In order to distract attention from his colleague stuck in the ice, NSW professor Steven Sherwood rushed out the stupidest forecast so far in 2014.
A decline in ocean cloud cover projected in climate models points to more than 5.6°F (3°C) of global warming coming in this century, on the high end of past global warming estimates, warn climate scientists in a new study.
www.woodfortrees.org/data/hadcrut4gl/from:2001/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2001/trend
I disagree with him. I think the 3 C of warming will come from all the sunlight hitting the arctic ocean with its catastrophically low albedo.
Just tell him .
Phone: (02) 9385 8960
Email: s.sherwood@unsw.edu.au
Researcher ID: B-5673-2008
http://www.climatescience.org.au/staff/profile/ssherwood
Except that:
1) low incident angle sunlight barely penetrates to the surface (atmospheric scattering)
2) low incident angle results in total reflection (Brewster’s angle = 53°, max exposure at Arctic=47° at summer solstice, and then only at 1 place per day, on 1 day per year)
3) Loss of ice permits greater heat loss to air and space by radiation / conduction / convection (around 307W/m^2 with no ice). Ice is a barrier to energy flow to space.
4) The presence of ice shows that the energy in the water below is insufficient to prevent an insulation layer from developing (the excess energy has already been swept away) Ice thickness of only 0.1m will insulate to such a degree, that to permit energy flow at the same rate as the ice-free state, would require air temps of around -16°C to maintain that rate (and since the surface is also at -16°C, the radiation would also be depressed at T^4). But with enough wind flow, you could carry away heat at the same rate by convection to air. Thick ice as we see in the arctic is an almost impenetrable barrier to heat escaping. Open water is a heat release mechanism, and dumps heat to space whenever warm water enters the Arctic.
Very good. Deep thunderous apple sauce.
Copied and pasted to comment section on Eric “Doctor” Zuess article for toddlers
Is that 2100 on the Mayan calendar?
Spot a warmist nerdy, then just trot out the link to this page to show him how utterly absurd their never ending predictions of doom look. Recycled hogwash. That’s all it continues to be. And that’s all it ever will be. That’s the plight of the warmists.
Down goes Frazier. Down goes Frazier. Down goes Frazier.
I like your graph. Yesterday I did a Sherwood projection (on powerpoint) combined with the CET graph (from 1659). Another hockey stick!
It is ENTIRELY possible that ALL of the global warming EVER recorded can be simply explained by changes in cloud cover !!!
http://isccp.giss.nasa.gov/zD2BASICS/B8glbp.anomdevs.jpg
The graph shows very clearly that cloud cover decreased from a maximum in 1986 to a minimum in about 1999. From 1999 to about 2007 cloudiness increased. There were a couple of minimums in 2006 thru 2008 – wasn’t that the minimum Arctic ice cover period ?
Factor in a lag time necessary to heat or cool down something as big as the Earth and this certainly corresponds with the “unprecedented” late 20th century warming and the “hiatus” of the 21st century.
Let more sunshine in and the temperature will increase – stands to reason.
As to what will happen in the future – NO-ONE knows. We’ll have to wait and see !
Steven Sherwood sacrificing any remaining integrity he had for his mate.
http://youtu.be/epI36-fRvEU
The stakes are rising. It’s gone up to “rise at least 4°C by 2100”.
http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/global-temperatures-to-rise-at-least-4c-by-2100/
It worked, all the posts are about the ridiculous 3°C projection by 2100, and not about the incompetent fools stuck since Christmas in Antarctic ice.
Another bit of advice, don’t smell it either.
I stopped reading at “..projected in climate models”; I prefer to deal in reality.
The warm-mongers are clearly getting desperate. They’re like cornered wild animals.
Hey Steven! Newsbusters has an interesting metric on this story…
“Frozen Out: 98% of Stories Ignore That Ice-bound Ship Was On Global Warming Mission”
http://m.newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ciandella/2014/01/02/frozen-out-98-stories-ignore-ice-bound-ship-was-global-warming-missi
Basically this climate model says as you add energy to the Earth, convection will be reduced causing reduced cloud cover and hence more heating. This will lead to even less convection and more heating until convection stops. The model doesn’t make sense.
Convection is mechanical energy so adding energy shouldn’t reduce this form of energy.