• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

  • Start here
  • Model-Observation Comparisons
  • Miscellaneous Climate Graphics
  • Surface temperature graphics
You are here: Home / Climate Science / Unforced Variations: Dec 2013

Unforced Variations: Dec 2013

1 Dec 2013 by group

This month’s open thread. It’s coming to the end of the year and that means updates to the annual time series of observations and models relatively soon. Suggestions for what you’d like to see assessed are welcome… or any other climate science related topic.

Filed Under: Climate Science, Open thread

Reader Interactions

354 Responses to "Unforced Variations: Dec 2013"

Comments pagination

« Previous 1 … 6 7 8
  1. prokaryotes says

    1 Jan 2014 at 12:30 AM

    IPCC reports have extensive reference lists but unfortunately they don’t include direct links to papers. Below are the references in IPCC AR5 WG1 Chapter 3, observations: oceans, with links to abstract pages and full texts where available. http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/ipcc-ar5-references-wg1-chapter-3-observations-ocean/

  2. Chuck Hughes says

    1 Jan 2014 at 2:07 AM

    Some interesting pictures from Antarctica 100 years ago:

    http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/antarctica-conservators-discover-100-year-old-negatives

  3. Pete Best says

    1 Jan 2014 at 5:46 AM

    Re #344 obviously because it is a lot of nonsense but posted on many a website as FACT citing no references or stating the alleged German scientists credentials. It is very easy on the Internet to pop stuff as fact and easy enough to spot it but on WUWT it was posted as fact to but then of course it would be.

    It all comes down to the same thing – since the first earth summit in 1992 emissions have doubled. Obfuscation, lobbying, listening to the 3% in the media (they don’t know science any more than any other average member of the public) and are determined to put up all arguments on equal and unbiased, and many other ways of delaying action is working just fine would you not say.

    So where are we on our way to limiting emissions to 2C (EU directive mainly as the USA and China don’t say much on this)? Well its obvious really, dig a little and its quite obvious that the assumptions made by the political economists (stern report etc) are somewhat off of the mark and continue to peddle a myth based around the need for growth to continue.

    The reality is 2C is gone and 4C is more likely

  4. Nathan says

    1 Jan 2014 at 6:04 AM

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/full/nature12829.html

    Anyone read this paper yet??

    [Response: I have a few comments on the paper in this National Geographic article. We may comment at further length here during the next few days. -mike]

« Older Comments

Primary Sidebar

Search

Search for:

Email Notification

get new posts sent to you automatically (free)
Loading

Recent Posts

  • Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Are direct water vapor emissions endangering anyone?
  • The Endangerment of the Endangerment Finding?
  • National Climate Assessment links
  • Ocean circulation going South?

Our Books

Book covers
This list of books since 2005 (in reverse chronological order) that we have been involved in, accompanied by the publisher’s official description, and some comments of independent reviewers of the work.
All Books >>

Recent Comments

  • jgnfld on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • jgnfld on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Thomas Fuller on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Pedro Prieto on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Pedro Prieto on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Pedro Prieto on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Martin Smith on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Nigelj on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Yebo Kando on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • patrick o twentyseven on The Endangerment of the Endangerment Finding?
  • Geoff Miell on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Geoff Miell on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • patrick o twentyseven on The Endangerment of the Endangerment Finding?
  • nigelj on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • MA Rodger on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Russ Doty on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Tomáš Kalisz on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • b fagan on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Adam Lea on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • Adam Lea on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • nigelj on The Endangerment of the Endangerment Finding?
  • jgnfld on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Ray Ladbury on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Tomáš Kalisz on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Ron R. on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • patrick o twentyseven on The Endangerment of the Endangerment Finding?
  • Ron R. on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • b fagan on Critiques of the ‘Critical Review’
  • David on Unforced Variations: Aug 2025
  • Piotr on The Endangerment of the Endangerment Finding?

Footer

ABOUT

  • About
  • Translations
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Page
  • Login

DATA AND GRAPHICS

  • Data Sources
  • Model-Observation Comparisons
  • Surface temperature graphics
  • Miscellaneous Climate Graphics

INDEX

  • Acronym index
  • Index
  • Archives
  • Contributors

Realclimate Stats

1,375 posts

11 pages

245,829 comments

Copyright © 2025 · RealClimate is a commentary site on climate science by working climate scientists for the interested public and journalists.