Post by magellan on Mar 7, 2009 0:35:24 GMT
As many may recall, I've been very critical of Hansen et al 2005, which IPCC derives much of their conclusions from.
Remember, OHC is the "smoking gun" for AGW.
OHC is the telltale, or at least the best we have to monitor global warming, not surface temperatures. My argument has been the two premises Hansen claims are false.
a) Hansen's main conclusion
and b) there is .6C "in the pipeline", a main tenet of alarmists
On point a, observational data are self-evident; Earth is not absorbing .85 W/m2 more than it is emitting to space.
On point b, a new paper just published says there is no heat "in the pipeline".
climatesci.org/2009/03/05/is-there-climate-heating-in-the-pipeline/
Now we have three metrics to conclude warming is over; no increase in OHC, no extra stored heat waiting to rear its ugly head, and no atmospheric warming.
In case nobody has heard, Met O prepared the warmer masses for a long period of "non-warming", posted in this forum. Now cracks are forming at NOAA with their latest:
climatesci.org/2009/03/06/ness-report-on-the-lack-of-recent-global-warming/
The tea leaves have been read.
Remember, OHC is the "smoking gun" for AGW.
OHC is the telltale, or at least the best we have to monitor global warming, not surface temperatures. My argument has been the two premises Hansen claims are false.
a) Hansen's main conclusion
Earth is now absorbing 0.85 +/- 0.15 watts per square meter more energy from the Sun than it is emitting to space.
and b) there is .6C "in the pipeline", a main tenet of alarmists
The observed 1880 to 2003 global warming is 0.6- to 0.7-C (11, 22), which is the full response to nearly 1 W/m2 of forcing. Of the 1.8 W/m2 forcing, 0.85 W/m2 remains, i.e., additional global warming of 0.85 0.67 È 0.6-C is ‘‘in the pipeline’’ and will occur in the future even if atmospheric composition and other climate forcings remain fixed at today’s values(3, 4, 23) .
On point a, observational data are self-evident; Earth is not absorbing .85 W/m2 more than it is emitting to space.
On point b, a new paper just published says there is no heat "in the pipeline".
climatesci.org/2009/03/05/is-there-climate-heating-in-the-pipeline/
Thus, there is no “warming in the pipeline” using the author’s terminology, nor any heating within the atmosphere! Perhaps the heating that was observed prior to 2003 will begin again, however, it is scientifically incorrect to report that there is any heat that has not yet been realized within the climate system.
The answer to the question posted in this weblog “Is There Climate Heating In “The Pipeline”? is NO.
Now we have three metrics to conclude warming is over; no increase in OHC, no extra stored heat waiting to rear its ugly head, and no atmospheric warming.
In case nobody has heard, Met O prepared the warmer masses for a long period of "non-warming", posted in this forum. Now cracks are forming at NOAA with their latest:
climatesci.org/2009/03/06/ness-report-on-the-lack-of-recent-global-warming/
The tea leaves have been read.