Is 400 just the number after 399, or are we doomed, so we can stop arguing

The June briefing includes a plot through May:

NOAA YTD Global Temperature 2016 May by fuzzy1 posted Jun 18, 2016 at 1:59 PM

Compare this to December's chart I posted back at #25 in this thread. 2016 is completely off that chart's scale.

 

Except that El Nino in 2016 was stronger than 1998.Or doesnt that matter to an engineer.
http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm

 

Avoiding the obvious may seem difficult but here are a couple of tips that will help:

During La Nina events, if temperatures seem low, it is global cooling, not La Nina
During El Nino events, if temperatures seem high, it is El Nino, not global warming.

Bonus tip: Never ever calculate 10-year average temperatures. If somebody else does, change the subject.

 

You can set aside the 2015-16 El Nino by chopping off this chart at 2014 (May), when the 10 year trailing average (red line) was +0.62C.

Global Average Temperature 2016 May by fuzzy1 posted Jun 18, 2016 at 11:00 PM

Legend: Blue line, 12 month average to May.
Red line, 10 year average to May.

May I presume that many folks will use 2016 as the new plateau for the next fifteen year 'pause'?

 

Lookup 'albedo.'

Bob Wilson

 

Next pause@64. No, you may not so assume. Within the next 15 years there may be another El Nino. The Pacific Ocean has in recent years collected some thermal energy and it sloshes as it pleases.

Albedo, why, Bob? Has the world gotten cloudier? That would sound like an Adaptive Iris to me.

 

Clouds have an effect but the lack of sea ice increases polar warming of the associated seas. It also has an effect on soils now more often exposed. Even the glacier retreats are exposing light absorbing rock and dirt.

I like the adaptive iris hypothesis but it isn't clear that the effect is sufficient to mitigate the CO{2} IR window. One reason is the bottom of the clouds also reflect heat back to the earth. So a cloudy night is warmer than a clear one leading to more heat retention. Don't forget that Venus is cloud covered and that helps retain surface heat without reflecting enough to moderate the temperature.

Bob Wilson

 

In that case, this next 'pause' may be shorter than 15 years as we move ahead to yet another higher 'pause' cycle.

 

ENSO is not quite periodic, but 7 years is close to the 'interval'. There were a couple of small El Ninos between 1998 and 2015 and that is reasonable to anticipate.

The year-to-years will always go up and down. Down years provide source material for 'looky here T down, an ice age is coming' . This is just Mother Nature trolling. Laying out a trap, but also putting a big sign next to it saying "TRAP: be careful lest you fall in!". Not everybody reads the sign.

Such things can be managed by decadal or longer averaging.

I would say though that use of 'pause' terminology was surprisingly general. This was not appropriate (and certainly not wise) without also referring to the previous two 'pauses' in the instrumental T record. Because there were two previously, anybody can see them, and they were more extensive than Pause3. In other woulds, they used to be able to turn decadal averages negative, but not any more.

The ocean thing - that it remains beyond the scope of climate models is no reason to ignore it.. Come to think of it, a 60 (ish) year ocean cycle could be Mother Nature trolling again

 

The June UAH TLT was lower than May, and so far I only know of one website commenting on this remarkable cooling trend. Get with it boys! spin while ye may.

 

'multiply, and subdue the earth'.

 

Good thing a one month change is not 'a weather.'

Bob Wilson

 

Ok until the earth's ecosystems get so far out of whack,that they bite Homo Sapiens in the a$$.

I would opine that any evolutionarily dominant, intelligent species has ipso facto the capability for , and high likelihood of , ecosystem destruction. 'Twould explain the complete lack of radio spectrum signatures from anyplace in the cosmos, despite the abundance of planets upon which some form of life may have evolved. Not a comforting thought, though.

 

I'm not yet going to get hung up on the lack of radio signals from other advanced life. Such signals that we can currently detect require a huge expenditure of power on the transmitting end, for no economic gain. As our own technology advances, our bandwidth efficiencies and transmission power efficiencies are improving, making our ordinary signals less detectable to eavesdroppers snooping from beyond the intended range.

 

[fumbled post upload]

 

It's been a long time since the most recent update to this thread, so here is the latest:

... still completely out of sight.

The "warmest years on record" no longer includes any representative from the 20th Century.

 

a good thing, i guess?

 

You have another free guess.

 

a bad thing? is 400 still important?

 

The "warmest years on record" no longer includes any representative from the 20th Century. from #76

Means that air T continues to increase. Means (to some 'degree' of certainty) that still-increasing CO2 is trapping more outgoing heat.

400 ppm is still important as the number that CO2 usta be. Annual average now approaches 420.

==
edit: Now about 415 ppm. If 420 has particular significance, it will be exceeded in year 2024.