I’m really confused looking at these model runs, because the IPCC reports warming under A2 of 2.0 to 5.4, yet the model runs do not have this range, instead it is just 3.0-4.0.

On the other hand, can you name three nice textbook to step people through useful things?

May I recommend “The R Book” by Michael Crawley for a start? Amazon lets you review examples of the books contents which may give you a better feel for how they’re written.

I looked up the tsp function in R help which gives you the start, end times and frequency of a time series (R has online help files and package manuals are on the CRAN site). The sapply takes the list in the first entry and applies the function to each of the entries in the list (instead of using a for loop).

The two hardest parts of R for me are changing my programing so my R code doesn’t look like C or Java and learning which packages to use.

Oh… I should probably learn R. But, that three line code only works because you already created http://www.climateaudit.org/da.....le.a1b.tab . I looked at your scraping code and it’s much longer than 3 lines. Plus, I downloaded http://www.climateaudit.org/da.....le.a1b.tab. How do I inspect that? It seems to be binary. Is it? )

Because I don’t know R, I can google and learn what sapply does. then, but I have no idea what tsp(A) does. I have no idea why I’m applying to sapply ensemble.a1b instead of temp.dat. (Worse, why to ensemble.a1b and not ensemble.a1b.tab? No doubt if I knew R, I would know why.)

So, right now, I can only take your word that it returns the 2100 values from whatever happens to be in “…. http://www.climateaudit.org/da.....le.a1b.tab“.

On the one hand, yes, I would like to learn R. On the other hand, can you name three nice textbook to step people through useful things? Really useful things? That uses actual english to explain what a function is going to do and why? Plus examples that aren’t ambiguous?

I’m speaking as a person who taught herself, Perl, php, C, and javascript having learned fortran. None of these are difficult– but the main thing i there are multiple fairly well organized references to give someone working in isolation a decent start.

If I knew three suggested references, I could order them all from the library, figure out which best suited my needs and pick one and buy it. With R, motivation alone with organized pedagogical materials is just not sufficient.

download.file(“http://www.climateaudit.org/data/models/knmi/ensemble.a1b.tab”,”temp.dat”,mode=”wb”)
load(“temp.dat”) #loads ensemble.a1b
sapply(ensemble.a1b, function(A) A[2100-tsp(A)[1]+1,])

This gives the required information for each model and each run.
Isn’t that quick enough to make you want learn R??

But no site has conveniently tabulated that specific information for you.

I’ve adapted it to retrieve some of the observation sets and that took only a couple of minutes.

Yes we are getting free (in the thermodynamic sense) energy at the surface. It’s called enthalpy and is the result of incoming photons having an effective temperature of 5800 K and outgoing photons having a temperature of 255 K, in round numbers. Any work done through moving air or water eventually ends up as heat too. The total incoming and outgoing energy balance, but entropy increases. Even a tiny imbalance would result in massive temperature change over hundreds of millions of years. But of course the temperature change would be in the direction required to achieve balance again.

Sunlight can be used to operate a photovoltaic cell and generate electricity. Outgoing IR can’t because there are insufficient photons at high enough energy to overcome the band gap in a practical photocell. The free energy content of outgoing IR is too low.

SteveM has some R code to help.

According to Tamino and others(discussed in ‘You Bet’, and also in Decadal Scale Coolings at Chris Colose’s blog), the models that project this have about the same short term temperature trend as the low warming models. I was arguing that the recent cooling should lower the likelihood of high warming, and cause a lowering of the estimate for future warming.

Also, could you provide a run through of how I would get such data from Climate Explorer? I don’t understand the material they have on their site.

” Energy is sort of degraded from forms that can be accessed to do useful work to forms that can’t”

Ok, so there is conservation of mass and energy. I always thought that meant that it was never DESTROYED!!

Energy, in the form of photons or light waves, enter the atmosphere and are absorbed by the earth. They heat the earth and SOME are then emitted. If ALL were emitted then there would be a perfect engine where the work expended expanding the earth and causing convection from conduction of heat to the atmosphere…

Do you see the question I have here?? If all the SW is converted to LW so there is a TOA BALANCE, we are getting free energy at the surface and in the atmosphere. This is even better than a perpetual motion machine. This is a generator where the fuel is not expended!!!

Imagine a big mirror reflecting the OLR at TOA onto a boiler. Double free power!!!

Some of the SW has been converted to other forms, not LW, and is not available to hit TOA as OLR.

Another example, scientists measure the temp delta in boreholes trying to estimate temperatures from the past. How could this be if some of the SW didn’t get converted to heat that was conducted into the earth??? This heat is still in the earth from hundreds (thousands…) of years ago. It has never left the system or these scientists are dumber than I am!!!

So, I guess I am asking if there are perfect machines making up our system. That is, is there 100% efficiency whenever SW is absorbed and reemitted as LW. When LW is absorbed and thermalised. When that thermalised LW is conducted to other gasses through collision. When it is convected to GHG through collision and emitted again…
?????????????????????????

I have some newly planted Eastern Redbud trees in my backyard. My dad planted them there in the winter and they looked like they were just little sticks in the ground (they were). Now they (4 of them) are all at least a foot tall and lots of big leaves. We have had what seems to be lots of good rain the last couple of months and it’s been mild except for a couple of “hot” days. That’s my Farmer’s Almanac Report for today. Peace!

Andrew

Andrew