Comments on: Preprint on climatic regime shifts

By: Global Warming: Why I Don’t Believe « Brian's Blog

Global Warming: Why I Don’t Believe « Brian's Blog — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:35:36 +0000

[...] 1930’s through to the late 1970’s of very variable, but overall flat temperature trend.” Preprint on Climatic Regime Shifts) (Decadal temperature variation is largely due to internal oceanic [...]

By: Niche Modeling » Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:47:25 +0000

[...] temperature Posted by David Stockwell in All, Climate Table of contents for regime-shiftsPreprint on climatic regime shiftsSwanson and Tsonis 2009 on Regime-shiftsSwanson’s PC ProjectionInfluence of the Southern [...]

By: Niche Modeling » Swanson and Tsonis 2009 on Regime-shifts

Niche Modeling » Swanson and Tsonis 2009 on Regime-shifts — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:11:10 +0000

[...] Tsonis 2009 on Regime-shifts Posted by admin in All, Climate Table of contents for regime-shiftsPreprint on climatic regime shiftsSwanson and Tsonis 2009 on [...]

By: spangled drongo

spangled drongo — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:08:16 +0000

FWIW, since 1976 no cyclone has crossed the east coast of Australia south of the tropic of Capricorn whereas prior to this it was commonplace and often several times per year.
It didn't stop happening gradually, it just stopped happening.

By: TCO

TCO — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 07:40:23 +0000

kee-rect. And it's miserable. Just read it.

By: davids99us

davids99us — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:24:06 +0000

I doubt that we will keep appraised. If you believe the temperature measurements from 1930-80 they are higher variance than after that. If the climate change involves a change in the mean AND the variance, and we are in a period like 1930-80, then its going to be a longer time before there is proof of stability.

By: davids99us

davids99us — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:20:42 +0000

I have. He is much more simulation physics based, though he does think that major climate shifts can contribute to warming, with an underlying AGW, so its along the lines of our forecast.

By: davids99us

davids99us — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:16:24 +0000

You mean Quirk 2009 http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse...

By: TCO

TCO — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 02:54:04 +0000

I mean the one from EnE that you cited. Which I can't read anyhow. Not paying for it and strangely enough my free access to the vast majority of journals does not extend to that exemplar of insights: EnE.

I will check out your paper.

By: davids99us

davids99us — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:34:38 +0000

I don't disagree. Why not RTFP? I check two papers, one a sceptic I guess and one not, then the forecast is in the last part in the sense of, “if this is real then this follows”.