Happy New Year!
Christmas 2015 was warm. Winter finally did arrive in the Chicago area; last night was cold. We put our coats on, drove to the Willowbrook Ballroom and danced our feet off. The Teddy Lee Orchestra played mostly foxtrots, waltzes and swings. Luckily most of that was swing which we are ok at. Foxtrot… waltz… not so much.
Of course most of you are likely wondering if the blogging slowdown will continue: Probably. The climate issues that motivate slow blogging are:
- The AR5 remains fairly new. So we do need to wait at least a bit before “testing” projections.
- The divergence between models and observations was sufficient to motivate people to hunt for explanations for model divergence; some have been proposed. As is generally the case in all science (not just climate science) these means we have a combination of “hindcast” and “forecast”. (“Forecast”, in scarequotes, is appropriate is true even if some people don’t like to call ‘projections/predictions/forecast’ anything that implies any sort of “prognostication about what is going to happen in the future”. But of course, “projections” are a sort of prediction– even if conditional. If they were not, no one could claim anyone should pay any attention to them at all for any planning purposes.)
To the extent that the AR5 projections are fresh “forecasts/projections/predictions” with the divergence in recent years “explained” by (volcanoes|sun|comparison to wrong thing|just a statistical fluke). Of course any of these things might be the explanation. If they are, one would expect temperature to bounce back up. It’s also an El Nino and anomalies themselves are within the range of projections so perhaps they have. Or perhaps not. We need a bit of time before to see if temperature do bounce and remain in the projected range or whether we are going to continue to see models being “in” the range at the top of El Nino and out and below during La Nina oscillating about a position that deviates more and more over time. The next two years will tell us much more.
With all these things in place, model/observation comparisons aren’t as interesting for a bit of time. So blogging will be light.
Of course slow blogging isn’t entirely due to the stage in the AR cycle nor what explanations have been proposed for past discrepancies. As some know, I decided it would be fun to tutor high school students (which is awfully fun btw.) To support the more motivated, I’ve been collecting together or creating “extra” problems that dovetail their particular programs (about 1/2 the kids use these extras. The other half don’t). In principle, if I had no real people to help, I could “organize” materials a topic at a time. But instead, I try to come up with things real time — and as a tutor who finds many highschool teachers seem to be allergic to providing students (or tutors) anything remotely resembling a “syllabus” or “outline” to predict which topics could be done in what order and at what depth. This often means having the student tell me which topic they are on now and creating what might help that particular student. This isn’t stupendously time consuming, but it occupies time which obviously subtracts from blogging.
That said: the plan is to post something from time to time and allow people to converse. If you want an open thread on a topic/paper/book/event, I’ll always be happy to open one.
Happy New Year. May you all avoid being placed in a trebuchet and flung. Ahh… the things Hobo Dog does for science!
Happy New Year!
Are you still working on the book?
Lucia,
Yes, there is an unending supply of excuses for divergence between models and reality, and that supply grows more abundant all the time…. never mind that some of these are contradictory, and never mind that if even most of the excuses were really happening, the temperature would already be up several degrees just in the last decade… save for the remarkable good fortune of all these things simultaneously working to keep the rate of warming low. The excuses are mostly rubbish.
.
Climate modeling is the most intellectually corrupt exercise I have ever encountered in 40+ years in science and engineering: the modelers and their camp followers will never allow the veracity of the models to be judged based on their ‘projections/predictions’ versus reality, because the models will fail. And without credibility for those scary projections, political support for rapid, drastic reductions in fossil fuel use evaporates. No matter how bad the divergence, the modeling goal posts will be continuously moved to maintain the urgency of avoiding ‘future catastrophe’.
.
History will judge this group of scientists harshly.
.
Climate modeling mainframes might make excellent fodder for a trebuchet.
Jonathan–
It’s been tabled. But I may get back to it in June.
SteveF,
Yes. But I think it will be interesting to do model/observation comparisons in a year or two. I still expect warming over the next decade. But if the “volcano/sun” reasons are true then presumably we should see rapid warming warming over the next five years. If not…well… then. The “comparing to the wrong temperature series” is a bit more complex.
Lucia,
The average temperature from several months ago until 6-9 months from now will be warmer than the long term trend, due to the current fairly strong El Nino, so unless you try to remove the ENSO effect from the measured trend, a comparison a year from now will make the models look better than they are.
SteveF,
I’ve never had much confidence in the notion that one can really truly remove El Nino. Of course, I’ve used various ENSO metrics to ‘remove’ it when those who want to say models are ok insist that the comparison needs it. I suspect many of those won’t insist quite as much right now 🙂 On the other hand, a different groups will be equally insistent it must be removed ;-).
But yes: It is a feature that the computed trend since some fixed start year continues to go up until the most recent temperature drop below the trend line. So the computed trends are going to go up for a while and will only begin to go down after temperatures drop and likely only when the next La Nina forms. So unless something dramatic happens the computed trend since “whenever” (e.g. 2001) will likely continue to go up for at least 6-9 months.
That is, of course, not a reason to stop posting comparisons. I’d still be posting if other things hadn’t gotten in the way. But I’m not motivated to show lots of comparisons until the AR5 has a little bit of time to mature– it does take a bit of time and it makes more sense to wait until one has at least some time since publication. (One can always compare to models, but the projections though based on models are actually something slightly different).
If future comparisons show observations coming close to models, then that’s what the future holds. If not… well… not.
Happy New Year to you too Lucia!
Alas, I feel it in my bones; mine days are numbered. 2016 will be the year I’m flung from a trebuchet. But that’s OK; with the project I’ve been working on and how poorly it’s going, it’ll be a mercy when it happens. 🙂
Mark Bofill,
Notice Hobo Dog is wearing a special protective suit. It’s translucent and grey. He wears this when doing momentum experiments in outer space, when being shot from cannons and doing many the other things he does for science.
He has not yet appeared in any EM worksheets. I’ll post one of his “work/energy” demonstrations in a minute so you can see him when he is not wearing his protective suit.
(Update to insert.)
Lucia, which one [s] of the AR5 models/projections would be best to test if you were so inclined?
Most of the CMIP5 and Earth System Model (ESM) simulations for AR5 WRI were performed with prescribed CO2 concentrations reaching 421 ppm (RCP2.6), 538 ppm (RCP4.5), 670 ppm (RCP6.0), and 936 ppm (RCP 8.5) by the year 2100. (IPCC AR5 WGI, page 22).
RCP 8.5 seems the favorite but I do not see it as a ‘worst case scenario” or upper limit.
In fact according to comments at Steve McIntyre Chinese and Indian ramping up should see CO2 levels exceed this easily.
Paraphrasing your comments
Perhaps it would be fun to tutor climate wannabes the more motivated, by collecting together the problems that dovetail their particular concerns one topic at a time. A “syllabus” or “outline” could predict which topics could be done in what order and at what depth.
“This often means having the student tell me which topic they are on now and creating what might help that particular student.”
I would like to put up for discussion some of the ideas or statements made by commentators here at other blogs and have them or others explain the rationale a bit better away from the bias of said blogs. Not to have a free kick but to get the gist of the argument explained a bit better.
angech,
That’s a choice that should be deferred until I am so inclined. There was no issue of choice with the AR4 because all scenarios had virtually identical projections over the short term.
I suspect any ‘wannabe’ who is competent to do their own testing of any climate claim doesn’t need tutoring to help them decide what they want to look into. They can presumably collect together the problems that interest them and will figure out which those are on their own.
I’m not entirely sure what you are hoping to do.To some extent you can already do that — you can invite them to comment on an open thread here to discuss ideas further. If you both think it would be easier here than on a crowded thread at someplace like Judy or Anthony’s that works fine. But of course, they have to be willing to engage you here and they may not wish to. Or maybe they will.
Lucia,
“I suspect many of those won’t insist quite as much right now 🙂 On the other hand, a different groups will be equally insistent it must be removed ;-). ”
.
I’ve always thought it better to remove identifiable sources of internal variation from data if there is a defensible rational for doing so. In looking at ENSO related response by latitude, it seems pretty clear that nearly all the influence is ~30S to ~30N, at least in terms of average temperature (precipitation patterns are a different story). The other thing that is clear is most of the remaining short term variation (30N latitudes in the late fall to early spring period, (never in the warmer months) with about equal numbers of quite large negative and positive peaks lasting a month or two. I am thinking about a short guest post on this if that would be OK.
SteveF,
A guest post would be great.
My issue isn’t that ENSO shouldn’t be removed. Certainly some insight can be obtained that way. It’s that if one removes it and gets what someone else things is the “wrong” answer, they always want you to hunt around to find a different metric that correlates with ENSO. Meanwhile, the analyst themselves ends up tempted to hunt for the “best” one.
The other problem is that people can get tempted into trying to explain ways too much — and given the total number of things one might explain and the variety of metrics end up explaining away too much. So, for example: one might get tempted into a multi-parameter fit attempting to eliminate ENSO, AMO, volcanoes, the sun, the effect of other planets in the solar system, leprechaun populations…. (Ok, I’ve never seen anything involving actual leprechauns. But I’m pretty sure I’ve seen people trying to explain using the effect of other planets in the solar system.)
So when actually testing models to observations, I don’t really like to say they differ based on observations with ENSO removed. (Though I do think it’s informative. Ok… I’m almost tempted to do a comparison with ENSO removed….)
An Energy Challenge 2016
Open to all educational, research and industry teams.
Get the maximum energy possible out of a ‘tea light’.
No limits as to the equipment used except that the whole machine must only be powered by the ‘tea light’.
Entries will be judged on the energy recovered and the cost of the capital required.
The prize(s) will be a single ‘tea light’ suitably inscribed.
https://climatedatablog.wordpress.com/
I like to think that my analogy of Stevenson versa the FRS saying we will all suffocated is a close approximation to what we see.
lucia,
Of course, there are lots of ways to introduce leprechauns, but I try to avoid that, if only because I am of Irish descent.
.
Tonight I am in the Bahamas (Treasure Cay), so it will take a couple of days to come up with a post. We were here for New Years, and watched the ‘Juckanew’ new years parade at Green Turtle cay.
lucia,
Of course, there are lots of ways to introduce leprechauns, but I trying to avoid that, if only because I am of Irish descent ;-).
.
Tonight I am in the Bahamas (Treasure Cay), so it will take some days to come up with a post. We were here for New Years, and watched the ‘Juckanew’ New Years parade at Green Turtle Cay. Sort of like a Philadelphia Mummers parade, but much, much smaller… and more authentic…. everyone knows everyone.
Ahhhhgggg. Duplicating leprechauns. That’s where they come from!
The internet connection around Abaco Island is not excellent — but the sailing and snorkeling are. ____8)l
“The internet connection around Abaco Island is not excellent — but the sailing and snorkeling are. ____8)l”
Is that an invite?
In Memoria – 2015
https://climatedatablog.wordpress.com/
Love is wider than you know
Why are all the graphs on WUWT and Arctic Sea Ice Blog out of date or not updated?
I will have to actually go and check sites myself!
Shame on them.
First prediction for 2016.
PIOMAS to jump this last month and in the next month.
Despite low Arctic Sea Ice extent and area in most models.
El Nino?
Don’t know.
Anyone else game to put up a short or long term prediction for 2016?
On the Climate, that is.
“Anyone else game to put up a short or long term prediction for 2016?”
This year will be remarkably similar to one of the last 60 years or so, year against year, given that we know that that quasi-cycle exists.
There may be some ‘unknown’ longer term offsets to be considered beyond that. Anything over 100 years could be included at an unknown magnitude and phase.
One year is too short for any Climate related effects to show up. And that is fact IMHO.
Lucia, since you mentioned your tutoring in this post, I have a question for you and other people with science/math backgrounds. My 9th grade son was invited to a conference sponsored by “National Academy of Future Scientists and Technologists” in late June. Among the speakers are Buzz Aldrin, Dean Kamen and 2 Nobel prize winners in physics.
….
I don’t expect that actual attendance at the conference, in itself, will be overly helpful to his academic career. (He scores roughly, in the top 5% in science with disciplined work but without a lot of stress) However, I think it might be a fun experience and that he might make friends/connections that would be worth the $1,500 cost. Online, a number of people call this a scam. Personally, if the speakers are as stated, I find it is hard to believe it is a scam. Whether it is worth doing is another question, and I am wondering what your opinion and that of others is.
….
One complicating factor is that he was planning to go to China for a month or two this summer, and the date conflicts with that. (He wants to do real work in China, such as maybe being a teacher’s assistant — our plans are not firmed up) To me the trip to China takes precedence, but the same event will occur in 2017, so if he isn’t available this year, he could be available next year.
…
Any thoughts and insights would be appreciated.
JD
I’ve never heard of it (which doesn’t mean much one way or the other.)
It strikes me as pretty expensive. The two benefits you list are (a) fund and (b) connections. With respect to the second: will he actually make connections there? And with whom? A few days is with mostly kids probably won’t result in lasting connections at that age. (Thoug who knows?)
On the other hand: it might be fun. If that’s enough, then that’s enough.
I googled a bit. Some people say it’s a scam. Most seem to be asking about it. I haven’t run across anyone saying their kid went and made lots of connections. But if this thing has run in past years maybe you could find someone whose kid went in the past and ask them if it was fun.
JD Ohio,
It does rather have the scent of the “Who’s Who” academic directories, which are arguably scams. It does have the appearance of being legitimate rather than an outright scam, but can it deliver on the promises? The Congress looks to be a fairly recently established event, and may have its origin more in the tech industry than in traditional science realms. As such it would come as no surprise to me if no one at the Blackboard has heard of it.
There is enough ambiguity in the promotional material to suggest that they are overselling the product and if your spawn attends there may be disappointment. For example the main web page at http://www.scitechleaders.com/ has a link to the 2016 confirmed speakers. The linked to page (http://www.scitechleaders.com/confirmed-speakers/ ) is some big time name-dropping of past and future “mentors”.
I think my kid would enjoy China more, and surely get much more out of such a trip. But this future technologists thing could turn out to be everything they promise, so Lucia’s advice to solicit feedback from past attendees could be very helpful in making a decision.
““National Academy of Future Scientists and Technologists” in late June. Among the speakers are Buzz Aldrin, Dean Kamen and 2 Nobel prize winners in physics.”
Hmm. Look beyond the lights and the razzmatazz. Ask for the logic and data. Clearly communicated, not shouted.
Real Penn and Teller stuff. ‘Read’ the ‘tells’ that are there
Damn, more off the price of the playbook
Lucia, your point about my son being too young to make real contacts was a very good obvious point that I missed. Thanks.
….
Re: Responding to those who responded to me and misc.
…
Personally, I think that Dean Kamen is a giant, and if my son (or I) could gain a greater understanding of him that would be great. Also, he has a long history of trying to encourage science and invention among young people, and I don’t think he would let his name be used in a bs conference.
….
My son is real enthused about the conference, and honestly, if he went and had a great time, I would consider my $1,500 well spent because he is so helpful around the house. (Such as washing the dishes twice a week at 5 a.m. in the morning — his choice, not my demand) I received a recent email saying that someone will call me about the conference soon. If this was a real scam, I don’t think they could afford to stay in touch with me for $1,500. Also, we will probably go to China this summer, but I am wondering whether the conference would be worthwhile next year. Thanks for all of the comments.
JD
Lucia,
Steve McIntyre has posted a new model/temperature comparison…. no accounting for ENSO, but plenty of commentary about the El Nino driven warming.
“but plenty of commentary about the El Nino driven warming.”
Have you considered my suggested vertical hemispherical sub set that may help remove most of the problems of sorting land and ocean?
A System Analysts viewpoint.
SteveF
Yep. For now, this the way it looks.
I’m waiting to see how high it goes. Perhaps the temperatures will rise and peak next year though. Or not. To some extent, that’s why I think next year will be more interesting.
I should post this year though so people don’t say “she only posts when it’s La Nina and waited!” I’m not waiting because of the peak. I’m glad Steve M did post non-adjusted because that always needs to be faced one way or the other. After that, discussing ENSO correction is important too. The ENSO correction will smooth out– and give a better indication of whether things are deviating form the mean.
RichardLH,
Have you? If you did, have you revealed your findings to the public? Or to us? And if you the answer to one, any or all questions is no, what are we to think?
I suspect likely answer to all but the last are “not in any meaningful way”. But I don’t really know perhaps you have spent time seeking the answer to the questions you post and have presented the findings in public.
Now I will teach you the rule about rhetorical questions. Note I used one. The rule is they are allowed provided the person asking one presents their own answer in the same comment as the question.
Given my guess about the likely answers, my answer to my own rhetorical “what are we to think?”, is that it’s probably a waste of time to think about most of your questions. But it’s a free world; if you think those are useful questions, I’m sure few would object to you devoting time to investigating questions that interest you.
“Have you? If you did, have you revealed your findings to the public? Or to us? And if you the answer to one, any or all questions is no, what are we to think?”
Or of it as an enquiry as to worth of the concept before any work is undertaken? USA – UK separated by a common language.
“But it’s a free world; if you think those are useful questions, I’m sure few would object to you devoting time to investigating questions that interest you.”
Thank you
Open disclosure: I rarely pose science questions with the same scalpel like intent as I do my Political ones. Please try to separate the two in your mind.
Re: Modulation of Ice Ages via Precession and Dust-Albedo Feedbacks
A new paper proving that CO2 is a minor player in the drama that is the Earth’s climate.
[snip for copyright issues]
https://www.academia.edu/20051643/Modulation_of_Ice_Ages_via_Precession_and_Dust-Albedo_Feedbacks
Sincerely,
Ralph Ellis
First prediction for 2016.
PIOMAS to jump this last month and in the next month.
Looking like a bust. went from 5th lowest to 6th lowest on only available graph to date I think.
so upwards a little but no great leap upwards.
Will wait til the trend graph comes out in next day or 2.
The short answer is send the kid to China (but be damn sure about the supervision).
For what it’s worth this National Academy of Future Scientists and Technologists is a type of operation that one Richard Rossi came up with. The original appears to be Envision EMI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envision_EMI which creates what could be described as “youth leadership” programs that the youth or their parents pay for. Follow the link and you will see the pattern.
If you look at their leadership page http://www.scitechleaders.com/leadership/
Rossi is the President and Executive Director of the Academy but he also runs a similar operation for those interested in medical stuff The National Academy of Future Physicians
The NY Times had an article on this
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/education/edlife/leadership-t.html?_r=0
which pretty much labelled it a money raising pitch.
PS (Note the travel and housing are not included, that means double the cost)
Eli (a cynical old bunny)
“Eli (a cynical old bunny)”
For once I agree with what you said and your sig as well
JD Ohio (http://rankexploits.com/musings/2016/happy-new-year-2016/#comment-142419) —
My nephew received a similar invite. After some investigation, I told him and my sister (his mother) to ignore it. They DO seem to have some excellent lecturers attending but it smacks of the Who’s Who scams (and indeed seems to be run by some of the same people).
Frankly, I think any high school student would be better off using that money toward offering their services in some citizen scientist or volunteer research projects either here at home or abroad. I’d like to get my nephew to go on a Biosphere Expeditions trip with me so he can see actual field work and experience some new cultures.
Eli & Derek: Thanks for your very useful comments and links. Sorry to see that there is a very strong commercial element to this program — not that surprised though. Mark will definitely go to China before he would ever attend this program.
…
I was hoping that this would be a good program, because Mark has a clever form of practicality in addition to reasonably good science academics, and I was hoping that he could meet very accomplished scientific leaders and pick up some things. Also, he would have gone to Boston by himself (to be supervised by the program when he arrived) and that form of travel would have been good practice for him.
JD
My daughter received today her invitation to the 2016 Congress of Future Medical Leaders. I appreciate Eli’s and Derek’s comments, it reinforces my take on this outfit. My daughter will be pining to go no doubt, but I think there are many more productive ways she can invest her time and my money.