Re: a modest proposal [was: Re: [asa] Phil Jones Stepping Down..]

From: Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com>
Date: Sat Dec 12 2009 - 18:50:49 EST

The following is from Storms of my Grandchildren by Jim Hansen. Note Dr. Hansen was brought into to present to the Bush WH early on because Hansen stressed non-carbon forcings. The reason why he did this to have two-pronged attack on AGW. Deal with the non-CO2 part such as reducing black carbon aerosols and also reducing CO2 emissions. By doing the former it makes the latter less draconian. According to Hansen, Dick Cheney abused the non-carbon part of his presentations but ignored the part about not having the coal-fired plants, reversing a campaign promise to treat CO2 as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. This is what Hansen says about the solar forcings:

"Changes of the sun’s irradiance (brightness seen from Earth) cause a potentially significant climate forcing on decade-to-century time scales. Unfortunately, precise measurements of solar brightness became possible only with satellite observations that began in the late 1970s. These data revealed a cyclic change of about 0.1 percent with the ten-to-twelve-year solar magnetic cycle, yielding a ten-to-twelve-year cyclic forcing of just over 0.2 watts. The direct effect of solar brightness is amplified by at least one indirect effect. The solar variability is much larger at ultraviolet wavelengths than it is at visible wavelengths. Ultraviolet radiation breaks up oxygen molecules in Earth’s atmosphere, creating ozone, which increases the greenhouse effect. This indirect climate forcing enhances the direct solar forcing by perhaps as much as one third, making the total cyclic solar forcing about 0.3 watts. Some who say the sun plays a larger role in climate change than carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases hypothesize that there must be other indirect effects that magnify the small measured variations of solar brightness. The most common hypothesis is an almost Rube Goldberg concoction: the sun altering cosmic rays, which then alter cloud condensation nuclei, which alter cloud cover, which alters absorbed sunlight, which alters climate. However, there is no meaningful evidence supporting a large indirect amplification. The small cyclic component of global temperature that is extracted from statistical analyses of observed global temperature is consistent with a solar forcing of 0.2 to 0.3 watts. Possible errors in extracting the cyclic temperature response allow, at most, amplification of the solar forcing by a factor of two, which still leaves the cyclic solar forcing much smaller than the greenhouse gas forcing."

Dr. Hansen is referring to studies like this:

http://www.pnas.org/content/104/10/3713.full.pdf

In addition to this the key reason why it's not solar forcing is not that solar forcing is not sufficient size -- it is way too small -- it's because the profile of the warming is wrong for solar forcing. See here (http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/2008ScienceMeeting/doc/Session4/S4_01_Ammann.pdf slide 16). If it was really solar forcing then the stratosphere would also be warming. If it's AGW it would decrease. We have a differential diagnosis and AGW came out on top.

Rich Blinne
Member ASA

On Dec 12, 2009, at 3:22 PM, William Hamilton wrote:

> Thanks for the data, Rich. However, from Rany's remark I was really expecting to find a dynamic analysis that hows the the phasing of the irradience variations just isn't right to sustain the sort of temperature increase postulated by Tobias and Weiss or Scafetta. So this doesn't establish anything. Yes, I see that the irradience stays right around 1367 w/m^2, but stochastic resonance can be triggered by very small variations.
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://mirador.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/mirador/presentNavigation.pl?tree=project&project=SORCE&CGISESSID=1b3e0d5e8eca07cec96fe19f5165fd23
>
> ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SOLAR_IRRADIANCE/composite_d25_07_0310a.dat
>
> http://www.acrim.com/
>
> http://www.acrim.com/RESULTS/Earth%20Observatory/earth_obs_fig2.pdf
>
> ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SOLAR_IRRADIANCE/ACRIM3/
>
> ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SOLAR_IRRADIANCE/COMPOSITE.v2.GIF
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:45 PM, William Hamilton <willeugenehamilton@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, I'd like to see the data.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net> wrote:
> Yes, Bill, this is indeed an important possibility that must be carefully considered. The two main remaining problems with it are: 1. such an amplification effect for solar activity has been hypothesized but evidence that it actually occurs has not yet been obtained, and 2. the observed climate effects do not correlate with the observed fluctuations in solar activity which should show up if such a large variation is actually occurring. I can show you the data if you wish.
>
> Randy
>
> From: William Hamilton
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 11:14 PM
> To: Rich Blinne
> Cc: ASA ; Randy Isaac
> Subject: Re: a modest proposal [was: Re: [asa] Phil Jones Stepping Down..]
>
> One reference that points out how a small variation in excitation can lead to a large variation in output in a nonlinear system is
> Resonant Interactions between Solar Activity and Climate
> S. M. Tobias and N. O. Weiss
> Journal of Climate
> Volume 13, Issue 21 (November 2000) pp. 3745–3759
> DOI: 10.1175/1520-0442(2000)013<3745:RIBSAA>2.0.CO;2
>
> Go to the American Meteorological Society web site and search Journal of Climate and you'll find a downloadable pdf. I'm not claiming that Tobias and Weiss have constructed an accurate model of sun/earth dynamics. That's not what they're trying to do. Their model simply demonstrates that in a nonlinear system small perturbations can lead to large changes in output behavior.
>
>
>
>
> --
> William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
> Member American Scientific Affiliation
> Austin, TX
> 248 821 8156
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
> Member American Scientific Affiliation
> Austin, TX
> 248 821 8156
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Dec 12 18:51:29 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Dec 12 2009 - 18:51:29 EST