Too bad he wasn't serious.
Over at Knox Views, R. Neal links (Here's the url in case Mr. Neal is still trying to hide his ravings from careful critique: http://www.knoxviews.com/node/7772) to a post showing atmospheric data that indicates that the tropical troposphere isn't heating up the way the best AGW models predict. Following that post back to its source leads you to Steve McIntyre's blog Climate Audit, and the post Tropical Troposphere.
Now before I get too deep into this thing, let's make something very clear. The issue at hand is NOT whether we are in the midst of an increase in global temperature due to man; the issue in this post is simply, "Is the troposphere reacting as the models predict?" You have to remember that all of the fuss about global warming comes from the predictions of computer models, models whose accuracy has been spotty at best.
The simplest way to put it is this: The models, based on thermodynamics predict that tropospheric temperatures will rise sooner and faster than surface temperatures. The models go on to say that the earliest indicators and the greatest movement will occur in the tropics.
So far, they aren't.
This doesn't mean that AGW isn't happening, although it does raise several important questions. What it does mean is that the predictive models we are using to forecast the extent and the severity of climate change incorrectly model the actual physical processes occurring.
In short, they're wrong.
Yet it is these very models that Al Gore preaches on every time he gets out of his Gulfstream.
Instead of reading the article, picking up the background knowledge required to understand it, and reading through the extensive discussion in the comments, Mr. Neal, would rather dismiss the problems generated by real world data out of hand, primarily because it doesn't fit within his orthodoxy.
Put simply, in deference to Mr. Neal, he'd rather stick his fingers in his ears and say "La la la la la," rather than hear the facts.
Here are the facts.
Thermodynamics is the study of how heat (thermo) moves (dynamics). Obviously, an understanding of thermodynamics is essential to understanding the greenhouse effect, and how CO2 emissions affects it. I learned basic thermodynamics while learning how to run a nuclear reactor. While the system is different, the laws governing the transfer of heat are the same.
OK, say you want to make a pot of tea. The first thing you have to do is boil water. You want to raise the temperature of the water from room temperature, around 70F to the boiling point of water, at 212F. In order to do that, you turn on the stove. Now, if the burner only heats up to 70F, will your water boil?
Obviously not. In order to transfer heat from one body to another, the body losing heat must be at a higher temperature than the body gaining the heat.
This is crucial to understanding how heat is transferred. It always must go down to a lower temperature body. In order to raise water to 212F, the stove burner is going to have to get hotter than 212F. It will also have to heat up the pan holding the water to greater than 212F.
The second thing to understand is that the rate of heat transfer is directly proportional to the difference in temperature between the two bodies. The greater the temperature difference, the faster the heat will transfer.
The final thing to understand is exactly how heat is transferred. There are three methods;
Now let's take a look at the greenhouse effect. Now, let's look at our thermodynamic system. The Sun radiates heat to the Earth in a steady, constant stream. (For the purposes of this discussion, will ignore the various solar cycles.) This heat passes through the atmosphere unhindered, and reaches the surface and warms it. Heat is sent back up through the troposphere but things have changed. Where before the outer layer of the Earth's atmosphere was transparent to heat radiation, this is no longer the case. By giving up energy to the surface, the photons carrying the energy are now blocked by stratospheric CO2 and CO. These gases act almost like a one way blanket around our atmosphere. They allow energy in, but not back out again.
Remember what we talked about before? The rate of heat transfer is dependent on a difference in temperature. Since the temperature of the troposphere has gone up while the surface temperature has remained constant, the difference between the two has dropped, resulting in slower removal of heat from the surface. But the Sun is still pumping out the same amount of energy, so what happens to surface temperature? Well, if you're putting more energy in than you're taking out, the only thing that can happen is that surface temperature will go up. And as surface temperature goes up, the differential between the surface and the troposphere goes up, and the rate of heat transfer goes up until we reach a new equilibrium.
That's the greenhouse effect folks, and it makes life possible here on earth.
Now then, let's look at AGW, man made global warming. According to the theory, humans have dumped massive quantities of CO2 into our atmosphere, which has caused a pronounced increase in the ability of our atmosphere to trap heat. This mean that the troposphere is now trapping more heat, causing a rise in surface temperatures until we reach a new, higher equilibrium.
And now you see why tropospheric temperatures are so critical to AGW modeling. If the troposphere is not heating up, and by the data in this post it isn't, then the proposed mechanism for AGW is in big trouble. Not only that, but the models forecasting gloom and despair are also completely off.
What Steve McIntyre's data shows is that tropical tropospheric temperatures are not increasing significantly. In fact, they're down compared to reference temperatures.
Does this mean AGW is not happening? No, but it raises questions both about the mechanics of our climate, and about the predictive value of the models. Asking those questions is the first step to learning the truth about our effect on this planet.
Posted by Rich at April 29, 2008 7:36 PM | TrackBack