Rocket Scientist's Journal

Time 2020-09-25 09:04:00

Web Name: Rocket Scientist's Journal

WebSite: http://rocketscientistsjournal.com

ID:59116

Keywords:

Rocket,Scientist,Journal,

Description:

THE FINGERPRINT OF THE SUN IS ON EARTH'S 160 YEAR TEMPERATURE RECORD, CONTRADICTING IPCC CONCLUSIONS, FINGERPRINTING, & AGWSOLAR GLOBAL WARMINGby Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhD3/27/10. Cor. 4/17/10. - ABSTRACT Solar energy as modeled over the last three centuries contains patterns that match the full 160 year instrument record of Earth's surface temperature. Earth's surface temperature throughout the modern record is given by (1)where Sn is the increase in Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) measured as the running percentage rise in the trend at every instance in time, t, for the previous n years. The parameters are best fits with the values m134=18.33°C/%, m46=-3.68°C/%, b=13.57(-0.43)°C, and =6 years. The value of b in parenthesis gives T(t) as a temperature anomaly. One standard deviation of the error between the equation and the HadCRUT3 data is 0.11°C (about one ordinate interval). Values for a good approximation ( =0.13°C) with a single solar running trend are m134=17.50°C/%, m46=0, b=13.55(-0.45)°C, and =10 years. Global average surface temperature with solar formula overlay. The figure is IPCC's AR4 Figure 3.6 from HadCRUT3, with Earth's surface temperature from Equation (1) added in berry color. The new temperature model is a linear combination of two variables. The variables are causal, running trend lines from the solar model of Wang, et al. (2005). IPCC's blue curve is the temperature smoothed by a backward and forward symmetric, non-causal filter. FIGURE 1 All data for this model are primary data preferred by IPCC in its Reports for solar radiation and for Earth's surface temperature. The solar running trends are elementary, backward-looking (realizable) mathematical trend lines as used by IPCC for the current year temperature, but computed every year for the Sun. Any variations in the solar radiation model sufficient to affect the short term variability of Earth's climate must be selected and amplified by Earthly processes. This model hypothesizes that cloud albedo produces broadband amplification, using established physical processes. The hypothesis is that while cloud albedo is a powerful, negative feedback to warming in the longer term, it creates a short term, positive feedback to TSI that enables its variations to imprint solar insolation at the surface. A calculation of the linear fit of surface temperature to suitably filtered solar radiation shows the level of amplification necessary to support the model, and isolates the short term positive feedback from the long term negative cloud albedo feedback.This model hypothesis that the natural responses of Earth to solar radiation produce a selecting mechanism. The model exploits evidence that the ocean dominates Earth's surface temperature, as it does the atmospheric CO2 concentration, through a set of delays in the accumulation and release of heat caused by three dimensional ocean currents. The ocean thus behaves like a tapped delay line, a well-known filtering device found in other fields, such as electronics and acoustics, to amplify or suppress source variations at certain intervals on the scale of decades to centuries. A search with running trend lines, which are first-order, finite-time filters, produced a family of representations of TSI as might be favored by Earth's natural responses. One of these, the 134-year running trend line, bore a strong resemblance to the complete record of instrumented surface temperature, the signal called S134.Because the fingerprint of solar radiation appears on Earth's surface temperature, that temperature cannot reasonably bear the fingerprint of human activity. IPCC claims that human fingerprint exists by several methods. These include its hockey stick pattern, in which temperature and gas concentrations behave benignly until the onset of the industrial revolution or later, and rise in concert. IPCC claims include that the pattern of atmospheric oxygen depletion corresponds to the burning of fossil fuels in air, and that the pattern of isotopic lightening in atmospheric CO2 corresponds to the increase in CO2 attributed to human activities. This paper shows that each of IPCC's alleged imprints due to human activities is in error. The extremely good and simple match of filtered TSI to Earth's complex temperature record tends to validate the model. The cause of global warming is in hand. Conversely, the fact that Earth's temperature pattern appears in solar radiation invalidates Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Continue reading "SGW" INTERNAL MODELING MISTAKES BY IPCC ARE SUFFICIENTTO REJECT ITS ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING CONJECTURE ALBEDO REGULATES CLIMATE, NOT THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT.CO2 HAS NO MEASURABLE EFFECT ON CLIMATE. Some critics of the science of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) urge that its reliance on a consensus of scientists is false, while others simply point out that regardless, science is never decided by consensus. Some critics rely on fresh analyses of radiosonde and satellite data to conclude that water vapor feedback is negative, contrary to its representation in Global Climate Models (GCMs). Some argue that the AGW model must be false because the climate has cooled over the last decade while atmospheric CO2 continued its rise. Researchers discovered an error in the reduction of data, the widely publicized Hockey Stick Effect, that led to a false conclusion that the Little Ice Age was not global. Some argue that polar ice is not disappearing, that polar bears are thriving, and that sea level is not rising any significant amount.To the public, these arguments cast a pall over AGW claims. But in a last analysis, they merely weigh indirectly against published positions, weigh against the art of data reduction, or rely on short-term data trends in a long-term forecast. Such charges cannot prevail against the weight of the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and its network of associated specialists in the field, principally climatologists, should they ever choose to respond categorically. Moreover, these proponents can support their positions with hundreds running into thousands of published, peer-reviewed papers, plus the official IPCC publications, to weigh against tissue-paper-thin arguments, many published online with at best informal and on-going peer review. On the other hand, what can carry the day are the errors and omissions included in the AGW model with respect to real and demonstrable processes that affect Earth’s climate. Here is a list of eight major modeling faults for which IPCC should be held to account. SOLAR WIND HAS TWICETHE GLOBAL WARMING EFFECT OF EL NI O THE CONSENSUS ON CLIMATEMISTAKENLY ATTRIBUTES SOLAR WIND WARMING TO MANMADE CARBON DIOXIDESOLAR WIND, EL NI O/SOUTHERN OSCILLATION, GLOBAL TEMPERATURE:EVENTS CORRELATIONSby Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhDRevised 7/10/07 ABSTRACT Classical and advanced signal analysis techniques applied to the climate data of global temperature, solar wind, and El Ni o/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) reveal new events and correlations in graphical form. The results include:1. Major state changes appear in the global temperature record around 1934.4 and 1979.5.2. A major state change occurred in the solar wind index around 1937 to 1939, and a secondary state change occurred in the 1970s. 3. Major state changes occurred in the Southern Oscillation Index beginning about 1919.3 and 1979.4. A large state change occurred during the brief period of 1940.2 to 1942.0. 4. The state changes are real in the records, but may be due either to data acquisition artifacts or to real physical phenomena. 5. The Southern Oscillation Index has a weak cyclic behavior with a period of 3.38 years.6. Global temperature lags the Southern Oscillation Index by about 5 months.7. The global temperature record appears to suffer from excessive processing.8. High correlations found by other investigators may be the result of prior data smoothing.9. The low level of correlation between temperature and other parameters may be due to excessive noise, equivalently due to low signal to noise ratio. More importantly, it may be due to the closed loop gain of a mechanism in the climate, unknown to the Consensus on Climate, that regulates global surface temperature.10. Global temperature is weakly correlated with ENSO. The SOI could account for 4.6% of the measured variation in global temperature.11. Global temperature and the solar wind index are correlated. The solar wind index may contribute as much as 8.9% of the processed global temperature variations. 12. Global temperature lags the solar wind index by about two to five years.13. ENSO and the Southern Oscillation affect the global surface temperature. The reverse, that temperature might affect either, is not true. ENSO may, as the Consensus says, devastate, but it has only half the capacity of the solar wind to warm the planet. By omitting the solar wind, the Consensus underestimates the natural causes of global warming, simultaneously overestimating the anthropogenic sources by the equivalent of two ENSOs, assigning the error to carbon dioxide emissions. ON WHY CO2 IS KNOWN NOT TO HAVE ACCUMULATED IN THE ATMOSPHERE &WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH CO2 IN THE MODERN ERAby Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhDRevised 3/14/10.Myles Goodman at Drexel posted the following question as a comment to the Acquittal of Carbon Dioxide:You posit that CO2 does NOT accumulate in the atmosphere. How do you explain atmospheric concentrations of CO2 increasing over the last 100 years?The Acquittal shows that carbon dioxide did not accumulate in the atmosphere during the paleo era of the Vostok ice cores. If it had, the fit of the complement of the solubility curve might have been improved by the addition of a constant. It was not. And because the CO2 presumably still follows the complement of the solubility curve, it should be increasing during the modern era of global warming in recovery from Earth's various ice epochs. These conclusions find support in a number of points in the IPCC reports.So the answer to the post begins with supporting background on why CO2 is known not to accumulate in the atmosphere, and then goes on to other aspects of the model that global warming causes increases in CO2, which accounts for the last 100 years or so. GAVIN SCHMIDT’S RESPONSE TO THE ACQUITTAL OF CO2SHOULD SOUND THE DEATH KNELL FOR AGWby Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhDRevised 3/18/10.-Gavin A. Schmidt is a well-placed leader of the Anthropogenic Global Warming movement. He is a climate modeler at NASA. While London trained as a mathematician, he was an NOAA Postdoctoral Fellow in “Climate and Global Change Research”. He is an editor for the Journal of Climate. He is the principal of an authoritative blog called RealClimate.org. As he has admitted and has been shown to be true, he usually doesn’t respond to outside criticism. E.g., re newspapers see http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/. However, he deigned to answer The Acquittal of Carbon Dioxide. See the discussion of the Acquittal at website for CrossFit, Comment #48, 10/31/06, www.crossfit.com.This is what he has to say: “[Response: That's pretty confused. He neither understands the physics of CO2, nor the implications of the Vostok record, nor the concept of positive feedback. We've discussed each of these issues before, and I would refer you there. - gavin] {Begin rev. 6/2/10} Realclimate.org, 10/31/06, http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/10/ocean-circulation-new-evidence-yes-slowdown-no/ {End rev. 6/2/10}“Dec 2004. What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming? http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/“22 Dec 2004. How do we know that recent CO2 increases are due to human activities? http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/“5 Jul 2006. Runaway tipping points of no return. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/runaway-tipping-points-of-no-return/Gavin Schmidt on Physics” RSJ dissects Dr. Schmidt's reply categorically. Rocket Scientist’s Journal… UNDER CONSTRUCTION …THE ACQUITTAL OF CARBON DIOXIDEby Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhDRevised 11/16/09.-ABSTRACT Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well known but under appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2 rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation. Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase. If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere.

TAGS:Rocket Scientist Journal 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

Hot Websites