Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scientists discover global warming linked to increase in tropopause height over past two decades
Space Daily ^ | January 5, 2003

Posted on 01/06/2003 10:48:27 AM PST by cogitator

Scientists discover global warming linked to increase in tropopause height over past two decades

LIVERMORE, Calif. -- Researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have discovered another fingerprint of human effects on global climate.

Recent research has shown that increases in the height of the tropopause over the past two decades are directly linked to ozone depletion and increased greenhouse gases.

The tropopause is the transition zone between the lowest layer of the atmosphere -- the turbulently-mixed troposphere -- and the more stable stratosphere. The tropopause lies roughly 10 miles above the Earth's surface at the equator and five miles above the poles. To date, no scientist has examined whether observed changes in tropopause height are in accord with projections from climate model greenhouse warming experiments.

The comparison was made by Livermore scientists Benjamin Santer, James Boyle, Krishna AchutaRao, Charles Doutriaux and Karl Taylor, along with researchers from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology and the Institut for Physik der Atmosphere in Germany. Their findings are reported in the today's (Jan. 3) online edition of the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres.

This research undercuts claims by greenhouse skeptics that no warming has occurred during the last two decades. Such claims are based on satellite measurements of temperatures in the troposphere, which show little or no warming since the beginning of the satellite record in 1979.

"Weather balloons and weather forecast models show that there's been a pronounced increase in the height of the global tropopause over the last two decades," Santer said. "Our best understanding is that this increase is due to two factors: warming of troposphere, which is caused by increasing greenhouse gases, and cooling of the stratosphere, which is mainly caused by depletion of stratospheric ozone. Tropopause height changes give us independent evidence of the reality of recent warming of the troposphere."

The Livermore research supports the bottom-line conclusion of the 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which states that, "most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations."

Earlier research showed that changes in the Earth's surface temperature, ocean heat content, and Northern Hemisphere sea ice cover are other indicators of human effects on climate change.

"The climate system is telling us a consistent story -- that humans have had a significant effect on it," Santer said. "We're seeing detailed correspondence between computer climate models and observations, and this correspondence is in a number of different climate variables. Tropopause height is the latest piece of the climate-change puzzle."

To support the research, Livermore scientists examined tropopause height changes in climate-change experiments using two different computer climate models. Both models showed similar decadal-scale increases in the tropopause height in response to changes in human-caused climate forcings. The patterns of tropopause height change were similar in models and so-called 'reanalysis' products (a combination of actual observations and results from a weather forecast model).

The model experiments focused on both manmade climate forcings, such as changes in well-mixed greenhouse gases, stratospheric and tropospheric ozone, and on natural forcings, such as changes in volcanic aerosols. The forces have varying effects on atmospheric temperature, that in turn affect tropopause height, the report concludes.

Founded in 1952, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is a national security laboratory, with a mission to ensure national security and apply science and technology to the important issues of our time. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is managed by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 1952; atmosphere; change; climate; emissions; globalwarminghoax; lawrencelivermore
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: KayEyeDoubleDee
Whoops. Should have been:

It would make sense to observe an increase in troposheric temperature followed by an increase in height/mass and say that the latter was a reaction to the former. However, there is quite definitely no such observation.

21 posted on 01/06/2003 11:45:35 AM PST by KayEyeDoubleDee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
So it's directly due to the increase in the population and ensuing longevity of women and exponetial linear effect of the hot flashes causing this global womaning er warming....lol
22 posted on 01/06/2003 11:48:57 AM PST by CJ Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CJ Wolf
Oh no. It's MY fault. It's always my fault.
23 posted on 01/06/2003 11:52:29 AM PST by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
slight drop in global temperatures from the 1940s to the 1970s

Which led to a number of books published about the coming ice age. The more recent rise in temperature has led to many books published about global warming.

I don't know the exact statistics, but there seems to be a strong correlation.

24 posted on 01/06/2003 11:55:53 AM PST by palmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
As I see it, there are three possibilities: the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere (1) will stay the same; (2) will get colder; or (3) will get warmer. I think most evidence shows that (1) it rarely stays the same for very long and (2) if it got much colder than it currently is, the effects would be extremely negative for human civilization and most forms of animal life. And that leads to my main critique of the global warming enthusiasts: they always present ALL of the effects of global warming as CATASTROPHIC to human civilization and to life on this planet, whereas it seems like the effects are likely to be a mixture of good and bad and - on the whole - preferable to the effects of global cooling.
25 posted on 01/06/2003 12:01:45 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Pure meaningless drivel as stated in this article. I would have to read the original to know for sure what the evidence is. News summaries of complicated articles are often garbage and this is another. It is full of contradictions. Note this quote

"This research undercuts claims by greenhouse skeptics that no warming has occurred during the last two decades. Such claims are based on satellite measurements of temperatures in the troposphere, which show little or no warming since the beginning of the satellite record in 1979.

"Weather balloons and weather forecast models show that there's been a pronounced increase in the height of the global tropopause over the last two decades," Santer said. "Our best understanding is that this increase is due to two factors: warming of troposphere, which is caused by increasing greenhouse gases, and cooling of the stratosphere, which is mainly caused by depletion of stratospheric ozone. Tropopause height changes give us independent evidence of the reality of recent warming of the troposphere."

The first paragraph says "there is no evidence of warming in the troposphere". The second says that the increased size in the tropopause is due to two factors, one of which is "warming of troposphere".

Do you see what kind of crap this article is? If there is no evidence that there is warming of the troposphere then how can you say that the warming of the troposphere causes the increase in size of the tropopause?

If anything, this same evidence - no warming of the troposphere - disproves the hypothesis.

As near as I can tell from this almost unintelligible summary, this is just another computer-model masturbation by some guys with too much beer and not enough grant money.

26 posted on 01/06/2003 12:13:17 PM PST by baxter999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee
I don't think we want OBSERVED changes in tropopause height, we want MEASURED changes in height. Precisely how much?
27 posted on 01/06/2003 12:15:29 PM PST by henderson field
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
"...they always present ALL of the effects of global warming as CATASTROPHIC to human civilization and to life on this planet, whereas it seems like the effects are likely to be a mixture of good and bad and - on the whole - preferable to the effects of global cooling."

"..seems like..." is not the correct operative word. We KNOW that the last time the planet was warmer than it is now, it was a period of great beneficence to most kinds of life (especially human). The "Medieval Optimum" period WITHIN RECORDED HISTORY was warmer than now, and the historical and archealogical record all indicate that it was a "boom" period for humanity.

The "global warmers" are just looking for another lever to overturn our liberties and institute more CONTROLS over our lives.

28 posted on 01/06/2003 12:17:53 PM PST by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
Global warming catastrophic? Or, if it is true at all, which is questionable, could it be beneficial? This is a point of view just as in "this is terrible: it's going to rain"...not considering that rain - and water - is life.
29 posted on 01/06/2003 12:20:18 PM PST by henderson field
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
My wife has this.

Explains those hot and cold spells.

30 posted on 01/06/2003 12:20:47 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Just one more comment. The summary at the beginning of the article is as big a piece of crap as the rest of the article.

"Recent research has shown that increases in the height of the tropopause over the past two decades are directly linked to ozone depletion and increased greenhouse gases."

The research says nothing of the sort. They use false information (that there is warming in the troposphere which even the article states is false) and make an unjustified assumption (that man-made activitis caused both the warming of the troposphere (which is false)and the increase in size of the tropopause (which is unknown)) to fit a pre-conceived idea that some political document that has been said to be false by even some of the author's of it is true.

GIGO!

31 posted on 01/06/2003 12:21:05 PM PST by baxter999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: baxter999
too much beer? what are the beer drinkers afraid of, wait is it simply not being able to throw the 12 pack in the snow and keep it cool? Global warming would suck for them, I see the conspirsy now, thanks.
32 posted on 01/06/2003 12:37:46 PM PST by CJ Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee
I think the misunderstanding is the result of poor wording in the summary article I posted, or a reticence on the part of the study authors to actually state a certain implication.

If there was no warming of the troposphere, there would be no change in the height of the tropopause. Analyses of Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) data to derive tropospheric temperatures have heretofore not shown an increasing tropospheric temperature trend. However, that picture is changing, according to abstracts of papers from two different groups that will be presented at the February American Meteorological Society meeting. These analyses, which include one by the Marshall Space Flight Center/University of Huntsville group that performed prior widely-quoted MSU tropospheric temperature analyses, DO show a warming of the troposphere. The increase in tropopause height is consistent with these analyses.

The implication that the authors of the study under discussion may have wished to avoid was that the prior analyses of tropospheric temperature were in error. I guess he'll wait for the researchers themselves to provide the update at the AMS meeting in February.

33 posted on 01/06/2003 1:04:05 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: baxter999
See reply 33 in this thread.
34 posted on 01/06/2003 1:04:29 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
And that leads to my main critique of the global warming enthusiasts: they always present ALL of the effects of global warming as CATASTROPHIC to human civilization and to life on this planet, whereas it seems like the effects are likely to be a mixture of good and bad and - on the whole - preferable to the effects of global cooling.

If the temperature rise in the next century doesn't exceed 2 C globally, the effects are likely to remain minimal, but they will be noticeable. In a second reply to you I will direct you to a thread where I expand on this topic.

35 posted on 01/06/2003 1:06:56 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
See reply 43 in this thread:

U.S. Climate Change Strategy Up for Public Comment

36 posted on 01/06/2003 1:10:01 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: henderson field
http://www.met.rdg.ac.uk/~piers/allkl.pdf

Short answer: 330-520 meters at all stations.

37 posted on 01/06/2003 1:17:34 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
If they cannot show an increase in temperature, then they will invent an analog for it and "demonstrate" that the analog is going the way they predict--since the climate clearly is not.

Yeah--that's the ticket! It's...it's tropopause height, not temperature, that is a measure of "global warming!"

Where have I heard that before?

If the &$!@&$# planet froze over, they'd find a correlation between the length of porcupine quills and "global warming."

That's the ticket!

--Boris

38 posted on 01/06/2003 1:51:27 PM PST by boris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boris
Boris,

The troposphere is warming. Recent data analyses of the satellite data (including
an analysis by the group that previously published analyses
showing no warming in the troposphere), now show a clear warming signal. The proper way to frame the skeptical argument now is to say that there is not enough warming in the troposphere, rather than saying there isn't any warming in the troposphere.
39 posted on 01/06/2003 1:59:15 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Question for all:

What exactly delineates the troposhere from the stratosphere? Is there really a change or are they just doing a little bit of redefining terms?
40 posted on 01/06/2003 3:03:18 PM PST by Gary Boldwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson