To be an AGW denier is to be paranoid

[CrusaderFrank]

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found
Posted on 11 June 2015 by Guest Author

This is a re-post from The Conversation by Steve Sherwood, UNSW Australia

Before climate sceptics got excited about the “hiatus” or slowdown in global surface warming during the past 15 years or so, they were fond of discussing the “missing tropospheric hotspot” – the alleged lack of anticipated temperature increase in the tropical upper troposphere (roughly 5-15 km altitude).

Both the “hiatus” and the “missing hot spot” have been interesting research problems, because models seemed like they might be missing something important.

There have been significant advances on both problems in the past year. And the new results do not offer much hope that scientists are fundamentally mistaken about global warming.

The “hiatus” has been addressed by a veritable avalanche of recent studies, as reported in articles on The Conversation (such as here and here). These studies collectively show that the warming slowdown has been the temporary result of a regularly recurring change in ocean circulation – essentially, a bump in the road towards a warmer planet. The phenomenon has no evident link to global warming or the physical principles that connect it to greenhouse gases.

Hitting the spot
But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface. This would seem highly relevant to the question of whether humans are causingclimate change, although in fact, the warming maximum should happen equally whether warming is natural or human-induced [(tropospheric hotspot is evidence of warming, not GHG warming specifically. Cooling in stratosphere is unique to an increase in GHG warming)]. Still, the seeming lack of such warming is an important puzzle for atmospheric scientists.

I wrote here in 2011 that recent (at the time) satellite studies were coming closer to showing the expected warming, but were still not all the way there. Some analyses of the data seemed to show it but were not completely convincing. Now, three newer papers make it look very much like the tropical atmosphere has indeed been warming as expected all along.

First, a 2013 paper [Revisiting the controversial issue of tropical tropospheric temperature trends - Mitchell - 2013 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library], featuring a new analysis of radiosonde (weather balloon) data showed increased warming in the upper troposphere. This analysis, which used weather forecasts to help identify artificial changes in the balloon data (such as those due to undocumented changes to instruments), also came up with a reassuringly realistic pattern of warming compared with earlier efforts.

My colleague Nidhi Nishant and I have now analysed the radiosonde data yet again [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...A692634BE990441DB03C931CAD67795.ip-10-40-2-73], and we found a tropical warming profile even closer to that expected. The fastest warming was at an altitude of about 12 km, and averaged 0.25C per decade – much faster than at the surface (0.14C per decade).

This means that the troposphere is warming around 70-80% faster than the surface. So, far from being absent, this tropospheric warming is at least as strong as predicted by the average climate model, which predicted that the troposphere would heat 64% faster than the surface.

Moreover, our data show that the tropical troposphere has warmed at a more or less constant rate since widespread balloon launches began in 1958, which is a bit puzzling given the ocean-surface hiatus since 2000 or so.

More evidence
This result comes hot on the heels of a new University of Washington study [http://www.atmos.uw.edu/~qfu/Publications/jtech.pochedley.2015.pdf] which overcomes one of the key obstacles to obtaining an accurate satellite-based record of atmospheric warming. The problem is that temperatures vary during the day, and when a new satellite is launched (which happens every few years), it observes the Earth at an earlier time of day than the old one (since after launch, each satellite orbit begins to decay toward later times of day).

This means that over time, if you don’t know the daily cycle of temperature very accurately over the whole planet, you are going to get an errors in the long-term warming trend when you piece the different satellite records together. The University of Washington group has come up with a way of estimating this temperature cycle from the satellite data themselves while at the same time accounting for other effects such as calibration changes.

The result is that they now find mid-to-upper tropospheric warming that is just as strong as predicted by models, in line with both of the new radiosonde studies. The tropospherewas warming all along – it’s just that the warming is very hard to see when other things are happening to the instruments over time.

One remaining puzzle is that the radiosonde data do not show a “hiatus” in atmospheric warming, but the satellite data do. Another is that the surface warming rate over oceans has been somewhat weaker than predicted by most climate models, even going back well before the “hiatus.”

This could be due to the models being too sensitive, but would be more easily explained by the existence of some influence on climate that has up until now been partly offsetting the greenhouse effect, and has not been properly accounted for. Thus climate scientists still have important puzzles to solve — but it looks like the “missing hot spot” has finally been found.

Steve Sherwood is Director, Climate Change Research Centre at UNSW Australia.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article[Climate meme debunked as the 'tropospheric hot spot' is found].
***************************************************************************************

Didn't you just tell us you never predicted a hot spot?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Do not validate his bullshit. The hotspot is NOT a requirement of GHG warming. Stratospheric cooling is.

See?

Then 2 pages later he posts "evidence" of a hot spot.

Insanity.

 

[Crick]

The tropospheric hot spot is due to changes in the lapse rate (Bengtsson 2009, Trenberth 2006, Ramaswamy 2006). As you get higher into the atmosphere, it gets colder. The rate of cooling is called the lapse rate. When the air cools enough for water vapor to condense, latent heat is released. The more moisture in the air, the more heat is released. As it's more moist in the tropics, the air cools at a slower rate compared to the poles. For example, it cools at around 4°C per kilometre at the equator but a much larger 8 to 9°C per kilometre at the subtropics.

When the surface warms, there's more evaporation and more moisture in the air. This decreases the lapse rate - there's less cooling aloft. This means warming aloft is greater than warming at the surface. This amplified trend is the hot spot. It's all to do with changes in the lapse rate, regardless of what's causing the warming. If the warming was caused by a brightening sun or reduced sulphate pollution, you'd still see a hot spot.

There's no tropospheric hot spot

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh.....and it is hysterical that these people still use the "denier" term as if it had any significance at all. Its about 5 years since this was taken up as a strategy of the AGW religion. Brand all non-true believers as "deniers".

So lets see how well that campaign has gone >>>





....not so good!!!

 

[Crick]

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found
Posted on 11 June 2015 by Guest Author

This is a re-post from The Conversation by Steve Sherwood, UNSW Australia

Before climate sceptics got excited about the “hiatus” or slowdown in global surface warming during the past 15 years or so, they were fond of discussing the “missing tropospheric hotspot” – the alleged lack of anticipated temperature increase in the tropical upper troposphere (roughly 5-15 km altitude).

Both the “hiatus” and the “missing hot spot” have been interesting research problems, because models seemed like they might be missing something important.

There have been significant advances on both problems in the past year. And the new results do not offer much hope that scientists are fundamentally mistaken about global warming.

The “hiatus” has been addressed by a veritable avalanche of recent studies, as reported in articles on The Conversation (such as here and here). These studies collectively show that the warming slowdown has been the temporary result of a regularly recurring change in ocean circulation – essentially, a bump in the road towards a warmer planet. The phenomenon has no evident link to global warming or the physical principles that connect it to greenhouse gases.

Hitting the spot
But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface. This would seem highly relevant to the question of whether humans are causingclimate change, although in fact, the warming maximum should happen equally whether warming is natural or human-induced [(tropospheric hotspot is evidence of warming, not GHG warming specifically. Cooling in stratosphere is unique to an increase in GHG warming)]. Still, the seeming lack of such warming is an important puzzle for atmospheric scientists.

I wrote here in 2011 that recent (at the time) satellite studies were coming closer to showing the expected warming, but were still not all the way there. Some analyses of the data seemed to show it but were not completely convincing. Now, three newer papers make it look very much like the tropical atmosphere has indeed been warming as expected all along.

First, a 2013 paper [Revisiting the controversial issue of tropical tropospheric temperature trends - Mitchell - 2013 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library], featuring a new analysis of radiosonde (weather balloon) data showed increased warming in the upper troposphere. This analysis, which used weather forecasts to help identify artificial changes in the balloon data (such as those due to undocumented changes to instruments), also came up with a reassuringly realistic pattern of warming compared with earlier efforts.

My colleague Nidhi Nishant and I have now analysed the radiosonde data yet again [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...A692634BE990441DB03C931CAD67795.ip-10-40-2-73], and we found a tropical warming profile even closer to that expected. The fastest warming was at an altitude of about 12 km, and averaged 0.25C per decade – much faster than at the surface (0.14C per decade).

This means that the troposphere is warming around 70-80% faster than the surface. So, far from being absent, this tropospheric warming is at least as strong as predicted by the average climate model, which predicted that the troposphere would heat 64% faster than the surface.

Moreover, our data show that the tropical troposphere has warmed at a more or less constant rate since widespread balloon launches began in 1958, which is a bit puzzling given the ocean-surface hiatus since 2000 or so.

More evidence
This result comes hot on the heels of a new University of Washington study [http://www.atmos.uw.edu/~qfu/Publications/jtech.pochedley.2015.pdf] which overcomes one of the key obstacles to obtaining an accurate satellite-based record of atmospheric warming. The problem is that temperatures vary during the day, and when a new satellite is launched (which happens every few years), it observes the Earth at an earlier time of day than the old one (since after launch, each satellite orbit begins to decay toward later times of day).

This means that over time, if you don’t know the daily cycle of temperature very accurately over the whole planet, you are going to get an errors in the long-term warming trend when you piece the different satellite records together. The University of Washington group has come up with a way of estimating this temperature cycle from the satellite data themselves while at the same time accounting for other effects such as calibration changes.

The result is that they now find mid-to-upper tropospheric warming that is just as strong as predicted by models, in line with both of the new radiosonde studies. The tropospherewas warming all along – it’s just that the warming is very hard to see when other things are happening to the instruments over time.

One remaining puzzle is that the radiosonde data do not show a “hiatus” in atmospheric warming, but the satellite data do. Another is that the surface warming rate over oceans has been somewhat weaker than predicted by most climate models, even going back well before the “hiatus.”

This could be due to the models being too sensitive, but would be more easily explained by the existence of some influence on climate that has up until now been partly offsetting the greenhouse effect, and has not been properly accounted for. Thus climate scientists still have important puzzles to solve — but it looks like the “missing hot spot” has finally been found.

Steve Sherwood is Director, Climate Change Research Centre at UNSW Australia.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article[Climate meme debunked as the 'tropospheric hot spot' is found].
***************************************************************************************

Didn't you just tell us you never predicted a hot spot?

I never said any such thing, but you HAVE nailed it right on the head. NO ONE {INCLUDING ME) EVER SAID A TROPOSPHERIC HOTSPOT WAS A MANDATORY SIGN OF GREENHOUSE WARMING. It is a sign of ALL forms of warming. If you want a sign of Greenhouse warming, you look for stratospheric cooling. And guess what?

Global Warming Causes Stratospheric Cooling | Weather Underground

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/278.htm

Why does the stratosphere cool when the troposphere warms?

Vertical Human Fingerprint Found in Stratospheric Cooling, Tropospheric Warming - Yale Climate Connections

And so forth

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found
Posted on 11 June 2015 by Guest Author

This is a re-post from The Conversation by Steve Sherwood, UNSW Australia

Before climate sceptics got excited about the “hiatus” or slowdown in global surface warming during the past 15 years or so, they were fond of discussing the “missing tropospheric hotspot” – the alleged lack of anticipated temperature increase in the tropical upper troposphere (roughly 5-15 km altitude).

Both the “hiatus” and the “missing hot spot” have been interesting research problems, because models seemed like they might be missing something important.

There have been significant advances on both problems in the past year. And the new results do not offer much hope that scientists are fundamentally mistaken about global warming.

The “hiatus” has been addressed by a veritable avalanche of recent studies, as reported in articles on The Conversation (such as here and here). These studies collectively show that the warming slowdown has been the temporary result of a regularly recurring change in ocean circulation – essentially, a bump in the road towards a warmer planet. The phenomenon has no evident link to global warming or the physical principles that connect it to greenhouse gases.

Hitting the spot
But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface. This would seem highly relevant to the question of whether humans are causingclimate change, although in fact, the warming maximum should happen equally whether warming is natural or human-induced [(tropospheric hotspot is evidence of warming, not GHG warming specifically. Cooling in stratosphere is unique to an increase in GHG warming)]. Still, the seeming lack of such warming is an important puzzle for atmospheric scientists.

I wrote here in 2011 that recent (at the time) satellite studies were coming closer to showing the expected warming, but were still not all the way there. Some analyses of the data seemed to show it but were not completely convincing. Now, three newer papers make it look very much like the tropical atmosphere has indeed been warming as expected all along.

First, a 2013 paper [Revisiting the controversial issue of tropical tropospheric temperature trends - Mitchell - 2013 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library], featuring a new analysis of radiosonde (weather balloon) data showed increased warming in the upper troposphere. This analysis, which used weather forecasts to help identify artificial changes in the balloon data (such as those due to undocumented changes to instruments), also came up with a reassuringly realistic pattern of warming compared with earlier efforts.

My colleague Nidhi Nishant and I have now analysed the radiosonde data yet again [Atmospheric changes through 2012 as shown by iteratively homogenized radiosonde temperature and wind data (IUKv2) - IOPscience], and we found a tropical warming profile even closer to that expected. The fastest warming was at an altitude of about 12 km, and averaged 0.25C per decade – much faster than at the surface (0.14C per decade).

This means that the troposphere is warming around 70-80% faster than the surface. So, far from being absent, this tropospheric warming is at least as strong as predicted by the average climate model, which predicted that the troposphere would heat 64% faster than the surface.

Moreover, our data show that the tropical troposphere has warmed at a more or less constant rate since widespread balloon launches began in 1958, which is a bit puzzling given the ocean-surface hiatus since 2000 or so.

More evidence
This result comes hot on the heels of a new University of Washington study [http://www.atmos.uw.edu/~qfu/Publications/jtech.pochedley.2015.pdf] which overcomes one of the key obstacles to obtaining an accurate satellite-based record of atmospheric warming. The problem is that temperatures vary during the day, and when a new satellite is launched (which happens every few years), it observes the Earth at an earlier time of day than the old one (since after launch, each satellite orbit begins to decay toward later times of day).

This means that over time, if you don’t know the daily cycle of temperature very accurately over the whole planet, you are going to get an errors in the long-term warming trend when you piece the different satellite records together. The University of Washington group has come up with a way of estimating this temperature cycle from the satellite data themselves while at the same time accounting for other effects such as calibration changes.

The result is that they now find mid-to-upper tropospheric warming that is just as strong as predicted by models, in line with both of the new radiosonde studies. The tropospherewas warming all along – it’s just that the warming is very hard to see when other things are happening to the instruments over time.

One remaining puzzle is that the radiosonde data do not show a “hiatus” in atmospheric warming, but the satellite data do. Another is that the surface warming rate over oceans has been somewhat weaker than predicted by most climate models, even going back well before the “hiatus.”

This could be due to the models being too sensitive, but would be more easily explained by the existence of some influence on climate that has up until now been partly offsetting the greenhouse effect, and has not been properly accounted for. Thus climate scientists still have important puzzles to solve — but it looks like the “missing hot spot” has finally been found.

Steve Sherwood is Director, Climate Change Research Centre at UNSW Australia.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article[Climate meme debunked as the 'tropospheric hot spot' is found].
***************************************************************************************

Didn't you just tell us you never predicted a hot spot?

I never said any such thing, but you HAVE nailed it right on the head. NO ONE {INCLUDING ME) EVER SAID A TROPOSPHERIC HOTSPOT WAS A MANDATORY SIGN OF GREENHOUSE WARMING. It is a sign of ALL forms of warming. If you want a sign of Greenhouse warming, you look for stratospheric cooling. And guess what?

Global Warming Causes Stratospheric Cooling | Weather Underground

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/278.htm

Why does the stratosphere cool when the troposphere warms?

Vertical Human Fingerprint Found in Stratospheric Cooling, Tropospheric Warming - Yale Climate Connections

And so forth

If you ever bothered reading the articles you link to, you'd know the AGWCult predicted a Hot Spot,'

"I wrote here in 2011 that recent (at the time) satellite studies were coming closer to showing the expected warming, but were still not all the way there. Some analyses of the data seemed to show it but were not completely convincing. Now, three newer papers make it look very much like the tropical atmosphere has indeed been warming as expected all along.

First, a 2013 paper, featuring a new analysis of radiosonde (weather balloon) data showed increased warming in the upper troposphere. This analysis, which used weather forecasts to help identify artificial changes in the balloon data (such as those due to undocumented changes to instruments), also came up with a reassuringly realistic pattern of warming compared with earlier efforts.

My colleague Nidhi Nishant and I have now analysed the radiosonde data yet again, and we found a tropical warming profile even closer to that expected. The fastest warming was at an altitude of about 12 km, and averaged 0.25C per decade – much faster than at the surface (0.14C per decade)."

So, according to Crickology, the AGWCult both predicted and didn't predict a Hot Spot

DoubleThink: the core of AGWCult "science"

 

[jc456]

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found
Posted on 11 June 2015 by Guest Author

This is a re-post from The Conversation by Steve Sherwood, UNSW Australia

Before climate sceptics got excited about the “hiatus” or slowdown in global surface warming during the past 15 years or so, they were fond of discussing the “missing tropospheric hotspot” – the alleged lack of anticipated temperature increase in the tropical upper troposphere (roughly 5-15 km altitude).

Both the “hiatus” and the “missing hot spot” have been interesting research problems, because models seemed like they might be missing something important.

There have been significant advances on both problems in the past year. And the new results do not offer much hope that scientists are fundamentally mistaken about global warming.

The “hiatus” has been addressed by a veritable avalanche of recent studies, as reported in articles on The Conversation (such as here and here). These studies collectively show that the warming slowdown has been the temporary result of a regularly recurring change in ocean circulation – essentially, a bump in the road towards a warmer planet. The phenomenon has no evident link to global warming or the physical principles that connect it to greenhouse gases.

Hitting the spot
But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface. This would seem highly relevant to the question of whether humans are causingclimate change, although in fact, the warming maximum should happen equally whether warming is natural or human-induced [(tropospheric hotspot is evidence of warming, not GHG warming specifically. Cooling in stratosphere is unique to an increase in GHG warming)]. Still, the seeming lack of such warming is an important puzzle for atmospheric scientists.

I wrote here in 2011 that recent (at the time) satellite studies were coming closer to showing the expected warming, but were still not all the way there. Some analyses of the data seemed to show it but were not completely convincing. Now, three newer papers make it look very much like the tropical atmosphere has indeed been warming as expected all along.

First, a 2013 paper [Revisiting the controversial issue of tropical tropospheric temperature trends - Mitchell - 2013 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library], featuring a new analysis of radiosonde (weather balloon) data showed increased warming in the upper troposphere. This analysis, which used weather forecasts to help identify artificial changes in the balloon data (such as those due to undocumented changes to instruments), also came up with a reassuringly realistic pattern of warming compared with earlier efforts.

My colleague Nidhi Nishant and I have now analysed the radiosonde data yet again [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...A692634BE990441DB03C931CAD67795.ip-10-40-2-73], and we found a tropical warming profile even closer to that expected. The fastest warming was at an altitude of about 12 km, and averaged 0.25C per decade – much faster than at the surface (0.14C per decade).

This means that the troposphere is warming around 70-80% faster than the surface. So, far from being absent, this tropospheric warming is at least as strong as predicted by the average climate model, which predicted that the troposphere would heat 64% faster than the surface.

Moreover, our data show that the tropical troposphere has warmed at a more or less constant rate since widespread balloon launches began in 1958, which is a bit puzzling given the ocean-surface hiatus since 2000 or so.

More evidence
This result comes hot on the heels of a new University of Washington study [http://www.atmos.uw.edu/~qfu/Publications/jtech.pochedley.2015.pdf] which overcomes one of the key obstacles to obtaining an accurate satellite-based record of atmospheric warming. The problem is that temperatures vary during the day, and when a new satellite is launched (which happens every few years), it observes the Earth at an earlier time of day than the old one (since after launch, each satellite orbit begins to decay toward later times of day).

This means that over time, if you don’t know the daily cycle of temperature very accurately over the whole planet, you are going to get an errors in the long-term warming trend when you piece the different satellite records together. The University of Washington group has come up with a way of estimating this temperature cycle from the satellite data themselves while at the same time accounting for other effects such as calibration changes.

The result is that they now find mid-to-upper tropospheric warming that is just as strong as predicted by models, in line with both of the new radiosonde studies. The tropospherewas warming all along – it’s just that the warming is very hard to see when other things are happening to the instruments over time.

One remaining puzzle is that the radiosonde data do not show a “hiatus” in atmospheric warming, but the satellite data do. Another is that the surface warming rate over oceans has been somewhat weaker than predicted by most climate models, even going back well before the “hiatus.”

This could be due to the models being too sensitive, but would be more easily explained by the existence of some influence on climate that has up until now been partly offsetting the greenhouse effect, and has not been properly accounted for. Thus climate scientists still have important puzzles to solve — but it looks like the “missing hot spot” has finally been found.

Steve Sherwood is Director, Climate Change Research Centre at UNSW Australia.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article[Climate meme debunked as the 'tropospheric hot spot' is found].
***************************************************************************************

Didn't you just tell us you never predicted a hot spot?

I never said any such thing, but you HAVE nailed it right on the head. NO ONE {INCLUDING ME) EVER SAID A TROPOSPHERIC HOTSPOT WAS A MANDATORY SIGN OF GREENHOUSE WARMING. It is a sign of ALL forms of warming. If you want a sign of Greenhouse warming, you look for stratospheric cooling. And guess what?

Global Warming Causes Stratospheric Cooling | Weather Underground

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/278.htm

Why does the stratosphere cool when the troposphere warms?

Vertical Human Fingerprint Found in Stratospheric Cooling, Tropospheric Warming - Yale Climate Connections

And so forth

so dude, I know that reading is difficult, but did you really mean to post this graph as evidence that there is a hot spot? Notice the tick marks on either side of the graph for the warming graph. It starts on the left at zero and ends on right at................................. zero. So, WTF?

 

[jc456]

As the planet flashes warning signs, U.S. and China pledge hasty signing of climate accord

For 15 years scientists have been screaming warnings to the entire human race. Now it's too late. But we have to make the effort anyway don't we.

Human life on Earth is going to drastically change soon. And every person that knew this was coming wishes it weren't true.

Here everyone, Tooth, Crick and whomever else is here from the warming party, this is what paranoid looks like.

 

[SSDD]

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found
Posted on 11 June 2015 by Guest Author

This is a re-post from The Conversation by Steve Sherwood, UNSW Australia

Before climate sceptics got excited about the “hiatus” or slowdown in global surface warming during the past 15 years or so, they were fond of discussing the “missing tropospheric hotspot” – the alleged lack of anticipated temperature increase in the tropical upper troposphere (roughly 5-15 km altitude).

Both the “hiatus” and the “missing hot spot” have been interesting research problems, because models seemed like they might be missing something important.

There have been significant advances on both problems in the past year. And the new results do not offer much hope that scientists are fundamentally mistaken about global warming.

The “hiatus” has been addressed by a veritable avalanche of recent studies, as reported in articles on The Conversation (such as here and here). These studies collectively show that the warming slowdown has been the temporary result of a regularly recurring change in ocean circulation – essentially, a bump in the road towards a warmer planet. The phenomenon has no evident link to global warming or the physical principles that connect it to greenhouse gases.

Hitting the spot
But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface. This would seem highly relevant to the question of whether humans are causingclimate change, although in fact, the warming maximum should happen equally whether warming is natural or human-induced [(tropospheric hotspot is evidence of warming, not GHG warming specifically. Cooling in stratosphere is unique to an increase in GHG warming)]. Still, the seeming lack of such warming is an important puzzle for atmospheric scientists.

I wrote here in 2011 that recent (at the time) satellite studies were coming closer to showing the expected warming, but were still not all the way there. Some analyses of the data seemed to show it but were not completely convincing. Now, three newer papers make it look very much like the tropical atmosphere has indeed been warming as expected all along.

First, a 2013 paper [Revisiting the controversial issue of tropical tropospheric temperature trends - Mitchell - 2013 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library], featuring a new analysis of radiosonde (weather balloon) data showed increased warming in the upper troposphere. This analysis, which used weather forecasts to help identify artificial changes in the balloon data (such as those due to undocumented changes to instruments), also came up with a reassuringly realistic pattern of warming compared with earlier efforts.

My colleague Nidhi Nishant and I have now analysed the radiosonde data yet again [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...A692634BE990441DB03C931CAD67795.ip-10-40-2-73], and we found a tropical warming profile even closer to that expected. The fastest warming was at an altitude of about 12 km, and averaged 0.25C per decade – much faster than at the surface (0.14C per decade).

This means that the troposphere is warming around 70-80% faster than the surface. So, far from being absent, this tropospheric warming is at least as strong as predicted by the average climate model, which predicted that the troposphere would heat 64% faster than the surface.

Moreover, our data show that the tropical troposphere has warmed at a more or less constant rate since widespread balloon launches began in 1958, which is a bit puzzling given the ocean-surface hiatus since 2000 or so.

More evidence
This result comes hot on the heels of a new University of Washington study [http://www.atmos.uw.edu/~qfu/Publications/jtech.pochedley.2015.pdf] which overcomes one of the key obstacles to obtaining an accurate satellite-based record of atmospheric warming. The problem is that temperatures vary during the day, and when a new satellite is launched (which happens every few years), it observes the Earth at an earlier time of day than the old one (since after launch, each satellite orbit begins to decay toward later times of day).

This means that over time, if you don’t know the daily cycle of temperature very accurately over the whole planet, you are going to get an errors in the long-term warming trend when you piece the different satellite records together. The University of Washington group has come up with a way of estimating this temperature cycle from the satellite data themselves while at the same time accounting for other effects such as calibration changes.

The result is that they now find mid-to-upper tropospheric warming that is just as strong as predicted by models, in line with both of the new radiosonde studies. The tropospherewas warming all along – it’s just that the warming is very hard to see when other things are happening to the instruments over time.

One remaining puzzle is that the radiosonde data do not show a “hiatus” in atmospheric warming, but the satellite data do. Another is that the surface warming rate over oceans has been somewhat weaker than predicted by most climate models, even going back well before the “hiatus.”

This could be due to the models being too sensitive, but would be more easily explained by the existence of some influence on climate that has up until now been partly offsetting the greenhouse effect, and has not been properly accounted for. Thus climate scientists still have important puzzles to solve — but it looks like the “missing hot spot” has finally been found.

Steve Sherwood is Director, Climate Change Research Centre at UNSW Australia.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article[Climate meme debunked as the 'tropospheric hot spot' is found].
***************************************************************************************

You are kidding...right? Tell me that you are not that gullible....never mind, of course you are that gullible and more.

 

[Crick]

If you ever bothered reading the articles you link to, you'd know the AGWCult predicted a Hot Spot,'

Your ignorance in almost everything, Frank, is why I maintain on the ignore list. I've simply been hitting (you and jc456) more frequently from a lack of actionable traffic from your side of the argument.

No climate scientist, nor the IPCC, has ever stated that a tropospheric hotspot was a mandatory symptom of greenhouse warming. If you disagree, I'd be glad to read a quote.

 

[jc456]

If you ever bothered reading the articles you link to, you'd know the AGWCult predicted a Hot Spot,'

Your ignorance in almost everything, Frank, is why I maintain on the ignore list. I've simply been hitting (you and jc456) more frequently from a lack of actionable traffic from your side of the argument.

No climate scientist, nor the IPCC, has ever stated that a tropospheric hotspot was a mandatory symptom of greenhouse warming. If you disagree, I'd be glad to read a quote.

so Crick, here is a link to skeptical science. your place right?

Hotspot Found Again: Warming of the Tropical Troposphere Confirms Climate Model Prediction

Well there are quite a few statements in there about hot spot and greenhouse warming. So which one are you most interested in? here try this one out first:

"Why should there be a 'hotspot' in the atmosphere above the tropics?
Because most of Earth's incoming energy from the sun is received in the tropics, strong evaporation there removes a lot of heat from the ocean surface. This heat is hidden (latent) as it is used to convert water from a liquid to a gaseous form. Readers are probably familiar with this process as it is the same one in which we are cooled when sweat evaporates off our bodies during strenuous exercise. Our skin cools as heat is used up in the act of evaporating away the sweat. "

Or,

"A temperature signal from the data
Sherwood & Nishant managed to extract useful information from the weather balloon data by using a combination of statistical methods that account and corrects for bias. In their words:

"The methodology statistically corrects for incomplete sampling and step changes in bias arising from changed instrumentation or observing practises. It does this by, in effect, performing a multiple regression of the available data onto a structural model that allows simultaneously for natural and artificial changes.This preserves trends and slow variations at individual stations in an unbiased way given the structural model...."

In effect the analysis enabled Sherwood & Nishant to identify spurious trends introduced by changes in instruments and collection procedures. The authors also carried out a number of other steps to improve their results, such as rejecting stations found to be unreliable from the dataset, and the inclusion of wind vector data, but I won't bore you with the details. Perhaps the most surprising results were that the tropical troposphere was still warming robustly from 2000-2012 despite a standstill in ocean surface temperatures in the tropics (see bottom panel of Figure 2 below), and that stratospheric cooling (a signature of the increased greenhouse effect) in the tropics and northern hemisphere leveled off during 2000-2012"

This one cracks me up cause they admit they are not using all of the data cause the stations don't line up with their expectations. It's fking hilarious ster.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you ever bothered reading the articles you link to, you'd know the AGWCult predicted a Hot Spot,'

Your ignorance in almost everything, Frank, is why I maintain on the ignore list. I've simply been hitting (you and jc456) more frequently from a lack of actionable traffic from your side of the argument.

No climate scientist, nor the IPCC, has ever stated that a tropospheric hotspot was a mandatory symptom of greenhouse warming. If you disagree, I'd be glad to read a quote.

Crick, let's start with the unread article you linked to,

"But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface."

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found

 

[Crick]

If you ever bothered reading the articles you link to, you'd know the AGWCult predicted a Hot Spot,'

Your ignorance in almost everything, Frank, is why I maintain on the ignore list. I've simply been hitting (you and jc456) more frequently from a lack of actionable traffic from your side of the argument.

No climate scientist, nor the IPCC, has ever stated that a tropospheric hotspot was a mandatory symptom of greenhouse warming. If you disagree, I'd be glad to read a quote.

Crick, let's start with the unread article you linked to,

"But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface."

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found

It is expected because it is warming. I've said this half a dozen times now. Show us a quote that makes it a necessary feature OF GREENHOUSE WARMING.

Since you won't find that, you have two options. Admit I was right or alter your argument to "the hotspot could not be found because the Earth is not warming" to which I would point out, again, that it has now been found by a number of people, though I will not deny the difficulty in finding it - thought at least partially due to the tools available - indicates scientists missing something in the physics of the atmosphere. The stratospheric cooling, on the other hand, which IS A NECESSARY FEATURE OF GREENHOUSE WARMING has been clearly visible for years.

 

[mamooth]

Except not really hairball....but you believe on if it gets you through your miserable bitter life.

RSS shows a very clear tropospheric warming trend, which even your graphs show that.

And the balloon measurements has been posted.

Face it, your conspiracy about the lack of a hotspot is crap. Sulking at us won't change that.

Might I suggest you deniers find a new cult? The one you're in is almost dead. It won't die fast, of course. After all, there are still a few JFK assassination conspiracy theorists. The denier cult has almost dropped to that level of insignificance.

 

[Crick]

Have you noticed the recent rise in chemtrail advocates among the deniers?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you ever bothered reading the articles you link to, you'd know the AGWCult predicted a Hot Spot,'

Your ignorance in almost everything, Frank, is why I maintain on the ignore list. I've simply been hitting (you and jc456) more frequently from a lack of actionable traffic from your side of the argument.

No climate scientist, nor the IPCC, has ever stated that a tropospheric hotspot was a mandatory symptom of greenhouse warming. If you disagree, I'd be glad to read a quote.

Crick, let's start with the unread article you linked to,

"But what about the “missing hot spot”? In this case, part of the atmosphere has reportedly warmed little, in spite of predictions that it should warm significantly faster than the surface."

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found

It is expected because it is warming. I've said this half a dozen times now. Show us a quote that makes it a necessary feature OF GREENHOUSE WARMING.

Since you won't find that, you have two options. Admit I was right or alter your argument to "the hotspot could not be found because the Earth is not warming" to which I would point out, again, that it has now been found by a number of people, though I will not deny the difficulty in finding it - thought at least partially due to the tools available - indicates scientists missing something in the physics of the atmosphere. The stratospheric cooling, on the other hand, which IS A NECESSARY FEATURE OF GREENHOUSE WARMING has been clearly visible for years.

Crick you're pathological, an enviromarxist jihadist. You're just plain lying now

 

[Crick]

Crick you're pathological, an enviromarxist jihadist. You're just plain lying now

What lie would that be Frank?

 

[IsaacNewton]

Look, it's the Global Warming denier cult and their allies. Birds of a feather comes to mind.

God hates climate scientists: Ars meets the Westboro Baptist Church

 

[Old Rocks]

Tell me moron, if matter receives the wave length what does the molecule emit? What other items NOT LISTED emit within the same range?

You see morons like you and crick dont understand the spectral emissions and what they can and can not cause.

Silly old crock... it went right over your dam head

BillyBob, you can't explain your point if it is mostly empty bluster. If you don't think all the GHGs were listed, just say what you think they are. You are referring to "the wave length" and "the molecule". The word "the" is a definite article and refers to something specific. Please say what specific wave length and molecule you are referring to.

"Retarded" is not used in radiation physics. If you are inventing new terms define them. Rather than simply calling someone a "moron" about spectral emissions, just state what you think spectral emissions "can and can not cause". When you type vague sentences with mostly bluster, people will assume you don't know what you are talking about.

Matter (molecules) emit what they receive at roughly the same wave length. OTHER items emit at this same wavelength which are NOT GHG's. You cant define what the GHG's actually do until you define what the other sources of the wave length are and how much they emit.

This is the reason that all current CO2 forcing estimates are wrong. In the past they have over and over again reduced the "forcing" effect of CO2. Now they are seeing the net forcing as negative (in other words even the base line warming shown in the lab is to high)

Currently the we are seeing only about 0.6 deg C rise per doubling...

You are on the right course here. But the 1st doubling since the Industrial Age isn't even done yet. Probably WILL be just over 1degC.. Which BTW -- as you say -- the empirical accurate modern measurements of temp confirm.

Even if it EXCEEDED that amount because of additive natural variations over that time frame ---- the basic physics/chemical calculations of 1degC/doubling that we started with ---- are not the CRISIS that has been declared by the GW circus..

But we pretty much know the spectral (frequency) emission/absorption properties of all the atmos constituents. What we DON'T KNOW accurately is the spectral variance of that big nuclear furnace in the sky. Can only ACCURATELY see that from space. And we've only been measuring that for about 30 years. Those matter bands of frequencies are narrowly tuned in a LOT of cases and a shift in the solar frequency distribution could easily cause a W/m2 or two of difference thru the atmos..

So, we are nowhere near doubling, yet we have already hit 0.9 degrees above the pre-industrial average. How do you square that with only 1 degree for a doubling?

2015 is warmest year on record, NOAA and NASA say - CNN.com

While it wasn't necessarily a surprise that 2015 finished in first place, its margin of victory was startling -- it lapped the field, with the average temperature across the entire planet 1.62˚F (0.90˚C) above the 20th century average, more than 20% higher than the previous highest departure from average.

Simple -- the observed variance is not ALL from CO2 doubling..

Well, no, it is not. Much of it is from the additional water vapor in the atmosphere. And CO2 has not doubled yet, that won't happen until it is at 560 ppm, it is presently about 400 ppm. And, of course, an El Nino creates a warmer year, which with the additional GHG's, creates a year much warmer than any in recorded history. And then, we also have the increased level of CH4, from about 750 ppb to 1800 ppb, and rising rapidly as the permafrost and clathrates outgass. Going to be very interesting in the coming decades.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Crick you're pathological, an enviromarxist jihadist. You're just plain lying now

What lie would that be Frank?

That your AGW Theory never supposed an atmospheric Hot Spot. You even posted an article claiming they found the Hot Spot.

Do you not read the article you link?

You're either lying or totally ignorant, your call