Monday, September 22, 2008
Thought of the Day
Hansen’s model of 1980 is no longer relevant...
Dr. Walt Meier of the US National Snow and Ice Data Center
No kidding. But here is what Dr. Hanson predicted as recently as 1999 (his are the lines B1, A1B and A3) versus what actually has happened in the past 9 years. 'Dead wrong' is the proper translation of 'no longer relevant.' Meier went on to say he has confidence in the more sophisticated climate models of today. Why? is my first question. They were dead wrong in their predictions of just a decade ago as well.
Labels: Walt Meier quote
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 10:35 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Meier's quote was referring to Hansen's model from 1980. I can't imagine why a climate model that is 28 years old would be out of date . . . hmmm.
Also, Hansen had three scenarios. The one that you refer too was the, for lack of a better word, "catastrophic" scenario (no volcanic eruptions to introduce a cooling effect, which we had with Mt Pinatubo starting in the early 90's). His middle scenario is actually the one that most closely reflects the current trend line. He did pretty damn good for the paper that was published in 1988.
Here's the link to the abstract and the PDF for the full paper is located therein.
"Dead wrong" is as far from accurate as you can get ;-)
Also, Hansen had three scenarios. The one that you refer too was the, for lack of a better word, "catastrophic" scenario (no volcanic eruptions to introduce a cooling effect, which we had with Mt Pinatubo starting in the early 90's). His middle scenario is actually the one that most closely reflects the current trend line. He did pretty damn good for the paper that was published in 1988.
Here's the link to the abstract and the PDF for the full paper is located therein.
"Dead wrong" is as far from accurate as you can get ;-)
Thanks, Andy. I had read that. The A scenario is if trace gasses increase at the same rate as they had done in the 60s and 70s. Scenario B was if the rate of increase of the gasses decreased but still increased and Scenarion C was if the trace gasses decreased. Obviously CO2 et al has continued to increase but even Scenario C is higher than reality. I's sticking with dead wrong.
Sadly, Andy, I think the same about you. What, if anything, could happen between now and 2013 which would cause you to doubt the theory of anthropogenic global warming? Is there anything?
First here is the graph from Hansen's 1988 paper.
http://www.cobybeck.com/illconsidered/HansenABC.jpg
Large enough for anyone to read. What about Scenario C could possibly be higher than reality. I don't know the source of your graph, but I'll suggest to you that if you are going to call Hansen's predictions dead wrong that you don't use anything but the one from his paper as evidence. If you do, then you have no credibility.
Therefore, when you look at the graph and I ask you which scenario most closely matches the current global temperature trend line. What is your answer? If I believe that you haven't looked at it, then I get to accuse you of sticking your fingers in your ears because you apparently don't want to see the evidence.
If you don't see that scenario B is the closest one to the current trend line of global temperatures, then you are unable to read a graph.
To answer your question, not much CAN happen between now and 2013 to change the trend line, but global temps would have to go down every year from now until then to make an impact on the trend that has been happening since we've been keeping these records. So IF they do go down every year until then, I'll re-evaluate my position.
http://www.cobybeck.com/illconsidered/HansenABC.jpg
Large enough for anyone to read. What about Scenario C could possibly be higher than reality. I don't know the source of your graph, but I'll suggest to you that if you are going to call Hansen's predictions dead wrong that you don't use anything but the one from his paper as evidence. If you do, then you have no credibility.
Therefore, when you look at the graph and I ask you which scenario most closely matches the current global temperature trend line. What is your answer? If I believe that you haven't looked at it, then I get to accuse you of sticking your fingers in your ears because you apparently don't want to see the evidence.
If you don't see that scenario B is the closest one to the current trend line of global temperatures, then you are unable to read a graph.
To answer your question, not much CAN happen between now and 2013 to change the trend line, but global temps would have to go down every year from now until then to make an impact on the trend that has been happening since we've been keeping these records. So IF they do go down every year until then, I'll re-evaluate my position.
Good to hear that at least something could chage your mind. You do know that Hansen has revised his predictions since the 80s? I'll take a second look but nothing, not any of the lines had the temperatures flat for a near decade in the early new millenium before a sudden steep decline. If you can see one in Figure 3 in the paper you, eventually, linked to, I worry that you can't read a graph.
Just to be clear the 1980 model essentially said that the northern and southern hemispheres would warm equally. That model is no longer relevant because the antarctic is acting more like it's own ecosystem. Anyway, I'm still confused by the graph you have in the post and it's source. It has little to do with the 1980 model.
Even if, as you claim, that the temps of the new millennium were "flat" with a "sharp decline", you will need several years of that to start to reverse the current trend.
Even if, as you claim, that the temps of the new millennium were "flat" with a "sharp decline", you will need several years of that to start to reverse the current trend.
I see the source of your confusion. You're going with land station reporting, which is unreliable fro several reasons. I go with the two satellite Earth temperature services UAH and RSS. I thought we had agreed to use RSS. According to these reliable temperature measurements the trend line is down, as the graph shows. Not one of Hansen's predictions showed a big downward trend in 2007-2008. Not one.
Post a Comment
<< Home
