22 August 2008

New Study Revolutionises Atmospheric Science

All of those billion dollar atmospheric circulation models financed by NASA, the IPCC, and other big money funding agencies are now as good as garbage. A new study from Imperial College London is forcing a complete re-thinking of atmospheric science and the entire infant science of climatology.
New research suggests that scientists may have to radically rethink their understanding of how air circulates in the atmosphere. The study, published in the journal Science, reveals that warm, moist air rising in the mid latitudes plays an important role in the circulation of air around the globe....

'With more attention than ever before being focused on understanding our planet's climate, weather systems and atmosphere, it's important that scientists challenge their own assumptions and current theories of how these complex processes work,' commented Dr Arnaud Czaja of Imperial College London in the UK, one of the authors of the paper.....

Previously, scientists thought there were two major air circulation 'cells' in the atmosphere: one in the northern hemisphere, the other in the southern hemisphere....According to Dr Czaja, previous theories failed to take into account the important role water vapour plays in mid-latitude weather systems. By allowing for this factor, the scientists found that much more air rises in the mid-latitudes than was previously thought, and as much as half of the air rising into the upper reaches of the atmosphere comes from the mid-latitudes...

The findings have important implications for our understanding of climate change. 'As Earth's temperature rises, the amount of water vapour present in the atmosphere is extremely likely to increase as well,' the article concludes. 'Understanding how changes in temperature and humidity affect the dynamics of [...] circulation is a critical issue for better predicting mid-latitude climate in a warmer world.'

Of course, informed persons already understood that the huge gaps in understanding of atmospheric processes made current climate models worse than worthless. It is only those who stood to profit from climate alarmism--along with the supremely gullible and academically lobotomised--who carried the alarmist banner so belligerently.

As the infant science of climatology slowly becomes a bona fide science, a better understanding of the authentic processes of climate will emerge.

Also covered in PO


Bookmark and Share


Blogger Loren said...

I've had the thought for a while that death of a thousand cuts would be a suitable end for the global warming idiocy.

Scientists would do small, seemingly insignificant studies, rather than anything big. These would be more likely to get funding, and over time, you get a mountain you can throw at the alarmists. It gets harder and harder to deny the multiple studies, some of which would probably end up receiving positive peer review from the people they will destroy.

I might try it myself, if I wasn't doing an EE instead.

Friday, 22 August, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Right. As long as science is allowed to work, it will chip away at "the big lie" until there is nothing left but databases of variable quality, which will be used to support other theories altogether.

Saturday, 23 August, 2008  
Blogger Barba Rija said...

Not to destroy your iconoclast stance, but, hahem, if anything, this study makes the case that water vapor is a rather positive feedback factor in the climate, which, hahem, only makes the alarmist's case better, not worse.

As usual, Al Fin shoots himself in the foot.

Saturday, 23 August, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Not so fast. You are making unwarranted assumptions without understanding the underlying dynamics. But that is the same mistake that most climate modelers make as well, except on a more superficial level.

If the situation were as simplistic as you claim, the study would warrant a huge yawn, rather than being just a part of the underground discussion that is making the IPCC more and more uncomfortable as of late.

The observations are not following the models, which is a huge problem for people who stake their reputations on alarmist claims that are based upon obsolete models.

This is a huge disruption to the climate infrastructure and the repercussions will take years to settle out.

Saturday, 23 August, 2008  
Blogger IConrad said...

Also, if the water vapor is coming from the mid-range latitudes then there is no guarantee that it will be contributory to the positive feedback signal hypothesis; none at all.

Much of that concept relied upon the water vapor carrying the heat from the central latitudes with it as it was raised into the higher atmospheric levels. If the water vapor we're seeing is coming from a wider band of latitudes, then the thermal signature of that water vapor can be presumed to be lower.

Barba Rija; are all of your criticisms this poorly thought out?

Monday, 25 August, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Right. Current models are unable to cope with water vapour convection, and the consequent movement of heat manifested in systems of storms.

I keep hoping that BR will start putting some actual content in his comments above and beyond childish insults. I would rather not think the problem is a lack of comprehension on his part.

Tuesday, 26 August, 2008  

Post a Comment

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts