Comments on: RSS Corrects 2007 Error

By: Thoughts on Hansen et al 1988 « Climate Audit

Thoughts on Hansen et al 1988 « Climate Audit — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:42:26 +0000

[...] set, which was later adjusted, slightly reducing the downtick in observations. On Jan 23, 2008, I updated the graphic comparing Hansen projections using the revised RSS version. Today I re-visited this data, posting a [...]

By: Hansen Update « Climate Audit

Hansen Update « Climate Audit — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:34:47 +0000

[...] January 2008, I discussed here and here how Hansen’s projections compared against the most recent RSS and MSU data, noting a downtick [...]

By: Norm

Norm — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 16:05:31 +0000

Somehow the whole point is being missed.
Global CO2 emissions continue to increase and the Hansen “A” and “B” projections both fit this emissions increase.
None of the actual temperature data whether corrected or not reflect this continued increase in global emissions.
This is not consistant with a direct causal relationship between CO2 emissions and global temperature and by normal scientific practice this would falsefy the AGW hypothesis.
Doesn’t science adhere to the principle that “even if there is only one observation that is not explained by a hypothesis the hypothesis must either be dropped or modified to fully explain all observations”?
It is not the amount of temperture difference between the projections and the data sets that is important; it is the fact that the two are not moving in the same direction, and the observed temperatures are not moving in a direction that is consistant with the increase in emissions from fossil fuels.

By: Raven

Raven — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 17:03:48 +0000

Steve McIntyre says:

Update: Jan 27, 2008
John Christy observed below that “one must either multiply the surface by 1.2 or divide the troposphere by 1.2″ to gave apples and apples. I will re-plot the graphic once I clarify a point on this.

Did you ever clarify this point?

By: MattN

MattN — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:19:50 +0000

RSS data has been updated with Jan 08 data: ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/msu/monthly_time_series/rss_monthly_msu_amsu_channel_tlt_anomalies_land_and_ocean_v03_1.txt

Coldest month for the planet in 8 years. 2nd coldest January in the last 15 years. Both hemispheres (scroll over all the way to the right), posted negative temp anomolies. 1st time that’s happened in 8 years.

By: Pat Keating

Pat Keating — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:47:13 +0000

146
Thanks for the response, capt.
I’m still trying to nail it down. John Christy gave a partial answer in #117, but it’s too general to indicate a specific mechanism.

By: captdallas2

captdallas2 — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:22:59 +0000

ref 45 Pat Keating, Sorry I can't recall the paper, but it was a discussion on the GCM's. This one discusses the IPCC predictions. J. Christy would be the better person to discuss this point. As I understand it, warming due to GHG should be most noticeable in the tropical Troposphere because there is more water vapor to warm. If the models are correct, the tropical Troposphere warming should be about 80% more than tropical surface warming tapering to virtually no difference between surface and tropo at the poles.

By: Pat Keating

Pat Keating — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:17:50 +0000

131 captd

Warming by GHG should start in the Troposphere where the GHGs reduce (contain) outbound radiation.

That’s an interesting statement. Where does it come from? Do you have a reference? (I ask because I’m trying to figure out what is going on physically, not to dispute it).

By: steven mosher

steven mosher — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:19:36 +0000

re 143. the tropical should always be done in flamigo pink. Just sayin

By: captdallas2

captdallas2 — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:43:08 +0000

The dark blue is tropical and the pink is global.