I’ve been having some discussions with a colleague who has never thought too hard about anthropogenic global warming.
Anyway, he says there must be some work/some research results that have been published in reputable scientific journals that:
1. examine the causal link between anthropogenic carbon dioxide and warming, and
2. quantify the extent of the warming from anthropogenic carbon dioxide.
What he really want is links to research papers or citations to research papers.
Cameron Stewart writing in today’s The Australian makes reference to the influence of internet bloggers in succeeding in highlighting that measuring climate change is an evolving science. But, goes on to suggest that “their success has been at the margins only” because we have apparently failed to “prove that these discrepancies negate the broader core arguments about the trends of global warming.”
The article is entitled ‘Key degrees of difference’ and it begins:
“Has global warming stopped? The question alone is enough to provoke scorn from the mainstream scientific community and from the Government, which says the earth has never been hotter. But tell that to a new army of sceptics who have mushroomed on internet blog sites and elsewhere in recent months to challenge some of the most basic assumptions and claims of climate change science…
Read more here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24148862-11949,00.html
This is at least the second time in the last two weeks that internet bloggers have been identified by the mainstream Australian media as relevant to the debate on climate change. The earlier story was on ABC Lateline, you can watch the video clip: http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2008/07/29/2318074.htm . I comment on the Lateline report in an associated blog post here: https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/003290.html.
Natural Variability of SSTs has NOT been Accounted for by the US CCSP.
In my first post at jennifermarohasy.com/blog, I noted a magnificent 0.9 deg C drop and rebound in North Pacific SSTs (sea surface temperatures). The anomaly occurs there between the late 19th to the early 20th centuries. Its impact is reflected in global SST anomaly data illustrated on the same graph:
http://i25.tinypic.com/2cyg07k.jpg
The largest of the late 19th century explosive volcanic eruptions, Krakatau in 1883, was approximately the same magnitude as Mount Pinatubo, and the Mount Pinatubo eruption did not duplicate the effect on SSTs. Assuming that TSI (total solar irradiance) variations are not responsible, and since there have been no discussions in any scientific papers that I could find of an anthropogenic cause for the drop in SST during that period, that leaves Thermohaline Circulation (THC) or Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC) as the driver.
A similar but lesser drop in SST occurs in the North Atlantic. This data set is the basis for the much studied Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO):
http://i27.tinypic.com/212s789.jpg
Referring to the first two illustrations, Global SST anomalies dropped 0.45 deg C from 1878 to 1910, then rebounded that amount plus 0.1 deg C from 1910 to 1941. I acknowledge that I cherry-picked the 1878 start date, but it’s used simply for illustration purposes. The AGW skeptical part of me looks at those graphs of Global SST anomalies and concludes that if a 0.45 decrease in SST is within the bounds of natural variability, a 0.45 deg C increase could also be natural, yet global SSTs haven’t come close to climbing 0.45 deg C above that 1878 starting temperature.
These THC/MOC oscillations are found in other SST data sets. The drop in SST during that period can also been seen in the data sets of THC upwelling points in both hemispheres of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans:
http://i27.tinypic.com/29c27v5.jpg
The placid South Pacific appears at first glance to contain more subtle SST oscillations, and it’s easy to see the influence of the North Pacific. However, as illustrated, the eastern half of the South Pacific also contains substantial oscillations that are independent of the North:
http://i25.tinypic.com/25allw2.jpg
If we divide the east-central mid-latitude South Pacific by 10 degree longitudinal bands and plot those data sets, those oscillations become much more pronounced:
http://i35.tinypic.com/250s2t2.jpg
THC/MOC MISSING FROM THE NEW CCSP REPORT
The effects of North Atlantic and North Pacific THC/MOC on global SST anomalies are illustrated in the preceding. In the recently released draft of “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States”, the U.S. Climate Change Science Program briefly discusses the impacts of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation on SALMON PRODUCTION. Salmon production? I believe they missed the greater effects of those two natural variables, their influences on climate. I searched the CCSP document for “Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation “, for “thermohaline”, for “meridional”, for “overturning”, but the search feature of Adobe Reader returned the same message: “No matches were found.” I have to conclude from these oversights that the CCSP are either misinformed, or they have been misdirected, or they are attempting to mislead the public.
SOURCES
The graphs are from my series on Smith and Reynolds SST data:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/06/smith-and-reynolds-sst-posts.html
Sea Surface Temperature Data is Smith and Reynolds Extended Reconstructed SST (ERSST.v2) available through the NOAA National Operational Model Archive & Distribution System (NOMADS):
The land valuation of our property in the Daintree rainforest has recently jumped by 250%. This may well reflect market activity over the last few years, but then again, government intervention has largely influenced these changes, with broad scale expropriation of development rights, including the right to construct dwelling homes on freehold land. It is unsurprising that properties with established homes would become more valuable, because of their administratively increased exclusivity, but these are not unimproved values. It is equally evident that those properties that were compulsorily stripped of development rights lost market value and for obvious reasons.
Our freehold property, in particular, was compulsorily inscribed within World Heritage in December of 1988. Its classification for farming was maintained, but World Heritage responsibilities, as prescribed within domestic legislation, have progressively diminished farming activities; most dramatically through the prohibition of harvesting native forests. At a local government level, World Heritage has been used to separate planning areas, to effectively deny development capabilities for the greater importance of protecting ecological values within the inscribed estate. In truth, the income-earning capabilities of freehold World Heritage lands have been progressively diminished.
On the basis of these mounting constraints, we lodged an objection to the new valuation, detailing the legislated conservation land-use and the lack of rateable services – no reticulated water, no reticulated electricity and a road that is frequently impassable due to the inadequacies of the existing infrastructure.
Not only was the decision on objection disallowed, but also a new valuation was simultaneously dispatched, with a further increase in unimproved value of an additional 250%. Details within our objection apparently alerted valuers to changes in land-use that no longer qualified for concession for farming. So what was once eligible for rateable concession, because of an existing right to harvest forest product, became ineligible, for the higher importance of protecting forest product. Go figure!
This reminded me of another valuation milestone in the Daintree rainforest, back in the mid-1990’s. Around $16million of Commonwealth and Queensland Government funds had been allocated for the voluntary conversion of Daintree freehold rainforest to National Park. Properties in the Cooper valley were prioritised for acquisition, because of their intrinsic values of rarity, endemicity and primitiveness.
In an act of perceived skulduggery, property values within the priority acquisition area, unexpectedly tripled. In response to the outrage of incensed landholders, officials insisted that those affected should have rightfully rejoiced, with the discovery that they had long enjoyed a ‘rate holiday’, brought inevitably into line with contemporary market-driven valuations.
I must confess that I remain unconvinced.
The PDO is NOT a Simple Residual Like the AMO.
People understand the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). It’s calculated very simply; subtract Global SST (sea surface temperature) anomalies from the North Atlantic SST anomalies. This simple process has been said to remove the global warming signal from the AMO. Many people believe the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is calculated using the same basic equation, but it’s not. According to Nathan Mantua of JISAO, the details of how the PDO is calculated are found in this paper:
ENSO-like Interdecadal Variability: 1900–93
Calculating the PDO is a multistep process. It includes creating an SST anomaly time series for each 5 degree grid of the North Pacific (North of 20N), calculating the residual for each grid, and computing the EOFs ( empirical
orthogonal function) of these North Pacific residual SST anomaly fields. The PDO index is the leading PC (principal component) of that analysis. It’s far from a simple process.
The PDO has been found to be a function of ENSO. In “ENSO-Forced Variability of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation“, Newman et al state in the conclusions, “The PDO is dependent upon ENSO on all timescales.”
A few months ago, I discovered the instructions for retrieving Smith and Reynolds ERSST.v2 data (extended reconstructed SST) from the NOAA NOMADS system based on user selected dates and global coordinates:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/sst/ERSST-ts.txt
One of the first data sets I downloaded was the time series of SST anomalies for the North Pacific, 20 to 65N, what I called the Mid-Latitude North Pacific SST Anomaly in the following graph. Note the 0.9 deg C drop then rebound in temperature from the late 19th to the mid-20th centuries. It’s tough to miss. It certainly appears to be related to Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC), not ENSO.
http://i25.tinypic.com/2cyg07k.jpg
Using the same simple process employed to calculate the AMO, that is, subtracting the Global SST Anomaly from the Mid-Latitude North Pacific Anomaly, provides a data set that I’ve dubbed the North Pacific Residual.
http://i28.tinypic.com/jrwjk6.jpg
The North Pacific Residual bears no resemblance to the PDO. In fact, note that I had to scale the PDO to bring it back into line with the data set from which it is extracted. (The PDO data illustrated is from the ERSST.v2 data set, not the JISAO version. The curves of the two PDO data sets are similar, but the ERSST.v2 data extends further back in time.)
http://i27.tinypic.com/2n1sv49.jpg
When compared to the AMO, the two Northern Hemisphere SST oscillations complement one another from the 1920s to present. Prior to that, they were out of synch, offsetting their individual impacts on global temperature. It is no coincidence that Northern Hemisphere and global temperatures follow the rises and falls of these two residual anomalies.
http://i30.tinypic.com/11kv7r5.jpg
CLOSING
Past studies have estimated the contribution of the AMO to the rises and falls of Northern Hemisphere and Global temperatures over the 20th century. I would think that the North Pacific Residual would contribute similarly. Shouldn’t climatologists and climate change bloggers have another index of North Pacific temperature anomalies, one that could be used to determine the effect of the North Pacific SST oscillation on Northern Hemisphere and Global temperatures?
SOURCES
The links and graphs are from my series on Smith and Reynolds SST data:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/06/smith-and-reynolds-sst-posts.html
Sea Surface Temperature Data is Smith and Reynolds Extended Reconstructed SST (ERSST.v2) available through the NOAA National Operational Model Archive & Distribution System (NOMADS):
David Stockwell has analysed the CSIRO/BoM Drought Report using data reluctantly released by CSIRO in response to public pressure. His report is entitled: ‘Tests of Regional Climate Model Validity in the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report’
The Abstract states:
In a statistical re-analysis of the data from the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report, all climate models failed standard internal validation tests for regional droughted area in Australia over the last century. The most worrying failure was that simulations showed increases in droughted area over the last century in all regions, while the observed trends in drought decreased in five of the seven regions identified in the CSIRO/Bureau of Meteorology report. Therefore there is no credible basis for the claims of increasing frequency of Exceptional Circumstances declarations made in the report. These results are consistent with other studies finding lack of adequate validation in global warming effects modeling, and lack of skill of climate models at the regional scale.
Read David’s own blog here.
Climate Audit:
Stockwell on CSIRO Drought Report
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.
Read more
