tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post2859653039526050247..comments2024-03-11T04:54:26.827-07:00Comments on THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Multiple papers ignored by IPCC document the effect of natural ocean oscillations on climateUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-4324292810312601202014-09-06T21:55:38.157-07:002014-09-06T21:55:38.157-07:00Thanks for this useful reference. The essence of t...Thanks for this useful reference. The essence of the question is this: <br /><br />Given that:<br />1. The net excess of incoming radiation over outgoing radiation has been estimated together with error bars. <br />2. Variations in the quantity of incoming radiation has been estimated together with uncertainties.<br /><br />Is the variation in incoming radiation sufficient to offset human drivers of warming?<br /><br />This question has been addressed by a number of groups. <br /><br />For example ten scientists led by Graeme Stephens, including five NASA scientists, showed that the estimated rate of energy imbalance is only a fraction of one percent of the incoming radiation (0.17%) an order of magnitude smaller than the uncertainties in estimation. (Order of magnitude = ten times) <br /><br />They stated, <br /><br />"The net energy balance is the sum of individual fluxes. The current uncertainty in this net surface energy balance is large, and amounts to approximately 17 Wm–2. This uncertainty is an order of magnitude larger than the changes to the net surface fluxes associated with increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (Fig. 2b). " <br /><br />Kopp and Lean stated in a paper cited by Stephens et al. that short-term variations in TSI can be double (0.34%) the estimated net solar flux stored by the oceans. <br /><br />Other NASA scientists have reported similar interannual variances in the main incoming and outgoing radiance components.<br /><br />Pamela E. Mlynczak, G. L. Smith and P. W. Stackhouse Jr. Interannual variations of surface radiation budget, 22nd Conference on Climate Variability and Change<br /><br />https://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/163815.pdf<br /><br />My comment: There is very little empirical support for the theory that the magnitude of AGW is greater than natural variability of the climate system. <br /><br />Readers can find further details and references in this blog article:<br /><br />http://geoscienceenvironment.wordpress.com/2014/09/04/the-emperors-of-climate-alarmism-wear-no-clothes/<br />Frank Waltershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17403044995764984391noreply@blogger.com