Tuesday, November 09, 2010

[jules' pics] 11/08/2010 09:04:00 PM


Dog and owner, originally uploaded by julesberry2001.

After all the scary buddhas and terrifying spiders, I'd better show something fluffy. Blonde fluffy child and blonde fluffy dog, at a village dog show in middle england, and curiously not in the dog-handler lookalike round, although, of course there was one...



--
Posted By Blogger to jules' pics at 11/08/2010 09:04:00 PM
at

17 comments:

  1. Anonymous9/11/10 8:50 pm

    Nice pics. Children and dogs can't miss.

    OT. Your bet with the Russian physicists came up at Lucia's. Are the average temperatures for 1998-2003 and 2012-2017 inclusive, that is for 6 years on each end? (Or, up until 2003 and 2017, 5 years.)
    thanks

    ReplyDelete
  2. James Annan10/11/10 12:13 am

    It's 6 years, I think. NCDC data. Currently here and if my sums are right, 1998-2003 is 0.51 and the last 6 years 2004-9 inclusive are 0.55 with 2010 on course to push that a bit higher (not that these years actually count towards the bet, but they obviously show an encouraging trend from my POV).

    ReplyDelete
  3. James Annan10/11/10 12:23 am

    Of course the reason for the slightly odd 6y period is that I was happy to let them cherry-pick to include the (then) hottest two years of 1998 and 2003, and still consider the bet (strongly) favourable.

    ReplyDelete
  4. crandles10/11/10 12:04 pm

    .55 for 6 years ended 2009 is well below .565 and .57 for 6 years ended 2006 and 2007.

    I expect 6 years ended 2011 will be somewhere around .559 still below 6 years ended 2006. It seems unusual in recent past (not since 1980) for there to be a drop in 6 year averages with a 5 year gap. Is this an indication of a leveling off of temperature or just random noise? A 1 in 30 event is not particularly significant.

    Importantly, there is still a big difference between a 5 year gap and a 14 year gap.

    (1/30)^(14/5) is a pretty small probability of 0.00007.

    OK, I don't really believe the probability is quite that low as the system may not be a constant level of random noise on a linear trend. But I don't really see much reason not to say I think there is a 95% chance that it is a reasonable approximation. What of the other 5%? A 50% probability seems close to being pathological to me.

    So I end up with my subjective estimate of at least a 97.5% chance of James (and I) winning.

    ReplyDelete
  5. James Annan11/11/10 8:11 am

    I guess there is a moderate component of decadal(ish) variability so there is a limit to how far we can go with trend + noise. Eg the solar cycle must have *some* effect and the Tsonis/Swanson stuff looks interesting to me...

    ...but I'm not planning on losing that bet in any case!

    ReplyDelete
  6. crandles12/11/10 12:02 pm

    >"looks interesting"

    hmm. Could be interesting for how wrong it is?

    Ignores aerosol forcing? De-ENSO temperatures before looking for new trend since 2002?

    For a different off topic [s]tangent[/s] err I mean U turn:

    Just wondering what you make of
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37346653@N05/5169283842/
    from
    http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/iadv/

    The immediate explanations that occured to me were
    1. Measurement error - doesn't seem likely with 3 consecutive boxes not '+'s and outside range of +s'

    If not measurement then local source seems to me more likely than sink reduction so:

    2. Underwater landslide disturbing methane hydrates. There may be no reason to think this sort of thing will become more common.

    3. Water temperature rise destabilising hydrates.

    If it was the much less concerning landslide, how long would local elevated levels of methane be likely to last?

    Basically, is it silly to express any concern over such a rapid but so far not very long lasting rise in methane levels?

    ReplyDelete
  7. skanky12/11/10 3:07 pm

    One possible explanation I've read (in OIFTG?) are the recent Russian wild fires burning peat bogs. I don't know how likely an explanation that might be.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Steve Bloom14/11/10 6:32 am

    Burning peat doesn't seem like a likely source. Mass drying due to the drought/heat wave seems more possible. Checking adjacent sites, many don't seem to be up to date, but the Finnish one that appears to be doesn't seem to show anything very interesting. Mauna Loa shows a spike, although smaller. Mysterious! Maybe email Ed and ask what's up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. jules16/11/10 1:14 am

    Oy, get off my fluffy picture with your dull climate arguments.

    ReplyDelete
  10. crandles16/11/10 11:07 am

    Surely for a climate argument, a methane spike isn't dull?

    No, on second thoughts I think I should give up on that argument and instead provide

    

    oh no, I think that url is too fluffy!

    (It was http://www.flickr.com/photos/37346653@N05/5180976817/ if you were wondering.)

    ReplyDelete
  11. crandles16/11/10 11:08 am

    Surely for a climate argument, a methane spike isn't dull?

    No, on second thoughts I think I should give up on that argument and instead provide

    

    oh no, I think that url is too fluffy!

    (It was http://www.flickr.com/photos/37346653@N05/5180976817/ if you were wondering.)

    ReplyDelete
  12. James Annan16/11/10 11:14 am

    Chris et al,

    Looks interesting, but clearly quite local. Probably not the end of the world, but then again, it might be :-)

    ReplyDelete
  13. skanky16/11/10 1:21 pm

    Actually, this was one of the few threads to contain climate content *without* argument - maybe it's the influence of the fluffy picture? Maybe all climate blogs should have similar pictures to ease the antagonism? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  14. crandles22/11/10 10:03 am

    >"clearly quite local"

    I assumed it wasn't a large region until mention of Russian fires, drought, & heatwave made me wonder, though I think I remained dubious of this.

    However, going by latest graph, perhaps non-existant rather than local.

    ReplyDelete
  15. crandles22/11/10 5:15 pm

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  16. crandles22/11/10 6:30 pm

    Spoke too soon again.

    http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/graph.php?code=ZEP&program=ccgg&type=ts

    appears to show last 6 reading to be unusually high. But they are on way back down again.

    (Easier to see looking at last year only data
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37346653@N05/5199023902/ )

    ReplyDelete
  17. crandles25/11/10 1:13 pm

    Dorlomin chased up on the reading and obtained a response:

    Response from NOAA on Svalsbard via the Guardian eviroment team....

    "We are aware of the apparently contaminated samples from Zeppelin".
    It looks like there is a leak in the sampling system and we are trying
    to sort it out. I will apply provisional flags to the data that might be affected."

    ReplyDelete