Climate Models and Evaporation

[IanC]

An article over at WUWT is discussing the evaporation rates on the oceans and whether or not climate model assumptions are even in the ballpark with real world data. Apparently not.

I am not saying these guys have it right but this is yet another area where 'settled science' is claiming one version and the data is saying something different. The water cycle is by far the largest factor in our climate and small variations in the assumed magnitudes make large differences that swamp the tiny CO2 effect.

 

[Abraham3]

But the short life span of water in the atmosphere compared to the long lifespan of CO2 makes an enormous difference.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But the short life span of water in the atmosphere compared to the long lifespan of CO2 makes an enormous difference.

...and that's why you're able to isolate all variables except for a wisp of CO2 and get an accurate correlation between CO2 and temperature in a laboratory setting.

 

[percysunshine]

An article over at WUWT is discussing the evaporation rates on the oceans and whether or not climate model assumptions are even in the ballpark with real world data. Apparently not.

I am not saying these guys have it right but this is yet another area where 'settled science' is claiming one version and the data is saying something different. The water cycle is by far the largest factor in our climate and small variations in the assumed magnitudes make large differences that swamp the tiny CO2 effect.

All I need is a different tree in Siberia, and the model will work.

Trust me.

 

[westwall]

But the short life span of water in the atmosphere compared to the long lifespan of CO2 makes an enormous difference.

That would be true if the water vapor weren't continuously replaced. The fact that it is makes your claim specious.

 

[IanC]

Major Errors Apparent in Climate Model Evaporation Estimates | Watts Up With That?

The physics of evaporation has complications related to what happens at the water / air interface such as wind speed and wave action. However if these factors remain constant, how evaporation changes with temperature and humidity can be estimated with well-known equations based on how water vapor pressure varies with temperature. For example, at a typical ocean temperature of 17 C, it should increase about 6.5% / C if the water vapor increases to maintain relative humidity, that the climate models indicate. If the surface air tracks the water within ± 2 C, the rate varies from 6.2% to 6.9% / C. Data over oceans by Wentz et, al (2007) report values of about 6% / C.

But the complex computer climate models show averages of only about 2.5% / C. There are no claims of reduced wind speeds or wave action or increased relative humidity to explain this. However many papers on the subject claim that the available energy is limiting evaporation in these models. But physics theory tells us that the latent energy for evaporation comes from the temperature of the water itself. The latent heat leaving the surface cools it and deposits heat in the atmosphere, part of which escapes to outer space. This combination causes negative feedback. The reduced net energy from increased CO2 still warms the surface, but this energy can’t be separated from what aids the final increased evaporation. A 6% / C increase applies to the water after the negative feedback is complete. Do the climate models ignore this cooling and feedback process?

it is interesting to note that the skin of water at the ocean/atmosphere boundary is always cooler than the water just beneath it, because of the evaporation process.

 

[IanC]

But the short life span of water in the atmosphere compared to the long lifespan of CO2 makes an enormous difference.

Frank makes a good point. CO2 has less fluctuations and a widespread tiny effect everywhere, making it easy to model. the water cycle causes large changes but on a short time scale and in small localities, making it next to impossible to model under the grid system.

the Earth is like a room that is heated 12 hours a day with an air conditioner that runs off the heater at a rate dependent on the available energy. CO2 is like a light on a dimmer switch. it makes a slight difference in when the AC turns on but has little effect on the temperature.

solar input warms the ocean, causing evaporation which cools the ocean via latent heat, humid air is lighter so convection ensues lifting the latent heat above the GHG bottleneck at the boundary, lapse rate cools the water vapour which forms clouds which shade the surface from solar input. a neat and tidy system which not only controls the amount of solar input but also carries away heat to a point in the atmosphere where it can more easily escape.

the models assume a 2.5% increase in evaporation per 1C temperature increase. data implies a 6%plus increase. I dont presume to know the actual amount but I see it as yet another assumption made by the climate modellers that is disputed by a large amount. and yet we are told it is settled science and mankind is 99% certain of being at least 90% at fault. I am not saying that climate science is a total fabrication but I am saying that the possible error range is huge and therefore the certainty that they claim is wildly, spectacularly exaggerated. and the conclusions that they draw from modelled predictions are even more exaggerated and less likely to be a realistic possibility.

 

[Abraham3]

I was halfway through when I ran into "Humid air is lighter". Want to rethink that one?

 

[IanC]

I was halfway through when I ran into "Humid air is lighter". Want to rethink that one?

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

you really are just a poser then? you have no concept of how things work?

 

[IanC]

I was halfway through when I ran into "Humid air is lighter". Want to rethink that one?

how did you get out of grade school science? have you never wondered how a barometer works for predicting the weather? what do you think powers the water cycle? giant water magnets in the sky?

 

[skookerasbil]

Great thread Ian......and yes, climate model assumptions are just that: ASSumptions. They are consistently inaccurate, yet the climate nutters take them for gospel. Youd think that theyd seen enough hurricane tracks via computer models to realize that its akin to a fucking game of darts thrown by a 4 year old.

 

[skookerasbil]

HURRICANE FAY MODEL






DUH


Who cant laugh at these poor AGW fuckers so duped and obsessed by this computer model BS......the centerpiece of the ruse!!! Hysterical shit.......

 

[IanC]

HURRICANE FAY MODEL






DUH


Who cant laugh at these poor AGW fuckers so duped and obsessed by this computer model BS......the centerpiece of the ruse!!! Hysterical shit.......

HAHA too funny!

but if even one of those tracks was kinda, sorta similar if you squinted your eyes just right.......the models are skillful!!!

 

[jc456]

I was halfway through when I ran into "Humid air is lighter". Want to rethink that one?

So I suppose with this comment you think wet air is heavier. That is a laugh. Do you ever watch baseball? Is it easier to hit a baseball for a home run in dry air or humid?
Maybe you should use the internet for the answer.

 

[westwall]

I was halfway through when I ran into "Humid air is lighter". Want to rethink that one?

how did you get out of grade school science? have you never wondered how a barometer works for predicting the weather? what do you think powers the water cycle? giant water magnets in the sky?

No Ian, c'mon...he's a "ocean engineer" It's all whale farts...every bit of it.!

 

[westwall]

I was halfway through when I ran into "Humid air is lighter". Want to rethink that one?

So I suppose with this comment you think wet air is heavier. That is a laugh. Do you ever watch baseball? Is it easier to hit a baseball for a home run in dry air or humid?
Maybe you should use the internet for the answer.

Yet another in an ever increasing line of idiocy posted by these nimrods. They know so little about the Earth and how it functions that it is frightening.

 

[Kosh]

But the short life span of water in the atmosphere compared to the long lifespan of CO2 makes an enormous difference.

Do you have a link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 controls climate?

 

[skookerasbil]

HURRICANE FAY MODEL






DUH


Who cant laugh at these poor AGW fuckers so duped and obsessed by this computer model BS......the centerpiece of the ruse!!! Hysterical shit.......

HAHA too funny!

but if even one of those tracks was kinda, sorta similar if you squinted your eyes just right.......the models are skillful!!!

LMOA.....indeed......but for the k00ks, if you're only 1,000 miles off with your computer model, that's ballpark enough to claim high degree of reliability!!


These people are mental cases.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

HURRICANE FAY MODEL






DUH


Who cant laugh at these poor AGW fuckers so duped and obsessed by this computer model BS......the centerpiece of the ruse!!! Hysterical shit.......

Omg! They nailed it!

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

 

[Abraham3]

HURRICANE FAY MODEL






DUH


Who cant laugh at these poor AGW fuckers so duped and obsessed by this computer model BS......the centerpiece of the ruse!!! Hysterical shit.......

HAHA too funny!

but if even one of those tracks was kinda, sorta similar if you squinted your eyes just right.......the models are skillful!!!

LMOA.....indeed......but for the k00ks, if you're only 1,000 miles off with your computer model, that's ballpark enough to claim high degree of reliability!!


These people are mental cases.

NHC Forecast Verification Procedures
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/verification/verify2.shtml

Official five-year mean errors and distributions
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/verification/verify4.shtml?

While you're "laughing at these fuckers" and "mental cases", they're working their asses off saving thousands of lives and billions of our dollars. You people really are a special class of assholes.