I notice that Spencer wants us to accept his analysis using UAH MT time series.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/Spencer-Forcing-Feedback-AGU-09-San-Francisco-final.pdf Perhaps he has forgotten that the MSU channel 2 data is contaminated with input from the stratosphere. At the beginning with his first graph on page 2, he throws in some AMSU data, which, if my memory is correct, uses different frequencies than the MSU, thus his time series can not be combined unless he simulates the MSU with the AMSU data. I suspect that both include the stratospheric contamination. Spencer is only able to extract his "looping" patterns after heavily filtering the data. But, his monthly running 3 month running mean induces a time lag and a running mean will also exhibit aliasing in the filtered time series. One might expect that the natural filtering effect of the thermal mass of the oceans would also induce a lag in the "temperature" data, so looking only at a single year's "event" he points to on page 4 may be just be part of the internal ENSO process we know and love. I don't see why he would expect to find a meaningful indication of the cloud feedback, given the short filtering period and the long lag of the circulating oceans. Spencer points to a period of cooler conditions after Mt. Pinatubo erupted for the graph on page 5. Really? What a surprise. Here, he uses a different filter, based on 72 day "seasons" not the 3 month running mean. Perhaps he hasn't noticed that nature doesn't work with mankind's arbitrary division of the year into "months" and 72 days is even stranger, unless that is a value which gives an answer he wants to see. I would think that a better analysis would start by averaging all the days in each season, then apply a decent filtering algorithm. More to the point, why isn't he using yearly averages, an approach which would filter out much of the noise. Or, would that kill his conclusion? E. S. ---------------------------- On Dec 21, 7:17 pm, Alastair <[email protected]> wrote: > Eric, > > The name of the author of your papers, Andrew Dessler,keeps appearing. > It appears here http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/12/little-feedback-on-climate-feedba... > where Roy Spencer, of Christie and Spencer fame, gave a talk at the > AGU at the invitation of Dessler. > Spencer seems to be arguing along the same lines as Lindzen, but I'll > leave others to decide on that. [cut] > Cheers, Alastair. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
