Global Climate Change Science News

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You guys should have a look at the "Sweatpea" threads over at the skeptic.com forums.

[macdoc]

More evidence climate change models, and hence their predictions are useless.

When a model fails to predict past events, the model is supposed to get thrown out because it is clearly wrong

More evidence you don't understand models.

Hindcasting it used to test models, -regional models are weak in that respect which is exactly what this shows...all regional outcomes need work.
Move on and stop looking foolish.

The only thing you can take away from this is that forecasting droughts on a regional basis is not yet practical just as it is not for monsoon activity tho China has made strides.

Hurricane season work is progressing as well.

Skilful multi-year predictions of Atlantic hurricane frequency

Doug M. Smith, Rosie Eade, Nick J. Dunstone, David Fereday, James M. Murphy, Holger Pohlmann & Adam A. Scaife
AffiliationsContributionsCorresponding author
Nature Geoscience 3, 846–849 (2010) doi:10.1038/ngeo1004
Received 01 June 2010 Accepted 06 October 2010 Published online 07 November 2010
Article tools
Citation
Reprints
Rights & permissions
Metrics
North Atlantic hurricane activity has increased substantially since the 1970s (refs 1, 2), but whether this is attributable to natural internal variability1, 3 or external forcing4, 5, 6, 7 has not been resolved8. Either way, hurricane frequency is potentially predictable, because climate models can directly simulate year-to-year variations in Atlantic tropical storm frequency, if forced by observed sea surface temperatures9. However, skilful predictions have been limited to lead times of one season10, and evidence for external forcing of hurricane frequency has been indirect, relying on statistical relationships4 or external influences on related environmental factors5, 6, 7. Here we extend skilful climate model predictions of hurricane frequency to lead times of several years, using decadal predictions11 with nine variants of a general circulation model. In our experiments, the recent increase in tropical storm numbers was not caused by internal variability alone. This provides physically based model evidence of externally forced changes in hurricane frequency, albeit from a single modelling system. Initialization of the model with the observed state of the climate improves forecast skill, mainly through better predictions of tropical Pacific and North Atlantic ocean conditions, in line with previously documented teleconnections1, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15. Our results show that predictions of hurricane frequency are viable beyond the seasonal scale, and further elucidate causes of hurricane variability.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v3/n ... o1004.html

[Tyrannical]

Regional models weak?
It seems the model does not work at all.

In fact, drought occurrences were no more in agreement when the model was fed realistic values for variables that influence rainfall than when it ran control simulations in which the values were unrealistically held constant.

Talk about putting the cart before the horse, making predictions based on models that are known to be rubbish.

[macdoc]

In April 1938, British amateur climatologist Guy Stewart Callendar wrote a paper that confirmed for the first time that the Earth is warming up. It helped kick start research into one of the world’s biggest scientific conundrums.

That happened exactly 75 years ago.

snip

“People were sceptical about some of Callendar’s results, partly because the build-up of CO2 in the atmosphere was not very well known and because his estimates for the warming caused by CO2 were quite simplistic by modern standards,” Hawkins said in a statement.

Callendar’s estimates for the amount of observed warming have stood the test of time and agree remarkably well with more modern analysis of the same period, said Hawkins.

http://thestar.blogs.com/worlddaily/201 ... rming.html

[macdoc]

Fucking hell

Must view

http://thiniceclimate.org

[Tero]

Nice graphics. I recently found that most people do not understand the two main ways heat is transferred to gases
http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/EarthTemp/

Here is a visdeo explaining one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... e0jhYDcazY

[Tero]

Nice graphics. I recently found that most people do not understand the two main ways heat is transferred to gases
http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/EarthTemp/

Here is a visdeo explaining one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... e0jhYDcazY

This is actually a skeptic site but he does get some things right.

[Tero]

Are there any rebuttals to the crackpot, Wiki does not know him
http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/Greenzilla/index.htm

[macdoc]

He's a crock - don't waste your time..he's dressing up being wrong in fancy clothes.....he's still wrong.

[Tero]

I could not even find any credentials for him. He is big on listing his rejected papers though!

[Tero]

What is this outfit then?
http://www.spaceandscience.net/index.html
Koch brothers again?

[Tero]

He has been peddling his Cold Sun book in some form since 2007
http://www.amazon.com/Cold-Sun-John-L-C ... cr_pr_pb_t


Same dude as the FL institute.

[Coito ergo sum]

The Russians say we're going to drop in temperature significantly -- http://www.bild.de/news/inland/wetter/e ... .bild.html

....or, do they?

[macdoc]

Harper gonna be left floundering as the world moves on....wait til the big trading partners start questioning his environment record.....oh ..wait....they already are..:rolleyes:

- the two big players are making meaningful progress.

China leads in climate change's 'critical decade'

* 12:52 30 April 2013 by Michael Slezak
* For similar stories, visit the Climate Change Topic Guide

China is fast becoming a world leader in the fight against climate change.

In the past year, it has halved the growth in electricity demand, continued to increase its wind and solar energy production, and is in the process of developing emissions trading schemes to cover a quarter of a billion people.

The US is also doing well, although much of its improvement comes from a shift away from oil in favour of cheaper gas and a slower economy, rather than as a result of direct action on climate change.

That's the conclusion of the latest in a series of reports entitled "The Critical Decade" published by Australia's Climate Commission, and examining global action on climate change. The report focuses on the US and China, which together produce 37 per cent of the world's emissions. Earlier this month, the two nations issued a strongly worded statement pledging to work together to curb climate change and "set the kind of powerful example that can inspire the world".

The report describes China's development of renewable energy as "extraordinary", pointing to a 50-fold increase in the amount of energy generated from wind power since 2005. Its investment in clean energy in 2012 was $65.1 billion, which represents 30 per cent of the total investment by G20 nations that year. The government is developing seven emissions trading schemes around the country that will include 256 million people and 3.4 per cent of the global economy. The schemes are expected to start this year in some regions with the expectation that they will be rolled out nationwide from 2015.

Emissions still rising

China's greenhouse gas emissions aren't expected to peak until 2025 at the earliest. However, the country has reduced its carbon intensity - the amount it emits per unit of GDP - by 5 per cent in 2012, which means it is on track to meet its pledge to reduce its carbon intensity by 40 per cent by 2020. The idea is to give China room to continue economic development, while doing so in a sustainable way as possible.

The US is also on track to meet its goal of reducing absolute emissions to 83 per cent of 2005 levels by 2020, with California's emissions trading scheme playing a role, as well as the country's $35.6 billion investment in renewable energy, second only to China. However, other factors have also helped, with the slower economy causing emissions to slump, and its ambition to be energy independent leading to an increase in domestic gas use rather than imported oil.

ZhongXiang Zhang, an economist at Fudan University in Shanghai, China, says the US got lucky on low emissions, which are not entirely down to its emissions policy. Since the "US is now in an easy position", it might push China towards stronger targets, he says.

Good, but can do better

Around the world, one third of countries that belong to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), including the US, have achieved absolute reductions in greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining economic growth. That proves "countries can continue to grow their economies while shrinking their emissions", the report notes.

"There is significant momentum being driven by a mix of economic, political and environmental motivations," says John Wiseman from the University of Melbourne. "That in turn creates a range of risks that these trends could fall over or head in unpredictable directions." He says that while the US's energy independence policy has led to an increased uptake of renewables, it also uses more gas and is working to exploit carbon-intensive tar sand oil.

"This report reminds us that we do still have the knowledge and time to drastically lower emissions, and lessen the impact of future climate change," says David Schlosberg from the University of Sydney. He warns however, that the pace must accelerate.

The report's authors, who include Tim Flannery, Australia's chief climate commissioner, agree – describing this as the critical decade to accelerate climate change action. "This decade must set the foundations to reduce emissions rapidly to nearly zero by 2050. The earlier such action is under way the less disruptive and costly it will be," they write.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2 ... ecade.html

[Tyrannical]

The Russians say we're going to drop in temperature significantly -- http://www.bild.de/news/inland/wetter/e ... .bild.html

....or, do they?

The Russians also point out one of the keystones to the global warming fraud, the year 1850. Ever wonder why the alarmists always mention that year as a baseline? Because it is the year the last little ice age ended and the Earth started to warm again. They purposely chose that year to mislead people. Shocking, I know