29 jan 2012
1 / 38

29 Jan 2012 יום עיון אמ"י מדוע הספקנים ומכחישי ההתחממות מעשי ידי-אדם אינם משכנעים (אותי)? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Updated On :
  • Presentation posted in: General

29 Jan 2012 יום עיון אמ"י מדוע הספקנים ומכחישי ההתחממות מעשי ידי-אדם אינם משכנעים (אותי)?. Pinhas Alpert Head of the Porter School of Environmental Studies Department of Geophysical, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Tel-Aviv University. Overview.

Related searches for 29 Jan 2012 יום עיון אמ"י מדוע הספקנים ומכחישי ההתחממות מעשי ידי-אדם אינם משכנעים (אותי)?

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentationdownload

29 Jan 2012 יום עיון אמ"י מדוע הספקנים ומכחישי ההתחממות מעשי ידי-אדם אינם משכנעים (אותי)?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

29 jan 2012 l.jpg

29 Jan 2012יום עיון אמ"ימדוע הספקנים ומכחישי ההתחממות מעשי ידי-אדם אינם משכנעים (אותי)?

Pinhas Alpert

Head of the Porter School of Environmental Studies

Department of Geophysical, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences

Tel-Aviv University

Overview l.jpg


  • The importance of a Regional Perspectives: 1)Mid-East 2)Mediterranean The limitation of local studies

  • Mediterranean Water Balance Changes under GW- Japanese Super High-Resolution Study

  • Why the climate model isconvincing- The Cairo-Adana Precipitation gradient

  • Does cloudiness decrease (Nir Shaviv & Cosmic Rays)?

  • The Real Holes in Climate Science

  • Importance of skepticism and its danger- איפכא מסתברא

Slide3 l.jpg

The importance of a Regional Perspectives:

1)Mid-East 2)Mediterranean

The limitation of local studies

Slide4 l.jpg

Climatic Trends

"Trends in Middle East climate extreme indices from 1950 to 2003",

X. Zhang, E. Aguilar, S. Sensoy, H. Melkonyan, U. Tagiyeva, N. Ahmed, N. Kutaladze, F. Rahimzadeh, A. Taghipour, T. H. Hantosh, P.Alpert, M. Semawi, M. K. Ali, M. H. S. Al-Shabibi, Z. Al-Oulan, T. Zatari, I. Al Dean Khelet, S. Hamoud, R. Sagir, M. Demircan, M. Eken, M. Adiguzel, L. Alexander, T. C. Peterson, and T. Wallis, "Trends in Middle East climate extreme indices from 1950 to 2003",J. Geophys. Res., 110, D22104, doi:10.1029/2005JD006181, 2005

Slide5 l.jpg


Top 10





10 y dramatic

Slide6 l.jpg


Top 10




Solid triangles

5% significance

Turkey- recent & TN

More significant

Slide7 l.jpg

Annual Precipitation Anomalies

Precipitation variation is characterized by strong interannual variability

without any significant trend in any of the indices

Mediterranean changes in p 1980 2002 vs 1931 79 l.jpg

Mediterranean Changes in P: 1980-2002 vs. 1931-79

Actual change in annual means (mm)

Data from UEA TS2p1

t-test (95% confidence highlighted)

Y. Kushnir 2009

Slide9 l.jpg

Mediterranean Water Balance Changes under Global Warming

Japanese Super High-Resolution Study

Slide10 l.jpg

Climatic Trends

Global super high-resolution run

Kitoh, Yatagai and Alpert, 2008: First super-high-resolution model projection that the ancient “Fertile Crescent” will disappear in this century. Hydrological Research Letters, 2, 1-4, DOI: 10.3178/HRL.2.1, 2008.

Annual precipitation mm year l.jpg

Annual Precipitation (mm/year)


IPCC AR4 models


20-km model

Water vapor budget equation l.jpg

Water vapor budget equation

Vertical integrated

moisture flux (VIMF)


Clw=cloud Liquid water


By neglect dPW, VIClwF +

Using Green’s Theorem

Total boundary outflows and inflows

Research area

Y. Shay-El, P. Alpert , and A. daSilva, "Preliminary estimation of horizontal fluxes of cloud liquid water in relation to subtropical moisture budget studies employing ISCCP, SSMI and GEOS-1/DAS datasets", J. Geophys. Res.,105, No. D14, 18,067, 2000.

Slide13 l.jpg

Sketch map




West inflow


West outflow



Unit: mm/day


Slide14 l.jpg

Five precipitation categories based on monthly averages in (mm/d) over the whole Mediterranean- current & future

Slide15 l.jpg

Relationships among the moisture budget components based on the 5 different precipitation categories


Unit: mm/day

Current (1979-2007)









Future (2075-2099) minus current

















Why the climate model is convincing me l.jpg

Why the climate model is convincing me?

The Cairo-Adana Precipitation gradient is not found realistically in the gridded observations but it does in the climate super high-resolution run!!

Slide17 l.jpg

Precipitation Comparison: ERA-40, CRU and 20 km GCM

Total seasonal (Oct-Apr) precipitation for the Eastern Meditrranean(EM)+Middle-East (left panel) and zoomed in over the EM (right panel). Averaging time period is 1979 - 2002. Unit: mm/season.

Slide18 l.jpg

  • (a) Comparison of average total observed seasonal precipitation with three model data for the selected 6 stations. The six stations are from south-to-north, Egypt---Cairo (Ca,); Israel---Beer-Sheva (Bs), Tel-Aviv (Ta), Haifa (Hf); Lebanon---Beirut (Be) and Turkey---Adana (Ad). Unit: mm/season. (b) Eastern Mediterranean map indicating the location of the six stations.

Slide19 l.jpg

Global mean temperature from an ensemble of 4 simulations using natural and anthropogenic forcing

Warming of 1910-1940

due to solar changes

Stott et al, Science 2000

Slide20 l.jpg

Models with only natural

forcings cannot reproduce

the observed temperature

trend after 1950

Slide21 l.jpg

Difference of seasonal total E, P and P-E between the future (2075-2099) and current (1979-2002) 20 km GCM runs.



Dashed contour lines indicate the negative changes, i.e. reduction in the future. Unit: mm/season


Slide22 l.jpg

Changes of monthly mean river discharge of six rivers by (1979-2003) compare to (2075-2099). Except to the Jordan River, all rivers flow into the Mediterranean (m3/s). Bold lines ( ) are for current climate, while dashed ( ) for the future.

Dashed 2075-2099 solid 1979-2007

Slide23 l.jpg

Does cloudiness really decrease?

response to Nir Shaviv & Cosmic Rays Theory

Slide24 l.jpg

No Evidence of Decreasing Cloud Cover!

Slide25 l.jpg

2007-2010 recordSolar Minimum should

have caused cooling

Slide26 l.jpg

Scientists find errors in hypothesis linking solar flares to global temperature

Why Anti-Global-Warming theories are not science :

  • "The theory of anthropogenic global warming consists of a set of logically interconnected and consistent hypotheses,” Martin Rypdal said.

  • “This means that if a cornerstone hypothesis is proven to be false, the entire theory fails.

  • A corresponding theory of global warming of solar origin does not exist. What does exist is a set of disconnected, mutually inconsistent, ad hoc hypotheses.

  • If one of these is proven to be false, the typical proponent of solar warming will pull another ad hoc hypothesis out of the hat.”

    M. Rypdal and K. Rypdal. “Testing Hypotheses about Sun-Climate Complexity

    Linking.” Physical Review Letters 104, 128501 (2010). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.128501


Slide27 l.jpg

  • Solar variation types : 11 year cycle, Forbush (Fd) decrease (following CME). Fd is a stochastic variation in Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCR) lasting about a week, similar in amplitude to 11 year cycle. Drops in hours, recovers in days.

  • Svensmark and Friis‐Christensen [1997] analyzed one solar cycle and found that global cloud cover changed in phase with the GCR flux by 2–3%.

  • Marsh and Svensmark [2000, 2003] indicated that the correlation holds only for low clouds (0–3.2 km) at low latitudes.

  • Svensmark et al. [2009] claimed significant reductions in cloud water content, cloud cover, and aerosol concentrations for low clouds during 26 Fd decreases.

  • A newly formed aerosol particle needs 3+ days to grow to Cloud Condensation Nuclei (CCN) size (30 nm). After a Fd event CCN reformation should take 3+2=5 days. Expect less than usual cloud cover about 4–8 days after a Fd event.

    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 37, L03802, doi:10.1029/2009GL041327, 2010

    Sudden cosmic ray decreases: No change of global cloud cover J. Calogovic, C. Albert, F. Arnold, J. Beer, L. Desorgher, and E. O. Flueckiger

Slide28 l.jpg

  • Performed correlation analysis of cloud cover and GCR-induced ion production for the six largest Fd events in the period 1989 to 2001.

  • Used 3 hourly infrared (IR) ISCCP (International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project) D1 cloud cover data, equivalent to the ISCCP D2 monthly data used by Marsh and Svensmark and others.

  • A model was used to calculate the ion production rate in the atmosphere during each event.

  • Correlation coefficients between ionization and cloud cover were calculated for each grid cell on a global grid of about 1700 to 6000 cells.

    Absence of a significant maximum for all three cloud layers.

  • Geographical locations where cloud cover correlates more positively with the CR intensity are different for each single Fd event.

    No indications of regional effects.

    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 37, L03802, doi:10.1029/2009GL041327, 2010

    Sudden cosmic ray decreases: No change of global cloud cover J. Calogovic, C. Albert, F. Arnold, J. Beer, L. Desorgher, and E. O. Flueckiger

Slide29 l.jpg

  • Observations on atmospheric aerosol formation

    based on measurements in Finland,

    over a solar cycle (years 1996–2008).

  • Days were divided into particle formation event days, non-event days and

    undefined days .

  • No connection between the frequency of atmospheric new particle

    formation and cosmic ray-induced ionization intensity (CRII) at the

    station over the investigated solar cycle.

    Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1885–1898, 2010


    Atmospheric data over a solar cycle: no connection between galactic cosmic rays and new particle formation

    M. Kulmala, I. Riipinen, T. Nieminen, M. Hulkkonen, L. Sogacheva, H. E. Manninen, P. Paasonen,

    T. Pet柑j柑, M. Dal Maso, P. P. Aalto, A. Viljanen, I. Usoskin, R. Vainio, S. Mirme, A. Mirme, A. Minikin,

    A. Petzold, U. H˜orrak, C. Plaァ-Dャulmer, W. Birmili, and V.-M. Kerminen

Slide30 l.jpg

  • Analyzed also for the total number concentration of particles in the nucleation

    (diameter 3–25 nm, N3−25), Aitken (25–100 nm, N25−100) and accumulation

    (100–1000 nm, N100−1000) modes, formation rate of 3 nm particles, and growth

    rate of nucleation mode particles.

    None of these quantities showed a statistically

    significant correlation with CRII.

  • Concluded that Ion induced nucleation may dominate atmospheric aerosol

    formation under specific conditions, confined to low aerosol formation rates.

    None of the quantities related to aerosol formation correlates with CRII.

  • CR charged particle flux in the lower atmosphere varies by about 15% at high

    latitudes over a solar cycle. Changes in CRII could induce a maximum change

    of 1.5% in the formation of aerosols. Change in the formation of cloud

    condensation nuclei (CCN) would be much less than 1%, since the contribution

    of atmospheric nucleation to total aerosol concentration is bigger than its

    contribution to CCN production.

    Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1885–1898, 2010


Slide31 l.jpg

On an annual scale CR is anti-correlated with nucleation events.

On a monthly scale even the anti-correlation disappears.

Slide32 l.jpg

The Real Holes in Climate Science- Nature News

(Q. Schiermeier, Nature, 20 Jan 2010, 284-287)

“Such holes do not undermine the fundamental conclusion that humans are warming the climate, which is based on the extreme rate of the 20th century temperature changes and the inability of climate models to simulate such warming without including the role of greenhouse-gas pollution”

“Nature has singled out four areas- regional climate forecasts, precipitation forecast, aerosols and paleoclimate data”

Slide34 l.jpg

הוויכוח הציבורי סביב שינויי האקליםהאם אנו יכולים למנוע אסון אשר מתקרב?

ויכוח עז ניטש בימים אלה, בעקבות התיאוריה לפיה כדור הארץ עובר תהליך של התחממות חסרת תקדים, שעל פי תיאוריה נוספת, מיוחסת לפעילות האנושית. אם זה נכון – שומה עלינו לנקוט צעדים חסרי תקדים על מנת להציל את העולם.

אם שתי התיאוריות מופרכות, או אף אם אחת מהן אינה נכונה, אזי ממשלות רבות עומדות להוציא הון עתק, לעצור את הקדמה ולהעמיק את העוני תוך פגיעה באזרחיהם.

בדפים הבאים נציג את עיקרי הוויכוח ונחשוף את העובדות, שלפעמים נעלמות בלהט הוויכוח.

מתי נולדה הדאגה מפני "התחממות גלובלית מעשה ידי אדם"?

התיאוריה בדבר התחממות גלובלית מעשה ידי אדם פרצה לתודעה הציבורית בשנת 1988,,,,,,,,,,,,,

My conclusions l.jpg

My conclusions

  • Debate gets into the interesting more basic questions: can cloud cover explain the major Temperature changes?

  • Kushnir’s talk yesterday on GHG role in the NAO shift in recent decade.

  • MedCLIVAR’s role

Slide36 l.jpg

Scientific American,New Research Examines Role of Clouds in Climate Change.New findings show that variations in cloud cover cannot explain temperature changes as a result of global climate change.Douglas Fischer and The Daily Climate | September 7, 2011 

The skeptic article:

Spencer, R.W.; Braswell, W.D. On the misdiagnosis of surface temperature feedbacks from variations in earth’s radiant energy balance. Remote Sens. 2011, 3, 1603-1613. (published 6 Sept 2011)

Remote Sensing Editor immediately resigned in wake of criticism

Svensmark theory supported by spencer braswell 2011 l.jpg

Svensmark Theorysupported by Spencer & Braswell (2011)

New findings published Tuesday appear to undermine a controversial study - oft-cited by those who downplay the human impacts of climate change - that claimed variations in cloud cover are driving temperature changes across the globe

Svensmark & Calder, The Chilling Stars- A new theory of Climate Change, 2009

In Hebrew) : הוצאת עם עובד, "הכוכבים המקררים")


Dessler Analysis:

The analysis confirms - as most atmospheric scientists have long held - that the reverse is true: Clouds change in response to temperature changes. There is no evidence clouds can cause meaningful climate change, concluded the report's author.

But Spencer's key assumptions were wrong, Dessler added. And while Spencer and his co-author, University of Alabama scientist Danny Braswell, claimed to have examined 14 climate models, they presented just the results of the six models showing the biggest mismatch with reality.


Response by dessler to national geographic l.jpg

Response by Dessler to National Geographic

The oceans are a primary driver of weather worldwide, responsible for periodic weather patterns such as El Ni–o and La Nina, known collectively as "ENSO," that bring extreme weather to many parts of the globe.

Dessler's research, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, looked at 10 years' worth of data from the sky and the sea. That data, he said, show the ocean's influence on the Earth's climate to be 20 times larger than any influence due to cloud cover changes. Spencer and Braswell assumed the ratio was closer to 0.5, Dessler said

The bottom line, Dessler added, is that energy trapped by clouds can only explain a small part of the temperature changes seen from 2000 to 2010.

"It's like someone saying Newton is wrong," Dessler said.

"ENSO is not caused by clouds”


Dessler, A.E. A determination of the cloud feedback from climate variations over the past decade. Science 2010, 330, 1523-1527..

  • Login