model vs modèle
Worth reading several times.
Monday, June 15, 2015
Friday, May 29, 2015
Radiant energy from the sun, what's really going on?
A WP image showing sunlight at the Top Of the Atmosphere (TOA)
An image showing sunlight vs infrared from earth's surface
from a good page on these things.
The top image shows in red, the radiant energy hitting the surface. The bottom image shows in red the infrared energy emitted by the warm surface.
In the Wikipedia image, the yellow is what does not reach the surface. (what happens to it?)
But you can see a lot of infrared does make it through the atmosphere. (what happens to it?) Where you see yellow but no read, the atmosphere has somehow absorbed or reflected the energy, before it reaches sea level. (what happens to it?) Note that water vapor (H2O) is the reason for most of the blocking of infrared reaching sea level. Water vapor keeps the earth cooler, by blocking the infrared from reaching us, down here at sea level. As well as keeping us warm.
Let's look at another view of the situation. From an astronomy site (infrared is used to look at the Universe)
And another one, from an imaging web page.
An image showing sunlight vs infrared from earth's surface
The top image shows in red, the radiant energy hitting the surface. The bottom image shows in red the infrared energy emitted by the warm surface.
In the Wikipedia image, the yellow is what does not reach the surface. (what happens to it?)
But you can see a lot of infrared does make it through the atmosphere. (what happens to it?) Where you see yellow but no read, the atmosphere has somehow absorbed or reflected the energy, before it reaches sea level. (what happens to it?) Note that water vapor (H2O) is the reason for most of the blocking of infrared reaching sea level. Water vapor keeps the earth cooler, by blocking the infrared from reaching us, down here at sea level. As well as keeping us warm.
Let's look at another view of the situation. From an astronomy site (infrared is used to look at the Universe)
(as always, click to enlarge)
Most of the infrared light coming to us from the Universe is absorbed by water vapor and carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere. Only in a few narrow wavelength ranges, can infrared light make it through (at least partially) to a ground based infrared telescope.
So there you have it, most of the infrared can't reach us from the sun. These same windows (where infrared can freely go) let infrared in and out. The same blocking by greenhouse gases that keeps us warmer (by stopping heat from just radiating away), also protects us from the intense heat from the sun. The window goes both ways.
The Straighter Dope, answering questions nobody has asked.
here is a good NASA image of the water vapor window.
Why even post about this? Oh right, because I just read this.
What’s great about the graph is you can see clearly how the radiation from the sun can be easily discriminated from the radiation from the earth. There’s no complicated deductive work, if you measure radiation below 4μm, you know it came from the sun, no matter how many things it bounced off in the meantime. If you measure radiation above 4μm, you know it’s generated by the terrestrial system. - Science of Doom blog
Here's the graphic from the blog post.
He is saying any radiation (light energy) "above 4μm" comes from the Earth, not the sun, " If you measure radiation above 4μm, you know it’s generated by the terrestrial system", which as we see in our first graphics, is hard to believe. We can see the sun radiates plenty of energy, and that it even reaches the surface.
So what's going on here? That graphics shows no sunlight "above 4μm", but we see in the other graphics plenty of radiation.
Somebody is wrong on the internet. And I don't want it to be me.
So let's look at a few more images. This one is concerned with what wavelengths are blocked by the atmosphere, at least at ground level.
So the "windows" where water vapor doesn't effect infrared is easy to see, but lets look at another astronomy based image, showing the difference altitude makes.
And a Spectroscopy of Rocks and Minerals web page. Note the calculated changes from CO2
We can see the greenhouse effect, and that it is different at altitudes, due to low or no water vapor.
One more image, from a blog that took it from another blog that no longer is to be found.
We see a different view of the solar coming in. Recall that incoming solar looks like this, compared to outgoing earth infrared.
What is going on with these graphics?
Thursday, April 23, 2015
Why xkcd "Cold" is unscientific, as well as "wrong on the Internet" updated May 12 2022
This blog is no longer updated. This blog covers the following post and more.
We will proceed in a scientific manner.
Is the xkcd comic true? (reproduced with permission)
Mouse over text: 'You see the same pattern all over. Take Detroit--' 'Hold on. Why do you know all these statistics offhand?' 'Oh, um, no idea. I definitely spend my evenings hanging out with friends, and not curating a REALLY NEAT database of temperature statistics. Because, pshh, who would want to do that, right? Also, snowfall records.'
It's a complicated comic, with multiple claims, and it is used to deflect commentary and concerns by people, who notice when it's really cold. So, is any of it true?
None of the black hatted characters claims are true. And the source the comic creator used is a biased web site that publishes deceptive "science", and is also wrong on the internet.
Looking at the winter trend for Missouri shows why people complaining about the cold In Missouri (and elsewhere) are not delusional, While temperature data doesn't show the snow and ice, that data also shows the increase in cold winters.
The Tmin (minimum daily temperature) shows it clearly, colder winters.
Comparing with the Tmax confirms it is a trend
Since trends are sensitive at times to start times, here's the 30 year trend using 2014 as the end date. (the comic was about Jan 2014)
A 30 year trend is solid evidence for climate trends,
You can see the areas using the GISS maps, the twent year trend for Jan-Feb makes it obvious.
The trend shows up using Jan-Mar.
It doesn't just seem like winters are getting colder in some cities, they actually are. It's why the xkcd comic is wrong.
That's a shame, since I really like his work.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Solar influence on climate
From here
Figure 5.14 Changes in solar constant (total solar irradiance) and global mean temperature of Earth’s surface over the past 400 years. Except for a period of enhanced volcanic activity in the early 19th century, surface temperature is well correlated with solar variability. From Lean, personal communication.
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Coldest January-March in the US Northeast. Ever
OK the coldest we have official data for. Even so, it was record cold.
Here's the straighter dope, the Tmin data
Here's the straighter dope, the Tmin data
Here's the average data
Here's the 30 year trend for Tmax
and for Tmin
And here is what it looks like using GISS
Here's the twenty year trend using GISS
And here it is using the NCDC data
This is most unexpected, unless you are Judah Cohen
Toronto also had it's coldest February ever,
Friday, April 17, 2015
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
How can we know that Hansen 2006 was completely wrong? With the facts of course.
Skeptical Science blog post from 2010, shows Hansen 2006 (now removed from the current page), showing a graph and claiming the predictions were accurate. Note the Scenario C purple line.
Woodfortrees graph using RSS land only is matched with the 2005 level, 7.7 anomaly.
Here is what actually happened.
Woodfortrees graph using RSS land only is matched with the 2005 level, 7.7 anomaly.
It's now 10 years later, so we can look at the next 9 years of data, and compare with the prediction. Hansen 2006 shows over 1,0 anomaly by now. The blue line.
You can see why Skepticalscience no longer show you that image, the one they used in 2010.
Monday, April 6, 2015
How the ocean tides actually work
The real reason is this. The pull of gravity drops off rapidly with distance. Lunar gravity tugs on the side of the earth facing it a lot, on the earth itself a medium amount, and on the opposite side of the earth relatively little. In short, the far-side tide is a result of the moon attracting the earth, leaving the ocean behind.The straight dope
December 16, 1988
That isn't actually what is happening with our oceans and the tides. If interested, see here.
Saturday, April 4, 2015
Another Trenberth travesty,
Another Trenberth travesty
paper
paper
"the extra snow can easily be order 10% or more"
In all storms, the main source of precipitation is the moisture already in the atmosphere at the start of the storm. This moisture, as water vapor, is gathered by the storm winds, brought into the storm, concentrated and precipitated out. Accordingly, if there is more moisture in the environment, it rains (or snows) harder.
How does this play out when temperatures are below freezing? Temperatures in the Goldilocks range of between about 28°F and 32°F, accompanied by moisture, mean more snow: indeed, the amount of snowfall at 32°F would be at least double that at 14°F.
paper
paper
"the extra snow can easily be order 10% or more"
Scott Adams vs the SGU
Scott Adams vs the Skeptic Guide to the Universe
Scott Adams blog post with challenge to SGU and comments
SGU forum threads one and two
This one could be interesting, since I could get involved in it. Which would ruin my chances of avoiding bias and remaining objective.
(placeholder post, much more to the story)
Scott Adams blog post with challenge to SGU and comments
SGU forum threads one and two
This one could be interesting, since I could get involved in it. Which would ruin my chances of avoiding bias and remaining objective.
(placeholder post, much more to the story)
Thursday, April 2, 2015
It's hard to understand some things
Not everything can be made simple. Some things require a lot of study before you can even follow the conversation.
Friday, March 27, 2015
What global warming looks like for the past two decades
The so called "pause" in global warming is actually a cooling of the Northern hemisphere winters (NH winter or boreal winter), specifically the NH land temperatures have changed to a cooling trend, and it is this cooling that has caused the annual global mean to be "flat", slightly cooler, or a slight warming, depending on which data and analysis you choose to believe.
But even surface station data shows the same thing as satellite data. NH winters are cooling, and it's effecting the entire years average.
You can see it using GISS maps, the NCDC global data, as well as global snowfall data, and especially using the high quality NCDC US climate data.
But even surface station data shows the same thing as satellite data. NH winters are cooling, and it's effecting the entire years average.
You can see it using GISS maps, the NCDC global data, as well as global snowfall data, and especially using the high quality NCDC US climate data.
NH winter land so negative, it makes the global winter trend negative.
All the other seasons are warming, and the NH winter trend for the ocean is warming.
US winter data
The idea that the tides are two bulges following the moon is wrong
The old primitive model of how the tides work, in the oceans, is wrong.
Satellite data has confirmed that the new model is correct, and tides behave in a manner consistent with the new model.
The old idea (which as always, is taking a very long time to die), is that the ocean has two bulges, and the earth rotates under them and this is why there are two high tides and two low tides a day. (all tide theories assume the energy for the tides comes from the gravity of the sun and moon)
The two bulge theory never matched up with observations, especially the following.
The bulges are gravity waves travelling along the ocean's surface, so they must follow the laws for waves. For a wave to travel along the equator of 40,000 km in 25 hours, requires a speed of around 1600 km/hr, which is impossible, as the depth of the ocean is around 3800m. 800 km/hr would be the maximum speed a tide could move.
As the bulges reach a continent, most of it will be bounced back off the continental shelf, or the land itself, causing a bulge of almost equal height to run in the opposite direction. This is not observed, it just doesn't happen.
As the bulge reached a continent (where it would have to stop) it would have to go back the other way. This is never observed.
There are either one and two tides each day: there are places without tides at all, and places where it's a mixture. This cannot be explained by bulges. Nor can the tides at the poles be explained by bulges.
The height of the tide, the difference between high and low tide, does not follow the two-bulge idea which suggests that the tide should be maximal around the equator or on opposite sides of a large ocean. Near the equator one can find places without tides and places with near-maximal tides. The poles can also have large tides.
High (and low) tide occurs at different times of the lunar cycle, depending more on one's place on Earth than on the position of the moon. In fact, there can be both high and low tide at the same time, like New Zealand experiences every day.
The balancing bulge on the other side is missing, and nowhere is there any evidence for it.
The new model is that tide waves run in ways to prevent loss of energy. Instead of running east to west, tide waves run around in circles (clockwise and CCW on both hemispheres) around islands, and certain points in the sea, called nodes.
This new model does away with the objections mentioned for the bulge model
Tide waves follow shorter paths in twelve hour rotations, never exceeding the maximum wave speed of about 800 km/hr.
Tide waves do not bounce off continents by hitting them squarely. Instead, they follow along their coasts.
There is no starting and stopping but a continuous motion. The standing waves absorb minimal energy.
There is no balancing bulge. Instead, tide waves run in twelve hour circles.
There can be none, one or two tides per day. Looking at the animation of how tides actually behave shows why.
The time of high tide depends both on the lunar cycle and the place on Earth. The high and low tides at the same time (New Zealand) makes sense.
Tide waves are standing waves, expending the least energy.
Computer models, and later satellite data has shown the new model matches with reality.
The two bulge model does not.
Satellite data has confirmed that the new model is correct, and tides behave in a manner consistent with the new model.
The old idea (which as always, is taking a very long time to die), is that the ocean has two bulges, and the earth rotates under them and this is why there are two high tides and two low tides a day. (all tide theories assume the energy for the tides comes from the gravity of the sun and moon)
The two bulge theory never matched up with observations, especially the following.
The bulges are gravity waves travelling along the ocean's surface, so they must follow the laws for waves. For a wave to travel along the equator of 40,000 km in 25 hours, requires a speed of around 1600 km/hr, which is impossible, as the depth of the ocean is around 3800m. 800 km/hr would be the maximum speed a tide could move.
As the bulges reach a continent, most of it will be bounced back off the continental shelf, or the land itself, causing a bulge of almost equal height to run in the opposite direction. This is not observed, it just doesn't happen.
As the bulge reached a continent (where it would have to stop) it would have to go back the other way. This is never observed.
There are either one and two tides each day: there are places without tides at all, and places where it's a mixture. This cannot be explained by bulges. Nor can the tides at the poles be explained by bulges.
The height of the tide, the difference between high and low tide, does not follow the two-bulge idea which suggests that the tide should be maximal around the equator or on opposite sides of a large ocean. Near the equator one can find places without tides and places with near-maximal tides. The poles can also have large tides.
High (and low) tide occurs at different times of the lunar cycle, depending more on one's place on Earth than on the position of the moon. In fact, there can be both high and low tide at the same time, like New Zealand experiences every day.
The balancing bulge on the other side is missing, and nowhere is there any evidence for it.
The new model is that tide waves run in ways to prevent loss of energy. Instead of running east to west, tide waves run around in circles (clockwise and CCW on both hemispheres) around islands, and certain points in the sea, called nodes.
This new model does away with the objections mentioned for the bulge model
Tide waves follow shorter paths in twelve hour rotations, never exceeding the maximum wave speed of about 800 km/hr.
Tide waves do not bounce off continents by hitting them squarely. Instead, they follow along their coasts.
There is no starting and stopping but a continuous motion. The standing waves absorb minimal energy.
There is no balancing bulge. Instead, tide waves run in twelve hour circles.
There can be none, one or two tides per day. Looking at the animation of how tides actually behave shows why.
The time of high tide depends both on the lunar cycle and the place on Earth. The high and low tides at the same time (New Zealand) makes sense.
Tide waves are standing waves, expending the least energy.
Computer models, and later satellite data has shown the new model matches with reality.
The two bulge model does not.
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Ohio Valley winter cooling and precipitation data
The Ohio Valley climate region is both cooling for winters (30 year trend), but also showing an increase in annual precipitation, using a 45 year or 15 year trend data. Even the 100 year trend show more rain/snow for the region.
Meanwhile winters show a continuing trend of colder.
Friday, March 20, 2015
"Warmer means more snow"
Oh my, this is actually the latest nonsense. Somebody actually said "It snows more when it's warm"
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Does it snow more when it's cold? Or when it's warm?
I know it sounds like a joke question. It's not.
It snows more when it's cold. The very idea that warmer winter temperatures would mean more snow is based on something other than science.
It snows more when it's cold. The very idea that warmer winter temperatures would mean more snow is based on something other than science.
Saturday, March 14, 2015
"It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data"
From James Randi Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 1891 A Scandal in Bohemia, I quote:
Watson: "This is indeed a mystery," I remarked. "What do you imagine that it means?"
Holmes: I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts...
SkepticalScience forum comments
And this isn't about science or personal careers and reputations any more. This is a fight for survival. Our civilisations survival. .. We need our own anonymous (or not so anonymous) donors, our own think tanks.... Our Monckton's ... Our assassins.Anyone got Bill Gates' private number, Warren Buffett, Richard Branson? Our 'side' has got to get professional, ASAP. We don't need to blog. We need to network. Every single blog, organisation, movement is like a platoon in an army. ..This has a lot of similarities to the Vietnam War....And the skeptics are the Viet Cong... Not fighting like 'Gentlemen' at all. And the mainstream guys like Gleick don't know how to deal with this. Queensberry Rules rather than biting and gouging...So, either Mother Nature deigns to give the world a terrifying wake up call. Or people like us have to build the greatest guerilla force in human history. Now. Because time is up...Someone needs to convene a council of war of the major environmental movements, blogs, institutes etc. In a smoke filled room (OK, an incense filled room) we need a conspiracy to save humanity.
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
1932 The year with out a winter (updated April 27 2022)
Article no longer works Archive.org version
What it looks like on a GISS map
What it looks like on a GISS map
Winter 2012
It's interesting that both really warm winter years show the globe being cool. Cooler than the period used to create anomalies. Which is the coolest period in the instrumental record.
A few climate stations to compare the two warm winters, I would hope no arrows are required to point them out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)