« PreviousContinue »
This could be cause either by increased cloud iness, which has been noted in four reports in the refereed scientific literature, op by the infrared absorbing effects of anthrpogenerated trace gases. It is more likely that the reduction in daily range results from a combination of the two. The pecularity is that if such a trend continued, greenhouse world could be one where growing seasons were longer (because nighttine temperatures increased): there was more precipitation and less skin cancer (because of increased cloudines8) and plants gre better (because of the well known effect of carbon dioxide fertilization). The 'positive' vision of futuro climate was recently presented by Soviet Acadeaician Mikhail Budyko, in a paper first read at NOAA sponored nooting of the climate Trends Panel last September. Budyko', position in the Soviet science establishment is roughly analogous to being in the highest echelons of our National Center for Ataospheric Researach. I only bring it up to underscore the broad range of expert opinion that exists on this subject. with regard to observed temperature changes, the current draft of the climate Trends Panel meeting proceedings states that "the over all magnitude of the surface warning since the latter 19th century...1: about half of that expected by most GCH simulations given the best estimate of changu la greenhouse gases over this period."
The Urbanization proble
is well known that long tera clinate records sometimes because their surround ings become more urbanized, and while much has been written on this probla, 1t remains Qlusive. In the March, 1989, issue of the Bulletin of the Annican Meteorological Society, NOM scientist Tan Tarl will publish a paper that compara: NASA climato records over the 0.8. to the urbanizationadjusted Historical climate Network. The paper will show that the published NASA record warns up 0.4 'in the twentieth century compared to the unur banised record. It is important to note that there is ao a priori reason to suspect that the urban bias is appreciably different in other portions of the industrialized world. A simple extension to the globe--which is not possible to rigorously defend at this time because the exhaustive research has not been partorned--would yield a residual warning of 0.20.3; an amount which is three times less than that predicted by the average of our sophisticated clinate models. The other popularly cited clinate record, of the East Anglia research group, leaves essentially the same residual an analogous comparison. A slightly different analysis finds virtually no change in conterainous 0.8. temperaturos over the East century, which is
size of the 0.8. can continue to be cooler than the rest of the world for periods of decades. However, analogous studies of Canadian data and my mean layer temperatur. calculations for Alaska show that indeed the art of no significant temperature change over the last 50 years is virtually all of North America. It I doubtful that this can be accomodated by a transient climate model with a realistic change in trace gas concentrations over that period. It would be important to extend these types of analyses to other regions with analogous urban/rurul clinate networks, such as the Soviet Union. I urge that you give what would have to be a joint effort your highest priority. in addition, I urge the support of other important investigations that will help us determine the earth', true tenperatur. history and to find in fact bov
the change in trace gases will eventually be expressed. These observations are not intended to ainiais. the importance of the climate change proble, but rather emphasise its complexity I find it extremely risky to enact sveeping environmental policy based upon visions that are at best clouded, and at worst aiready failing. Further, if nodels that eventually fail used as the lynchpin for an otherwise sational energy policy, that policy could eventually suffer a serious loss in credibility which would set back progress on these important issues for decades.
KASA', record the cotoninou. 0.3. vanas approximately 0.4'c compared to the urbanisatior adjusted historical climate network. If such . trend occurred throughout the rust of the vorld.izpot global waing for the 20th century vould be 0.2-0.3°C, which is virtuilly indistinguishable
asn't everyone noticed the recent
Let's suspend disbelief for a moment and assume that these trends are meaningful. Is this really a problem? Most agricultural regions in the United States benefit from summer rain since this is the time of year when evaporation is highest and a plant's need for water the greatest. Ask any com grower if he would prefer an extra two-inch rainfall in midsummer. Assuming the Government's not paying him to lose money that year, his answer will be "$%, yes!"
Are more heavy summer rains in the United States a global warming Indicator? In the United States, daytime temperatures (which provide the fuel for thunderstorms) have actually declined over the last seven decades. To make conditions more unstable (conducive to thunderstorm formation), we have to cool the atmosphere from 20,000 to 50,000 feet; but all computer climate models predict warming in this layer. So, does this alleged global warming indicator invalidate these models?
Further, how torrential are these rains? How accurate is the image of fields of com being washed away by these cloudbursts? We mapped the percentage of heavy rainfall (greater than two inches per day) accounted for by three-inch-per-day or greater rain events. Except for the Gulf Coast region, few instances of more than three inches of
increase in Torrential" rains?
According to a new report, there's one more day every two years in which rainfall exceeds two inches. Apparently as reported in our last issue (Karl Finds "No Smoking Gun," Vol. 1, No. 3), this is definitive proof that global warming is here.
Why does a little extra rain in the central United States demonstrate global warming? Don't look for answers here-we have no idea. But since this study has garnered so much media attention, let's look at it a little more closely.
In a paper that appeared in the British
these heavy rains fall during summer.
Vice-President Gore referred to these as
We examined a large subset of the same
is the definitive proof of global warming
on Change in the percentage of summer Gratall the lo scounted for by day with son Inches on the shadedres Indication shen the comedonda
the total rainfall has been inomasing the percent per century). The stations the swiated by dedessed Med dres Indicator RGNE The percentage dally taller than to Inches that is comitted by means the more Inches Sachs, ich could be scared to comedor
(UKMO goes on to refer to an unpublished manuscript on which we have agreed te make no public comment-Ed.). ...consequently, it would be ry working hypothesis that even a sulfate modified GCX (the type that best tracts pest climate) would still be producing a large (and erroneous) arctic winter warming.... Perhaps now you see why I am so interested in the gridded timeseries. Maybe you'll reconsider ?
I am sorry to trouble you but I hope you agree that the credibility of the Atmospheric Sciences-everything we have worked for-lies in the global warming issue.
At this point, we tried to get UKMO to send the data to a neutral (whatever that means in a science debate) party, Roy lenne of the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research, who would logically request the data for his archive.
Electronic Mail to UKMO, May 17. 1995:
Roy Jenne says he would be very pleased if you would promptly send him a high latitude sample of the 1.5m temperature transient, output from the sultate/greenhouse model. say. gridpoints north of 60 degrees.... Roy would be very careful about sending it out.
No further communication was received from UKMO.
rain per day occur in the United States. Most two-to-three inch daily rainfalls will not cause problems in midsummer unless the ground is already saturated.
Thus, while we largely agree with Karl's analysis, we offer the following revisionist headline: "Beneficial, Non-torrential Rains in Gothenburg, Nebraska Not Related to Global Warming!" That's a tough way to fet people's attention.
This would seem to mean that even the
Karl LR, RW. Knight, and N. Hummer (1995). Trends in
TOO HOT TO HANDLED
Electronic Mail to U.K. Meteorological
In writing my review of the
to the 1995 (IPCC) Assessment.'
In view of the interests of my
data at present."
I do not understand your state-
ast issue of this Report caused quite a
proper in the review process for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Specifically, we mentioned unfindable references and denial of specific data critical to a proper independent evaluation.
This finding comes at a critical juncture in the climate change issue. The Clinton Administration has just announced that its Climate Change Action Plan-the voluntary program to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levets by the year 2000-has failed. Not coincidentally, global warming rhetoric is at high crescendo. Something's about to give, and we would not be surprised if the Administration soon proposes tradeable emission permits for greenhouse gases. They'll correctly predict that Congress will have no part of it, and forge a big issue for the 1996 election.
All of this, of course, depends largely upon the reliability of global warming science, and it is the IPCC that claims to be the colossus of credibility. If their review process is tainted, so is their science.
In the course of reviewing their new report, this editor noticed that the climate model that IPCC said best tracked the past climate (and therefore is most reliable in the future) only reduced its warming forecast for the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere for 2040 by 1°C to 2°C, and forecast a rise of 4°C to 6°C. This was of some concern, because older models, which are now acknowledged as Inaccurate, predict that those latitudes should have warmed some 2°C since 1950. The actual warming is zero.
UKMO then sent two papers that were in review. One has been published in Nature, as the e-mail mentions.
Electronic Mail to UKMO, May 12, 1995:
Thank you for sending the
Temperature Change (C)
Reply from UKMO, May 12, 1995:
The data will be made available
•The reason I am so interested
Wereling price for so longe
model buds prest the heroes
vyjed this colores
World Climate Report is a research review edited by Patrick J. Michaels Funding for this publication is provided
I want to express my appreciation for your participation in the Committee's recent hearing on Global Change modelling. Your testimony was of great value to me and to the Committee.
Enclosed, you will find some additional questions which are intended to clarify certain points raised in the bearing and develop additional information for the Committee's use. Your written responses will be included as part of the hearing record. I ask that you provide your responses by February 1S. You may contact Dr. William S. Smith of my staff at 202/225-4439 if you have any questions regarding this request.
Once again, thank you for your assistance.
RGB B. BROWN, R.