Climate Change 3of12: Atmospheric Temperature Data

Lecture by Professor Richard Muller of the University California, Berkeley. Taken from Lectures 20 and 21 of the spring 2008 webcasts of Physics For Future Presidents. Also known as Descriptive Introduction to Physics. Emphasis is on conceptual understanding, rather than mathematics.

This lecture deals with the physics of climate change, the data on global temperature and carbon dioxide changes, and some potential solutions. Also covered are the many mistakes that can be made, including the trap of exaggeration. He warns against the danger of cherry picking and overstating the case. When people discover that the exaggerated case is not valid, they may dismiss the problem altogether. Professor Muller has researched this topic for many years and has co-authored a book with Gordon MacDonald called "Ice Ages and Astronomical Causes".

The reports of the IPCC are referenced much during this lecture. The full IPCC reports can be found here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/assessments-reports.htm

This lecture can also be found here, along with many other lectures:
http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course_details.php?seriesid=1906978515

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• temperature
• global
• warming
• hockeystick
• ice
• age
• prediction

[maxdazeglio]

Thank you for having poseted this video man, I have now discovered the precious Berckley podcast. Thanks again!

[gertomaniac]

i thought the drop was caused by aerosols?

[Scobo11]

you lost me at "hockey stick"... obsolete knowledge when based on a flawed fundamental

[ohmbumichum]

@Dave26851 yup not to forget: moon orbit, gravity, and internal processes earth,

like mantle convection

[cthulhu11111111]

@Dave26851

That isn't what a forcing is. Both forcing and feedbacks "affect changes in the earth's climate". Clouds are a feedback, in that they change in response to temperature change.

the "airborne fraction" in Knorr 09 refers to the ratio of human emissions that accumulate in the atmosphere each year as being constant. It's not saying co2 levels haven't risen in the atmosphere, quite the contrary.

[Dave26851]

Hey don't let the truth get in your way.

[Dave26851]

False and false. It is laughable the misinformation spread.

Clouds as shown by Dr. Roy Spencer and John Christy act as both a climate forcing that is they affect changes in the earth's climate, whilst also acting as a feedback for elements such as water vapour.

Knorr certainly not

QUOTE: It is shown that with those uncertainties, the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 ± 1.4% per decade, i.e. close to and not significantly different from zero. Knorr , W. et al. (2009)

[cthulhu11111111]

@ovdtogt

PDO was positive in the 1930s but today we are warmer than the 1930s. Also the PDO has been in a negative trend since 1980, ie becoming less positive and more negative. If PDO is supposed to relate to warming then it's been providing less and less warming since 1980, ie a cooling effect. Yet temperature has risen since 1980. If anything it seems PDO has been hiding the true rate of the recent warming.

[cthulhu11111111]

@Dave26851

clouds are feedbacks not forcings. co2 correlates better than solar over the 20th century, especially so in the past 30 years. Knorr's work agrees that atmospheric co2 has increased over 30% in the past 100 years. As do I.

[Dave26851]

absolutely clouds are forcings. Co2 over what ever timescale is shown to correlate poorly with temperatures. Moreover, atmospheric concentrations of co2 have probably not increased by much at all. Dr. Wolfgang Knorr (2009).

All i can say about other forcings is for you to do some research rather than blindly believing people with vested interests.