|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 31, 2019 16:55:30 GMT
www.nature.com/articles/nature16494The past rapid growth of Northern Hemisphere continental ice sheets, which terminated warm and stable climate periods, is generally attributed to reduced summer insolation in boreal latitudes1,2,3. Yet such summer insolation is near to its minimum at present4, and there are no signs of a new ice age5. This challenges our understanding of the mechanisms driving glacial cycles and our ability to predict the next glacial inception6. Here we propose a critical functional relationship between boreal summer insolation and global carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration, which explains the beginning of the past eight glacial cycles and might anticipate future periods of glacial inception. Using an ensemble of simulations generated by an Earth system model of intermediate complexity constrained by palaeoclimatic data, we suggest that glacial inception was narrowly missed before the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. The missed inception can be accounted for by the combined effect of relatively high late-Holocene CO2 concentrations and the low orbital eccentricity of the Earth7. Additionally, our analysis suggests that even in the absence of human perturbations no substantial build-up of ice sheets would occur within the next several thousand years and that the current interglacial would probably last for another 50,000 years.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 1, 2019 1:56:49 GMT
www.nature.com/articles/nature16494The past rapid growth of Northern Hemisphere continental ice sheets, which terminated warm and stable climate periods, is generally attributed to reduced summer insolation in boreal latitudes1,2,3. Yet such summer insolation is near to its minimum at present4, and there are no signs of a new ice age5. This challenges our understanding of the mechanisms driving glacial cycles and our ability to predict the next glacial inception6. Here we propose a critical functional relationship between boreal summer insolation and global carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration, which explains the beginning of the past eight glacial cycles and might anticipate future periods of glacial inception. Using an ensemble of simulations generated by an Earth system model of intermediate complexity constrained by palaeoclimatic data, we suggest that glacial inception was narrowly missed before the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. The missed inception can be accounted for by the combined effect of relatively high late-Holocene CO2 concentrations and the low orbital eccentricity of the Earth7. Additionally, our analysis suggests that even in the absence of human perturbations no substantial build-up of ice sheets would occur within the next several thousand years and that the current interglacial would probably last for another 50,000 years. I think that this should be subtitled do not speak too soon. Chiefio has already pointed out that we are very close to the edge. What these studies fail to do is take into account the smoothing of the sampling rate of the past climate values compared to the rate now.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 1, 2019 2:34:29 GMT
I humbly disagree with Chiefio. WE have mimicked MIS-11 from the get go. No one can figure out why it lasted 44,000+ years as an interglacial. Now is when I wish I knew more about that Baycenter thing.
There is a reason MIS-11 lasted, and was cooler while doing so. Can't find a valid explanation to date.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Apr 1, 2019 2:59:16 GMT
is generally attributed to reduced summer insolation in boreal latitudes1,2,3. How, exactly, does the earth get "reduced" solar energy in just some latitudes during summer months? Additionally, our analysis suggests that even in the absence of human perturbations no substantial build-up of ice sheets would occur within the next several thousand years and that the current interglacial would probably last for another 50,000 years. I suppose I could make equally sincere projections so far out that no one's great grandchildren will be alive to verify them.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Apr 1, 2019 3:03:54 GMT
What these studies fail to do is take into account the smoothing of the sampling rate of the past climate values compared to the rate now. There are Climate values? What are they? What does a Climate value look like? Is it an integer? Could you post those values here in this thread? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Apr 1, 2019 3:15:29 GMT
www.nature.com/articles/nature16494The past rapid growth of Northern Hemisphere continental ice sheets, which terminated warm and stable climate periods, is generally attributed to reduced summer insolation in boreal latitudes1,2,3. Yet such summer insolation is near to its minimum at present4, and there are no signs of a new ice age5. This challenges our understanding of the mechanisms driving glacial cycles and our ability to predict the next glacial inception6. Here we propose a critical functional relationship between boreal summer insolation and global carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration, which explains the beginning of the past eight glacial cycles and might anticipate future periods of glacial inception. Using an ensemble of simulations generated by an Earth system model of intermediate complexity constrained by palaeoclimatic data, we suggest that glacial inception was narrowly missed before the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. The missed inception can be accounted for by the combined effect of relatively high late-Holocene CO2 concentrations and the low orbital eccentricity of the Earth7. Additionally, our analysis suggests that even in the absence of human perturbations no substantial build-up of ice sheets would occur within the next several thousand years and that the current interglacial would probably last for another 50,000 years. Sadly, the authors A. Ganopolski, R. Winkelmann & H. J. Schellnhuber make no effort to avoid violating Stefan-Boltzmann. This entire article is gibber-babble. It's just not possible.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 1, 2019 4:50:57 GMT
Take a course in radiative physics. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 3, 2019 15:41:10 GMT
"Canada’s CBC here recently cited “a leaked report” which claimed Canada is “warming at twice the global rate.” According to the “leaked report”, Canada’s annual average temperature over land has warmed 1.7 C when looking at the data since 1948. But that claim is misleading when recent data is considered. Over the past 25 years, since scientists began to warn that the planet was warming in earnest, there has not been any warming when one looks at the untampered data provided by the Japan meteorology Agency (JMA) that were measured by 9 different stations across Canada."notrickszone.com/2019/04/03/cbc-claims-canada-warming-twice-as-fast-as-globe-yet-data-tell-a-different-story-no-warming-in-25-years/
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 3, 2019 15:55:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 6, 2019 9:13:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 6, 2019 13:40:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Apr 6, 2019 13:54:46 GMT
The nature of curve fitting provides "climate scientists" plenty of latitude to predict almost anything they want to.
If the designer has guile in his heart, the model will not be predictive, it will be worthless.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Apr 6, 2019 14:50:13 GMT
"Climate" is not NASA's job. NASA doesn't have any "Climate" models. The underlying premise is a joke being played on the gullible.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 6, 2019 16:37:12 GMT
The nature of curve fitting provides "climate scientists" plenty of latitude to predict almost anything they want to. If the designer has guile in his heart, the model will not be predictive, it will be worthless. Not true. The aim of the NASA climate models is to support the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, it is not to model how the atmosphere works. In this respect the awful impenetrable undocumented code is useful as no 'real' programmer would want to try to support it. Howoever, it generates the ' we are all going to die in 12 years' warming figures needed to ensure funding continues. I would not be at all surprised to find that the overall effect of a lot of the code written is the same as several hundred thousand 'No Op's. But they mask the process of taking the parameters input and converting them into 'you are all going to die in 12 years' values as output. That is all NASA GISS wants.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 6, 2019 20:34:47 GMT
I would have to read all the papers to see if NOtricks is false. Snopes is like SS, in that it likes to present an argument that really isn't there as gospel fact.
I will send a temperature chart taken from Canadian temperature data that clearly shows Canada is not experiencing a sudden heat wave.
|
|