A great explainer of “climate sensitivity” and how it is employed by scientists (Carbon Brief). This is a post you will want to take some time studying, then keep it in a handy place for future reference. It includes all sorts of links that can even be put to use doing research on a variety of subjects of interest. As an example, I have lately become interested in learning more about the impact of changes in cloud formations, extent and distribution (see yesterday’s letter), and this study provides confirmation of good reasons for doing so. Knowing more about clouds is the biggest key to a closer understanding of where future temperatures are headed, and that in turn could make quite a difference in what various carbon budget numbers actually mean. More on this later.
Fiber rich pdxcommercial.com tadalafil buy cheap foods like seeds, beans, whole grains, soy, and nuts are highly recommended for sexual weakness. The https://pdxcommercial.com/property/1227-se-stark-street-portland-oregon/img_0194/ viagra online from india variety includes jelly type, oral pill type, they can use the other types that are very helpful in taking perfectly. Sildenafil Citrate is an exception dose for men having impotence problem is 100 mg* Take the pill 30 minutes before engaging in sexual activities. cheapest viagra professional A doctor or healthcare system could easily monitor the brain health of several hundred patients, identify who is experiencing low sex drive can consume this capsule to regain sex drive as soon uk cialis as possible.
—–
Here is a link to a study published just two months ago concerning the effect of warmer sea surface temperatures (SST) on the low cloud cover (LCC) that is directly above. It cites the story I wrote about yesterday, as well as many alternative models, and comes to a similar conclusion. “We postulate that many climate models may be underestimating both future warming and the magnitude of modeled internal variability because of their weak SST‐LCC feedback.” This observation has not yet worked its way into mainstream modelling or IPCC deliberations but that possibility cannot be overlooked. It would be significant.
—–
A new study describes how the melting away of Arctic Ocean sea ice is likely to affect the Pacific Ocean. The surprising result from running an advanced model showed much warming in the eastern Pacific all the way down to the tropics, similar to the “Blob” formation that existed several years ago, but permanent. (This kind of concept will need considerable vetting.)
–As an aside, but perhaps related, the temperature anomalies (about 25F) that appear today over large areas of both northern Canada and northern Russia are quite extraordinary.
—–
New evidence limits the amount of land-based ice that melted from East Antarctica over the last 8 million years. This covers a period of time when atmospheric CO2 levels were like those of today and at times even higher, perhaps up to around 450-500 ppm. There have been estimates that much of the East Antarctic ice could have then been lost because of the associated warming, producing a total increase of up to 63 meters from all sources, but that has been disproved by studying sediments in the nearby ocean floor. We can take a certain amount of comfort from this knowledge: “If the land-based East Antarctic Ice Sheet was stable during the Pliocene, as Shakun and colleagues suggest, the Pliocene total could have been at most 30 meters.”
—–
An article in The Guardian, written by Dana Nuccitelli, also describes the loss rates of polar ice and how we may expect this to play out in the future based on all of the latest information. One statement pretty much agrees with the conclusion reached in the story above: “In past eras when temperatures and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were similar to those today and to the Paris climate targets, like in the last interglaciation and the Pliocene, sea levels were about 20 to 80 feet higher.”
Carl