Get Yourself Informed on Temperature Anomalies

_{February 17, 2007

Global Warming, Off Topic, Science}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Satellites have been accurately measuring the temperature of the troposphere all over the face of the earth since 1979. You can view a map of the globe with all temperatures above and below average mapped out in red (above) and blue (below) month by month for over 25 years. Anyone can plainly see that global warming is regional. Near the equator, both above and below it, is almost always uncolored or blue. South America, Central America, and the lower U.S. are experiencing cooling. Most of Africa is cooling. Austrailia is cooling. Southern Europe and Southern Asia are cooling. The air over almost all the Pacific and Mid, and South Atlantic is cooling. Greenland is heating up. Northern Asia and Northern Europe are heating up. Northern Canada and Alaska are heating up. Antarctica has been about the same and the interior has actually cooled off some in the last 10 years. Global warming IS REGIONAL! Everyone needs to know this but no one is being told. If you’re unbiased about this and willing to be swayed by the facts then go to the link below and click through the time series of the global map showing where it is warming, where it is cooling, and how much. Get yourself informed.

http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature/

Pay attention to the lower graph too. It represents the average across the globe. Note it spends about as much time above as below zero point indicating that, at least since 1979, the earth hasn’t been heating or cooling on average, some places are heating and some are cooling.

You have been lied to. Big time.

Once you see how information has been withheld from you so you don’t question the politically driven “scientific” consensus in regard to global warming you’ll understand how the wool is being over everyone’s eyes about the politically driven “scientific” consensus in regard to evolution too.

Comments

Bruce There are two blogs that I would recommend. I used to follow both avidly but the discussions became repetitive. HodorH is right to point out www.realclimate.org. This is run by climate scientists with an establishment/IPCC/believe AGW viewpoint. Climate Audit (www.climateaudit.org/) is a sceptical blog run by knowledgeable sceptics. The advantage of both these blogs is the contributors by and large know what they are talking about. As far as I can see there is no one who knows much about climate change contributing to this discussion (sorry Dave but it is clearly true). I am no expert, but I did follow the discussion quite closely for a few years, so I might as well chip in. The temperature record that Dave is directing you to is the satellite data for the lower troposphere. There are a number of other temperature records which show a different pattern and a stronger warming trend. The interpretation of the satellite data is one of many controversies in climate change. Among other things the satellite mesurements do not measure the surface of the earth. See wikipedia for a discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements Dave's albedo paper was written in 1980. The world's climate scientists are aware of the albedo effect and in the intervening 27 years have made increasingly sophisticated adjustments for that and many other factors. There are many different things that contribute to the change in the world's temperature and change in albedo is one of them. For a discussion of the different "forcings" as they are called and their relative importance look at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/10/attribution-of-20th-century-climate-change-to-cosub2sub/Mark Frank_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
11:39 PM
11
11
39
PM
PDT}

I added the following comment to http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/02/what-triggers-ice-ages/ and also to http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1150#more-1150
I was browsing the NASA interactive satellite temperature data for the troposphere which stretches from 1979 to 2003. It has a global map that's colored in shades of red for heating and blue for cooling. Flipping through the time sequence it's obvious that almost all the heating anomalies are in the snow covered far north. South of Canada down to Antarctica isn't really heating at all. Moreover, there's a graph of the average temperature anomalies of all areas (below the world map) and that shows that the net of heating and cooling is just about zero. I was wondering what could account for this pattern of heating and cooling and it occured to me that if the albedo of the snow cover in the far north was declining that would do it. So I looked around and dug up a study of snow albedo that appeared in the Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, Volume 37, August 1980 which confirmed that carbon soot from manmade sources (including forest fires) migrates thousands of miles and accumulates on permanent snow cover causing melting and temperature increases. The antarctic is relatively free of soot buildup but the arctic has been well contaminated. This explains the heating and cooling patterns quite well. How does CO2 greenhouse heating explain these patterns and why is the global average temperature not really increasing if a growing C02 greenhouse situation is responsible?
Both are moderated (no big surprise, all the good sites are). Let's see if they approve the comment and respond to it.DaveScot_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
11:18 PM
11
11
18
PM
PDT}

WinglesS Yes, ice is melting and sea level is rising VERY slowly but I recall reading that Greenland's ice sheet, because it's on land, will take a thousand years or more to melt which is plenty of time to deal with a rising ocean. Antarctica isn't melting and it too is on land. Those are the biggies as far as ice sheets go and the remainder aren't enough to cause drastic rise of ocean level. The problem with soot is that what's already on the snow won't go away. It just gets darker and darker as snow melts and the soot on top gets thicker and thicker. Even if you stop all soot emission now it's probably too late to do anything about it.DaveScot_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
10:41 PM
10
10
41
PM
PDT}

Hmm, but aren't sea levels rising? So even though global warming is regional it melts more ice than it freezes? Well I'm all for stopping the soot - or whatever is the root cause of the problem.WinglesS_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
08:14 PM
8
08
14
PM
PDT}

If St. Paul were writing the book of Romans today, surely he would point out that there is absolutely no excuse for anybody not reading the "signs of the times" on the not-so-invisible Internet. There is so much material available; there are so many clues to underlying intent and pervading agendas. Something I like to repeat to folks now and again concerns this (relatively) extremely thin layer of air we live in. Go up thousands of feet and it gets cold fast. Dig down thousands of feet, and it gets hot fast. Take a globe of the World, say about a foot in diameter. If you could draw a line 1/1000th of an inch thick (less than the thickness of a normal human hair), it would represent the vertical extent of reasonable, livable temperatures above or below the ground. With the temperatures above that region being so cold, and those below being so hot, IMO, it is totally awesome that the global temperatures are so constant! If I were Chicken Licken or Henny Penny or Cocky Locky or Ducky Lucky or Loosey Goosey or Turkey Lurkey or Foxy Loxy or Holey Moley I wouldn't go to the king to announce a temperature increase of a mere 0.6 degree Celsius. I hope I'd go to visit the King, and give thanks! All of which isn't to encourage a careless, carefree attitude towards the stewardship of our environment. Quite the opposite. Perhaps somebody will discover that the relentless increase in the tiny fraction of CO2 in our atmosphere has actually saved countless thousands from starvation -- not to mention a huge increase in wood to build houses. Maybe the fine-tuning of our atmosphere is finer than some people think. Could it be that the almost constant surface temperature existing between the near absolute zero of space and the thousands of degrees of molten earth beneath us derives from mere chance?eebrom_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
07:05 PM
7
07
05
PM
PDT}

Bingo. THAT'S the stuff: Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, Volume 37, August 1980
Longwave emissivity of snow is unaltered by its soot and dust content. Thus the depression of snow albedo in the visible is a systematic effect and always results in more energy being absorbed at a snow covered surface than would be the case for pure snow. Thus man-made carbon soot aerosol may continue to exert a significant warming effect on the earth's climate even after it is removed from the atmosphere.
Be sure to read, if nothing else, the summary at the end of the article which clearly illuminates the smoking gun. The article is scanned and I transcribed the summary for your convenience:
7. Summary We have shown that the discrepancy between observations of visible snow albedo and calculationas for pure snow (fig. 17 of part 1) can be resolved if the snow whose albedo was measured was not pure. In order to match the observations of snow albedo at Station T-3 in the Arctic Ocean and at the South Pole Station, we require the presence of a grey impurity, i.e., one whose imaginary index of refraction varies little with wavelength. Graphitic carbon ("soot") has this property, and it is a normal component of the background atmospheric aerosol due to industrial sources as well as forest and brush fires. The snow at the South Pole Station almost certainly suffers from local contamination and its albedo is unrepresentative of the rest of the Antarctic plateau where measured impurity concentrations are too low to affect the albedo. Soot at T-3 in the Arctic Ocean, of which we require 0.3 ppmw to explain the albedo, may either be characteristic of the entire Arctic basin or derived from local (camp) pollution. This amount is not unrealistic if the soot which has been measured in Arctic air finds its way into the snow as well. In middle latitudes the snow is closer to sources of of dust and soot, but the snow accumulation rate is higher, so the concentration of impurities may not be larger until the snow begins to melt. The deposition rate of elemental carbon in Lake Michigan is now 30 ug/cm^2/year (J. Herring, U.S.G.S., unpublished manuscript). It was only half this value prior to 1900. The morphology of the particles indicates about one-half charcoal and one-half industrial sources. Assuming an annual precipitation of 1 m(liquid equivalent), the snow near Lake Michigan would contain 0.3 ppmw soot, the same as we need to explain the albedo observations in the Arctic Ocean (Fig. 6), where the annual precipitation is only one-tenth that of Lake Michigan. It is difficult to analyze for graphitic carbon, particularly because it must be distinguished from organic carbon. It has not been looked for in any of the many snow-chemistry studies in Antarctica and Greenland. Due to the excellent experimental work of Rosen and Novakov (1977, 1978), however, it has now become possible to identify and measure the carbonaceous content of aerosols. In order to test the predictions of our model, it will be necessary to make simultaneous measurements of snow spectral albedo, snow grain size, soot concentration and soot size distribution. The snow samples reviewed here were from Artic and Antarctic locations, and they exhibited "grey" albedo in the visible. In snowfields closer to desert areas and remote from population centers, such as ice caps of the Tibetan Plateau, the principle absorptive component of the dust may be iron oxide instead of carbon. The snow would then exhibit a peak in the spectral albedo 0.6 um (Fig. 5) as has been seen by eye in Europe and New Zealand following dust storms in North Africa and Austrailia. If the albedo of natural snow is being reduced by the presence of dust or soot, this could be an important climatic effect of tropospheric aerosols. Landsberg (1970) speculated that the climatic effects of aerosols in snow would be greater than their effects in the troposphere. Aerosols in the troposphere have competing effects on the radiation budget, in that they both absorb and reflect solar radiation, and emit infrared radiation. Carlson and Benjamin (1980) show that, for typical Saharan dust over the Atlantic, these effects roughly cancel each other for the top-of-atmosphere net flux. But when absorbing aerosols fall into snow, they have only one effect -- that of reducing the shortwave albedo. The emissivity of snow in the infrared region (8-12 um) is very close to 1.0 (Figs. 8b and 11b of Part I) and the addition of parts-per-million amounts of dust does not change. In closing, we might note that gross amounts of carbon particles have in the past been suggested as effective melters of sea ice or modifiers of weather (Gray et al., 1976). The present work indicates that such particles may have been having a climatic effect, albeit on a more subtle scale, over long periods of earth's history, which effect has been accentuated by man's industrial pollution. Note added in proof. Grenfell et al. (1980) have recently collaborated to make simultaneous measurements of snow spectral albedo and soot content. Their measured grain sizes apparently are not the same as our effective spherical radii, so we deduce the effective grain size from the near-IR albedo measurements. It then appears that, in order to explain the visible albedos, we would need 2-5 time as much soot as actually found in the snow. A factor of 2 difference in soot concentration can be explained by our use of graphite density instead of soot density (see footnote 3), but the remaining discrepancies remain to be investigated. Acknowledgements. We thank Craig Bohren for first suggesting to us the importance of trace impurities in lowering snow albedo; Thomas Grenfall and Michale Kuhn for providing details of the experiments; and Robert Charlson, Peter MacKinnon, Kenneth Rahn, Hal Rosen, Lonnie Thompson and Ellen Mosley-Thompson for helpful discussion.
It's not C02 causing the worst heating in the far north, it's carbon soot. That explains why the southern hemisphere isn't getting nailed. All the industrial smokestacks, residential wintertime heating from burning dirty fuels, and vehicle exhausts spewing out carbon soot are concentrated in the northern hemisphere. We don't need to lower C02, we need to continue and improve cleaning the particulate pollutants out of exhaust gases. Even so, it may be too late because the soot, once in the snow, doesn't leave until the snow either completely melts away or it gets buried by clean snow cover that never melts. DaveScot_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
03:38 PM
3
03
38
PM
PDT}

Here's more http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0469(1980)037%3C2734:AMFTSA%3E2.0.CO%3B2 (a working link for above: http://tinyurl.com/3atbg3)
A Model for the Spectral Albedo of Snow. II: Snow Containing Atmospheric Aerosols Stephen G. Warren and Warren J. Wiscombe National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307 ABSTRACT Small highly absorbing particles, present in concentrations of only 1 part per million by weight (ppmw) or less, can lower snow albedo in the visible by 5Ã¢â‚¬â€œ15% from the high values (96Ã¢â‚¬â€œ99%) predicted for pure snow in Part I. These particles have, however, no effect on snow albedo beyond 0.9 ÃŽÂ¼m wavelength where ice itself becomes a strong absorber. Thus we have an attractive explanation for the discrepancy between theory and observation described in Part I, a discrepancy which seemingly cannot be resolved on the basis of near-field scattering and nonsphericity effects. Desert dust and carbon soot are the most likely contaminants. But careful measurements of spectral snow albedo in the Arctic and Antarctic paint to a Ã¢â‚¬Å“greyÃ¢â‚¬Â absorber, one whose imaginary refractive index is nearly constant across the visible spectrum. Thus carbon soot, rather than the red iron oxide normally present in desert dust, is strongly indicated at these sites. Soot particles of radius 0.1 ÃŽÂ¼m, in concentrations of only 0.3 ppmw, can explain the albedo measurements of Grenfell and Maykut on Arctic Ice Island T-3. This amount is consistent with some observations of soot in Arctic air masses. 1.5 ppmw of soot is required to explain the Antarctic observations of Kuhn and Siogas, which seemed an unrealistically large amount for the earth's most unpolluted continent until we learned that burning of camp heating fuel and aircraft exhaust indeed had contaminated the measurement site with soot. Midlatitude snowfields are likely to contain larger absolute amounts of soot and dust than their polar counterparts, but the snowfall is also much larger, so that the ppmw contamination does not differ drastically until melting begins. Nevertheless, the variations in absorbing particle concentration which will exist can help to explain the wide range of visible snow albedos reported in the literature. Longwave emissivity of snow is unaltered by its soot and dust content. Thus the depression of snow albedo in the visible is a systematic effect and always results in more energy being absorbed at a snow-covered surface than would be the case for pure snow. Thus man-made carbon soot aerosol may continue to exert a significant warming effect on the earth's climate even after it is removed from the atmosphere. Manuscript received April 15, 1980, in final form August 28, 1990 DOI: 10.1175/1520-0469(1980)037<2734:AMFTSA>2.0.CO;2
DaveScot_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
03:02 PM
3
03
02
PM
PDT}

Since you can see from the map that northern landmasses with permanent snowcover are by far the global warming hotspots it occurs to me that changing surface albedo could easily explain the phenomenon. As a child in the 1950's and 1960's growing up in cold northeastern winters near a busy highway I remember vividly that soot from all the 18-wheel diesel truck exhausts darkened the snow cover. I also remember from living in Southern California back in the 1970's and 1980's how light colored windowsills would turn dark from the air pollution. As one of, if not THE fastest, warming regions of the world, Greenland is a prime candidate to see if surface albedo has been decreasing in the 20th century due to dust and soot in the atmosphere from burning of fossil fuels and land clearing for agriculture darkening the snow slightly. If it has then this handily explains what's happening in the regions of the world most subject to warming. There is positive feedback in this effect because as the top layer of snow melts it concentrates the dust and soot on the surface. Melting snow drifts close to highways where I grew up would turn almost black in a paper thin layer on the top surface after 12 or more inches had melted off in a thaw. I'm having a difficult time finding historic surface albedo measurements. Can anyone else find anything and report back here? So far this is tantalizing:
TI: Effects of dust and black carbon on albedo of the Greenland ablation zone AU: * Boggild, C E EM: carl.egede.boggild@unis.no AF: The University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS), PB 156, Longyearbyen, N-9171 Norway AU: Warren, S G EM: sgw@atmos.washington.edu AF: Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Box 351640, Seattle, WA 98195-1640 United States AU: Brandt, R E EM: brandt@atmos.washington.edu AF: Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Box 351640, Seattle, WA 98195-1640 United States AU: Brown, K J EM: kbr@geus.dk AF: Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, Department of Quaternary Geology, Oster Voldgade 10, Copenhagen, DK-1350 Denmark AB: Recent thinning of the perimeter of the Greenland ice sheet has prompted several studies that are focused on identifying possible mechanisms. Surface melting in the ablation zone is known to be highly sensitive to changes in the surface albedo. However, explanations for the variable albedo of the ablation zone in Greenland have not yet been established because ground validation is often difficult due to the inaccessibility of much of the marginal zone. The emergence and melting of old ice in the ablation zone creates a surface layer of dust that was originally deposited with snowfall high on the ice sheet. This debris cover is augmented by locally-derived windblown sediment. Subsequently, the surface dust particles often aggregate together to form millimeter to centimeter scale clumps that melt into the ice, creating cryoconite holes. The debris in the cryoconite holes becomes hidden from sunlight, thus raising the area-averaged albedo. These processes were examined on the readily accessible ice sheet margin of northeast Greenland in Kronprins Christians Land (80 N, 24 W). To assess the effects of dust and black carbon deposition on ice albedo, spectral albedo measurements across the solar spectrum at ultraviolet, visible and near-infrared wavelengths were taken on snow, slush, ice hummocks, debris-covered ice and cryoconite-studded ice. In addition, albedo measurements were likewise taken on the debris in the cryoconite holes. Areal distribution of the aforementioned surface types was estimated as a function of distance from the ice edge (330 m elevation). Ablation rates were measured on a 5-km transect from the ice margin that spanned both Pleistocene and Holocene ice, eventually terminating in the slush zone (550 m). Impurity concentrations (per unit area of surface and per unit volume for snow and subsurface ice) were measured. Snow was also collected for analysis of impurities at distances of 40 and 90 km from the margin, at elevations of 950 and 1440 m respectively. The absorption of sunlight at visible wavelengths is dominated by dust at all the sites studied, but black carbon also contributes. The nature of the impurities is being determined through mineralogical and optical-microscopy analyses. Our results show that the ablation zone is characterized by higher albedo near the margin and a decline in albedo toward the equilibrium line, before superimposed ice and snow again raise the albedo. The higher albedo close to the ice margin is due to the formation of cryoconite holes, which become less frequent higher on the ice sheet. Studies in western Greenland have shown that a lowering of the surface albedo by 0.15 can result in excess annual melting of up to 1 meter. Lowering of snow albedo by increasing deposition of black carbon could cause more rapid snowmelt, thereby uncovering the darker debris-laden ice earlier in the summer season. This process may help to explain the ongoing thinning of the Greenland ice sheet margin. DE: 0305 Aerosols and particles (0345, 4801, 4906) DE: 0726 Ice sheets DE: 0738 Ice (1863) DE: 0764 Energy balance SC: Union [U] MN: 2006 Fall Meeting
DaveScot_{February 17, 2007
February
02
Feb
17
17
2007
02:42 PM
2
02
42
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 2

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply