Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - AbruptSLR

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 224
1
Consequences / Re: Hansen et al paper: 3+ meters SLR by 2100
« on: April 24, 2017, 05:59:26 PM »
As deep convective clouds (DCC) are a significant positive feedback mechanism, the fact that they increase rapidly with warming of the tropical ocean, is a major consideration of Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanism, because freshwater hosing of the Southern Ocean will slow the thermohaline circulation of the great ocean conveyor-belt current circulation; which will back-up ocean surface heat in the tropical oceans.  Thus, the linked reference errs on the side of least drama by ignoring the effects of:

(a)a potential collapse of the WAIS this century (see also the first attached image that shows the increase in GMSTA at 30N & 30S latitude since 2003, which is associated with DCC); and/or
 
(b) a relatively high ECS (in the 5C +/- 0.5C range as indicated by the middle panel of the second attached image).

Aumann, H. H., Ruzmaikin, A., and Behrangi, A.: Increase in the Frequency of Tropical Deep Convective Clouds with Global Warming, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., doi:10.5194/acp-2017-135, in review, 2017.

http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/acp-2017-135/

Abstract. Deep Convective Clouds (DCC) are extreme rain events associated with large thunderstorms. They form in 0.6 % of the area of the tropical oceans. As the tropical oceans warm in a future climate, the frequency of occurrence of DCC may change. Between 2003 and 2016 the yearly mean temperature of the tropical ocean varied by almost 1 K. We use Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) data for this time period to derive the probability of the DCC process as function of the Sea Surface Temperature (SST). The onset of the DCC process shifts about 0.5 K per 1 K of warming of the mean tropical SST. When these results are applied to the temperature distribution predicted by CMIP5 climate models for the end of this century, we find that the frequency of DCC, i.e. the percent of the area of the tropical oceans associated with DCC, which is 0.6 percent in the current climate, increases to 0.9 %, close to a 50 % increase.


Summary: "We derive the probability of the DCC process as function of the Sea Surface Temperature (SST) associated with DCC identified with AIRS between the years 2003 and 2016 for the tropical oceans (30S-30N). During this time the annual mean value of the SST varied by almost 1K, producing measureable shifts in the temperature of the onset of the DCC process. We find that the temperature of the onset of the DCC formation process shifts at the rate of about +0.50 K per K of the warming of the mean tropical ocean temperature. We use the probability of the DCC process to predict the change in the frequency of DCC in a future climate, based on the temperature distribution of the tropical oceans predicted by the CMIP5 models. The average of the 36 CMIP5 models (RCP 8.5 scenario) predicts 2.7 K of warming of the mean SST of the tropical oceans by the end of this century. As a result the percent of the area of the tropical oceans associated with DCC, in the current climate 0.6 percent, increases to 0.9% by the end of the century, close to a 50% increase.

2
Consequences / Re: 2017 ENSO
« on: April 24, 2017, 04:31:48 PM »
The four attached images were issued today by the BoM showing weekly Nino values thru the week ending April 23, 2017, for the Nino 1, 2, 3 & 4 indices, respectively.  This information supports the position that we are likely beginning to transition from ENSO-neutral into weak El Nino conditions (assuming the atmosphere follows the indicated oceanic lead in the next couple of months):

3
Consequences / Re: 2017 ENSO
« on: April 24, 2017, 04:28:35 PM »
The following weekly data and the first two images (of the Eq Pac Upper Ocean Heat Anom and the SSTA Evolution, respectively) were issued today by NOAA (for the week centered on April 19 2017), and the last two images where issued today by the BoM for the week ending April 23, 2017, showing the Nino 3.4 and the IOD, indices, respectively.  Collectively, this information indicates that we are most likely beginning to transition from an ENSO neutral, into a weak El Nino pattern (assuming that the atmosphere follows the oceanic lead in the next few months).


                     Nino1+2      Nino3         Nino34        Nino4
 Week           SST SSTA    SST SSTA   SST SSTA    SST SSTA
 29MAR2017     27.8 1.8     28.1 0.8     27.7 0.3     28.3 0.0
 05APR2017     26.7 0.9     28.2 0.8     27.9 0.3     28.3 0.0
 12APR2017     26.1 0.5     28.2 0.7     28.0 0.2     28.5 0.0
 19APR2017     26.4 1.1     28.1 0.6     28.3 0.5     28.8 0.3

4
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 24, 2017, 09:47:11 AM »
The linked article is entitled: "Group of Mental Health Professionals Warn Trump’s State ‘Putting Country in Danger’”, and it addresses the duty of mental health care professionals to warn the public of the risks associated with Donald Trump's mental condition:

https://enewspf.com/2017/04/22/group-mental-health-professionals-warn-trumps-state-putting-country-danger/

Extract: "Despite professional rule barring them from doing so, psychological experts have argued that “too much is at stake to be silent any longer.

“We do believe that Donald Trump’s mental illness is putting the entire country, and indeed the entire world, in danger,” argued Dr. John Gartner, a psychologist who used to teach at Johns Hopkins University, local WTNH writes. “As health professionals we have an ethical duty to warn the public about that danger,” he said.

“Worse than just being a liar or a narcissist, in addition he is paranoid, delusional and grandiose thinking and he proved that to the country the first day he was President. If Donald Trump really believes he had the largest crowd size in history, that’s delusional,” Gartner added."

5
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 24, 2017, 09:37:19 AM »
The linked article is entitled: "James Comey’s Fear of Everyone—Except Democrats—Helped Donald Trump Upset Hillary Clinton", and it indicates that the Democrats (& other parties including the FBI's criminal investigation of the Trump-Russia connection) need to take their collective gloves off and start hitting Trump & the GOP harder:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/24/james-comey-s-fear-of-everyone-except-democrats-helped-donald-trump-upset-hillary-clinton.html

Extract: "Comey thought a lot about the rabid Republican zealots he could offend by doing his job and enforcing the law, and not at all about the Democrats he trusted would be docile and play by the rules.

Everyone spent the weekend talking about the big New York Times James Comey piece, an informative (and infuriating) tick-tock about what was going through the FBI director’s head last year as he said what he said about Hillary Clinton—and didn’t say what he didn’t say about Donald Trump.

The big takeaway may be that the reason everything happened the way it did is that everyone involved, from Comey up to President Obama, assumed Hillary Clinton was going to win. Their behavior was guided by that assumption.

There are two morals to this story. The first is, well, good on the Democrats, I guess, for not playing politics (Lynch excepted) with such a sensitive matter. This is how things are supposed to work in this country.

But the second moral is that, regrettable as it may be, this isn’t how things work in this country anymore. Republicans were so ferociously partisan about everything having to do with Hillary Clinton—and Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, and fill in the blank—that they created a reality in which the nation’s top law enforcement official was thinking more or less constantly about how he could avoid incurring their wrath. Of course, he’s a Republican himself, and was involved in Clinton probes in the 1990s, so there’s also that. But how that factored in we can’t know.

What we do know is that one political party frightens people and the other one doesn’t. The party in question needs to learn from this. And I mean right now, while Comey is investigating Trump and the Democrats are in opposition with nothing to lose. When one side has a bazooka, a sling shot won’t cut it."

6
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 24, 2017, 09:24:42 AM »
The first attached image (that I previously posted in Reply 264), indicates a flattening of the influence of increasing values of ECS on GMSTA; thus implying that increases in atmospheric GHG concentrations may be more impactful on future global warming.  However, the oceans and land vegetation currently sequester about one half of all current anthropogenic emissions; thus if these carbon sinks are compromised with future global warming then mankind's ability to limit future increases in atmospheric GHG concentrations would also be compromised.  In this frame of mind, the first linked reference is entitled "Doubling Down on Our Faustian Bargain" and it indicates that temporary radiative forcing masking factors (such as: both anthropogenic & natural aerosols, and temporary increases in CO₂ absorption by plants) have allowed mankind to accumulate large accumulations of carbon in the atmosphere, land and ocean; that could actively contribute to future radiative forcing once the temporary masking factors have been eliminated. 

The second, third & fourth linked references cite research on forests, as an illustration of how sensitive such carbon sinks can be to future climate disruption (such as :wet-dry cycles, pests, fires, etc) especially as our current rate of increase of radiative forcing is much higher than at any time since the PETM; and thus vegetation (both on land & in the ocean) will not have adequate time to adapt to such rapidly changing climate conditions:


James Hansen, Pushker Kharecha, Makiko Sato (2013), "Doubling Down on Our Faustian Bargain", Environmental Research Letters.

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/011006/meta
&
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130329_FaustianBargain.pdf

Abstract: "Rahmstorf et al 's (2012) conclusion that observed climate change is comparable to projections, and in some cases exceeds projections, allows further inferences if we can quantify changing climate forcings and compare those with projections. The largest climate forcing is caused by well-mixed long-lived greenhouse gases. Here we illustrate trends of these gases and their climate forcings, and we discuss implications. We focus on quantities that are accurately measured, and we include comparison with fixed scenarios, which helps reduce common misimpressions about how climate forcings are changing.
Annual fossil fuel CO2 emissions have shot up in the past decade at about 3% yr-1, double the rate of the prior three decades (figure 1). The growth rate falls above the range of the IPCC (2001) 'Marker' scenarios, although emissions are still within the entire range considered by the IPCC SRES (2000). The surge in emissions is due to increased coal use (blue curve in figure 1), which now accounts for more than 40% of fossil fuel CO2 emissions."

The second linked article is entitled: "Forests 'held their breath' during global warming hiatus, research shows".  This illustrates Hansen's Faustian Bargain.

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-forests-held-global-hiatus.html

Extract: "The study shows that, during extended period of slower warming, worldwide forests 'breathe in' carbon dioxide through photosynthesis, but reduced the rate at which they 'breathe out'—or release the gas back to the atmosphere."


The third linked reference indicates that forests play a more important role in keeping the planet cool than was previously appreciated.  Thus if one assumes that they are entitled to make self-serving assumptions one could assume that decision makers will not only preserve forests but will expand them in the future.  However, the reality is that we are currently losing forests at a rate appropriate for a BAU scenario; and which could accelerate in the future.  Thus if we keep losing forest, our AR5 projections may err on the side of least drama:

Ryan M. Bright et al. Local temperature response to land cover and management change driven by non-radiative processes, Nature Climate Change (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nclimate3250

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3250.html

Abstract: "Following a land cover and land management change (LCMC), local surface temperature responds to both a change in available energy and a change in the way energy is redistributed by various non-radiative mechanisms. However, the extent to which non-radiative mechanisms contribute to the local direct temperature response for different types of LCMC across the world remains uncertain. Here, we combine extensive records of remote sensing and in situ observation to show that non-radiative mechanisms dominate the local response in most regions for eight of nine common LCMC perturbations. We find that forest cover gains lead to an annual cooling in all regions south of the upper conterminous United States, northern Europe, and Siberia—reinforcing the attractiveness of re-/afforestation as a local mitigation and adaptation measure in these regions. Our results affirm the importance of accounting for non-radiative mechanisms when evaluating local land-based mitigation or adaptation policies."

The fourth reference (see also the second attached image) indicates a two-fold increase of carbon cycle sensitivity to tropical temperature variations:

Wang, X., Piao, S., Ciais, P., Friedlingstein, P., Myneni, R.B., Cox, P., Heimann, M., Miller, J., Peng, S.P., Wang, T., Yang, H. and Chen, A., (2014), "A two-fold increase of carbon cycle sensitivity to tropical temperature variations", Nature, 2014; DOI: 10.1038/nature12915.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7487/full/nature12915.html#extended-data

http://sites.bu.edu/cliveg/files/2014/01/wang-nature-2014.pdf

Abstract: "Earth system models project that the tropical land carbon sink will decrease in size in response to an increase in warming and drought during this century, probably causing a positive climate feedback. But available data are too limited at present to test the predicted changes in the tropical carbon balance in response to climate change. Long-term atmospheric carbon dioxide data provide a global record that integrates the interannual variability of the global carbon balance. Multiple lines of evidence demonstrate that most of this variability originates in the terrestrial biosphere. In particular, the year-to-year variations in the atmospheric carbon dioxide growth rate (CGR) are thought to be the result of fluctuations in the carbon fluxes of tropical land areas. Recently, the response of CGR to tropical climate interannual variability was used to put a constraint on the sensitivity of tropical land carbon to climate change. Here we use the long-term CGR record from Mauna Loa and the South Pole to show that the sensitivity of CGR to tropical temperature interannual variability has increased by a factor of 1.9 ± 0.3 in the past five decades. We find that this sensitivity was greater when tropical land regions experienced drier conditions. This suggests that the sensitivity of CGR to interannual temperature variations is regulated by moisture conditions, even though the direct correlation between CGR and tropical precipitation is weak. We also find that present terrestrial carbon cycle models do not capture the observed enhancement in CGR sensitivity in the past five decades. More realistic model predictions of future carbon cycle and climate feedbacks require a better understanding of the processes driving the response of tropical ecosystems to drought and warming."

Caption for the second attached image: " Figure 1 | Change in detrended anomalies in CGR and tropical MAT, in dCGR/dMAT and in ªintCGR over the past five decades. a, Change in detrended CGR anomalies at Mauna Loa Observatory (black) and in detrended tropical MAT anomalies (red) derived from the CRU data set16. Tropical MAT is calculated as the spatial average over vegetated tropical lands (23uN to 23u S).  The highest correlations between detrended CGR and detrended tropicalMAT are obtained when no time lags are applied (R50.53, P,0.01). b, Change in dCGR/dMAT during the past five decades. c, Change in cintCGR during the past five decades. In b and c, different colours showdCGR/dMATor cint CGR estimated with moving time windows of different lengths (20 yr and 25 yr). Years on the horizontal axis indicate the central year of the moving time window used to derive dCGR/dMAT or cintCGR (for example, 1970 represents period 1960–1979 in the 20-yr time window). The shaded areas show the confidence interval of dCGR/dMATand cintCGR, as appropriate, derived using 20-yr or 25-yr moving windows in 500 bootstrap estimates."


7
Consequences / Re: 2017 ENSO
« on: April 24, 2017, 03:28:03 AM »
Per the attached plot issued yesterday by the BoM, the 30-day moving average SOI has drifted up to -4.3:

8
Science / Re: Adapting to the Anthropocene
« on: April 24, 2017, 02:52:28 AM »
The linked open access reference indicates: "We find that a straightforward application of a recent result yields exponential speedup compared to classical heuristics in approximate probabilistic inference, thereby demonstrating another example where advanced quantum resources can potentially prove useful in machine learning".

Peter Wittek & Christian Gogolin, (2017), "Quantum Enhanced Inference in Markov Logic Networks", Scientific Reports 7, No. 45672, doi:10.1038/serp45672

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep45672


9
Consequences / Re: Conservative Scientists & its Consequences
« on: April 24, 2017, 02:24:49 AM »
The linked open access reference indicates that: "… sea ice will completely disappear in the Barents and Kara Seas by around 2025"; which is clearly an indication that Arctic Amplification is greater than AR5 acknowledges:

Kim, K.-Y., Kim, J., Yeo, S., Na, H., Hamlington, B. D., and Leben, R. R. (2017), "Understanding the Mechanism of Arctic Amplification and Sea Ice Loss", The Cryosphere Discuss., doi:10.5194/tc-2017-39

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/tc-2017-39/

Abstract. Sea ice reduction is accelerating in the Barents and Kara Seas. Several mechanisms are proposed to explain the accelerated loss of polar sea ice, which remains an open question. In the present study, the detailed physical mechanism of sea ice reduction in winter is identified using the daily ERA interim reanalysis data. Downward longwave radiation is an essential element for sea ice reduction, but can only be sustained by excessive upward heat flux from the sea surface exposed to air in the region of sea ice loss. The increased turbulent heat flux is used to increase air temperature and specific humidity in the lower troposphere, which in turn increases downward longwave radiation. This feedback process is clearly observed in the Barents and Kara Seas in the reanalysis data. A quantitative assessment reveals that this feedback process is amplifying at the rate of ~ 8.9 % every year during 1979–2016. Based on this estimate, sea ice will completely disappear in the Barents and Kara Seas by around 2025. Availability of excessive heat flux is necessary for the maintenance of this feedback process; a similar mechanism of sea ice loss is expected to take place over the sea-ice covered polar region when sea ice is not fully recovered in winter.

10
Antarctica / Re: What's new in Antarctica ?
« on: April 24, 2017, 01:47:16 AM »
And a paper showing evidence for meltwater stabilization of an ice shelf (?!) doi:10.1038/nature22048

Here is a more complete reference & a linked to an open access cop of the paper:

Jonathan Kingslake, Jeremy C. Ely, Indrani Das & Robin E. Bell (20 APRIL 2017), "Widespread movement of meltwater onto and across Antarctic ice shelves", NATURE, VOL 544, 349; doi:10.1038/nature22049

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22049.epdf?referrer_access_token=F81z0TqwjGmb71By493OxNRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0NWLAFAcjzSECmaCP-TuhnQnGZAtnvyAOn7AnGvU4eFIhvSEXoC1C_eSvhX66G7wIrelRihqRI2ZJiLFK7noXL2wRaVkuwepFW4IPEnI18R27P44CGAGzLWoi2s9p-L4iIXUTf9xLPsUKVG5QyR-syQVj_dX8IR8ikWvtV8j6UV4zYWWaEHHTVDErJ8Je1mG9hoI8AgdRFZYtm_R8vq6R96&tracking_referrer=www.cbsnews.com

11
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 23, 2017, 09:36:25 PM »
The linked article is entitled: “Trump’s Organized Crime Ties Bring Blackmail to the White House”, & it indicates that Trump has ties to the mob in Kazakhstan.

http://www.salon.com/2017/04/23/trumps-organized-crime-ties-bring-blackmail-to-the-white-house/

Extract: “Says one former business partner, "The headline will be ‘The Kazakh Gangster and President Trump.'"”

12
The rest / Re: Russiagate
« on: April 23, 2017, 07:45:48 PM »
...
...
If you ever want to publish your thoughts to a wider audience, let me know.

prokaryotes,

Over the next month, or two, I will endeavor to put some posts in the "Adapting to the Anthropocene" thread related my thought of how the Technocracy movement could be updated to function in the coming 4th Industrial Revolution (including with a functioning 'quantum Internet' beginning circa 2030); which may be able to take sufficient root to partially survive the coming socio-economic collapse circa 2050 to 2060.  You can decide whether you like what I post there, or not.

Best,
ASLR

13
Science / Re: Adapting to the Anthropocene
« on: April 23, 2017, 07:36:10 PM »
The following three linked articles, collectively indicate that within about 10 years a commercially available quantum Internet could be established (parallel with the existing classical Internet), that could allow not only for the development of dispersed networks of general purpose quantum computers; but also for quantum-synchronized small devices in the Internet-of-Things:

The first linked article is entitled: "Building the Quantum Internet".

https://cacm.acm.org/news/214225-building-the-quantum-internet/fulltext

Extract: "In 2015 and 2016, quantum physicists from QuTech, a joint initiative of the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) and the Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), were the first to demonstrate loophole-free violation of the Bell inequality. Although this was an achievement in esoteric quantum physics, it is also the first step toward building a quantum Internet, a long-range network that can connect super-fast quantum computers or provide absolutely secure, tamper-free communication.

The quantum Internet will never replace the regular Internet; it simply adds extra functionality. The entangled photons traveling the fledgling quantum Internet will probably first be used for quantum key distribution, …

Perhaps the ultimate goal of the quantum Internet is to connect the world's quantum computers, which might become a reality in another decade. Entangling two quantum computers effectively merges them into one device twice as big, and for quantum computers, size matters exponentially; if you connect two same-sized regular computers, you get roughly twice the computing power. Entangle two quantum computers, and the computing power is squared; connect three, and you get the cube of their computing power."

The second linked article is entitled: "Quantum technology is beginning to come into its own".

http://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2017-03-09/quantum-devices

Extract: "Last August China launched Micius, a quantum-key-distribution-enabled satellite backed by tech companies including Huawei and Lenovo. The goal at this stage is to link the Beijing-to-Shanghai network to another in Urumqi, in Xinjiang province, some 3,000km away. Efforts to develop satellite communications are also under way in Singapore, Canada, Japan, Italy and America. Once the challenges of getting quantum signals into space—through turbulent air, clouds and so on—are overcome, a global network could easily follow.

With country-spanning networks and quantum-enabled satellites, it is easy to envisage a global “quantum internet” in which each link offers quantum-enhanced security. But the kind of innovation that will allow the development of such networks will also be of use, for example, in shuttling information within, and between, future quantum-computing devices: think quantum distributed computing and quantum cloud computing. Just as the internet has demonstrated the power of linking many standard computers, says Seth Lloyd, a theorist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, “the quantum internet has the potential to change the way in which people and organisations collaborate and compete, establishing trust while protecting privacy.

quantum technologies are still viewed by many industries as risky. That may be because many of the approaches are technologically so far beyond the current state of the art. Richard Murray, an emerging-technologies expert at Innovate UK, Britain’s technology-strategy agency, says that the more transformative the technological change, the easier it is to miss opportunities.

Many practitioners believe that the applications and technologies outlined in this report are just the beginning. As they become more familiar, they will give rise to new applications and wholly new hardware. Subjects that used to be mere footnotes to physics will rule, and engineers (and perhaps even consumers) will have to learn to speak quantum.

Quantum computers and simulators should eventually be capable of solving some of science’s most basic and yet most daunting questions. Sensors of unparalleled precision may at last make it possible to test the predictions of physicists’ most abstract ideas, perhaps linking the theories of quantum mechanics and gravity.”

The third linked article is entitled: "The Race to Sell True Quantum Computers Begins Before They Really Exist".

https://www.wired.com/2017/03/race-sell-true-quantum-computers-begins-really-exist/

Extract: "Within the next five years, Google will produce a viable quantum computer. That’s the stake the company has just planted. In the pages of Nature late last week, researchers from Google’s Quantum AI Laboratory told the world that a machine leveraging the seemingly magical principles of quantum mechanics will soon outperform traditional computers on certain tasks. They said this long-anticipated technology will, among other things, improve the artificial intelligence that’s already remaking the tech world. “The field of quantum computing will soon achieve a historic milestone,” the team wrote. They call this milestone “quantum supremacy.”

A true quantum computer is not yet a reality. “You can’t do anything practical today,” says Gregoire Ribordy, founder and CEO of quantum cyber-security company ID Quantique. But the world’s biggest tech companies are already jockeying for their own form of commercial supremacy as they anticipate a quantum breakthrough. Both Google and IBM now say they will offer access to true quantum computing over the internet (call it quantum cloud computing). Microsoft recently hired several notable researchers in launching its own effort to build a quantum computer. And in China, internet giant Alibaba has teamed up with the Chinese Academy of Science to build a quantum computing lab. Meanwhile, various organizations (including Google) are exploring the potential of a commercial machine from D-Wave, which takes a more immediate but less powerful approach to the problem."

14
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 23, 2017, 05:27:43 PM »
My previous post in this thread..


Thanks Abrupt, it will take some time to make a video with the suggested science. Will post it here when ready, cheers.


Thanks prokaryotes, in the meantime I will continue consolidating some evidence here that ESMs need to be updated to include such dynamical sensitivity considerations as 'freshwater hosing' and warming induced rainfall on permafrost:

The first linked reference studies ice-climate feedback calibrated to 'freshwater hosing' events in the North Atlantic over the past 720,000 years, in order to study state dependence of climatic instabilities within a CMIP class of climate model.  Such research can help to calibrate models for such 'freshwater hosing' events such as the possible collapse of the WAIS this century:

Ayako Abe-Ouchi, et. al. (2017), "State dependence of climatic instability over the past 720,000 years from Antarctic ice cores and climate modeling", Science Advances, Vol. 3, no. 2, e1600446, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1600446

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/2/e1600446
&
http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/218067/1/sciadv.1600446.pdf

Abstract: "Climatic variabilities on millennial and longer time scales with a bipolar seesaw pattern have been documented in paleoclimatic records, but their frequencies, relationships with mean climatic state, and mechanisms remain unclear.  Understanding the processes and sensitivities that underlie these changes will underpin better understanding of the climate system and projections of its future change. We investigate the long-term characteristics of climatic variability using a new ice-core record from Dome Fuji, East Antarctica, combined with an existing long record from the Dome C ice core. Antarctic warming events over the past 720,000 years are most frequent when the Antarctic temperature is slightly below average on orbital time scales, equivalent to an intermediate climate during glacial periods, whereas interglacial and fully glaciated climates are unfavourable for a millennial-scale bipolar seesaw. Numerical experiments using a fully coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model with freshwater hosing in the northern North Atlantic showed that climate becomes most unstable in intermediate glacial conditions associated with large changes in sea ice and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Model sensitivity experiments suggest that the prerequisite for the most frequent climate instability with bipolar seesaw pattern during the late Pleistocene era is associated with reduced atmospheric CO2 concentration via global cooling and sea ice formation in the North Atlantic, in addition to extended Northern Hemisphere ice sheets."


The Last Glacial Termination, LGT, occurred from 18,000 to 11,650 kya, and the following reference, reconstructs the dynamic response of the Antarctic ice sheets to warming in this period in order to better evaluate Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanisms.  The abstract from the second linked reference concludes: "Given the anti-phase relationship between inter-hemispheric climate trends across the LGT our findings demonstrate that Southern Ocean-AIS feedbacks were controlled by global atmospheric teleconnections.  With increasing stratification of the Southern Ocean and intensification of mid-latitude westerly winds today, such teleconnections could amplify AIS mass loss and accelerate global sea-level rise."

Fogwill, et. al. (2017), "Antarctic ice sheet discharge driven by atmosphere-ocean feedbacks at the last Glacial Termination", Scientific Reports 7, Article number 39979, doi:10.1038/srep39979

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39979


Finally (for this post), can you imagine how the timing of a rain-dominated Arctic will be affected by Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanism driven by a WAIS collapse circa 2040-2060 (which almost all ESM projections currently ignore), and or pulses of methane emission from thermokarst lakes?  I also note that the third linked reference assumes that ECS is only around 3C.

Richard Bintanja and Olivier Andry (2017), “Towards a rain-dominated Arctic”, Geophysical Research Abstracts Vol. 19, EGU2017-4402

http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2017/EGU2017-4402.pdf

Abstract: “Current climate models project a strong increase in Arctic precipitation over the coming century, which has been attributed primarily to enhanced surface evaporation associated with sea-ice retreat. Since the Arctic is still quite cold, especially in winter, it is often (implicitly) assumed that the additional precipitation will fall mostly as snow. However, very little is known about future changes in rain/snow distribution in the Arctic, notwithstanding the importance for hydrology and biology. Here we use 37 state-of-the-art climate models in standardised twenty-first century (2006–2100) simulations to show that 70◦ – 90◦N average annual Arctic snowfall will actually decrease, despite the strong increase in precipitation, and that most of the additional precipitation in the future (2091– 2100) will fall as rain. In fact, rain is even projected to become the dominant form of precipitation in the Arctic region. This is because Arctic atmospheric warming causes a greater fraction of snowfall to melt before it reaches the surface, in particular over the North Atlantic and the Barents Sea. The reduction in Arctic snowfall is most pronounced during summer and autumn when temperatures are close to the melting point, but also winter rainfall is found to intensify considerably. Projected (seasonal) trends in rain/snowfall will heavily impact Arctic hydrology (e.g. river discharge, permafrost melt), climatology (e.g. snow, sea ice albedo and melt) and ecology (e.g. water and food availability).”

See also the fourth linked reference:

R. Bintanja et al. Towards a rain-dominated Arctic, Nature Climate Change (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nclimate3240

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v7/n4/full/nclimate3240.html

Extract: "Rain causes more (extensive) permafrost melt [Refs. 7,26], which most likely leads to enhanced emissions of terrestrial methane [Ref. 27] (a powerful greenhouse gas), more direct runoff (a smaller seasonal delay) and concurrent freshening of the Arctic Ocean [Ref 18]. Rainfall also diminishes snow cover extent and considerably lowers the surface albedo of seasonal snow, ice sheets and sea ice [Ref. 9] , reinforcing surface warming and amplifying the retreat of ice and snow; in fact, enhanced rainfall will most likely accelerate sea-ice retreat by lowering its albedo (compared with that of fresh snowfall) "

15
The rest / Re: Russiagate
« on: April 23, 2017, 05:05:26 PM »
Or stop dividing in terms of the left and right entirely, and just focus on science based policy

+1


Can you imagine a world where policy is based on the best science and policy changes to meet new data?  Too bad we are prisoners of the lawyers and their cognitive dissonance based system.

I would think that is the way to go, because it eliminates the noise from the facts. The evolution of politics, our future .... how long will it take? It would also possibly mean the best possible environment for prosperity.

You might want to take a quick look at the linked Wikipedia article entitled: "Technocracy":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy

Extract: "Technocracy is a system of governance where decision-makers are selected on the basis of technological knowledge. Scientists, engineers, technologists, or experts in any field, would compose the governing body, instead of elected representatives. Leadership skills would be selected on the basis of specialized knowledge and performance, rather than parliamentary skills. Technocracy in that sense of the word (an entire government run as a technical or engineering problem) is mostly hypothetical. In another commonly used sense, technocracy is any portion of a bureaucracy that is run by technologists in technically and analytically sound ways.

The term technocracy was originally used to advocate the application of the scientific method to solving social problems. In such a system, the role of money, economic values, and morals could be eliminated altogether. Concern would be given to sustainability within the resource base, instead of monetary profitability, so as to ensure continued operation of all social-industrial functions. Some uses of the word refer to a form of meritocracy, where the ablest are in charge, ostensibly without the influence of special interest groups. The word technocratic has been used to describe governments that include non-elected professionals at a ministerial level."


Also see the following linked Wikipedia article entitled: "Technocracy movement"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_movement

Extract: "In a publication from 1938 Technocracy Inc. the main organization made the following statement in defining their proposal.

'Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population of this continent. For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem. There will be no place for Politics or Politicians, Finance or Financiers, Rackets or Racketeers. Technocracy states that this method of operating the social mechanism of the North American Continent is now mandatory because we have passed from a state of actual scarcity into the present status of potential abundance in which we are now held to an artificial scarcity forced upon us in order to continue a Price System which can distribute goods only by means of a medium of exchange. Technocracy states that price and abundance are incompatible; the greater the abundance the smaller the price. In a real abundance there can be no price at all. Only by abandoning the interfering price control and substituting a scientific method of production and distribution can an abundance be achieved. Technocracy will distribute by means of a certificate of distribution available to every citizen from birth to death. The Technate will encompass the entire American Continent from Panama to the North Pole because the natural resources and the natural boundary of this area make it an independent, self-sustaining geographical unit.'"

16
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: April 23, 2017, 04:41:14 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "How Western Civilization Could Collapse".  It discusses how the appetite of the economic elites to hoard resources, not only damages the environment, but also stratifies our socio-economic fabric; both of which appear to be on track to lead to a collapse of Western Civilization in the 2050-2060 timeframe.  As this timeframe comes after the 2045 date for Ray Kurzweil's 'Technological Singularity', I attach an image from The Matrix of what the Machine City looks like after the Machine Wars.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170418-how-western-civilisation-could-collapse

Extract: "Safa Motesharrei, a systems scientist at the University of Maryland, uses computer models to gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms that can lead to local or global sustainability or collapse. According to findings that Motesharrei and his colleagues published in 2014, there are two factors that matter: ecological strain and economic stratification. The ecological category is the more widely understood and recognised path to potential doom, especially in terms of depletion of natural resources such as groundwater, soil, fisheries and forests – all of which could be worsened by climate change.

That economic stratification may lead to collapse on its own, on the other hand, came as more of a surprise to Motesharrei and his colleagues. Under this scenario, elites push society toward instability and eventual collapse by hoarding huge quantities of wealth and resources, and leaving little or none for commoners who vastly outnumber them yet support them with labour. Eventually, the working population crashes because the portion of wealth allocated to them is not enough, followed by collapse of the elites due to the absence of labour.

“The world will not rise to the occasion of solving the climate problem during this century, simply because it is more expensive in the short term to solve the problem than it is to just keep acting as usual,” says Jorgen Randers, a professor emeritus of climate strategy at the BI Norwegian Business School, and author of 2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years. “The climate problem will get worse and worse and worse because we won’t be able to live up to what we’ve promised to do in the Paris Agreement and elsewhere.”

“By 2050, the US and UK will have evolved into two-class societies where a small elite lives a good life and there is declining well-being for the majority,” Randers says. “What will collapse is equity.”

Some of these forecasts and early warning signs should sound familiar, precisely because they are already underway. While Homer-Dixon is not surprised at the world’s recent turn of events – he predicted some of them in his 2006 book – he didn’t expect these developments to occur before the mid-2020s."

17
Consequences / Re: 2017 ENSO
« on: April 23, 2017, 03:28:33 AM »
Per the attached plot issued yesterday by the BoM, the 30-day moving average SOI has moved down to -4.6:

18
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 23, 2017, 03:00:21 AM »
My previous post in this thread, focused on possible previously unrecognized/unappreciated possible natural feedback pathways that could have amplified natural radiative forcing in order to better account for some of the large past high sea level events (focused on MIS 11c, the Holsteinian Peak). I concluded that post with a suggestion that methane emission feedback mechanisms (like thermokarst lakes and/or methane hydrates) may have played an important role.  In this regards, the first two images come from Isaksen et al. (2011) who used computer models to estimate methane's atmospheric burden.  Isaksen et al (2011) found (see the first image) that as the assumed emission rate increased the chemistry of the atmosphere would change, resulting in increased lifetime for methane, thus increasing the associated radiative forcing (see the second image).  The last two images show how during periods slightly warmer than current conditions, relatively warm seawater can enter the Arctic Ocean from the Atlantic, which, might result in methane emissions from marine methane hydrates in the seafloors of Arctic Ocean continental shelves.

Edit: Isaksen, I. S. A., Gauss M., Myhre, G., Walter Anthony, K. M.  and Ruppel, C.,  (2011), "Strong atmospheric chemistry feedback to climate warming from Arctic methane emissions", Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 25, GB2002, doi:10.1029/2010GB003845.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010GB003845/abstract

19
Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: April 23, 2017, 01:13:19 AM »
The linked article is entitled: "March for Science or March for Reality?".  Hopefully, the public comes to realize that Mother Nature doesn't care what people believe to be true, only what is true.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/march-for-science-or-march-for-reality/

Extract: "Hostility toward the former is troublesome, but hostility toward the latter is the underlying issue

The Trump Administration is discovering that obfuscation, denial, and hype may work when selling real estate, but in public arena eventually reality has a way of biting you in the butt. And the public is watching. The March for Science may be lucky to capitalize upon a growing awareness that there is no Wizard behind the curtain. The number of marchers, their backgrounds, or even their myriad messages may not drive the success of the March. Rather, it may be driven by the harsh examples coming out every day that reality exists independent of the desires or claims of those in power. In this case, the greatest asset the March for Science has going for it may be Donald Trump himself."

20
The rest / Re: Systemic Isolation
« on: April 23, 2017, 01:05:27 AM »
The linked article indicates that one path out of our climate change problem is to recognize its roots in a human behavior problem; and to find, or develop, sustainability leaders that can inspire collective action (i.e. and not encourage systemic isolation):

Elise Amel, Christie Manning, Britain Scott & Susan Koger (21 Apr 2017), "Beyond the roots of human inaction: Fostering collective effort toward ecosystem conservation", Science, Vol. 356, Issue 6335, pp. 275-279, DOI: 10.1126/science.aal1931

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6335/275

Abstract: "The term “environmental problem” exposes a fundamental misconception: Disruptions of Earth’s ecosystems are at their root a human behavior problem. Psychology is a potent tool for understanding the external and internal drivers of human behavior that lead to unsustainable living. Psychologists already contribute to individual-level behavior-change campaigns in the service of sustainability, but attention is turning toward understanding and facilitating the role of individuals in collective and collaborative actions that will modify the environmentally damaging systems in which humans are embedded. Especially crucial in moving toward long-term human and environmental well-being are transformational individuals who step outside of the norm, embrace ecological principles, and inspire collective action. Particularly in developed countries, fostering legions of sustainability leaders rests upon a fundamental renewal of humans’ connection to the natural world."

21
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 23, 2017, 12:51:55 AM »
As I previously noted (see also Melles et. al. 2012) currently the best ESMs cannot match the climate response during MIS 11c (the Holsteinian Peak), where MIS 11 extents from 424,000 to 374,000 years ago (see the first two attached images).  This likely means that feedback mechanisms treated by current ESMs as noise may actual be important from a dynamical sensitivity point-of-view of such considerations as climatic state, climate attractors (such as PDO/AMO/ENSO interactions), and 'short-term' feedback mechanisms (such as the collapse of marine ice sheets and/or GHG emissions from permafrost, and/or methane hydrate, degradation).  In this regards, I note that the first image indicates that the annual precipitation (PANN) in NE Siberia was much higher during MIS 11c than during MIS 5e (Eemian Peak) or MIS 1 (Holocene).  This higher annual precipitation likely fell as rainfall during MIS 11c; which may have contributed to a pulse of methane emissions from thermokarst lakes as indicated by the third attached image (of projections of such possible emissions this century).  Thus, it would be stupid to ignore the potential impacts of such un-correctly modeled dynamical factors; and hopefully ACME will continue to be improved beyond 2017, when its approved budget runs out (i.e. hopefully the Trump Administration is not so stupid as to kill future funding for ACME).


Martin Melles, Julie Brigham-Grette, Pavel S. Minyuk, Norbert R. Nowaczyk, Volker Wennrich, Robert M. DeConto, Patricia M. Anderson, Andrei A. Andreev, Anthony Coletti, Timothy L. Cook, Eeva Haltia-Hovi, Maaret Kukkonen, Anatoli V. Lozhkin, Peter Rosén, Pavel Tarasov, Hendrik Vogel & Bernd Wagner (20 July 2012), "2.8 Million Years of Arctic Climate Change from Lake El’gygytgyn, NE Russia", Science, Vol. 337 no. 6092 pp. 315-320, DOI: 10.1126/science.1222135

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/337/6092/315
&
https://www.geo.umass.edu/climate/papers2/Melles_Science2012.pdf


ABSTRACT: "The reliability of Arctic climate predictions is currently hampered by insufficient knowledge of natural climate variability in the past. A sediment core from Lake El’gygytgyn in northeastern (NE) Russia provides a continuous, high-resolution record from the Arctic, spanning the past 2.8 million years. This core reveals numerous “super interglacials” during the Quaternary; for marine benthic isotope stages (MIS) 11c and 31, maximum summer temperatures and annual precipitation values are ~4° to 5°C and ~300 millimeters higher than those of MIS 1 and 5e. Climate simulations show that these extreme warm conditions are difficult to explain with greenhouse gas and astronomical forcing alone, implying the importance of amplifying feedbacks and far field influences. The timing of Arctic warming relative to West Antarctic Ice Sheet retreats implies strong interhemispheric climate connectivity."


Captions for the first image: "Fig. 3. (A to H) (A) LR04 global marine isotope stack (12) and (B) mean July insolation for 67.5°N (13) for the past 2.8 My compared with (C) magnetostratigraphy, (D) facies, (E) magnetic susceptibility, (F) TOC contents, (G) Mn/Fe ratios, and (H) Si/Ti ratios in the sediment record from Lake El’gygytgyn (magnetic susceptibility and x-ray fluorescence data are smoothed using a 500-year weighted running mean to improve the signal-to-noise ratio). Super interglacials at Lake El’gygytgyn are highlighted with red bars. (I to L) Expanded views into the interglacials MIS 1, 5e, 11c, and 31 and adjoining glacials/ stadials. (I) Reconstructed MTWM and (J) PANN based on the pollen spectra and best modern analog approach [modern values from (56)]. (K) Mean July insolation for 67.5°N (13) compared with El’gygytgyn Si/Ti ratios, smoothed by five-point weighted running mean. (L) Tree and shrub pollen percentages compared with spruce pollen content. Simulated July surface air temperatures (red and green dots) at the location of the lake are shown for comparison. The location of the dots relative to the x axis corresponds with the GHG and orbital forcing used in each interglacial simulation (see supplementarymaterials). Simulated modern and preindustrial temperatures are close to observed values, so model temperatures are not corrected for bias. The green dot indicates the results derived with a deglaciated Greenland and increased heat flux under Arctic Ocean sea ice by 8Wm−2."  Where: PANN = annual precipitation and MTWM = the warmest month of the year (i.e. July).

22
The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: April 23, 2017, 12:00:06 AM »
My favorite sign was handwritten by a pre-teenage boy that said: "More Gravity, Less Grabbity"; however here is a small sample of other resistance signs/posters:

23
The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: April 22, 2017, 11:56:57 PM »
I just returned from the March for Science in SF and I would like to express my admiration for the spirit of the protesters, and of their great wit in protest signs (here are a very few examples):

24
Science / Re: Adapting to the Anthropocene
« on: April 22, 2017, 10:36:29 AM »
The April 23 2017 issue of the New York Times Magazine is focused on climate change (see the following link); for those who want to get ready:

https://www.nytimes.com/section/magazine

See also the article (& associated attached image) on how a warming planet drives human migration:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/magazine/how-a-warming-planet-drives-human-migration.html?action=click&contentCollection=magazine&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0

25
Science / Re: Adapting to the Anthropocene
« on: April 22, 2017, 10:20:46 AM »
The linked article is entitled: "Kurzweil Claims That the Singularity Will Happen by 2045".  Rather than preparing for the future by buying 'survivalist' books, maybe it would be better to improve your mind (say via mindfulness):

https://futurism.com/kurzweil-claims-that-the-singularity-will-happen-by-2045/

Extract: "In a communication to Futurism, Kurzweil states:

"2029 is the consistent date I have predicted for when an AI will pass a valid Turing test and therefore achieve human levels of intelligence. I have set the date 2045 for the ‘Singularity’ which is when we will multiply our effective intelligence a billion fold by merging with the intelligence we have created."

And, because it’s the nature of technology to improve, Kurzweil  predicts that during the 2030s some technology will be invented that can go inside your brain and help your memory.

So, instead of the machines-taking-over-the-world vision of the singularity, Kurzweil thinks it’ll be a future of unparalleled human-machine synthesis."

26
Sidd's condemnations are not the law and the prophets.
...
The complicated truth has gone missing in favor of simple condemnation of hardworking public servants.


The linked article is entitled: “Bernie Sanders defends his endorsements of red state Democrats: “Can’t exclude people who disagree with us””.  Ossoff is a centrist (not a left-wing populist) yet Bernie endorsed him.  Why?  Because Bernie is a grown-up who knows that you need to work with people that you may disagree with in order to make progress.

http://www.salon.com/2017/04/21/bernie-sanders-defends-his-endorsements-of-red-state-democrats-cant-exclude-people-who-disagree-with-us/

Extract: “Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the face of the progressive movement in the United States and the most popular politician in the nation, is defending his decision to support two Democratic candidates this week. Sanders finally endorsed Democrat Jon Ossoff in his contested election in Georgia’s sixth congressional district, after initially hesitating to call Ossoff a progressive. The Independent senator also defended his endorsement of a Democratic candidate in Nebraska who supports restrictions on abortion access.

“Let me be very clear,” Sander said in an interview Thursday night with the Huffington Post, “It is imperative that Jon Ossoff be elected congressman from Georgia’s 6th District and that Democrats take back the U.S. House.””

27
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 22, 2017, 04:10:16 AM »

So ...
You believe that Hillary, or her staff, would not have (colluded*) with Trudeau, May or Merkel to assure that their comments/influence didn't inadvertantly clash with whatever proposal the Candidate might be about to make?


I believe that we should let the FBI's criminal investigation of potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Putin take its full, and natural, course.

28
Consequences / Re: 2017 ENSO
« on: April 22, 2017, 03:28:06 AM »
Per the attached plot issued yesterday by the BoM, the 30-day moving average SOI has moved down to -4.2:

29
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 22, 2017, 02:31:14 AM »
The linked article is entitled: “Former Acting AG Sally Yates to Testify Publicly in House Russia Probe.  We will progressively get at the truth.

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/former-acting-ag-sally-yates-testify-publicly-russia-probe-n749481

Extract: “The Republican and Democrat leading the House Intelligence Committee probe of Russian election interference announced Friday they are seeking to schedule public testimony sometime after May 2 by Yates, as well as former CIA Director John Brennan and James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence.”

30
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: April 22, 2017, 01:43:04 AM »
Wili


What if every student brought a calculator to a math test. But they decided that you alone had cheated?
What if every serviceman marched for Trump, but they insisted that by marching you had swung the election.
What if every countries leader urged Americans to vote for Hillary, but Putin urged them to vote for Trump.


The final example is almost exactly what happened. If Putin and Trump are guilty so are Hillary and Trudeau, Hillary and May, and Hillary and Merkel.


You certainly won't claim that America must stand neutral in Russia's coming election. I doubt that you would charge Mexico's leader for saying nasties about Trump. Why on earth would you expect Putin to sit on his hands when one candidate threatens war as the other makes nice overtures?


Terry

Terry,

The main problem with your analogy is that in this thread we are outraged by the reported evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Putin, so the outrage is about Trump.

Best,
ASLR

31
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 21, 2017, 11:44:16 PM »
prokaryotes,

For my 10th reference I provide Elliot A. et al. (2015), which I discussed in Reply #256, indicating that if we are not careful we might be locked into a Northern Hemisphere equable atmospheric pattern before the year 2100.


Jagniecki,Elliot A. et al. (2015), "Eocene atmospheric CO2from the nahcolite proxy", Geology, http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/G36886.1


http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/early/2015/10/23/G36886.1

ftp://rock.geosociety.org/pub/reposit/2015/2015357.pdf


32
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 21, 2017, 11:36:48 PM »
prokaryotes,

This brings us to the topic of how soon might we expect to reach the 2 to 3C GMSTA range cited by DeConto & Pollard (2016) for the WAIS to begin its main stage collapse.  In this regards, the first linked reference, Rogelj et.al. (2016), indicates that the remaining carbon budget from 2015 may be as low as 590 GtCO2; and as CO₂-e emissions are around 50GtCO2, it is easy to see that we could locked in to exceeding the 2C limit (sometime before 2100) if we continue BAU emissions thru 2030, assuming that ECS is close to 3C.  However, both my immediate prior post and the second linked reference, Sherwood et. al. (2014), find that ECS cannot be less than 3C, and is likely currently in the 4C to 4.5C range.  Per the third linked reference (and attached image), if we were to conservatively assume that the effective ECS is currently 4.0C then we passed the threshold to reach 3C GMSTA (circa 2100) when the CO₂-e was about 500ppm around the year 2010 [the current CO₂-e atmospheric concentration (with the GWP100 for methane assumed to be 35) is well over 520ppm, and climbing rapidly].

Joeri Rogelj, Michiel Schaeffer, Pierre Friedlingstein, Nathan P. Gillett, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Myles Allen & Reto Knutti (2016) "Differences between carbon budget estimates unravelled", Nature Climate Change, Volume: 6, Pages: 245–252, doi:10.1038/nclimate2868

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n3/full/nclimate2868.html

Abstract: "Several methods exist to estimate the cumulative carbon emissions that would keep global warming to below a given temperature limit. Here we review estimates reported by the IPCC and the recent literature, and discuss the reasons underlying their differences. The most scientifically robust number — the carbon budget for CO2-induced warming only — is also the least relevant for real-world policy. Including all greenhouse gases and using methods based on scenarios that avoid instead of exceed a given temperature limit results in lower carbon budgets. For a >66% chance of limiting warming below the internationally agreed temperature limit of 2 °C relative to pre-industrial levels, the most appropriate carbon budget estimate is 590–1,240 GtCO2 from 2015 onwards. Variations within this range depend on the probability of staying below 2 °C and on end-of-century non-CO2 warming. Current CO2 emissions are about 40 GtCO2 yr−1, and global CO2 emissions thus have to be reduced urgently to keep within a 2 °C-compatible budget."


Sherwood, S.C., Bony, S. and Dufresne, J.-L., (2014) "Spread in model climate sensitivity traced to atmospheric convective mixing", Nature; Volume: 505, pp 37–42, doi:10.1038/nature12829

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/full/nature12829.html


Zhou Tianjun, Xiaolong Chen, 2015: Uncertainty in the 2C Warming Threshold Related to Climate Sensitivity and Climate Feedback. J. Meteor. Res., 29(6), 884-895, doi: 10.1007/s13351- 015-5036-4

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13351-015-5036-4
http://www.lasg.ac.cn/staff/ztj/group/files/201612292920438.pdf


33
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 21, 2017, 08:54:22 PM »
prokaryotes,

As my last post mentioned the dynamical sensitivity of climate models, I provide the following four references related to the calibration of such dynamical sensitivity of climate models using paleodata.

The first following linked reference (der Heydt et. al. 2016) concludes: "Such perturbations (illustrated in Fig. 1b,d) are not normally applied in climate models used for climate predictions [IPCC, 2013], where climate sensitivity is derived from model simulations considering prescribed, non-dynamic atmospheric CO2. In our conceptual model, we have derived climate sensitivities from both types of perturbations and find that the classical climate model approach (section 2.2, Fig. 4f) leads to significantly lower values of the climate sensitivity than the perturbations away from the attractor with dynamic CO2 (section 2.3, Fig. 11a). This emphasises the importance of including dynamic carbon cycle processes into climate prediction models. Moreover, it supports the idea that the real observed climate response may indeed be larger than the model predicted one, because those models never will include all feedback processes in the climate system.“

Anna S. von der Heydt, Peter Ashwin (Submitted on 12 Apr 2016), "State-dependence of climate sensitivity: attractor constraints and palaeoclimate regimes",    arXiv:1604.03311


http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.03311
&
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.03311v1.pdf

The second linked reference on the application of "dynamical systems theory" supports the position that the current effective ECS may be as high as 4.35C (but is masked both by lag times and by aerosol impacts):

Egbert H. van Nes, Marten Scheffer, Victor Brovkin, Timothy M. Lenton, Hao Ye, Ethan Deyle and George Sugihara (2015), "Causal feedbacks in climate change", Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/nclimate2568

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n5/full/nclimate2568.html


The third linked reference examines the state dependency of ECS using paledata from the past 5 millions years and similarly finds that the effective ECS is higher than more CMIP5 models assume.

Köhler, P., de Boer, B., von der Heydt, A. S., Stap, L. B., and van de Wal, R. S. W. (2015), "On the state dependency of the equilibrium climate sensitivity during the last 5 million years", Clim. Past, 11, 1801-1823, doi:10.5194/cp-11-1801-2015.


http://www.clim-past.net/11/1801/2015/cp-11-1801-2015.html
http://www.clim-past.net/11/1801/2015/cp-11-1801-2015.pdf


The fourth linked reference could not make it more clear that paleo-evidence from inter-glacial periods indicates that ECS is meaningfully higher than 3C and that climate models are commonly under predicting the magnitude of coming climate change.  Furthermore, these finding concur with those of Köhler et al (2015) which indicates that inter-glacial values for specific ECS was about 45% higher than during glacial periods.

Dana L. Royer (2016), "Climate Sensitivity in the Geologic Past", Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Vol. 44


http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-earth-100815-024150?src=recsys


For those who do not understand dynamical sensitivity, I note that it is related to the influence of climate attractors (from chaos theory), which can capture energy from radiative forcing and progressively ratchet-up climate states (see the two attached images).

34
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 21, 2017, 08:41:44 PM »
prokaryotes,

Next, with Hansen et al (2016)'s observation that ice sheet melting can temporarily reduce SSTA in the Southern Ocean and North Atlantic, it is important to consider parameters such a dynamical sensitivity and Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI).  The linked reference discusses the relationship of ECS and dynamical sensitivity of climate models.:

Kevin M. Grise & Lorenzo M. Polvani (28 April 2016), "Is climate sensitivity related to dynamical sensitivity?", Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, DOI: 10.1002/2015JD024687


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015JD024687/abstract

Abstract: "The atmospheric response to increasing CO2 concentrations is often described in terms of the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS). Yet, the response to CO2 forcing in global climate models is not limited to an increase in global-mean surface temperature: for example, the mid-latitude jets shift poleward, the Hadley circulation expands, and the subtropical dry zones are altered. These changes, which are referred to here as “dynamical sensitivity,” may be more important in practice than the global-mean surface temperature.

This study examines to what degree the inter-model spread in the dynamical sensitivity of 23 CMIP5 models is captured by ECS. In the Southern Hemisphere, inter-model differences in the value of ECS explain ~60% of the inter-model variance in the annual-mean Hadley cell expansion, but just ~20% of the variance in the annual-mean mid-latitude jet response. In the Northern Hemisphere (NH), models with larger values of ECS significantly expand the Hadley circulation more during winter months, but contract the Hadley circulation more during summer months. Inter-model differences in ECS provide little significant information about the behavior of the Northern Hemisphere subtropical dry zones or mid-latitude jets.

The components of dynamical sensitivity correlated with ECS appear to be driven largely by increasing sea surface temperatures, whereas the components of dynamical sensitivity independent of ECS are related in part to changes in surface temperature gradients. These results suggest that efforts to narrow the spread in dynamical sensitivity across global climate models must also consider factors that are independent of global-mean surface temperature."

For anyone not aware of how the Hadley cell expansion effects the jet streams I attached an illustrative image.

35
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 21, 2017, 08:31:14 PM »
prokaryotes,

In my last post I cited Hansen et. al. (2016)'s ice-climate feedback mechanism, and with my first two attached images both from Robert M. DeConto & David Pollard (Nature 31 March 2016), I note that the extended versions of the DeConto –Pollard (2016) analysis of the WAIS indicates that the ice-climate feedback (associated with freshwater hosing) will accelerate the collapse of the WAIS.

James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Paul Hearty, Reto Ruedy, Maxwell Kelley, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Gary Russell, George Tselioudis, Junji Cao, Eric Rignot, Isabella Velicogna, Blair Tormey, Bailey Donovan, Evgeniya Kandiano, Karina von Schuckmann, Pushker Kharecha, Allegra N. Legrande, Michael Bauer, and Kwok-Wai Lo (2016), "Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 °C global warming could be dangerous", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3761-3812, doi:10.5194/acp-16-3761-2016

http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/acp-16-3761-2016.html

The green curve in panel (b) of the third attached image from Hansen et. al. (2016) shows that a collapse of the WAIS would contribute to a temporary planetary energy imbalance; which the fourth images (from Hansen & Sato 2012) indicates results in a temporary bump in the effective equilibrium climate sensitivity over the period of the ice-climate feedback mechanism.

36
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 21, 2017, 07:53:33 PM »
To learn more about  large-noise events such as ice-climate feedback due to the collapse of a marine ice sheet (like the WAIS) please review my posts

AbruptSLR, i currently plan a new video production where i want to summarize some of the most worrying research. Is it possible, can you summarize maybe what you think are the top 5 or top 10 findings in those regards? Or what you think should be communicated to a larger audience of laymen?
 Thank you.


prokaryotes,

As I am relatively busy, I will try to provide responses to your question in a series of posts; and I begin here by providing information related to the DeConto & Pollard's collective 2016 findings related to the implications of cliff failures and hydrofracting on marine glaciers.

The first linked refer indicates that to ensure that cliff failures and hydrofracturing (calving) of marine glaciers do not occur that the GMST departure above pre-industrial could be as low as 1C, but is not higher than 3C (and at the EGU conference DeConto said that the most likely range was between 2 and 2.7C, assuming the current consensus climate sensitivity).

Robert DeConto and David Pollard (2016), "Commitments to future retreat of Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets",  EGU General Assembly, Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 18, EGU2016-10930


http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/EGU2016-10930.pdf

Abstract: "The agreement reached at the COP21 United Nations Conference on Climate Change is aimed at limiting future increases in global mean temperature below 2ºC. Here, we use a continental ice sheet/shelf model with new treatments of meltwater-enhanced calving (hydrofracturing) and marine terminating ice-cliffs, to explore future commitments to sea-level rise given limits of global mean warming between 1 and 3ºC. In this case, ice-sheet model physics are calibrated against past ice-sheet response to temperatures warmer than today. The ice-sheet model is coupled to highly resolved atmosphere and ocean-model components, with imposed limits on future warming designed to mimic the idealized limits discussed at COP21. Both the short and long-term potential rise in global mean sea level are discussed in light of the range of allowances agreed in Paris. We also explore the sensitivity of Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets to plausible ranges of atmospheric versus ocean warming consistent with global mean temperatures between 1 and 3ºC; and the resulting long-term commitments to sea-level rise over the coming centuries and millennia."

Also see:

"At an EGU press conference DeConto said this work implied tipping points for major sea level rise occur between 2 and 2.7C above pre-industrial.

http://client.cntv.at/egu2016/press-conference-8 (DeConto starts about 22:10) "

While the entire video is worth watching I provide the four attached screenshots from the video.  The first two images are from the second (MIT EGU) speaker with:
(a) The first image showing the impact of the faux hiatus on both effective ECS (top panel) and effective oceanic diffusion (bottom panel), and the blue lines showing PDF values using observations until 2000 and the black lines showing PDF values using observations until 2010 (including part of the faux hiatus).  Further the lower panel clearly indicates that the faux hiatus (in GMST departures) was due to more heat content temporarily being sequestered into the oceans during the faux hiatus (some of which heat is now being released from the oceans).  Thus I believe that the blue line climate parameter distributions (with observations to 2000) is more "Realistic" (and indicates a mean ECS value of about 4C) and the black line climate parameter distributions is more "Pollyannaish" (and is best ignored).
(b) The second image shows the implications of both MIT's more "Realistic" climate parameters (left panel, which is good to consider) and "Pollyannaish" climate parameters (right panel, which is best ignored) for different carbon emission scenarios described in the video but with the current Paris pledges indicated by the red lines for which the more "Realistic" climate parameters indicate that we will reach 2C by about 2050 and 2.7C by about 2060.
The last two images are from the DeConto & Pollard EGU presentation with:
(c) The third image showing different carbon concentration pathways with the upper left panel showing the RCP scenarios used by DeConto & Pollard (2016) for their SLR projections; and the bottom left panel showing three new pathways postulated by DeConto where we follow the RCP 8.5 50%CL scenario until we reach 2C (by about 2040), 2.7C (by about 2065) and 3.6C (by about 2090), respectively for the blue, green and red lines.
(d) The fourth image shows DeConto & Pollard's (2016 EGU) projections of Antarctic contributions to changes in global mean sea level, GMSL, by the 2C (blue line), 2.7C (green line) and 3.6C (red line) forcing scenarios.  I believe that DeConto & Pollard's 2C scenario is not achievable in the real world (as confirmed by the second attached MIT analysis), and that by 2100 the 2.7C and the 3.6C forcing scenario produce essentially the same amount of increase in GMSL.  Taken together with the more "Realistic" MIT analysis the DeConto & Pollard (2016 EGU) findings indicate it likely that the WAIS collapse will begin about 2050 following the current Paris Pact pledges (and also ignoring the increase in carbon emissions associated with increasing agricultural growth).

Also I note that the indicated DeConto & Pollard (2016) findings do not include considerations that I plan to address in subsequent posts such as Hansen et al (2016)'s ice-climate feedback, nor the current positive PDO phase, nor higher ECS values, nor the activation/acceleration of non-linear positive feedback mechanisms and thus errs on the side of least drama.

Also see:
Robert M. DeConto & David Pollard (31 March 2016), "Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level rise", Nature, Volume: 531, Pages: 591–597, doi:10.1038/nature17145

http://www.nature.com/articles/nature17145.epdf?referrer_access_token=px-zRubs4M6aBBPl42_1GdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0M-pvJMg7VLINRa2mnTNsvXfjbAFNU4M9sSVFBNmnefzinIWT5DIW6fVmmjzqPkWPG0EWAexculA_Dh1H0gVAzIYAUjdsj8uznmBvFk8_blNOM5-opyiSaKMyaJis4af48A0kgec2kZ8QcJLEQ0CKHzo1BxzQZ7aHlC6ggm5qLKPX8C4yz0OZ4SKpsmFZlbgUA%3D&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com

37
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: April 21, 2017, 03:46:59 PM »
ASLR, I think this is what you intended for your first link:

http://news.wisc.edu/new-climate-model-better-predicts-changes-to-ocean-carbon-sink/


wili,

Thanks for the catch.

Best,
ASLR

38
Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: April 21, 2017, 03:45:35 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "The Carbon Brief Interview: Michael Gerrard", and it focuses on how both the Trump Administration and the GOP are assaulting climate science:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/carbon-brief-interview-michael-gerrard

Extract: "Gerrard on the election of Donald Trump: “In short, it’s been catastrophic.”"

39
Consequences / Re: Sea Level Rise and Social Cost of Carbon
« on: April 21, 2017, 05:32:11 AM »
The following link leads to a report entitled: "Rising Seas in California – An Update on Sea-Level Rise Science", and includes input by Rob DeConto & Claudia Tebaldi (& see the associated image).

http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/rising-seas-in-california-an-update-on-sea-level-rise-science.pdf

40
Consequences / Re: 2017 ENSO
« on: April 21, 2017, 03:31:25 AM »
Per the attached plot issued yesterday by the BoM, the 30-day moving average SOI has moved down to -3.1:

41
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: April 20, 2017, 11:54:22 PM »
Merci beaucoup, M'sieur AbruptSLR.  How depressed will I get on reading these links?

The truth will set you free ;).

42
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: April 20, 2017, 11:10:42 PM »
@AbruptSLR

wow
the world in in for a shit load of hurt...
you have echoed all my concerns.


To learn more about  large-noise events such as ice-climate feedback due to the collapse of a marine ice sheet (like the WAIS) please review my posts in:

1. The "Hansen et al paper: 3+ meters SLR by 2100" thread at:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1327.0.html

2. The "Potential Collapse Scenario for the WAIS" thread at:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,31.0.html

3. The "Conservative Scientists & its Consequences" thread at:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1053.0.html

While to see other discussions about existential risks see the "Anthropogenic Existential Risk" thread at:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1307.0.html




43
Consequences / Re: Hansen et al paper: 3+ meters SLR by 2100
« on: April 20, 2017, 11:02:49 PM »
The linked reference studies ice-climate feedback calibrated to 'freshwater hosing' events in the North Atlantic over the past 720,000 years, in order to study state dependence of climatic instabilities within a CMIP class of climate model.  Such research can help to calibrate models for such 'freshwater hosing' events such as the possible collapse of the WAIS this century:

Ayako Abe-Ouchi, et. al. (2017), "State dependence of climatic instability over the past 720,000 years from Antarctic ice cores and climate modeling", Science Advances, Vol. 3, no. 2, e1600446, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1600446

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/2/e1600446
&
http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/218067/1/sciadv.1600446.pdf

Abstract: "Climatic variabilities on millennial and longer time scales with a bipolar seesaw pattern have been documented in paleoclimatic records, but their frequencies, relationships with mean climatic state, and mechanisms remain unclear.  Understanding the processes and sensitivities that underlie these changes will underpin better understanding of the climate system and projections of its future change. We investigate the long-term characteristics of climatic variability using a new ice-core record from Dome Fuji, East Antarctica, combined with an existing long record from the Dome C ice core. Antarctic warming events over the past 720,000 years are most frequent when the Antarctic temperature is slightly below average on orbital time scales, equivalent to an intermediate climate during glacial periods, whereas interglacial and fully glaciated climates are unfavourable for a millennial-scale bipolar seesaw. Numerical experiments using a fully coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model with freshwater hosing in the northern North Atlantic showed that climate becomes most unstable in intermediate glacial conditions associated with large changes in sea ice and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Model sensitivity experiments suggest that the prerequisite for the most frequent climate instability with bipolar seesaw pattern during the late Pleistocene era is associated with reduced atmospheric CO2 concentration via global cooling and sea ice formation in the North Atlantic, in addition to extended Northern Hemisphere ice sheets."


44
The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: April 20, 2017, 10:34:51 PM »
Now for something on 'Alternative Facts':

45
Consequences / Re: Conservative Scientists & its Consequences
« on: April 20, 2017, 08:48:07 PM »
The linked research indicates that current climate models are underestimating the amount of observed Arctic Amplification.

Anais J. Orsi, et. al. (17 April 2017), "The recent warming trend in North Greenland", Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1002/2016GL072212 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL072212/full

Abstract: "The Arctic is among the fastest warming regions on Earth, but it is also one with limited spatial coverage of multi-decadal instrumental surface air temperature measurements. Consequently, atmospheric reanalyses are relatively unconstrained in this region, resulting in a large spread of estimated 30-year recent warming trends, which limits their use to investigate the mechanisms responsible for this trend.

Here, we present a surface temperature reconstruction over 1982-2011 at NEEM (51∘ W, 77∘ N), in North Greenland, based on the inversion of borehole temperature and inert gas isotope data. We find that NEEM has warmed by 2.7±0.33∘C over the past 30 years, from the long-term 1900-1970 average of -28.55±0.29∘C. The warming trend is principally caused by an increase in downward longwave heat flux. Atmospheric reanalyses underestimate this trend by 17%, underlining the need for more in situ observations to validate reanalyses."

46
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: April 20, 2017, 07:03:16 PM »
I have looked and failed to find any easily digestible info on the current and future ability of the biosphere to absorb CO2. If the carbon sinks are becoming less effective then presumably part or all of reductions in CO2 emissions would have no effect on reducing and reversing inceases in CO2 ppm.

Anybody got any url links for a moderately intelligent non-scientist ?


You are asking a very complex question to which there is no simple answer.  Nevertheless, I provide the following two linked articles, with the first discussing efforts to better understand the ocean-carbon sink; and the second discussing how forests temporarily contributed to the illusion of the faux warming hiatus.

The first linked article is entitled: "New climate model better predicts changes to ocean-carbon sink"


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/094013

The second linked article is entitled: "Forests 'held their breath' during global warming hiatus, research shows".

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-forests-held-global-hiatus.html

Extract: "The study shows that, during extended period of slower warming, worldwide forests 'breathe in' carbon dioxide through photosynthesis, but reduced the rate at which they 'breathe out'—or release the gas back to the atmosphere."

Edit: gerontocrat, to get a better feel for a more complete response to your question, look at the "Carbon Cycle" thread in the Science folder:

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,77.350.html

47
Consequences / Re: Conservative Scientists & its Consequences
« on: April 20, 2017, 06:42:41 PM »
In my last post I did not directly address Hansen's ice-climate positive feedback mechanism on ECS, due to a progressive collapse of the WAIS this century (& which could begin as soon as with about twenty years), so I provide the following recent posts from other threads, that indicate that paleo-evidence confirms that a collapse of marine ice sheets in Antarctica accelerates Arctic Amplification (due to Hansen's ice-climate feedback & the bipolar seesaw mechanism); which can in-turn amplify ENSO-like behavior that can telecommunicate more atmospheric energy from the Tropical Pacific poleward (& particularly towards West Antarctica thus sustaining a collapse of the WAIS begun in the Byrd Subglacial Basin).  If so this would dramatically increase the effective value of ECS this century:

Extract from the Human Stupidity thread:'

'The first linked article is entitled: "3M-year-old sediment tells the story of today's climate", and it discusses research about Lake El'gygytgyn, in Siberia, that began in 2009.  Even through the findings of this research has been available for years (see the last two linked references), ESMs have not been able to replicate that amount of Arctic Amplification documented by the Lake El'gygytgyn physical evidence.  This implies that the climate sensitivity of current ESMs need to be increased to appropriate capture the climate change risks (including Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanism due to 'freshwater hosing' that we are collectively exposing ourselves to.

https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060053182

Extract: "One of the "most astounding things" in the sediment, she said, was evidence that ancient summer temperatures in the region had spiked by as much as 14 degrees Fahrenheit higher than today, not just once, but several times in the past.

There is no direct way to measure the atmosphere of this ancient time, but repeated estimates from leaf stomata, ocean fossil studies and other remnants now put its carbon dioxide content at around 400 parts per million — about where it is today, largely due to the sharp rise of CO2 and other greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution began, literally gaining steam in the 1850s.

According to Brigham-Grette, that means the Earth is much more sensitive to climate change now, and it is speeding up as the planet tries to reach equilibrium from the new injection of heat.

The findings of the science team at Lake El'gygytgyn were also very hard for experts who use computer-driven climate models to understand. They pride themselves on being able to predict the speed of climate change in the future and also in the past by use of a technique called "hindcasting."

In the case of the late Pliocene, though, the models missed the ice melting. Yet the data collected from drilling in the Arctic and more recently from the Antarctic suggest it happened not just once, but repeatedly at both poles.

James White, a paleoclimatologist and climate modeler at the University of Colorado, Boulder, said Brigham-Grette's study is "one of the more important paleoclimate studies of the last 10 years."

"The fact that we don't get the Pliocene is a concern," he explained, because over the years, the modelers and the data gatherers have helped each other perfect their understanding of climate change and how to improve the models.

"We're not in equilibrium now, not even close," he asserted, as the planet's oceans struggle to distribute the new influx of heat.

A new Japanese study, published in February written by scientists from a team exploring ice cores drilled in Antarctica, found that ocean warming currents carrying heat from the tropics have become more unstable in the North Atlantic because of colder fresh water dripping from the melting ice of glaciers in Greenland. The phenomenon is called "freshwater hosing," which also appears to have happened in the ancient past.

"There's this attitude of 'Well, we're Americans, and we're going to tough it out and help people rebuild along our coastlines,'" she said. "Well, that's sort of stupid, because we're putting people and infrastructure back in harm's way.""


Gregory A. De Wet, Isla S. Castañeda, Robert M. DeConto & Julie Brigham-Grette  (February 2016), “A high-resolution mid-Pleistocene temperature record from Arctic Lake El'gygytgyn: A 50 kyr super interglacial from MIS 33 to MIS 31?”Earth and Planetary Science Letters 436:56-63 DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2015.12.021 

http://blogs.umass.edu/biogeochem/files/2016/01/de-Wet-et-al.-2016.pdf

&

Coletti, A. J., DeConto, R. M., Brigham-Grette, J., and Melles, M.: A GCM comparison of Pleistocene super-interglacial periods in relation to Lake El'gygytgyn, NE Arctic Russia, Clim. Past, 11, 979-989, doi:10.5194/cp-11-979-2015, 2015.

http://www.clim-past.net/11/979/2015/cp-11-979-2015.pdf
http://www.clim-past.net/11/979/2015/cp-11-979-2015.html
"


Extract from Hansen et al paper3+ meters SLR by 2100 thread:

"The Last Glacial Termination, LGT, occurred from 18,000 to 11,650 kya, and the following reference, reconstructs the dynamic response of the Antarctic ice sheets to warming in this period in order to better evaluate Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanisms.  The abstract concludes: "Given the anti-phase relationship between inter-hemispheric climate trends across the LGT our findings demonstrate that Southern Ocean-AIS feedbacks were controlled by global atmospheric teleconnections.  With increasing stratification of the Southern Ocean and intensification of mid-latitude westerly winds today, such teleconnections could amplify AIS mass loss and accelerate global sea-level rise."

Fogwill, et. al. (2017), "Antarctic ice sheet discharge driven by atmosphere-ocean feedbacks at the last Glacial Termination", Scientific Reports 7, Article number 39979, doi:10.1038/srep39979

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39979


See also:
http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/gmd-2017-18/gmd-2017-18.pdf
"

48
Science / Re: Adapting to the Anthropocene
« on: April 20, 2017, 06:21:24 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Quantum Computers Could Have Higher Speed Limits Than Previously Believed"; which is good news for tackling complex problems like climate change modeling; and other 'wicked problems'.

http://wallstreetpit.com/113203-quantum-computers-higher-speed-limits-previously-believed/?google_editors_picks=true

49
The Last Glacial Termination, LGT, occurred from 18,000 to 11,650 kya, and the following reference, reconstructs the dynamic response of the Antarctic ice sheets to warming in this period in order to better evaluate Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanisms.  The abstract concludes: "Given the anti-phase relationship between inter-hemispheric climate trends across the LGT our findings demonstrate that Southern Ocean-AIS feedbacks were controlled by global atmospheric teleconnections.  With increasing stratification of the Southern Ocean and intensification of mid-latitude westerly winds today, such teleconnections could amplify AIS mass loss and accelerate global sea-level rise."

Fogwill, et. al. (2017), "Antarctic ice sheet discharge driven by atmosphere-ocean feedbacks at the last Glacial Termination", Scientific Reports 7, Article number 39979, doi:10.1038/srep39979

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39979


See also:
http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/gmd-2017-18/gmd-2017-18.pdf

50
Consequences / Re: Hansen et al paper: 3+ meters SLR by 2100
« on: April 20, 2017, 12:33:30 PM »
The Last Glacial Termination, LGT, occurred from 18,000 to 11,650 kya, and the following reference, reconstructs the dynamic response of the Antarctic ice sheets to warming in this period in order to better evaluate Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanisms.  The abstract concludes: "Given the anti-phase relationship between inter-hemispheric climate trends across the LGT our findings demonstrate that Southern Ocean-AIS feedbacks were controlled by global atmospheric teleconnections.  With increasing stratification of the Southern Ocean and intensification of mid-latitude westerly winds today, such teleconnections could amplify AIS mass loss and accelerate global sea-level rise."

Fogwill, et. al. (2017), "Antarctic ice sheet discharge driven by atmosphere-ocean feedbacks at the last Glacial Termination", Scientific Reports 7, Article number 39979, doi:10.1038/srep39979

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39979


See also:
http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/gmd-2017-18/gmd-2017-18.pdf

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 224