|
Post by mondeoman on Mar 3, 2019 20:22:04 GMT
What is this "energy at the top of the atmosphere" of which you speak? Just how much energy is there at the top of the atmosphere?
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Mar 4, 2019 1:44:42 GMT
What is this "energy at the top of the atmosphere" of which you speak? Just how much energy is there at the top of the atmosphere? Just a little less than is needed to create the "perfect melt storm" Mr. Wolf so often predicts, but just never seems to happen.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 4, 2019 2:32:47 GMT
What is this "energy at the top of the atmosphere" of which you speak? Just how much energy is there at the top of the atmosphere? Just a little less than is needed to create the "perfect melt storm" Mr. Wolf so often predicts, but just never seems to happen. Somewhere over the rainbow. But the blue birds are still looking. Minus Dorothy you ODed on drugs and alcohol.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 4, 2019 11:52:58 GMT
What is this "energy at the top of the atmosphere" of which you speak? Just how much energy is there at the top of the atmosphere? I think that this post solarcycle24com.proboards.com/post/144748 by MoBoy gives a lot of indication of energy that is at the TOA and in the various belts above and below. Get a coffee and listen to what the Climate Science community do not want you to know.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 4, 2019 21:45:38 GMT
Northern Norway temperatures. Shucks..........I will figure out how to post them. Later.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 4, 2019 21:46:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 4, 2019 23:27:24 GMT
Mann ohh Mann! Ya don't see a slope like that every day.
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Mar 5, 2019 0:56:50 GMT
There’s some obvious details there that demonstrate dramatic CO2 increases before the Industrial Age.🙄
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 5, 2019 5:50:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 5, 2019 11:17:35 GMT
Two points: - We are at the cold end of the Holocene with a series of reducing 'optima' around 1000 years or so apart
- The CO2 levels from ice cores look very much like what one would expect from the diffusion of CO2 out of the bubbles and through the ice when under extreme pressure. This is why recent values are so much higher and why the values should not be trusted.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 5, 2019 11:40:17 GMT
[ Snip ]Two points: - We are at the cold end of the Holocene with a series of reducing 'optima' around 1000 years or so apart
- The CO2 levels from ice cores look very much like what one would expect from the diffusion of CO2 out of the bubbles and through the ice when under extreme pressure. This is why recent values are so much higher and why the values should not be trusted.
Problem is, we here are the 3%.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 5, 2019 11:54:03 GMT
When I last spoke with the Guy's down in McMurdo the conversation lead to their lead 'orbital forcings' chappie back in the U.S. and his thinking on both the present orbital forcings and the future prospects for the impacts of our warming on Orbital forcings for cooling.
He informed me that the far north had been under cooling forcings ( still are) for the current orbital forcing.
This has lead to a 1c drop in temps across the far north over the past 1,000 yrs. This cooling has been see to halt and then warm since the end of the 1800's
The region is now one of the fastest warming on the planet.
If the forcing that had seen 1,000 yrs of cooling is still in place what has cause the stop in cooling and then promoted such fierce warming?
As for 'energy at the top of the atmosphere' I thought everybody was aware that we took measures of the incoming solar both, as it arrives at the top of our atmosphere and also how much of that energy reaches the surface?
We also use another measure to find out how much energy is hitting the surface and this measure helped us recognise just how much global dimming can impact the energy we end up seeing at the surface. This is known as 'pan evaporation rate' and is just that. how much fluid evaporates from a container over a set period of time.
I'm sure the pan evap rates under what was once badly blighted by China and the dirty coal it used to fast track the nation into becoming a modern Industrialised Nation, are now increasing rapidly as that pall clears and the sulphates/particulates drop out?
With the Pacific side of the Arctic currently the one seeing changes to ice cover ever earlier in the year then the prospects of warmer Pacific waters entering into the basin merely increases the melt potential of the summer?
|
|
|
Post by fatjohn1408 on Mar 5, 2019 12:07:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 5, 2019 13:02:34 GMT
When I last spoke with the Guy's down in McMurdo the conversation lead to their lead 'orbital forcings' chappie back in the U.S. and his thinking on both the present orbital forcings and the future prospects for the impacts of our warming on Orbital forcings for cooling. He informed me that the far north had been under cooling forcings ( still are) for the current orbital forcing. This has lead to a 1c drop in temps across the far north over the past 1,000 yrs. This cooling has been see to halt and then warm since the end of the 1800's The region is now one of the fastest warming on the planet. If the forcing that had seen 1,000 yrs of cooling is still in place what has cause the stop in cooling and then promoted such fierce warming? As for 'energy at the top of the atmosphere' I thought everybody was aware that we took measures of the incoming solar both, as it arrives at the top of our atmosphere and also how much of that energy reaches the surface?We also use another measure to find out how much energy is hitting the surface and this measure helped us recognise just how much global dimming can impact the energy we end up seeing at the surface. This is known as 'pan evaporation rate' and is just that. how much fluid evaporates from a container over a set period of time. I'm sure the pan evap rates under what was once badly blighted by China and the dirty coal it used to fast track the nation into becoming a modern Industrialised Nation, are now increasing rapidly as that pall clears and the sulphates/particulates drop out? With the Pacific side of the Arctic currently the one seeing changes to ice cover ever earlier in the year then the prospects of warmer Pacific waters entering into the basin merely increases the melt potential of the summer? The point about energy at the top of the atmosphere or anywhere is that it includes magnetic and electrical energy as well as the impact (literally) of the particles in the solar wind. Pointing at TSI and saying we measure it on the way in and out, misses these significant energy sources. Any changes due to these energy sources are then put on the 'anthropogenic' side of the equation as non-natural forcings which is not correct. As to the Arctic warming at a huge pace that does not seem to be borne out by the DMI recordings albeit they are a little scarce for back a 1000 years but then I am not aware of any accurate (+/-5C) measures of Arctic temperatures much before 1850. I am certain someone somewhere will have invented some but they need to be honest about their provenance. Go to the page for the graphic and you can go back as far as they produced it and the top temperature of the arctic and average low temperatures seem to be very consistent.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 5, 2019 13:15:55 GMT
When I last spoke with the Guy's down in McMurdo the conversation lead to their lead 'orbital forcings' chappie back in the U.S. and his thinking on both the present orbital forcings and the future prospects for the impacts of our warming on Orbital forcings for cooling. He informed me that the far north had been under cooling forcings ( still are) for the current orbital forcing. This has lead to a 1c drop in temps across the far north over the past 1,000 yrs. This cooling has been see to halt and then warm since the end of the 1800's The region is now one of the fastest warming on the planet. If the forcing that had seen 1,000 yrs of cooling is still in place what has cause the stop in cooling and then promoted such fierce warming? As for 'energy at the top of the atmosphere' I thought everybody was aware that we took measures of the incoming solar both, as it arrives at the top of our atmosphere and also how much of that energy reaches the surface? We also use another measure to find out how much energy is hitting the surface and this measure helped us recognise just how much global dimming can impact the energy we end up seeing at the surface. This is known as 'pan evaporation rate' and is just that. how much fluid evaporates from a container over a set period of time. I'm sure the pan evap rates under what was once badly blighted by China and the dirty coal it used to fast track the nation into becoming a modern Industrialised Nation, are now increasing rapidly as that pall clears and the sulphates/particulates drop out? With the Pacific side of the Arctic currently the one seeing changes to ice cover ever earlier in the year then the prospects of warmer Pacific waters entering into the basin merely increases the melt potential of the summer? Has China stopped burning coal these days or is it now 'clean' coal devoid of sulphates and particulates? Global dimming surely requires more of the evil CO2 molecule to compensate. PS: I read a journal some years back which postulated that an ice free Arctic is usually the precursor of a new ice age.
|
|