There is a very odd study out of MIT, summarized thus:
Researchers show that a canonical view of global warming tells only half the story
I'm not sure what to make of this. Basically, they say that rising CO2 will not block more longwave radiation from leaving the atmosphere, but that the Earth will heat up because the atmosphere will absorb more incoming shortwave radiation.
Here's what the article says:
They found the answer by drawing on both computer simulations and a simple energy-balance model. As longwave radiation gets trapped by CO2, the Earth starts to warm, impacting various parts of the climate system. Sea ice and snow cover melt, turning brilliant white reflectors of sunlight into darker spots. The atmosphere grows moister because warmer air can hold more water vapor, which absorbs more shortwave radiation. Both of these feedbacks lessen the amount of shortwave radiation that bounces back into space, and the planet warms rapidly at the surface.
But in reality, we are seeing more and more sea ice and snow cover, which completely contradicts the basic predictions of the CO2/global warming theory. My initial reaction to this MIT study is that it shows the CO2 effect is already pretty well saturated; i.e., additional concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will not block more longwave radiation, which means it will have no impact on global warming (which is also what the data shows for the last 18 years). This also means that we will not have the death spiral of sea ice that the alarmists long predicted. Instead, the global sea ice will continue to expand, and the Arctic will continue the current trend toward more sea ice until it reaches the peak of the cycle in a few decades. Then it will cycle downward again, like it has since around 1978.
Tony Heller thinks this: The takeaway from the article is that the authors believe that Mann-made global warming is nonsense, but can’t say it for political reasons.
Maybe he's right, but I suspect the researchers were just repeating the "consensus" view that, despite the actual facts, the Arctic sea ice will continue to melt and the late summer sun at the north pole will somehow heat the exposed water enough to change the planet.
I'm laughing writing this, the theory is so absurd.
:)
Researchers show that a canonical view of global warming tells only half the story
 |
Outgoing longwave radiation from CERES Instrument on NASA Aqua Satellite for March 18, 2011, near Vernal Equinox of 2011
Courtesy of NASA
|
I'm not sure what to make of this. Basically, they say that rising CO2 will not block more longwave radiation from leaving the atmosphere, but that the Earth will heat up because the atmosphere will absorb more incoming shortwave radiation.
Here's what the article says:
They found the answer by drawing on both computer simulations and a simple energy-balance model. As longwave radiation gets trapped by CO2, the Earth starts to warm, impacting various parts of the climate system. Sea ice and snow cover melt, turning brilliant white reflectors of sunlight into darker spots. The atmosphere grows moister because warmer air can hold more water vapor, which absorbs more shortwave radiation. Both of these feedbacks lessen the amount of shortwave radiation that bounces back into space, and the planet warms rapidly at the surface.
But in reality, we are seeing more and more sea ice and snow cover, which completely contradicts the basic predictions of the CO2/global warming theory. My initial reaction to this MIT study is that it shows the CO2 effect is already pretty well saturated; i.e., additional concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will not block more longwave radiation, which means it will have no impact on global warming (which is also what the data shows for the last 18 years). This also means that we will not have the death spiral of sea ice that the alarmists long predicted. Instead, the global sea ice will continue to expand, and the Arctic will continue the current trend toward more sea ice until it reaches the peak of the cycle in a few decades. Then it will cycle downward again, like it has since around 1978.
Tony Heller thinks this: The takeaway from the article is that the authors believe that Mann-made global warming is nonsense, but can’t say it for political reasons.
Maybe he's right, but I suspect the researchers were just repeating the "consensus" view that, despite the actual facts, the Arctic sea ice will continue to melt and the late summer sun at the north pole will somehow heat the exposed water enough to change the planet.
I'm laughing writing this, the theory is so absurd.
:)
No comments:
Post a Comment