Next decade 'may see no warming'

[Daly Coast]

Hoping to get your some feedback on this amazing video about the strange direction we are taking to minimize global warming

YouTube - Rex Murphy - The End Of Ethanol

Thanks

[Cthulhu]

Originally Posted by arno

Interesting, but my understanding was that the leading science suggests that natural variations are an order of magnitude less dramatic than the human-caused global warming.

Yes you are right, on the longterm - even looking ahead 50 years this paper doesn't propose we end up any cooler.

[cbacba]

Originally Posted by screener

cbacba I was surprised by another of your posts and the comment that water has a low reflectance except at a low range of angles. I can see then that as the ice goes the oceans will warm faster, and that in itself could create the same circuit effects.

ice is basically at high latitudes where there is relatively little insolation. Earth's albedo is around 0.32 - this is almost totally from cloud cover as oceans are 3/4 of the total and are below 0.04. Land is somewhat higher but there again, it's got the problem of being only 25% of the total.

What is happening is that the clouds can vary by 8-10% over a couple of decades and this goes directly to the global temperatures. In general, they form a strong negative feedback, adjusting the vagaries of various factors that contribute to the net balance. Ice age glaciation actually helps with a 'short circuit' of this system as the surface with fresh snow is rather high, prohibiting cloud formation from being the control mechanism.

The 'natural variations' being claimed by the AGW ghg crowd are the solar insolation - which is small in variation. That doesn't mean the spectrum varies by that small 0.1 to 0.2% moderately short term value as some bandwidths may vary by several percent and the effects of insolation don't have to be only related to total power. Also, solar effects don't just include total radiated power.

Palle & (goodson)??? showed that the albedo varied over the last 20+ years by about 10% min to max. Albedo is an extremely potent and a 10% variation can mean total arriving power from the sun (averaged) can vary by 10W/m^2 as compared to the presumed 3.6W/m^2 for a co2 doubling from 1750. You'll note that this is almost 3 times the amount of change that is supposed to happen in the future and the doubling itself is over twice the change supposedly that has happened already.

When people point to 1998 and the serious changes in T that appear to have happened in the last 20 years that suggests the co2 1.7W/m^2 increase since 1750 has had a massive effect, it fails to consider that the almost 10% cloud albedeo variation contributed about 10W/m^2 and this correlates with the T curve over that time - including the albdeo drop in 1998 - as opposed to the lack of correlation of co2 versus T during that time frame.

[screener]

At the high latitudes there is insolation 24 hours a day, It gets pretty warm, it's true too that the sunlight comes at a lower angle but when it's there all the time it doesn't matter. It hits the ice front back and sides. the ice is melting, the cold water is causing changes to ocean currents. The water then warms, water evaporates and clouds form, all moderating influences.

Clouds come and go, perhaps causing more rain in some areas, wind shifts in others, This is not an indication that we'll be going into cooling in a big way. Unless clouds cover the earth, the warming effect would still be larger than the cooling effect they grant us.

[screener]

daly coast, I don't try to look at videos on the computer, too slow, especially someone as wordy as REX. And I missed Rex on the CBC. Can you give a brief summary of what he had to say?