Weather and Climate Data: Water The Ignored Variable
Written by Dr. Tim Ball | January 25 2011
Knowledge of the subject and an ability to understand how words are used is required to know how misleading interpretations are created to pervert climate science. It is part of the attempt to persuade the public so their collective voice can overwhelm scientists asking legitimate questions: it’s a variation of the consensus argument.
The opening statement of an article in the November 9, 2005 ScienceDaily provides a good example. It said, “A new report indicates that the vast majority of the rapid temperature increase recently observed in Europe is likely due to an unexpected greenhouse gas: water vapor.” (ScienceDaily, 2005)
It is important because new measures of water vapor in the stratosphere and upper troposphere are causing consternation. The findings might help explain why global surface temperatures have not risen as fast in the last ten years as they did in the 1980s and 1990s. But if true, it puts official climate science claims in jeopardy.
The 2005 comment is remarkable because of the phrase “unexpected greenhouse gas” that betrays either ignorance of the science or an attempt to mislead. Water vapour is by far the most important “greenhouse gas” being 95% by volume of the total so-called greenhouse gases and anything but “unexpected”.
A second comment in the article gives insight about what is going on. “The authors, led by Rolf Philipona of the World Radiation Center in Davos, show experimentally that 70 percent of the rapid temperature increase is very likely caused by water vapor feedback.” Unless you read every word and know why and how it is being used, a misconception is created.
The word “experimentally” is critical because it means it is not an actual observation but one achieved in a computer model. The claim is qualified as “very likely,” which official science of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change say is better than 90%. Then there is the unqualified phrase “rapid temperature increase” that implies something unusual happened with the temperatures when there is no evidence.
Few know what the word “feedback” means in climate science. It can be either positive if it enhances a trend or negative if it counters the trend. The IPCC were confronted with the problem that even if CO2 doubled or tripled there was a very small upper limit to temperature increase, so they created a positive feedback. They claimed a CO2 increase would cause a temperature increase and higher evaporation with more water vapour in the atmosphere.
All of this obscurity, deflection, and conditional information are swamped by what will stay with the public — the headline. It categorically states, without the conditions in the article, that “Water feedback is rapidly warming Europe.”
The total of so-called “greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere is not known. Even less is known about how much they vary. Water vapor is the only one shown with a range of variability from zero to 4%. In fact, it is never zero. The range reflects the variability of water vapor in the atmosphere from one region to another; however, it is considered constant globally over time.
Ongoing Problem. The amount of water vapor in the air has always been a challenge to meteorology underscored by development of four different measures: Absolute Humidity — Ratio of mass or weight of water vapor per unit volume of air (grams per cubic meter). Specific Humidity — Ratio of the mass or weight of water vapor in the air to a unit of air including the water vapor (grams of water vapor per kilogram of wet air). Mixing Ratio — Ratio of the mass of water vapor to the mass of dry air (grams per gram or grams per kilogram). Relative Humidity — Ratio of amount of water vapor in the air as a percentage of what it could hold. The latter is of little scientific value. You can have a relative humidity (RH) of 80% but a totally different amount of actual water vapor in the air, because the amount held is a function of temperature.
CO2 and CH4 are considered constant throughout the atmosphere, but that is not correct either. Some gases are identified as variable, but the reality is they are all variable. If the amount of one changes, then the percentage amount of all others change. The problem is the measure of variability is being applied in different ways.
Buy Now!
FREE COMPLIMENTARY BOOK (worth $8.99) if you order today! Hurry, this is a limited introductory promotional offer. Order ‘Slaying the Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’ and receive your complimentary companion book totally free (Requires Acrobat Reader or Preview-Mac)!