A conservative news and views blog.

Location: St. Louis, Missouri, United States

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Muted or No Increase in Water Vapor; a Blow to Global Warming Theory

Timothy Birdnow

Global Warming theory is predicated on positive feedbacks. Carbon Dioxide is only a trace gas in the Earth's atmosphere (at just38 molecules for every 10,000) and is itself limited in the spectrum it can absorb heat from. The idea of runaway greenhouse warming comes from the notion that a small temperature increase caused by an increase in carbon dioxide will lead to more water evaporation, leading to much more greenhouse warming (since water vapor is the principle greenhouse gas) leading to more CO2 and the release of some more powerful greenhouse gases like methane. The argument in the scientific community is whether this positive cycle will occur - and is occuring - or whether there is a negative feedback loop where an increase in water vapor increases the Earth's albedo (reflectivity) and the planet cools back down.

So the critical question is, are we seeing higher levels of evaporation and atmospheric water vapor.

No, according to Roger Pielke Sr.

According to Dr. Pielke:

"The amplification of the radiative effect of the addition of CO2 and other human-emitted greenhouse gases into the atmosphere requires the addition of water vapor to the atmosphere which is assumed to occur primarily from warmer ocean surface temperatures (thus elevated evaporation). However, this increase of water vapor, at least in recent years is either not occurring or is very muted from the predictions made by the IPCC multi-decadal global model predictions."

End excerpt.

Dr. Pielke quotes the abstract of a new paper by V. Isaac and W. A. van Wijngaarden, 2012: Surface Water Vapor Pressure and Temperature Trends in North America during 1948-2010.

"Over 1/4 billion hourly values of temperature and relative humidity observed at 309 stations located across North America during 1948-2010 were studied. The water vapor pressure was determined and seasonal averages were computed. Data were first examined for inhomogeneities using a statistical test to determine whether the data was fit better to a straight line or a straight line plus an abrupt step which may arise from changes in instruments and/or procedure. Trends were then found for data not having discontinuities. Statistically significant warming trends affecting the Midwestern U.S., Canadian prairies and the western Arctic are evident in winter and to a lesser extent in spring while statistically significant increases in water vapor pressure occur primarily in summer for some stations in the eastern half of the U.S. The temperature (water vapor pressure) trends averaged over all stations were 0.30 (0.07), 0.24 (0.06), 0.13 (0.11), 0.11 (0.07) C/decade (hPa/decade) in the winter, spring, summer and autumn seasons, respectively. The averages of these seasonal trends are 0.20 C/decade and 0.07 hPa/decade which correspond to a specific humidity increase of 0.04 g/kg per decade and a relative humidity reduction of 0.5%/decade."

End abstract.

Couple this with the missing heat (which the AGW crowd claims is trapped in the deep oceans although they do not give a mechanism for this heat to move DOWNWARD to the bottom of the ocean) and you have a disastrous real-world example of non-warming.

Oh, and there is no heat piling up in the tropical troposphere, another key prediction of AGW theory.

If there's no heat there's no warming. We haven't seen any since 1995 (although we had a temperature spike in 1998 due to unusually powerful El Nino).

A theory that does not explain real world observations is an exploded theory. Global Warming just does not fit. If it does not fit you must acquit, to quote O.J. Simpson's pandering attorney. Well, if it's good enough for the Juice...

The Geocentric theory of the Universe had better success predicting the movement of the planets than AGW theory predicts the climate. If Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler were alive today they would be trashed by the astronomical equivalent of Realclimate as "deniars" and would find it difficult to obtain jobs teaching or doing research.

Science just isn't what it used to be!

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by