29 jan 2012
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
29 Jan 2012 יום עיון אמ"י מדוע הספקנים ומכחישי ההתחממות מעשי ידי-אדם אינם משכנעים (אותי)?

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 38

29 Jan 2012 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

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.

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

PowerPoint Slideshow about '29 Jan 2012 - ' - heman

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
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

  • 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
The importance of a Regional Perspectives:

1)Mid-East 2)Mediterranean

The limitation of local studies


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



Top 10





10 y dramatic



Top 10




Solid triangles

5% significance

Turkey- recent & TN

More significant


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
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


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

Annual Precipitation (mm/year)


IPCC AR4 models


20-km model

water vapor budget equation
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.


Sketch map




West inflow


West outflow



Unit: mm/day



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


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
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!!


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.


(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.


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


Models with only natural

forcings cannot reproduce

the observed temperature

trend after 1950


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



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

Does cloudiness really decrease?

response to Nir Shaviv & Cosmic Rays Theory


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



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


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


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


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



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

On a monthly scale even the anti-correlation disappears.

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”

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
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

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
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
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..