Another Example of Why I Don't Trust Peer Review or CAGW In General

[ScienceRocks]

Umm, where do they get that snowpack is down in Western states? I LIVE in Colorado, and as of two weeks ago snowpack was 300% ABOVE the normal average. We have ski slopes that reopened and are planning to stay open until the 4th of July weekend, for gods sake. Things actually started warming up last week and now we're worrying about flooding.

It is the trend over a very long period of time. IT IS NOT ABOUT ONE YEAR!!!

 

[Old Rocks]

This is the relevant image from the paper. You can see that late 20th century reductions are almost unprecedented in the record, as the paper says.

Yes, and during the Holocene Maximum the snow levels would have been even less. Imagine that the worlds climate was 3 degree's C warmer and there was no CO2 driving the temp increase. It lasted for around 3,000 years. I wonder what could have caused that.

Well, Walleyes, perhaps you should ask a real scientist.

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/ccr/ottobli/pubs/Otto-Bliesner-JClimate-Paleo-19.pdf

Last Glacial Maximum and Holocene Climate in CCSM3

BETTE L. OTTO-BLIESNER AND ESTHER C. BRADY
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

GABRIEL CLAUZET
Department of Physical Oceanography, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

ROBERT TOMAS, SAMUEL LEVIS, AND ZAV KOTHAVALA

National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

(Manuscript received 23 January 2005, in final form 7 November 2005)

ABSTRACT
The climate sensitivity of the Community Climate System Model version 3 (CCSM3) is studied for two past climate forcings, the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) and the mid-Holocene. The LGM, approximately 21 000 yr ago, is a glacial period with large changes in the greenhouse gases, sea level, and ice sheets. The mid-Holocene, approximately 6000 yr ago, occurred during the current interglacial with primary changes in the seasonal solar irradiance. The LGM CCSM3 simulation has a global cooling of 4.5°C compared to preindustrial (PI) conditions with amplification of this cooling at high latitudes and over the continental ice sheets present at LGM. Tropical sea surface temperature (SST) cools by 1.7°C and tropical land temperature cools by 2.6°C on average. Simulations with the CCSM3 slab ocean model suggest that about half of the global cooling is explained by
the reduced LGM concentration of atmospheric CO2 (
50% of present-day concentrations). There is an increase in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current and Antarctic Bottom Water formation, and with increased ocean stratification, somewhat weaker and much shallower North Atlantic Deep Water. The mid-Holocene CCSM3 simulation has a global, annual cooling of less than 0.1°C compared to the PI simulation. Much larger and significant changes occur regionally and seasonally, including a more intense northern African
summer monsoon, reduced Arctic sea ice in all months, and weaker ENSO variability.

 

[Old Rocks]

What was your reaction to this post showing the Royal Meteorological Society's study proving that weather has not gotten more extreme?

The study does not disprove global warming or man's contribution to it. It simply presents evidence that the unusually serve weather we have been having is not that unusual.

One of the fundamental "tenets" of the AGW religion is that global warming will result in more powerful storms and in greater frequency. The Royal Society report refutes those claims. One other tenet was that with increased heat there would be no snow. Even in winter. One climate warming alarmist made the hilarious claim that "snow in winter will be a rare and wonderful event...our children won't know what snow is". Then when Mother Nature decided she had had enough of these idiots and slammed the UK with three record winters in a row the mantra changed to "well the increased warming is creating more water vapor and that is causing the snow". Entirely ignoring the fact that to get snow it has to first be cold.

Basically whatever the "weather event" of the moment happens to be it is global warmings fault. No matter if it is hot or cold, wet or dry. Day or night. It is all AGW's fault. In other words it is a non falsifiable hypothesis.


Here's the problem.....a hypothesis that is non fasifiable is by its very nature false.

Falsifiability - Karl Popper's Basic Scientific Principle

Falsifiability - Definition | WordIQ.com

No, that is not at all what that study says. It is simply that the storms and variability are still within the outlier region of natural varibility.

 

[Old Rocks]

And there was a significant pulse of GHGs during that period. CH4 from the massive Storegga landslide.

The Storegga Landslides: Catastrophic Underwater Natural Methane Explosions

The complex consists of three very large underwater landslides known to have taken place during the last 100,000 years. The landslides departed from the destabilized slope and “flowed” into the deep ocean crevasses below. The Second Storegga Slide was large enough to have caused a megatsunami around 7,100 years ago that triggered widespread coastal flooding in Scotland, Norway and other coastlines bordering the eastern North Atlantic and North Sea. (4) For example, at a number of localities near the eastern coast of Scotland is a sand deposit as deep as 25 feet above sea level that has been dated to about 7,000 years ago. One researcher in 1989 proposed that this sand is a megatsunami deposit resulting from the sediment displacement associated with the Second Storegga Slide. (5)

 

[westwall]

And there was a significant pulse of GHGs during that period. CH4 from the massive Storegga landslide.

The Storegga Landslides: Catastrophic Underwater Natural Methane Explosions

The complex consists of three very large underwater landslides known to have taken place during the last 100,000 years. The landslides departed from the destabilized slope and “flowed” into the deep ocean crevasses below. The Second Storegga Slide was large enough to have caused a megatsunami around 7,100 years ago that triggered widespread coastal flooding in Scotland, Norway and other coastlines bordering the eastern North Atlantic and North Sea. (4) For example, at a number of localities near the eastern coast of Scotland is a sand deposit as deep as 25 feet above sea level that has been dated to about 7,000 years ago. One researcher in 1989 proposed that this sand is a megatsunami deposit resulting from the sediment displacement associated with the Second Storegga Slide. (5)

Ahh yes the ever popular methane catastrophe fantasy. So sad for you the historical record refutes that pet theory of yours....


However, good news for you is they have retooled the methane bubble theory as an explanation for the Bermuda Triangle! How appropriate!

"A hot theory about how the Ice Age ended has got a frosty response at a meeting of the leading European and American geoscience societies in France.

A climatologist says the idea that bursts of methane from deep-sea reservoirs jolted the planet out of its chilly state does not match the geologic record.
This idea, popularly dubbed the "hydrate gun hypothesis", was first proposed a decade ago, but has gained momentum through the work of James Kennett, a paleo-oceanographer from the University of California - Santa Barbara."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Methane theory gets frosty response

Methane Hydrates

 

[Flopper]

What was your reaction to this post showing the Royal Meteorological Society's study proving that weather has not gotten more extreme?

The study does not disprove global warming or man's contribution to it. It simply presents evidence that the unusually serve weather we have been having is not that unusual.

One of the fundamental "tenets" of the AGW religion is that global warming will result in more powerful storms and in greater frequency. The Royal Society report refutes those claims. One other tenet was that with increased heat there would be no snow. Even in winter. One climate warming alarmist made the hilarious claim that "snow in winter will be a rare and wonderful event...our children won't know what snow is". Then when Mother Nature decided she had had enough of these idiots and slammed the UK with three record winters in a row the mantra changed to "well the increased warming is creating more water vapor and that is causing the snow". Entirely ignoring the fact that to get snow it has to first be cold.

Basically whatever the "weather event" of the moment happens to be it is global warmings fault. No matter if it is hot or cold, wet or dry. Day or night. It is all AGW's fault. In other words it is a non falsifiable hypothesis.


Here's the problem.....a hypothesis that is non fasifiable is by its very nature false.

Falsifiability - Karl Popper's Basic Scientific Principle

Falsifiability - Definition | WordIQ.com

There are people making all kinds of claims about global warming. Some backed by scientific research, some pure conjecture. As temperatures rise, there will be more intense storms. This study shows some evidence that it has not happened yet. That does not mean it's not going to happen or that global temperatures are not rising.

The facts are indisputable. Global temperatures are rising, glaciers are melting, and C02 content in the atmosphere is rising.

IMHO, it is unrealistic to expect that nations of the world will take the kind of actions need to seriously lower C02 content in the atmosphere. It's just not political or economically feasible. Scientist can not accurately predict what will occur nor when. Even if we drastically reduce the amount of C02, we don't know if the process can be reversed. In fact we don't know for sure it can be stopped at all. I think governments of the world will ignore scientists until they have indisputable proof. At that time, we be dealing with the results of global warming not the prevention.

 

[bripat9643]

Why would Republicans care what scientists would say. Didn't someone say, "eliminate the EPA" during the Republican debate last night?

The EPA doesn't have any scientists in its emply, only a gang of political hacks who masquerade as scientists. People who refuse to release their data are not scientists.

 

[westwall]

The study does not disprove global warming or man's contribution to it. It simply presents evidence that the unusually serve weather we have been having is not that unusual.

One of the fundamental "tenets" of the AGW religion is that global warming will result in more powerful storms and in greater frequency. The Royal Society report refutes those claims. One other tenet was that with increased heat there would be no snow. Even in winter. One climate warming alarmist made the hilarious claim that "snow in winter will be a rare and wonderful event...our children won't know what snow is". Then when Mother Nature decided she had had enough of these idiots and slammed the UK with three record winters in a row the mantra changed to "well the increased warming is creating more water vapor and that is causing the snow". Entirely ignoring the fact that to get snow it has to first be cold.

Basically whatever the "weather event" of the moment happens to be it is global warmings fault. No matter if it is hot or cold, wet or dry. Day or night. It is all AGW's fault. In other words it is a non falsifiable hypothesis.


Here's the problem.....a hypothesis that is non fasifiable is by its very nature false.

Falsifiability - Karl Popper's Basic Scientific Principle

Falsifiability - Definition | WordIQ.com

There are people making all kinds of claims about global warming. Some backed by scientific research, some pure conjecture. As temperatures rise, there will be more intense storms. This study shows some evidence that it has not happened yet. That does not mean it's not going to happen or that global temperatures are not rising.

The facts are indisputable. Global temperatures are rising, glaciers are melting, and C02 content in the atmosphere is rising.

IMHO, it is unrealistic to expect that nations of the world will take the kind of actions need to seriously lower C02 content in the atmosphere. It's just not political or economically feasible. Scientist can not accurately predict what will occur nor when. Even if we drastically reduce the amount of C02, we don't know if the process can be reversed. In fact we don't know for sure it can be stopped at all. I think governments of the world will ignore scientists until they have indisputable proof. At that time, we be dealing with the results of global warming not the prevention.

The evidence is the opposite. As the world warms the violence of storms decreases. We have a wonderful analog for this in the equatorial belt. It is very warm along the equator and there are constant mild rain storms. There is very little major storm activity in the equatorial tropics.

To get violent storms you need the interaction between warm and cold air masses.

As far as the rest, yes CO2 is going up but man only produces around 5% of the total CO2 budget and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is less then 1% of the total air mass. Glaciers are also advancing worldwide though the warmists won't admit to it. Global temperatures were rising from the end of the '70's up until 1998 and then they moderated and now it appears we are entering the next cooling phase that will last for the next 20 to 30 years. All part of the normal cycles of warming and cooling that have been going on since the world came out of the last ice age.


Thunderstorms develop in warm, moist air in advance of eastward-moving cold fronts. These thunderstorms often produce large hail, strong winds, and tornadoes. Tornadoes in the winter and early spring are often associated with strong, frontal systems that form in the Central States and move east. Occasionally, large outbreaks of tornadoes occur with this type of weather pattern. Several states may be affected by numerous severe thunderstorms and tornadoes.

During the spring in the Central Plains, thunderstorms frequently develop along a "dryline," which separates very warm, moist air to the east from hot, dry air to the west. Tornado-producing thunderstorms may form as the dryline moves east during the afternoon hours.

Along the front range of the Rocky Mountains, in the Texas panhandle, and in the southern High Plains, thunderstorms frequently form as air near the ground flows "upslope" toward higher terrain. If other favorable conditions exist, these thunderstorms can produce tornadoes.

Tornadoes occasionally accompany tropical storms and hurricanes that move over land. Tornadoes are most common to the right and ahead of the path of the storm center as it comes onshore.


Tornadoes....Nature's Most Violent Storms

 

[Old Rocks]

And there was a significant pulse of GHGs during that period. CH4 from the massive Storegga landslide.

The Storegga Landslides: Catastrophic Underwater Natural Methane Explosions

The complex consists of three very large underwater landslides known to have taken place during the last 100,000 years. The landslides departed from the destabilized slope and “flowed” into the deep ocean crevasses below. The Second Storegga Slide was large enough to have caused a megatsunami around 7,100 years ago that triggered widespread coastal flooding in Scotland, Norway and other coastlines bordering the eastern North Atlantic and North Sea. (4) For example, at a number of localities near the eastern coast of Scotland is a sand deposit as deep as 25 feet above sea level that has been dated to about 7,000 years ago. One researcher in 1989 proposed that this sand is a megatsunami deposit resulting from the sediment displacement associated with the Second Storegga Slide. (5)

Ahh yes the ever popular methane catastrophe fantasy. So sad for you the historical record refutes that pet theory of yours....


However, good news for you is they have retooled the methane bubble theory as an explanation for the Bermuda Triangle! How appropriate!

"A hot theory about how the Ice Age ended has got a frosty response at a meeting of the leading European and American geoscience societies in France.

A climatologist says the idea that bursts of methane from deep-sea reservoirs jolted the planet out of its chilly state does not match the geologic record.
This idea, popularly dubbed the "hydrate gun hypothesis", was first proposed a decade ago, but has gained momentum through the work of James Kennett, a paleo-oceanographer from the University of California - Santa Barbara."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Methane theory gets frosty response

Methane Hydrates

Getting more stupid every day, there, Walleyes. The Storegga Slide that was during the Holocene Warm Period was 7000 years ago, right in the midst of the period. And it contributed some GHGs to that period.

Your sites and post has nothing at all to do with the Mid Holocene Warm Period slide. That occured, the methane burp occurred, and both are well documented.

 

[elvis]

And there was a significant pulse of GHGs during that period. CH4 from the massive Storegga landslide.

The Storegga Landslides: Catastrophic Underwater Natural Methane Explosions

The complex consists of three very large underwater landslides known to have taken place during the last 100,000 years. The landslides departed from the destabilized slope and “flowed” into the deep ocean crevasses below. The Second Storegga Slide was large enough to have caused a megatsunami around 7,100 years ago that triggered widespread coastal flooding in Scotland, Norway and other coastlines bordering the eastern North Atlantic and North Sea. (4) For example, at a number of localities near the eastern coast of Scotland is a sand deposit as deep as 25 feet above sea level that has been dated to about 7,000 years ago. One researcher in 1989 proposed that this sand is a megatsunami deposit resulting from the sediment displacement associated with the Second Storegga Slide. (5)

Ahh yes the ever popular methane catastrophe fantasy. So sad for you the historical record refutes that pet theory of yours....


However, good news for you is they have retooled the methane bubble theory as an explanation for the Bermuda Triangle! How appropriate!

"A hot theory about how the Ice Age ended has got a frosty response at a meeting of the leading European and American geoscience societies in France.

A climatologist says the idea that bursts of methane from deep-sea reservoirs jolted the planet out of its chilly state does not match the geologic record.
This idea, popularly dubbed the "hydrate gun hypothesis", was first proposed a decade ago, but has gained momentum through the work of James Kennett, a paleo-oceanographer from the University of California - Santa Barbara."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Methane theory gets frosty response

Methane Hydrates

Getting more stupid every day, there, Walleyes. The Storegga Slide that was during the Holocene Warm Period was 7000 years ago, right in the midst of the period. And it contributed some GHGs to that period.

Your sites and post has nothing at all to do with the Mid Holocene Warm Period slide. That occured, the methane burp occurred, and both are well documented.

what were you saying earlier about insults?

 

[Old Rocks]

One of the fundamental "tenets" of the AGW religion is that global warming will result in more powerful storms and in greater frequency. The Royal Society report refutes those claims. One other tenet was that with increased heat there would be no snow. Even in winter. One climate warming alarmist made the hilarious claim that "snow in winter will be a rare and wonderful event...our children won't know what snow is". Then when Mother Nature decided she had had enough of these idiots and slammed the UK with three record winters in a row the mantra changed to "well the increased warming is creating more water vapor and that is causing the snow". Entirely ignoring the fact that to get snow it has to first be cold.

Basically whatever the "weather event" of the moment happens to be it is global warmings fault. No matter if it is hot or cold, wet or dry. Day or night. It is all AGW's fault. In other words it is a non falsifiable hypothesis.


Here's the problem.....a hypothesis that is non fasifiable is by its very nature false.

Falsifiability - Karl Popper's Basic Scientific Principle

Falsifiability - Definition | WordIQ.com

There are people making all kinds of claims about global warming. Some backed by scientific research, some pure conjecture. As temperatures rise, there will be more intense storms. This study shows some evidence that it has not happened yet. That does not mean it's not going to happen or that global temperatures are not rising.

The facts are indisputable. Global temperatures are rising, glaciers are melting, and C02 content in the atmosphere is rising.

IMHO, it is unrealistic to expect that nations of the world will take the kind of actions need to seriously lower C02 content in the atmosphere. It's just not political or economically feasible. Scientist can not accurately predict what will occur nor when. Even if we drastically reduce the amount of C02, we don't know if the process can be reversed. In fact we don't know for sure it can be stopped at all. I think governments of the world will ignore scientists until they have indisputable proof. At that time, we be dealing with the results of global warming not the prevention.

The evidence is the opposite. As the world warms the violence of storms decreases. We have a wonderful analog for this in the equatorial belt. It is very warm along the equator and there are constant mild rain storms. There is very little major storm activity in the equatorial tropics.

To get violent storms you need the interaction between warm and cold air masses.

As far as the rest, yes CO2 is going up but man only produces around 5% of the total CO2 budget and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is less then 1% of the total air mass. Glaciers are also advancing worldwide though the warmists won't admit to it. Global temperatures were rising from the end of the '70's up until 1998 and then they moderated and now it appears we are entering the next cooling phase that will last for the next 20 to 30 years. All part of the normal cycles of warming and cooling that have been going on since the world came out of the last ice age.


Thunderstorms develop in warm, moist air in advance of eastward-moving cold fronts. These thunderstorms often produce large hail, strong winds, and tornadoes. Tornadoes in the winter and early spring are often associated with strong, frontal systems that form in the Central States and move east. Occasionally, large outbreaks of tornadoes occur with this type of weather pattern. Several states may be affected by numerous severe thunderstorms and tornadoes.

During the spring in the Central Plains, thunderstorms frequently develop along a "dryline," which separates very warm, moist air to the east from hot, dry air to the west. Tornado-producing thunderstorms may form as the dryline moves east during the afternoon hours.

Along the front range of the Rocky Mountains, in the Texas panhandle, and in the southern High Plains, thunderstorms frequently form as air near the ground flows "upslope" toward higher terrain. If other favorable conditions exist, these thunderstorms can produce tornadoes.

Tornadoes occasionally accompany tropical storms and hurricanes that move over land. Tornadoes are most common to the right and ahead of the path of the storm center as it comes onshore.


Tornadoes....Nature's Most Violent Storms

LOL!!!!!!!

First There ain't no fuckin' global warming

Second OK, so it is warming, but we have nothing to do with it

Third OK, so we are affecting the temperature, but it is going to be good for you

Fourth Oh shit!! Why didn't those damned scientists tell us this was going to happen?

In prior periods of very rapid warming there is evidence of extreme changes in precipition. See the Karoo Formation in South Africa for the P-T event.


The Permian-Triassic Boundary

 

[westwall]

Ahh yes the ever popular methane catastrophe fantasy. So sad for you the historical record refutes that pet theory of yours....


However, good news for you is they have retooled the methane bubble theory as an explanation for the Bermuda Triangle! How appropriate!

"A hot theory about how the Ice Age ended has got a frosty response at a meeting of the leading European and American geoscience societies in France.

A climatologist says the idea that bursts of methane from deep-sea reservoirs jolted the planet out of its chilly state does not match the geologic record.
This idea, popularly dubbed the "hydrate gun hypothesis", was first proposed a decade ago, but has gained momentum through the work of James Kennett, a paleo-oceanographer from the University of California - Santa Barbara."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Methane theory gets frosty response

Methane Hydrates

Getting more stupid every day, there, Walleyes. The Storegga Slide that was during the Holocene Warm Period was 7000 years ago, right in the midst of the period. And it contributed some GHGs to that period.

Your sites and post has nothing at all to do with the Mid Holocene Warm Period slide. That occured, the methane burp occurred, and both are well documented.

what were you saying earlier about insults?

He operates on a double standard. Kind of like a weiner we all know.

 

[westwall]

There are people making all kinds of claims about global warming. Some backed by scientific research, some pure conjecture. As temperatures rise, there will be more intense storms. This study shows some evidence that it has not happened yet. That does not mean it's not going to happen or that global temperatures are not rising.

The facts are indisputable. Global temperatures are rising, glaciers are melting, and C02 content in the atmosphere is rising.

IMHO, it is unrealistic to expect that nations of the world will take the kind of actions need to seriously lower C02 content in the atmosphere. It's just not political or economically feasible. Scientist can not accurately predict what will occur nor when. Even if we drastically reduce the amount of C02, we don't know if the process can be reversed. In fact we don't know for sure it can be stopped at all. I think governments of the world will ignore scientists until they have indisputable proof. At that time, we be dealing with the results of global warming not the prevention.

The evidence is the opposite. As the world warms the violence of storms decreases. We have a wonderful analog for this in the equatorial belt. It is very warm along the equator and there are constant mild rain storms. There is very little major storm activity in the equatorial tropics.

To get violent storms you need the interaction between warm and cold air masses.

As far as the rest, yes CO2 is going up but man only produces around 5% of the total CO2 budget and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is less then 1% of the total air mass. Glaciers are also advancing worldwide though the warmists won't admit to it. Global temperatures were rising from the end of the '70's up until 1998 and then they moderated and now it appears we are entering the next cooling phase that will last for the next 20 to 30 years. All part of the normal cycles of warming and cooling that have been going on since the world came out of the last ice age.


Thunderstorms develop in warm, moist air in advance of eastward-moving cold fronts. These thunderstorms often produce large hail, strong winds, and tornadoes. Tornadoes in the winter and early spring are often associated with strong, frontal systems that form in the Central States and move east. Occasionally, large outbreaks of tornadoes occur with this type of weather pattern. Several states may be affected by numerous severe thunderstorms and tornadoes.

During the spring in the Central Plains, thunderstorms frequently develop along a "dryline," which separates very warm, moist air to the east from hot, dry air to the west. Tornado-producing thunderstorms may form as the dryline moves east during the afternoon hours.

Along the front range of the Rocky Mountains, in the Texas panhandle, and in the southern High Plains, thunderstorms frequently form as air near the ground flows "upslope" toward higher terrain. If other favorable conditions exist, these thunderstorms can produce tornadoes.

Tornadoes occasionally accompany tropical storms and hurricanes that move over land. Tornadoes are most common to the right and ahead of the path of the storm center as it comes onshore.


Tornadoes....Nature's Most Violent Storms

LOL!!!!!!!

First There ain't no fuckin' global warming

Second OK, so it is warming, but we have nothing to do with it

Third OK, so we are affecting the temperature, but it is going to be good for you

Fourth Oh shit!! Why didn't those damned scientists tell us this was going to happen?

In prior periods of very rapid warming there is evidence of extreme changes in precipition. See the Karoo Formation in South Africa for the P-T event.


The Permian-Triassic Boundary

Point to a single post where I have claimed there is no warming. I dare you.