Re: Top meteoroligist talks sense on GW scare stories
- From: Alastair <al@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:48:29 -0800
On 6 Nov, 16:41, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 6, 11:02 am, Alastair <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5 Nov, 18:57, lawrenc...@xxxxxxx wrote:
Why Joe even takes a swipe at James Hansens for relying on his models
and getting it wrong.
"The widely accepted idea, based on climate modeling, that man-made
global warming will accelerate itself (positive feedback) by creating
more heat trapping clouds, such as cirrus is being challenged by a new
study from the University of Alabama at Huntsville, which showed that
individual tropical warming cycles, based on 30 to 60 day tropical
temperature fluctuation data saw a decrease in coverage of heat
trapping cirrus clouds (a strong negative feedback). As the tropical
atmosphere warms, cirrus clouds decrease, which allows more infrared
heat to escape from the atmosphere to outer space."
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/
That's a coincidence. James Lovelock criticised the IPCC too. See:
the Realtime webcast athttp://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/event.asp?id=7142
Hi Al, glad to see you haven't given up on us. (Me and them that is.)
Let's get this straight, certain experts believed that a storm would
increase the overall warming effect from all the cloud they produced
and now some chimp or other has shaken their cages and woke some of
the buggers up. Is that right?
How the feck did they get to believe that the heat direction of a
cyclone would not send things scurrying "up above the north star"?
Dear god have mercy on us for we are but pots of clay.
Thanks for alerting me to that paper. It is very interesting :-)
There is a fuller report of the paper http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2007GL029698.shtml
in Science Daily at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071102152636.htm
Spencer is not discussing events as short as storms. He is saying that
seasonal warming in tropical weather result in abrupt cooling due to a
loss of cirrus cloud. He concludes that the decadal warming due to the
increase in CO2 concentration will have the same effect.
This is an echo of Lindzen's Iris theory, but that did not seem to
operate during the last interglacial 100,000 years ago when hippo's
frolicked in the Thames. That is not something they could have done
during this interglacial with the Thames frozen over during the
"Little Ice Age". Spencer is correct that the climate models are
wrong. However, the modellers are underestimating the warming (cf
Arctic sea ice), not overestimating it as Spencer, Christy, Lindzen,
etc. wishfully believe :-(
.
- References:
- Top meteoroligist talks sense on GW scare stories
- From: lawrence13
- Re: Top meteoroligist talks sense on GW scare stories
- From: Alastair
- Re: Top meteoroligist talks sense on GW scare stories
- From: Weatherlawyer
- Top meteoroligist talks sense on GW scare stories
- Prev by Date: Re: BBC email
- Next by Date: Re: Thursday's storm in Scotland and after..?
- Previous by thread: Re: Top meteoroligist talks sense on GW scare stories
- Next by thread: Re: Wokingham 5Nov07
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|