RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

You are here: Home / Archives for Climate Science

Climate Science

Fun with correlations! Korelasyonlarla eğlenelim!

by

We are forever being bombarded with apparently incredible correlations of various solar indices and climate. A number of them came up in the excoriable TGGWS mockumentary last month where they were mysteriously ‘improved’ in a number of underhand ways. But even without those improvements (which variously involved changing the axes, drawing in non-existent data, taking out data that would contradict the point etc.), the as-published correlations were superficially quite impressive. Why then are we not impressed?

To give you an idea, I’m going to go through the motions of constructing a new theory of political change using techniques that have been pioneered by a small subset of solar-climate researchers (references will of course be given). And to make it even more relevant, I’m going to take as my starting point research that Richard Lindzen has highlighted on his office door for many years:
[Read more…] about Fun with correlations! Korelasyonlarla eğlenelim!

This Week Bu Hafta

by

There are a few minor items this week worthy of mention:

1. The CO2 rise. Who dunnit?

Here at RealClimate, we have been (naively, apparently) operating under the assumption that climate change contrarians had long ago moved on from the untenable position that humans are not even responsible for the observed increase in CO2 concentrations over the past two centuries. The dubious paper by Ernst Beck we commented on the other day indicates that there is indeed still a rear guard attack being waged. As if to drive the point home further, pundit Alexander Cockburn, known generally for his progressive views, has perplexingly disputed the existence of any link between CO2 emissions and rising CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere in a screed he penned this week for the online journal “Counterpunch” (also printed in The Nation). It’s hard to know where to start, since his piece is so over the top and gets just about everything so thoroughly wrong, it’s almost comical. So we’ll just hit the low points: (a) Cockburn claims that there is zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of CO2 is making any measurable contribution to the world’s present warming trend, despite the fact that not even such strident climate change contrarians as Pat Michaels dispute that there is a measurable influence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases on global temperature. Plus there’s all the empirical evidence of course (see the new IPCC report). (b) Going further, Cockburn brazenly opines that ‘it is impossible to assert that the increase in atmospheric CO2 stems from human burning of fossil fuels’ despite the fact that there is an isotopic smoking gun for this connection. He then (c) fails to understand that water vapor is a feedback not a forcing, and citing ‘expert’ Dr. Martin Hertzberg, quite remarkably states that ‘It is the warming of the earth that is causing the increase of carbon dioxide and not the reverse.’ Never mind that isotopic evidence proves otherwise. Upon what evidence does he base this assertion?

Since no anti-global warming op-ed these days is complete without it, Cockburn (d) resorts to the usual misrepresentation of lag/lead relationships between CO2 and temperatures during glacial/interglacial cycles as if they disprove the causal relationship between greenhouse gas concentrations and surface temperatures (see our most recent debunking of this favorite contrarian talking point here). Oh dear.

2. The other (Glenn) Beck–Even Worse!

CNN gave their resident shock-jock Glenn Beck a forum for spreading more disinformation on global warming in an hour-long segment entitled Exposed: The Climate of Fear (see also this discussion by “Media Matters”). We could pick apart his (rather thin) arguments, which constitute the usual cocktail of long debunked contrarian talking points. Suffice it to say, however, that the moment a rhetorician invokes Hitler, Nazi Germany, and Eugenics, it is the moment they are no longer worthy of being listened to (cf Godwin’s Law of usenet debates). We don’t seem to be alone in our opinion here. Beck’s performance earned him the dubious title of “worst person in the world” from analyst Keith Olbermann.

However, there was one amusing moment: Beck asked Christopher ‘Incorrect’ Horner what the key thing to google was that would show that Al Gore was wrong. Horner suggested the lag between CO2 and temperature in the ice cores. Of course, if you do Google that, the first hit is the RealClimate debunking of the issue. Thanks!

3. Nature’s new blog

Nature has started a new blog called “Climate Feedback”, which says of itself ‘Climate Feedback is a blog hosted by Nature Reports: Climate Change to facilitate lively and informative discussion on the science and wider implications of global warming. The blog aims to be an informal forum for debate and commentary on climate science in our journals and others, in the news, and in the world at large.’

We wish it well, remembering their welcome for RealClimate, though early reviews based on the first few posts are decidedly mixed.

Ingilizce’den çeviren Figen Mekik/

Kaydedilmeye değer ufak tefek bazı konularımız var bu hafta.

1. CO2 yükselmesi. Faili kim?

Biz de sitemizde safça zannediyorduk ki iklim değişimine karşı çıkanlar en azından “insanların son ikiyüz yıldır görülen CO2 artışına hiç bir katkısı yoktur” gibi, savunulması güç tezleri çoktan geride bıraktılar. Ernst Beck’in bizim de daha önce üstünde durduğumuz bilimsel değeri şüpheli makalesi, daha hala bu saçma bu fikirlerin savunulduğunu gösteriyor. Dahası, ünlü alim Alexander Cockburn, ki ilerici düşünceleriyle tanınır, “Counterpunch” adlı site için uzun ve bıktıran bir eleştiri yazmış (The Nation’da da yayınlanmış) ve çok şaşırtıcı bir şekilde demiş ki CO2 emisyonuyla, havakürede görülen CO2 artışı arasında hiç bir bağlantı yoktur. Lafa nasıl başlayacağımızı kestirmek zor çünkü yazısı neredeyse komik olacak kadar saçma ve hemen hemen her konuda hatalı. Onun için sadece bir iki noktaya değinelim: (a) Cockburn diyor ki dünyamızın yaşadığı ısınma eğilimine insanların ürettiği CO2’nin katkısı olduğunu gösteren hiç bir delil yok. Bu çok tuhaf bir görüş çünkü en amansız karşı çıkıcılardan Pat Michaels bile insanların ürettiği sera gazlarının dünyanın ısınmasına ölçülebilir bir katkısı olduğunu kabul ediyor. Artı, bir sürü de deneysel veri var tabii (yeni Uluslarası Iklim Değişimi Görevgücü’nün raporuna bakın). (b) Daha da ileri giderek, izotoplarla kesin olarak ispat edilmesine rağmen, Cockburn hiç utanmadan ileri sürüyor ki ”atmosferdeki CO2 artışının insanların fosil yakıt kullanmasına bağlanması imkansızdır”. Ayrica, (c) anlamamakta inat ettiği bir başka konu da su buharı bir zorlama değil geribeslemedir. Ve hatta “uzman” Dr. Martin Hertzberg’e atıf yaparak ”dünyanın ısınması CO2’yi artırıyor ve tersi doğru değildir” fikrini öne sürüyor. Izotop verilerinin tam tersini ispat ediyor olmasını tamamen göz ardı ederek, hem de. Kendi görüşlerini hangi delillerle destekliyor acaba?

Ve küresel ısınmaya inanmayan yorum yazılarından hiç eksik olmayan bir diğer husus da (d) buzul ve buzul arası dönemlerde CO2-ısı arasındaki öncü-gecikmeci ilişkinin yanlış ifade edilmesi; sanki CO2 ve ısı arasındaki sebep-sonuç ilişkisi tamamen yanlışmış gibi (bunu en son burada tartıştık). Eyvah!

2. Diğer (Glenn) Beck —Daha kötüsü!

CNN, sansasyonel havadiscisi Glenn Beck’e bir saatlik, < a href=”http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/beck.climateoffear/”>Açığa Çıktı: Korku Iklimi adlı (Media Matters’deki bu tartışmaya da bir göz atın) bir program vererek küresel ısınma hakkında yanlış bilgiler yaymasına olanak sağladı. Beck’in savunduğu çok zayıf iddiaları tek tek ele alabiliriz, ama çoğu zaten sıklıkla herkesin öne sürüp de rezil olduğu aynı iddialar. Onun için şunu demekle yetinelim: herhangi bir retoretisyen Hitler, Nazi Almanyası ve ırk islahı gibi fikirleri ortaya attı mı, dinlenebilirliğini yitiriyor (mesela Godwin’in kanunu gibi). Bu fikrimizde de yanlız değiliz galiba. Beck’in programı ona, Keith Olbermann tarafından < a href=”http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18438559/“>“dünyanın en kötü insanı” namını kazandırdı.

Ancak bizi güldüren bir an oldu. Beck, Christopher “Yanlış” Horner’a sordu: Al Gore’un hatalı olduğunu göstermek için neyi Google’lamalıyım? Horner da buzul karotlarındaki CO2 ve ısı arasındaki gecikeyi dedi. Tabii hakikaten bunu Google ederseniz, ilk çıkan RealClimate’ın bu konuyu püskürtmesi oluyor. Teşekkürler!

3. Nature dergisinin yeni blog’u.

Nature dergisi “Iklim Geribeslemesi” (Climate Feedback) adlı yeni bir blog başlatmış. Tarifi şöyle: Iklim Geribeslemesi Nature Reports: Climate Change’un ev sahipliğini yapacağı yeni bir blog. Amacı, küresel ısınma gerçeğinin ve geniş çaplı anlamlının canlı ve bilimsel olarak tartışmasını kolaylaştırmaktır. Blogumuz, resmi olmayan bir forumda, iklim bilimleri hakkında dergilerimizde, haberlerde ve dünyada yayınlanan bilgilerin tartışılmasını sağlayacaktır.

Onlara başarılar diliyoruz, çünkü onlar da bize dilemişlerdi, ama ilk yorumları biraz karışıktı.

Thin Soup and a Thin Story Sulandırılmış Çorba ve Sulandırılmış bir HikâyeФертилизацията с желязо не е решение на СО2 проблема

by

A firm called planktos.com is getting a lot of airplay for their bid to create a carbon offset product based on fertilizing the ocean. In certain parts of the ocean, surface waters already contain most of the ingredients for a plankton bloom; all they lack is trace amounts of iron. For each 1 atom of iron added in such a place, phytoplankton take up 50,000 atoms of carbon. What could be better?
[Read more…] about Thin Soup and a Thin Story Sulandırılmış Çorba ve Sulandırılmış bir HikâyeФертилизацията с желязо не е решение на СО2 проблема

Beck to the future

by

Guest commentary from Georg Hoffmann

Our understanding of the natural carbon cycle has greatly improved since the times of Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927) and Guy Stewart Callendar (1898-1964). We know what the atmospheric background value of CO2 currently is (it passed 380ppm last year, about 100ppm over the pre-industrial level), we know the seasonal/diurnal cycle in different environments, we have been able to put reasonable constraints on terrestrial and marine sources and sinks, and finally we know the impact of fuel combustion both globally and locally in heavily polluted areas.
[Read more…] about Beck to the future

Full IPCC AR4 report now available

by

The complete WG1 IPCC 4th Assessment report (AR4) is now available online. It’s missing the index and some supplemental data, but all should be available by May 7.

Over the next few weeks we’ll try and go through the report chapter by chapter, but since this is likely to the key reference for a number of years, we can take a little time to do it properly. Happy reading!

The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)

by

When I give talks about climate change, the question that comes up most frequently is this: “Doesn’t the relationship between CO2 and temperature in the ice core record show that temperature drives CO2, not the other way round?”

On the face of it, it sounds like a reasonable question. It is no surprise that it comes up because it is one of the most popular claims made by the global warming deniers. It got a particularly high profile airing a couple of weeks ago, when congressman Joe Barton brought it up to try to discredit Al Gore’s congressional testimony. Barton said:

    In your movie, you display a timeline of temperature and compared to CO2 levels over a 600,000-year period as reconstructed from ice core samples. You indicate that this is conclusive proof of the link of increased CO2 emissions and global warming. A closer examination of these facts reveals something entirely different. I have an article from Science magazine which I will put into the record at the appropriate time that explains that historically, a rise in CO2 concentrations did not precede a rise in temperatures, but actually lagged temperature by 200 to 1,000 years. CO2 levels went up after the temperature rose. The temperature appears to drive CO2, not vice versa. On this point, Mr. Vice President, you’re not just off a little. You’re totally wrong.

Of course, those who’ve been paying attention will recognize that Gore is not wrong at all. This subject has been very well addressed in numerous places. Indeed, guest contributor Jeff Severinghaus addressed this in one of our very first RealClimate posts, way back in 2004. Still, the question does keep coming up, and Jeff recently received a letter asking about this. His exchange with the letter writer is reproduced in full at the end of this post. Below is my own take on the subject.

Una traduzione in italiano è disponibile qui
Una traducción en español está disponible aquí
[Read more…] about The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)

Hurricane Spin

by

Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt

A recent paper by Vecchi and Soden (preprint) published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters has been widely touted in the news (and some egregiously bad editorials), and the blogosphere as suggesting that increased vertical wind shear associated with tropical circulation changes may offset any tendencies for increased hurricane activity in the tropical Atlantic due to warming oceans. Some have even gone so far as to state that this study proves that recent trends in hurricane activity are part of a natural cycle. Most of this is just ‘spin’ (pun intended), but as usual, the real story is a little more nuanced.
[Read more…] about Hurricane Spin

Ocean Cooling. Not. Resfriamento Oceânico? Não. L’océan se refroidit. Pas.

by

A lot has been made of a paper (Lyman et al, 2006) that appeared last year that claimed that the oceans had, contrary to expectation, cooled over the period 2003-2005. At the time, we (correctly) pointed out that this result was going to be hard to reconcile with continued increases in sea level rise (driven in large part by thermal expansion effects), and that there may still be issues with way that the new ARGO floats were being incorporated into the ocean measurement network. Now it seems as if there is a problem in the data and in the latest analysis, the cooling has disappeared.
[Read more…] about Ocean Cooling. Not. Resfriamento Oceânico? Não. L’océan se refroidit. Pas.

Lindzen in Newsweek

by

Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann

As part of a much larger discussion on Learning to live with Global Warming in Newsweek recently, the editors gave some space for Richard Lindzen to give his standard ‘it’s no big deal’ opinion. While we disagree, we have no beef with serious discussions of the costs and benefits of various courses of action and on the need for adaption to the climate change that is already locked in.

However, Lindzen’s piece is not a serious discussion.
[Read more…] about Lindzen in Newsweek

Learning from a simple model

by

A lot of what gets discussed here in relation to the greenhouse effect is relatively simple, and yet can be confusing to the lay reader. A useful way of demonstrating that simplicity is to use a stripped down mathematical model that is complex enough to include some interesting physics, but simple enough so that you can just write down the answer. This is the staple of most textbooks on the subject, but there are questions that arise in discussions here that don’t ever get addressed in most textbooks. Yet simple models can be useful there too.

I’ll try and cover a few ‘greenhouse’ issues that come up in multiple contexts in the climate debate. Why does ‘radiative forcing’ work as method for comparing different physical impacts on the climate, and why you can’t calculate climate sensitivity just by looking at the surface energy budget. There will be mathematics, but hopefully it won’t be too painful.
[Read more…] about Learning from a simple model