Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


Profile Information

  • Location
  1. I have often thought that GFS underestimates the heat flux from the ocean so tends to have 850s too low in polar maritime airmasses
  2. Here is a link to the statement by Imperial College on Jo's retirement https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/191071/climate-champion-jo-haigh-retires-after/
  3. I see this is in ACP, I publish there quite frequently. It is a high impact journal with good refereeing standards with open discussion. An excellent avenue for scientific discussion.
  4. Really ? Reviewers report herehttp://ioppublishing.org/newsDetails/statement-from-iop-publishing-on-story-in-the-times
  5. We know from GCM hindcasts that most of the warming up until 1950 or thereabouts was natural. The odd thing about the paper is that it does not seek to identify the driver of the warming from the analysis over the period 1860 to 1950 then 1950 to date. This would be quite an interesting result as the GCM studies do identify the source of the early 20 th century warming, does this technique agree?
  6. It is worth saying that Mason retired approximately 23 years ago. He is certainly not Head of the Met Office (he was back in the 70s) In terms of the CERN experiments an excellent talk was given at the European Aerosol Conference in the opening plenary, the main points were: 1. Ammonia is a major regulator of particle nucleation in the atmopshere this is more than an order of magnitiude more important than cosmic rays (which do haver an effect) 2. Ammonai and cosmic rays combined only produce a sulphate nucleation rate which is sveral orders of magnitude too small to explain atmospheric nuclea
  7. The fact is though that physics tells us the increasing greenhouse gases causes warming and that there is a posiitve feedback from increased water vapour. The 20 the /. 21 st century warming cannot be explained apart from this. You don't need paper after paper to tell you this. We do need research and publications to explore regional climate change and the uncertainties in the magnitude of the warming over the next century.
  8. It will show, I think, that CRs do nucleate ion clusters in the atmosphere but generally cannot compete with CCN production by the whole raft of othe rprocesses for generating CCN which go on in the atmopshere.
  9. The rate of sea-level rise is rapidly increasing suggesting that the IPCC may have underestimated sea-level rise by the end of the century Nature Reports Climate Change Published online: 6 April 2010 | doi:10.1038/climate.2010.29 A new view on sea level rise Stefan Rahmstorf Over the course of the twentieth century, the rate of sea level rise has roughly tripled in response to 0.8 °C global warming2. Since the beginning of satellite measurements, sea level has risen about 80 per cent faster, at 3.4 millimetres per year3, than the average IPCC model projection of 1.9 millimetres per year. fro
  10. Indeed it is very clearly explained in the WMO reported quoted above http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/documents/GHG_bull_6_en.pdf
  11. I think you are stuggling with percentages there. You really should know that in low concentration radiatively active gases such as methane can have a significant impact on the radiation budget. Modern methods of measuring atmospheric methane are able to detect changes of 0.1ppbv.
  • Create New...