does is cause evaporation at the surface which causes the surface and the air to cool. That is why you get the temperature dip during the day.

rbabcock
June 9, 2015 5:37 am

As the atmosphere warms, the cloud bases move higher. Would be interesting to see how much of an impact this has if any.

ren
June 9, 2015 5:39 am

Let’s see clouds over the North Atlantic.
http://www.sat24.com/

June 9, 2015 6:34 am

Hey Willis,
My father was a meteorologist during WWII in the South Pacific, stationed at airfields on several islands. This phenomenon you describe was very familiar to him — so much so that he could look up at the sky in the early morning and predict within 15 minutes when it was going to rain that day just by how the clouds were starting to build up. The cook would always ask him when to serve lunch so that it wouldn’t rain on the food!
See the book, Weather Knight http://bit.ly/1dt5Swt

mdmnmdllr
Reply to  TBraunlich
June 9, 2015 8:29 am

Reinforcement for something I had noted myself, and thought all the while Willis was discoursing. The normal summer pattern of South Florida weather – when there is not some system affecting it – was SO regular you could essentially set your clock by it. Early mornings would be clear, sometimes hazy but few real clouds; mid to late morning they built; and if you didn’t hear thunder by mid-afternoon it was very unusual. I see the exact same pattern in what Willis is describing, and the same for your father’s experience. I also noted the cooling effect of nature’s “air conditioners” through that process, as well. Just one vast heat pump …

Reply to  TBraunlich
June 9, 2015 2:01 pm

I worked as a geologist on Bougainville Island in the later 1960’s and noticed the predictability of afternoon storms even though mornings started with clear skies.

ED, 'Mr.' Jones
June 9, 2015 6:48 am

I t always amazed me how little weight was given to albedo . . . . I wonder when the schmodellers will get around to factoring in this variable (high altitude air traffic / contrail impacts): http://markosun.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/land5-global-air-traffic-routes.jpg?w=1000&h=666

Billy Liar
Reply to  ED, 'Mr.' Jones
June 9, 2015 12:28 pm

Well, contrails would only make a difference if they occurred and spread widely and there was no lower cloud; ie not very often.

Reply to  Billy Liar
June 9, 2015 12:37 pm

Nasa’s models thought differently.

Minnis determined the observed one percent per decade increase in cirrus cloud cover over the United States is likely due to air traffic-induced contrails. Using published results from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (New York) general circulation model, Minnis and his colleagues estimated contrails and their resulting cirrus clouds would increase surface and lower atmospheric temperatures by 0.36 to 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. Weather service data reveal surface and lower atmospheric temperatures across North America rose by almost 0.5 degree Fahrenheit per decade between 1975 and 1994

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/releases/2004/04-140.html
After 9/11 they claimed it wasn’t anywhere near as large, but then what does that say about NASA’s GCM?

June 9, 2015 7:10 am

Some time back Willis E wrote a post discussing the natural stability of our atmosphere. The gist was that our atmosphere returns to equilibrium after perturbations from volcanic eruption changed, temporarily, the climate. Then Anthony had a meeting with Bill McKibben where Mckibben said our atmosphere was “finely tuned”. I took that to mean that any perturbations would disrupt this “tuning” and cause instability. Baloney!
The Earth’s atmosphere is a stable system.
There are no tipping points for temperature run-away. What Mckibben calls fine tuning, I call stability.

Grant
June 9, 2015 7:30 am

It would be interesting to view rainfall patterns and amounts over the last 40 years on land throughout the pacific at the equator. Wouldn’t they see increased rainfall if increased clouds were a negative CO2 forcing?

June 9, 2015 7:39 am

Willis E
Great commentary, enjoyed reading it this morning (Tuesday, 6-09-15). And concerning this statement of yours, to wit”

….. and thunderstorms and squall lines moving heat from the surface to up near the tropopause in the afternoon. It is this regulation of each day’s maximum tropical temperature via a host of inter-related mechanisms that keeps the earth from overheating on a daily basis.

If I replace the word “tropical” with “temperate” (I live in central WV), that is exactly what I experienced late yesterday afternoon.
The air temperature in my local area was hovering around 90 F and the humidity was increasing when kinda suddenly like “WHOOSH”, …. in rolled a thunderstorm with high winds and massive hurricane-like rainfall …. which only lasted for 15 minutes or so. The wife’s daughter who lives about 25 miles SE of us ….. called to tell us “they heard the thunder but didn’t get any wind or rainfall”.
Cheers

June 9, 2015 7:50 am

Willis
I notice you are using time zones to separate the graphs. For a year of plotting temperatures from different locations here in north america, I was having problems with correlations. My sniff test was telling me something was wrong so to give myself a second source of data, I mounted a solar cell on my roof connected to a volt meter. Trying to get a clear picture of what it was representing took awhile. Because of clouds, the readings were very irratic, but managed to have quite a few days without clouds that allowed me to see what what was going on.
Just like I see in your charts, the voltage peaks at about 9 am and then dropped and flattened out for the rest of the day. I assumed it was wrong because of the common sense approach, it should peak at high noon.
While I was also plotting temperature as a comparison, noticed it peaked around 2 to 3 pm (just like your second peak). Again, this made no sense why nothing correlated. When I added a barometer to the mix, It gave me another pattern that appeared to be a floating di-urnal that appeared to pass through the same point at high noon.
So I began using the solar noon as my reference to see if it would clear up the correlation problem. After wrestling with plotting for a long time, I almost gave up and switch my research to killing fire ants…
But, in January this year, things started changing. I was able to get a clear voltage plot that showed the 9am peak. It wasn’t until the middle of March that the pressure waves started clearing up. That is when I began using GOES data comparisons to put some sense into the pressure waves. I found correlation of the noise on the pressure wave to incoming solar activity. That has now cleared up, the solar wind became my next topic to study since everything else had dissappeared.
Just recently, 6/3/15 at 1700gmt, there was a sharp spike in the solar wind that lasted about 2 hours of which only abut 10 minutes it exceeded 500 and peaked at 1136 and dropped instantly back to the 300 mark. It made the barometric pressure rise about .03″hg.
And today the K wing showes two periods in the red. The wind is now rising starting sharply rising at midnight. As I wait for data to catch up I read your blog on WUWT. I believe this exercise is way beyond my basic knowledge of how things work.
But, I believe that the voltage peak at 9am is real. That going through the atmosphere almost horrizonal to the earth is the way light travels through the layers. And the 3pm temperature peaks are because the warming of the sun does not reach earth at the same time but 2 to 3 hours later.
This time factor I have been seeing when there has been a reported solar flare (they see the light) and when I see it on the barometer. Ive timed it to be 2hr 40minutes.
So maybe an adjustment to the recorded times should be set to the sun daily cycle at high noon instead of the normal time zones.
If I had a way to send pictures of my plots, it would be easier to explain what I see.
LeeO

Reply to  Lee Osburn
June 11, 2015 6:54 am

I guess this string will work. (I would never use thread to tie two tin cans together it is just too weak when we streach it to talk) Iphones work alot better.
Update
Willis, the storm is continuing this morning with wind around 600. We had a M1flare at 0855gmt and coincidently the satelite stopped sending data for 13 minutes. The time for transit time to the satelite from the sun is 2hr35min. Previously I estimated the time for flares to reach earth 2hr40minutes. Because the sat is between us and it (about 30min transit from goes to us) totals 3hr10min. Not sure yet if this delay varies but I expect it does.
LeeO

Reply to  Lee Osburn
June 11, 2015 9:19 am

w.
It is 10:15 and my voltmeter on my second solar panel overloaded and had to change the scale. Looks like its gonna be a hot day.
lo

Hartley Gardner
Reply to  Lee Osburn
June 11, 2015 10:37 am

Lee, the voltage across silicon solar cells is not a good measure of incoming insolation energy. These cells are current sources, not voltage sources (I’m sure someone here can do the whole physics explanation if you like..:-) If you want to measure insolation, you will need to measure total power being generated, not just voltage.
Hartley

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 11, 2015 12:25 pm

Hartley
My voltmeter is not terminated. I am only using it as a TOOL to watch solar energy. Physics seems to be about a Solar panel that is being used as a charger.
lo

Hartley Gardner
Reply to  Lee Osburn
June 11, 2015 12:34 pm

Lee, the way a silicon solar panel works, the open-circuit voltage will rise with increasing solar flux until the maximum voltage of the panel is reached. You will then see little or no additional voltage rise with additional flux, though MUCH more power would be available if you were drawing current from it. What you reported – that voltage rises until about 0900, then shows little change until evening is exactly what we would expect. If you want to measure approximate solar flux with a silicon solar cell, you have to measure the power (current X voltage), not just the voltage.
Hartley

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 11, 2015 12:27 pm

But, I would like to know what it is measuring. Maybe the frequency that I assume is sublight

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 11, 2015 12:58 pm

No I said that it rises (to a peak) about 9am. Then drops back down where it flattens out until the evening when the sun goes down.

Hartley Gardner
Reply to  Lee Osburn
June 11, 2015 1:13 pm

Lee, I’m not sure, never having closely examined the open-circuit behavior of solar cells, but my suspicion is that your panel is heating up, which would reduce the voltage (slightly), beginning after the 9 am peak you report.
Hartley

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 11, 2015 5:14 pm

I have bought six 12v arrays and set them up to see what was the most sensitive. I use it to record the reflections from the Moon. I have just glanced at them but looking back at midnight on a non-moon nite it measures .2mv. That is really dark.. During lightning storms it records the brightness of the flashes. I can’t wait to have time to plot them!
The peak voltage for the Sun around 9am is around 17volts. On 3/28 and 3/29 it was peaking at 8:30am at 17.12v. My last check on 5/1-2 showed it peaking at 7:15am. This makes it take on a longer “bite” pattern that slowly drifts down until noon (16v) when it rises back up to 16.25 at 5pm and drops gradually drops off at dusk.
No, dont think they are heating up, just doing their job.
lo
[What latitude is your array? What total area and how are they oriented or controlled? .mod]

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 15, 2015 12:30 pm

Mod,
I am using a solar charger used in feeders on ranches. Like I said, its just a tool. I plot the readings and compare to various sensors I use. All graphic comparisons.
Hartley,
I am not looking for insolation energy. Only a signal like a phonograph needle, a barometer, thermometer, and all the usual tools needed to monitor the atmosphere here in the hill country of Texas. I have yet to see where these tools are being used so I am doing it. The problems with collection, saving, and plotting so much data has been worked out. But, I guess no one wants to see the results. At least no questions as to what they are showing me.

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 15, 2015 12:53 pm

Mod
For instance, on 6/15/15 0100gmt, a M2 solar flare was detected on the sun. It was located on the west limb. I received the resulting change of the diurnal cycle 2-1/2 hours later using my barometer. How could that be? It was beyond geo effective positions. The same thing happens on the ones we see on the east limb. It seems to me that the light and the uv component is being reflected by the magnetic bubble above the “hole” as if it was a mirror….

Reply to  Hartley Gardner
June 15, 2015 6:24 pm

Hartley
I have other devices that are set up in a mini-studio
You realize that this “string” is obscure.
BTW, I saw some communicating going on couple of nights ago in an obscure location like this…..hackers….this is their tool.
While another blog is going on and everybody is following an encounter, they are doing their thing. I cannot find it now so guess it was deleted….? mod delete this…

James at 48
June 9, 2015 8:20 am

4:30 PM, like clockwork, a downpour and thunder.

Billy Liar
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
June 9, 2015 12:35 pm
Ian H
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
June 9, 2015 3:35 pm

This suggests however that you have more work to do before you can say this mechanism will regulate climate. The basic problem is that if temperature differences are the trigger then uniformly raising all temperatures will not trigger earlier thunderstorms.
What I take away from this is the massive amounts of energy involved in the daily temperature regulation cycle and the huge size of the effect caused by clouds and changes in albedo throughout the day. The posited effect from CO2 in the global warming hypothesis is so miniscule by comparison that only a very subtle and tiny change in the daily cycle would be needed to completely overwhelm it.
As I see it your main problem is going to be finding such a subtle and tiny effect in the midst of these massive chaotic daily exchanges of energy. You may need to settle for simply pointing out that worrying about a couple of Watts per square metre from CO2 while all this is going on is rather like worrying about the draft from a fan in the middle of a hurricane.

Reply to  Ian H
June 10, 2015 6:14 am

The temperature differences are the “trigger” …… but the H2O vapor (humidity) ppm is the “powder charge”.

Ian H
Reply to  Ian H
June 15, 2015 3:11 pm

The warmer the buoy location, the greater the response.

Ahah – I get you now. The greater the response but not the earlier the response. So what you are saying is that timing is triggered by temperature differences, but the amplitude of the response is determined by absolute temperature. Gotcha.
That is a modification of the model as you first presented it where you suggested variations in the time of initiation as being the main controlling mechanism.

Bair Polaire
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
June 9, 2015 4:28 pm

Thank you for elaborating. I understand that thresholds for emergent phenomena can be triggered by ∆T – but with regard to a governor mechanism I thought (and still think) absolute temperature being relevant, at least for the strength of the response.
It’s even more puzzling to me that not only the onset times for the temperature changes (and subsequent emergent phenomena) but also the diurnal temperature patterns are so similar. What else goes in sync with the slowly increasing SST from East to West: cloud height, air temperature at certain pressure levels, air pressure near the surface, humidity, biogenic atmospheric ice nuclei,…?
Where is the leeway coming from…?
b.

MattE
June 9, 2015 9:32 am

Great post as always. Don’t take this as criticism, just a (maybe) different viewpoint.
Small bone to pick. You say:
The regulation of the temperature will be greater up at the warm end of the scale than down at the cool end. This is because the emergent phenomena act to reduce peak temperatures.
My ‘bone’ is ‘act to.’ They don’t act to (ie intention), they merely have the effect of… semantics but also reflects how one thinks about it. It’s just a reproducible response by air/water/water vapor to temps.
Related: You also said early on ‘This prevents the surface temperature from overheating.’ What the heck is ‘overheating’? The earth doesn’t have a temperature that is ‘normal’ or ‘supposed’ to be. Again, it’s just water vapor acting as water vapor acts
Again, I agree with nearly everything you say about the system; it limits temperatures by feedback. I see it as natural responses to threshhold events. In the west pacific you start at higher T (higher humidity?), closer to a threshhold to form clouds, so this system of cloud formation snap into gear faster than it does in the east where it’s cooler, clouds probably form less fast. Another possibility it seems is that the eastern feedback is less consistently at the same time of day (is it some days a sharp effect like the west and some days not at all so the average looks different?). Can you ‘predict’ by the starting temp of the day (or the water) how strong that 9am dip is?
How to test this? is there seasonality to the temps at the equator buoys? Do individual cool days (or cool seasons) in the west look like the same temperature days/seasons in the east?
Thanks again, yet another enjoyable and thought-provoking post.
ME

MattE
June 9, 2015 9:39 am

It would be cool to quantify the ‘dip’ T9-T12 is a nearly perfect measure it seems, and see what that correlates to (seasonally, daily).

June 9, 2015 9:51 am

Thanks, Willis. It is good to see your Thermostat Hypothesis is advancing.
“Planet Ocean” (Earth) has emergent phenomena that prevent it from frying under the Sun. On the other hand, humans, seem to have only reason, and it is a scarce commodity, have we gone past “Peak Reason”?

Not Sure
June 9, 2015 9:56 am

Dear Mr. Eschenbach,
Can I talk you into using a code-sharing service? I’m not a big fan of Github, but it is the most popular. Alternatives off the top of my head are Bitbucket and Gitorious.
The immediate advantage to you is that you could crowd-source your code cleanup. I could “fork” your repository and send you pull requests with fixes. You can merge the fixes you approve of, and reject the ones you don’t with or without comment.
I would be happy to help with setup.

D.J. Hawkins
June 9, 2015 9:59 am

Willis;
When you say:
All of the locations receive exactly, precisely, the same amount of top-of-atmosphere solar energy every single day.
do you mean within the calendar day, or for every day of the year? If the later, I’m confused.

Mike
June 9, 2015 10:16 am

Willis, I don’t know whether you missed it or just weren’t interested because there’s not code supplied 😉
I think the graph I supplied provided empirical evidence of what you have been saying for the last few years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/08/the-daily-albedo-cycle/#comment-1958222
Extracting the ERBE data at this level is a bit complicated but I can provide details if you are interested.

carbon bigfoot
June 9, 2015 10:24 am

The earth is always trying to reach equilibrium with all of its thermodynamic processes. As a consequence of an infinite number of variables, your never going to predict its weather or climate. All you can hope to do is call out trends, based upon limited information, or data and previous history ( undoctored of course ). For my $$$ Weather Bell is best, followed by the Farmer’s Almanac.

Curious George
Reply to  carbon bigfoot
June 9, 2015 12:46 pm

That’s a few bold statements. I would love to know what the Earth is trying to achieve.

Mike
Reply to  Curious George
June 9, 2015 2:10 pm

What’s she doing? Nothing much, just messing with our heads. Sort of things deities find amusing.

June 9, 2015 11:44 am

Reblogged this on Climate Collections and commented:
Fascinating analysis. Consistent with my tropical met training. Saturated boundary layer at dawn; weak inversion; AM insolation/heating overturns the boundary layer mixing drier/cooler air from aloft; random CU form; low/medium sun angle reflects off sides of CU casting medium/long shadows; late morning sun angle increases reducing CU shadow footprint; surface heating increases; random CU organize into TCU; max insolation/heating in early afternoon; CB and rainfall mid-late afternoon; surface insolation/heating reduced by CB-induced CS footprint; surface also cooled by rainfall and subsidence/downdraft of cooler drier air aloft. Rinse, repeat.

David L. Hagen
June 9, 2015 2:12 pm

Willis
Compliments on your graphs and results.
You show the temperatures increase westwards along the equator. (“The buoys I used stretch from 95°W (buoy just to the left of the “E” in “Equator”) to 165°E (on the Equator northeast of Australia). Conveniently, the average temperature increases steadily along the line.”)
Similarly your graph of daily temperatures shows corresponding increasing trends about 9:00 hours. (“To me, the “dip” in the morning records is the clear sign of the phenomenon I described in my last post—the emergence of the cumulus clouds starting in mid-to-late morning.”)
However there is the inverse trend about 17:00 hours. (“The later reduction of the peak afternoon temperature values is due not to increased albedo but to the emergence of afternoon thunderstorms.”)
The ocean temperature provides the integrated effect of net heat heating. E.g., See Shaviv’s Blog “The Oceans as a Calorimeter.”
May I suggest plotting the derivative of temperature vs time, and the difference between non-cloudy integrated insolation (such as your land temperature Fig. 3) and the ocean temperature (Fig. 4). I think that should be insightful when compared against the cloud cover (albedo) and consequent change in net heating.
Best regards, David

philsalmon
June 9, 2015 2:56 pm

Willis
Your hypothesis seems compelling – how much does it have in common with the “Iris hypothesis” of Richard Lindzen?
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/adinfriris.pdf
Could your work be a refinement of the Iris hypothesis? Lindzen saw a role for cirrus cloud in relation to cumulus. From Lindzen’s abstract:
Motivated by the observed relation between cloudiness (above the trade wind boundary layer) and high
humidity, cloud data for the eastern part of the western Pacific from the Japanese Geostationary Meteorological Satellite-5 (which provides high spatial and temporal resolution) have been analyzed, and it has been found that the area of cirrus cloud coverage normalized by a measure of the area of cumulus coverage decreases about 22% per degree Celsius increase in the surface temperature of the cloudy region. A number of possible interpretations of this result are examined and a plausible one is found to be that cirrus detrainment from cumulus convection diminishes with increasing temperature. The implications of such an effect for climate are examined using a simple two-dimensional radiative–convective model. The calculations show that such a change in the Tropics could lead to a negative feedback in the global climate, with a feedback factor of about -1.1, which if correct, would more than cancel all the positive feedbacks in the more sensitive current climate models.

What are your thoughts on cirrus cloud?

Dinostratus
Reply to  philsalmon
June 9, 2015 9:04 pm

“Could your work be a refinement of the Iris hypothesis? ”
Not in my opinion. I wouldn’t use the word “refinement”. Perhaps “paling in comparison” might be a better phrase. This post reads like Lindzen never existed.