Latest Breaking News

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)

19. Only one near term feedback contributes significantly to temperature change.

Thu Mar 28, 2013, 08:11 AM

Mar 2013

And that's clouds. We've found that clouds are a positive feedback (ie, they will not reduce warming, but will contribute to it by producing drier climates and moving away from the equator).

That feedback will not be reflected in the temperature records for years. At which point IPCCs temperature predictions will be found to be inaccurate. (Though by then maybe the IPCC will put it into their models, so they can still say they're accurate on temperature, but certainly AR4 and below, and possibly AR5 will get it wrong.)

This doesn't even consider clathrate release or ocean heat absorption peaking. Both of those are still not really quantified, especially since the "missing heat" has now been determined to have sunk into the ocean.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Climate change models predict remarkably accurate results [View all] AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 OP

calling out is not good NMDemDist2 Mar 2013 #1

I just wanted to provide a real example of what's happening, and nothing else. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #6

Climate change science is reliable daleo Mar 2013 #2

Very true. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #8

is "doomers" your favorite word? CreekDog Mar 2013 #3

Only one near term feedback contributes significantly to temperature change. joshcryer Mar 2013 #19

K&R SunSeeker Mar 2013 #4

Thanks, SunSeeker. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #7

I feel it's important to get the facts out. SunSeeker Mar 2013 #13

You're welcome, and I do my best. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #25

What was wrong with that source? caseymoz Mar 2013 #5

What gets ignored is the AGGI Benton D Struckcheon Mar 2013 #9

Thanks for the link, Benton. n/t AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #11

NP. n/t Benton D Struckcheon Mar 2013 #12

There's more to it than that. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #10

So you post an article about global warming to camouflage your attack on environmentalists? CreekDog Mar 2013 #37

I think you're getting a little delusional, my friend, and all I can say is..... AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #38

Except that the large feedback loops are just now kicking in NickB79 Mar 2013 #14

The article doesn't even talk about feedbacks. joshcryer Mar 2013 #18

Good point. It seems like 1C is the new 2C NickB79 Mar 2013 #21

Nah, not really. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #23

Outside of what's going on in the Arctic? NickB79 Mar 2013 #26

You do realize I never actually implied what you think I did, right? AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #27

Like joshcryer pointed out, the temperature estimates were fairly accurate NickB79 Mar 2013 #29

"Completely missed?" AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #30

Um, "accurate, outside the rate melting of the Arctic ice caps." joshcryer Mar 2013 #40

There may be a reason for the clathrate problem, however: AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #53

I made no mention of the clathrate gun. joshcryer Mar 2013 #59

Some cases? Name one where the outlook is positive. joshcryer Mar 2013 #39

To be frank, Either you don't know where to look, or you don't even want to try. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #44

Both of those are links to warming predictions. joshcryer Mar 2013 #48

Nice try. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #51

It doesn't. joshcryer Mar 2013 #58

..... AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #22

Again, outside of the Arctic? NickB79 Mar 2013 #28

I used to think 2016 myself. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #31

2011-2012, you mean. joshcryer Mar 2013 #41

No, 2016 was the date that I thought we'd see our first ice-free day. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #42

You said volume has "gone back to 2011 levels." joshcryer Mar 2013 #49

Maybe they were bad years, but it doesn't really change anything. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #52

It certainly changes your implication. joshcryer Mar 2013 #57

Even though the PIOMAS graph data clearly backs up the latter. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #64

Ice area is not the same as volume, and you know it. joshcryer Mar 2013 #67

You continue to lie & take me out of context, as usual. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #70

You falsely used a PIOMAS graph. joshcryer Mar 2013 #74

I didn't do that and you know it. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #76

You acted as if the ice volume recovered. joshcryer Mar 2013 #77

You took me out of context, once again(as is typical). AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #80

Contrarians are the 'show me' crowd. They'll believe it when they see it lunatica Mar 2013 #15

It's not just them.....n/t AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #24

Climate change isn't just temperature. joshcryer Mar 2013 #16

Okay, but I never said or implied that it WAS the only factor. n/t AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #46

"IPCC has proven to be largely correct" joshcryer Mar 2013 #47

It was also correct in most other areas, too. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #50

AR4 didn't even consider sea level rise from melt. joshcryer Mar 2013 #55

What I've said still stands. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #56

That's just false, though, what you said is false. joshcryer Mar 2013 #60

The IPCC is not a regional weather forecasting system muriel_volestrangler Mar 2013 #62

Very true. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #65

This is incorrect, it is affecting Russia, China, the United States, and Europe. joshcryer Mar 2013 #66

Sorry, but Muriel is likely right; none of them are connected to one another, as far as can be seen. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #69

No, they're connected to climate change. joshcryer Mar 2013 #72

"Minimizing"? AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #63

"it's not just the deniers, either, by the way" joshcryer Mar 2013 #68

"Rosy picture"? GTFO! AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #71

You call me a contrarian and I merely post facts. joshcryer Mar 2013 #73

It's the other way around, actually. Your notions don't fit with my facts. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #75

You don't post facts. joshcryer Mar 2013 #78

You don't know that for sure.....neither of us does. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #79

In 3 or 4 years, we'll see who's right. joshcryer Mar 2013 #81

..... AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #82

I don't think it's inevitable, either. Just likely. joshcryer Mar 2013 #83

Some others WOULD go that far, though. n/t AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #84

The Deniers PolitFreak Mar 2013 #17

I don't doubt climate change or that we are part of the cause, but ... bemildred Mar 2013 #20

Well..... AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #32

I stand by what I said. bemildred Mar 2013 #35

You may have a point. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #54

Thank you. bemildred Mar 2013 #61

You make a powerful observation. sofa king Mar 2013 #33

Thanks. AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #34

Yeah, they're a mess. sofa king Mar 2013 #36

misleading pack of lies quadrature Mar 2013 #43

Erm....what? n/t AverageJoe90 Mar 2013 #45