Comments on: Are Changes in Water Vapor Consistent with the Models http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/ The Power of Numeracy Wed, 16 May 2012 18:37:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-2106 Andrew Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:15:41 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-2106 BTW, "adjustments" to radiosonde data for discontinuity problems can be quite large. See: http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3062 I realize that I am playing devil's advocate here, but I want to be fair with my assessment. BTW, “adjustments” to radiosonde data for discontinuity problems can be quite large. See:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3062
I realize that I am playing devil’s advocate here, but I want to be fair with my assessment.

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-10688 Andrew Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:15:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-10688 BTW, "adjustments" to radiosonde data for discontinuity problems can be quite large. See: http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3062 I realize that I am playing devil's advocate here, but I want to be fair with my assessment. BTW, “adjustments” to radiosonde data for discontinuity problems can be quite large. See:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3062
I realize that I am playing devil’s advocate here, but I want to be fair with my assessment.

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-2105 Andrew Wed, 11 Mar 2009 00:21:50 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-2105 Pete-discontinuities in the original data due to changes in instrumentation etc. might alter the trend because some later instruments might consistently report lower values than the older ones would have. However, I see it as unlikely that the errors are so great and systematic to so radically change the "real trend"-the data are just so different from the model I looked at that I don't see how you could account for the differences with errors. But I am not familiar with the specific data issues, so I might be convinced to change my mind if I was presented with strong evidence to the contrary (and IMHO, the data from satellites that claim to somewhat contradict the radiosondes are not sufficient-like Paltridge et al. I don't think that modelers should handwave past the issue). Pete-discontinuities in the original data due to changes in instrumentation etc. might alter the trend because some later instruments might consistently report lower values than the older ones would have. However, I see it as unlikely that the errors are so great and systematic to so radically change the “real trend”-the data are just so different from the model I looked at that I don’t see how you could account for the differences with errors. But I am not familiar with the specific data issues, so I might be convinced to change my mind if I was presented with strong evidence to the contrary (and IMHO, the data from satellites that claim to somewhat contradict the radiosondes are not sufficient-like Paltridge et al. I don’t think that modelers should handwave past the issue).

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-10687 Andrew Wed, 11 Mar 2009 00:21:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-10687 Pete-discontinuities in the original data due to changes in instrumentation etc. might alter the trend because some later instruments might consistently report lower values than the older ones would have. However, I see it as unlikely that the errors are so great and systematic to so radically change the "real trend"-the data are just so different from the model I looked at that I don't see how you could account for the differences with errors. But I am not familiar with the specific data issues, so I might be convinced to change my mind if I was presented with strong evidence to the contrary (and IMHO, the data from satellites that claim to somewhat contradict the radiosondes are not sufficient-like Paltridge et al. I don't think that modelers should handwave past the issue). Pete-discontinuities in the original data due to changes in instrumentation etc. might alter the trend because some later instruments might consistently report lower values than the older ones would have. However, I see it as unlikely that the errors are so great and systematic to so radically change the “real trend”-the data are just so different from the model I looked at that I don’t see how you could account for the differences with errors. But I am not familiar with the specific data issues, so I might be convinced to change my mind if I was presented with strong evidence to the contrary (and IMHO, the data from satellites that claim to somewhat contradict the radiosondes are not sufficient-like Paltridge et al. I don’t think that modelers should handwave past the issue).

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-2104 Andrew Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:13:12 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-2104 Oh, and if you want to verify that, just rotate each graph 270 degrees clockwise and only the labels will look different from Gray's, in that they will be backwards. Oh, and if you want to verify that, just rotate each graph 270 degrees clockwise and only the labels will look different from Gray’s, in that they will be backwards.

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-10686 Andrew Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:13:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-10686 Oh, and if you want to verify that, just rotate each graph 270 degrees clockwise and only the labels will look different from Gray's, in that they will be backwards. Oh, and if you want to verify that, just rotate each graph 270 degrees clockwise and only the labels will look different from Gray’s, in that they will be backwards.

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-2103 Andrew Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:10:06 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-2103 jae, I put those graphs together rather hastily- they are from Gray's paper and had an orientation which made it difficult to compare them to the graphs from the radiosonde data that I put together. Unfortunately, my attention to detail was not so great, and I didn't flip everything right. But other than that, I faithfully adapted the graphs from Gray's paper. jae, I put those graphs together rather hastily- they are from Gray’s paper and had an orientation which made it difficult to compare them to the graphs from the radiosonde data that I put together. Unfortunately, my attention to detail was not so great, and I didn’t flip everything right. But other than that, I faithfully adapted the graphs from Gray’s paper.

]]> By: Andrew http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-10685 Andrew Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:10:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-10685 jae, I put those graphs together rather hastily- they are from Gray's paper and had an orientation which made it difficult to compare them to the graphs from the radiosonde data that I put together. Unfortunately, my attention to detail was not so great, and I didn't flip everything right. But other than that, I faithfully adapted the graphs from Gray's paper. jae, I put those graphs together rather hastily- they are from Gray’s paper and had an orientation which made it difficult to compare them to the graphs from the radiosonde data that I put together. Unfortunately, my attention to detail was not so great, and I didn’t flip everything right. But other than that, I faithfully adapted the graphs from Gray’s paper.

]]> By: Pete Stroud http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-2102 Pete Stroud Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:09:31 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-2102 Gary P. I agree with you entirely. I cannot see any reason why humidity value accuracy should affect a trend. The sign of the feedback mechanism is so important that every effort should be put in to determining it, but unfortunately the IPCC are very unlikely to support such research. Also Geoff Sherrington, a very pertinent comment. Gary P. I agree with you entirely. I cannot see any reason why humidity value accuracy should affect a trend. The sign of the feedback mechanism is so important that every effort should be put in to determining it, but unfortunately the IPCC are very unlikely to support such research.

Also Geoff Sherrington, a very pertinent comment.

]]> By: Pete Stroud http://landshape.org/enm/are-changes-in-water-vapor-consistent-with-the-models/#comment-10684 Pete Stroud Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:09:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=1911#comment-10684 Gary P. I agree with you entirely. I cannot see any reason why humidity value accuracy should affect a trend. The sign of the feedback mechanism is so important that every effort should be put in to determining it, but unfortunately the IPCC are very unlikely to support such research. Also Geoff Sherrington, a very pertinent comment. Gary P. I agree with you entirely. I cannot see any reason why humidity value accuracy should affect a trend. The sign of the feedback mechanism is so important that every effort should be put in to determining it, but unfortunately the IPCC are very unlikely to support such research.

Also Geoff Sherrington, a very pertinent comment.

]]>