2011-07-27 06:42:19ALERT TO MODERATORS: go easy on How we know we're causing global warming in a single graphic
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229

This is a blog experiment I'm doing with the University of W.A. - the following post is the "petri dish" of the experiment:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/How-we-know-were-causing-global-warming-in-single-graphic.html

It's currently in Stage 1 - collecting comments. We need 10 to 15 skeptic comments and 10 to 15 warmist comments. Then I can go to Stage 2 where we survey people after they've read the article and comments.

So go easy on the skeptic comments for this thread - if they violate the policy, allow it for this one exception so I can quickly build up the # of comments and move onto stage 2 of the experiment asap.

Thanks! Looking forward to seeing the results and if they're significant, we'll be publishing this in a paper.

2011-07-27 07:10:17Note re skeptic/warmist comments
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229

Comments are rated by the user bias and every SkSer will be categorised 'warmist'. So don't bother submitting skeptic comments - any comment you post will go in the warmist category. And you should only see warmist comments too (that's part of the experiment).

2011-07-27 14:49:49
Albatross
Julian Brimelow
stomatalaperture@gmail...
199.126.232.206

"And you should only see warmist comments too (that's part of the experiment)."

OK, I'm probably being obtuse.  Post #3 is by a 'skeptic', yet I can obviously see it.  Given that I know what I know should I (or others in the know) be posting on that thread or is that going to mess up the experiment?

2011-07-27 19:32:54Post 3
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
I see Chris Colose as post 3 - what do you see?
2011-07-27 20:31:24I see warmistas
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

This is what I see (and they're not dead people):

 

  1. If the sun was causing global warming, it would cause summers to warm faster than winter,

    Is this true sufficiently far from the Arctic? My understanding has been that the polar warming will generally tend to be greater in winter than in summer for either CO2 or solar forced-global warming, at least around where sea ice loss is occuring.
  2. Patrick 027:

    I expect solar-forced warming would not be as effective in the Arctic as a direct heating source in the winter since the Arctic receives so little sunlight.

    The key to the differing warming characteristics from a solar forcing is that the additional energy from a warming Sun arrives at the Earth strictly in those areas actively being basked in sunlight (i.e. during daytime hours); it follows that days would warm faster than nights, and that summers would warm faster than winters on account of the greater amount of sunlight received during the longer summer days.
  3. There is very little Arctic amplification in the summer because the temperature stays pegged to the freezing point (as the extra energy goes largely into melting and evaporation). Actually the temperature manifestation of the ice-albedo feedback does seem to show up more in the colder months. Mark Serreze has some work on this.

    I don't think the change in the annual cycle with different forcings is a resolved issue. A quick comparison between 2xCO2 and 1.02 solar in the GISS model output that you can run with a one button click from their website didn't show distinct changes between summer and winter. I can't think of a great reference on it actually, but the ones referenced by John Cook, and some follow ups (e.g. Mann and Park, 1996) all suggested it was more complicated, especially as you compared models with observations, take into account internal variability, clouds, other forcings, etc. Some of these issues also apply to the diurnal range as well, but that has decreased, and I'm quite sure that is expected from GHG's primarily (but aerosols modify the picture too).
  4. Keeping my non-expertise on models in mind, I want to play with the communication aspect of what Chris said vs what composer99 said:

    In summer, the upper temperature limit is restricted by the ice-water phase change to zero centigrade in the presense of massive amounts of ice. The larger (always?) summer energy flux in the arctic shows up as melt water, not air temperature. In winter, the air temperatures are well below zero, and the heat trapped by GHG can raise the air temperature without melting ice. Since some of the winter ice comes out of winter warmer than it formerly did, the volume of summer meltwater will be somewhat higher than if the ice mass had stayed colder during the winter.

    I can't address the question of convective transfer of heat to the polar regions from the equator by either air or water circulation. It's possible to imagine circulation modes that effectively block convective heat transfer, or modes that accelerate it.
2011-07-27 20:50:08
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.51.102

If Albie sees 'skeptic people' maybe he's been infected?

2011-07-28 01:18:42
Albatross
Julian Brimelow
stomatalaperture@gmail...
199.126.232.206

Oh no, oh no.....maybe I am infected (maybe it is b/c I hung out at DesmogBlog  yesterday.....)!  

That is odd, I just checked and I now see only sensible comments ;)  I no longer see the post by the fellow who posted the comment about OLR (actualy in one graph he was showing data for the ENSO region in the tropical Pacific and claiming, or under the misguided impression, that it held for the planet--- he did nicely show the impact of ENSO on deep convection in the tropical Pacific though). And yes, Chris is now #3.

2011-07-28 01:38:09Only visible when signed-in?
BaerbelW

baerbel-for-350@email...
93.231.176.126

Just out of curiosity I went to SkS's homepage without being logged in and I didn't see the post at all. When I tried via the direct link, I get "This blog post is not yet available for viewing."

2011-07-28 06:18:25Baerbel, that's correct
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
I only want users who have been categorized skeptic or warmists to view the post. Thats the experiment - to create 2 conditions, a blog post with all skeptic comments and a post with all warmists comments.

Am noticing one wrinkle already - the comments from the warmists are actually quite skeptical (in the genuine sense, not the denialist sense). I take it as a compliment to the critical thinking of SkSers but I wonder if it complicates the experiment. Interesting stuff...

2011-08-01 03:58:49
logicman

logicman_alf@yahoo.co...
86.177.51.236

I look forward to reading a collaborative paper in psychology: 'Does the reading of web comments affect readers' perceptions of concepts stated as facts in web articles?'.  Or am I hopelessly wide of the mark?

2011-08-01 12:18:50
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

I actually saw Ken Lambert's comment @ 3 like Albie did when I read the thread prior to taking the survey.  Wasn't there before for me.

2011-08-01 20:23:28Do web comments affect reader perceptions?
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
120.151.137.213
Logic, yes, that's the question our experiment seeks to answer. I had two major concerns about this experiment. First, generating two contrasting threads of skeptic and warmist comments. I didn't expect the discussion to obsess over DTR. So the contrast was not as stark as I would've liked. Second, I wasn't sure whether we'd get enough surveyants. But the response seems strong so far. Haven't looked at the data yet - won't get to check till I get back from holiday.

If there is a strong signal, it has some implications considering the increasing sock puppeting activity these days.