Site: Science of Doom

Slant: Sceptic

Active: yes

Recent Articles

Science of Doom: Models, On – and Off – the Catwalk – Part Seven – Resolution & Convection

In the comments on Part Five there was some discussion on Mauritsen & Stevens 2015 which looked at the “iris effect”: A controversial hypothesis suggests that the dry and clear regions of the tropical atmosphere expand in a warming climate and thereby allow more infrared radiation to escape to space One of the big challenges in

2017-11-26 00:58   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Cimate Sensitivity – Stevens et al 2016

I was re-reading Missing iris effect as a possible cause of muted hydrological change and high climate sensitivity in models, Thorsten Mauritsen and Bjorn Stevens from 2015 (because I referenced it in a recent comment) and then looked up other recent papers citing it. One interesting review paper is by Stevens et al from 2016.

2017-11-23 23:48   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Models, On – and Off – the Catwalk – Part Six – Tuning and Seasonal Contrasts

In Part Five – More on Tuning & the Magic Behind the Scenes and also in the earlier Part Four we looked at the challenge of selecting parameters in climate models. A recent 2017 paper on this topic by Frédéric Hourdin and colleagues is very illuminating. One of the co-authors is Thorsten Mauritsen, the principal author of the 2012 paper we

2017-11-20 09:03   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Renewables XX – Recent Renewable Statistics

I’ve been digging through some statistics for my own benefit. When you read or hear a statistic that country X is generating Y% of electricity via renewables it can sound wonderful, but the headline number can conceal or overstate useful progress. A few tips for readers new to the subject: Energy is not electricity. So

2017-11-17 23:26   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Water vapour feedback is simply written into climate models as parameters?

Over in another article, a commenter claims: ..Catastrophic predictions depend on accelerated forcings due to water vapour feedback. This water vapour feedback is simply written into climate models as parameters. It is not derived from any kind simulation of first principles in the General Circulation Model runs (GCMs).. [Emphasis added] I’ve seen this article of

2017-11-05 22:17   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Two Basic Foundations

This article will be a placeholder article to filter out a select group of people. The many people who arrive and confidently explain that atmospheric physics is fatally flawed (without the benefit of having read a textbook). They don’t think they are confused, in their minds they are helpfully explaining why the standard theory is

2017-11-05 05:20   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts – XIV – Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change 1

In recent articles we have looked at rainfall and there is still more to discuss. This article changes tack to look at tropical cyclones, prompted by the recent US landfall of Harvey and Irma along with questions from readers about attribution and the future. It might be surprising to find the following statement from leading

2017-09-24 08:26   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts – XIII – Rainfall 3

In XII – Rainfall 2 we saw the results of many models on rainfall as GHGs increase. They project wetter tropics, drier subtropics and wetter higher latitude regions. We also saw an expectation that rainfall will increase globally, with something like 2-3% per ºC of warming. Here is a (too small) graph from Allen & Ingram (2002) showing the model

2017-08-21 05:23   Click to comment

Science of Doom: The Debate is Over – 99% of Scientists believe Gravity and the Heliocentric Solar System so therefore..

At least 99.9% of physicists believe the theory of gravity, and the heliocentric model of the solar system. The debate is over. There is no doubt that we can send a manned (and woman-ed) mission to Mars. Some “skeptics” say it can’t be done. They are denying basic science! Gravity is plainly true. So is

2017-08-01 02:57   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Renewables XIX – Behind the Executive Summary and Reality vs Dreams

In a few large companies I observed the same phenomenon – over here are corporate dreams and over there is reality. Team – your job is to move reality over to where corporate dreams are. It wasn’t worded like that. Anyway, reality won each time. Reality is pretty stubborn. Of course, refusal to accept “reality”

2017-07-26 05:49   Click to comment

Science of Doom: The Confirmation Bias – a Feature not a Bug

A long time ago I wrote The Confirmation Bias – Or Why None of Us are Really Skeptics, with a small insight from Nassim Taleb. Right now I’m rereading The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt. This is truly a great book if you want to understand more

2017-06-25 23:32   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts – XII – Rainfall 2

I probably should have started a separate series on rainfall and then woven the results back into the Impacts series. It might take a few articles working through the underlying physics and how models and observations of current and past climate compare before being able to consider impacts. There are a number of different ways to look at rainfall

2017-05-18 02:29   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts XI – Rainfall 1

If we want to assess forecasts of floods, droughts and crop yields then we will need to know rainfall. We will also need to know temperature of course. The forte of climate models is temperature. Rainfall is more problematic. Before we get to model predictions about the future we need to review observations and the ability of

2017-05-08 03:17   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts – X – Sea Level Rise 5 – Bangladesh

FitzGerald et al 2008: Sea-level rise (SLR) poses a particularly ominous threat because 10% of the world’s population (634 million people) lives in low-lying coastal regions within 10 m elevation of sea level (McGranahan et al. 2007). Much of this population resides in portions of 17 of the world’s 30 largest cities, including Mumbai, India;

2017-05-04 08:05   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts – IX – Sea Level 4 – Sinking Megacities

In Impacts – VIII – Sea level 3 – USA I suggested this conclusion: So the cost of sea level rise for 2100 in the US seems to be a close to zero cost problem. Probably the provocative way I wrote the conclusion confused some people. I should have said that it was a very expensive problem. But that

2017-05-02 08:30   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Models, On – and Off – the Catwalk – Part Five – More on Tuning & the Magic Behind the Scenes

[I started writing this some time ago and got side-tracked, initially because aerosol interaction in clouds and rainfall is quite fascinating with lots of current research and then because there are many papers on higher resolution simulations of convection that also looked interesting.. so decided to post it less than complete because it will be some time before

2017-02-21 02:22   Click to comment

Science of Doom: Impacts – VIII – Sea level 3 – USA

In Parts VI and VII we looked at past and projected sea level rise. It is clear that the sea level has risen over the last hundred years, and it’s clear that with more warming sea level will rise some more. The uncertainties (given a specific global temperature increase) are more around how much more ice

2017-02-19 08:26   Click to comment


comments powered by Disqus
116