It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Strong Evidence That Cloud Changes May Exacerbate Global Warming

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 11:42 AM

Strong Evidence That Cloud Changes May Exacerbate Global Warming

The role of clouds in climate change has been a major question for decades. As the earth warms under increasing greenhouse gases, it is not known whether clouds will dissipate, letting in more of the sun's heat energy and making the earth warm even faster, or whether cloud cover will increase, blocking the Sun's rays and actually slowing down global warming.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 11:42 AM

"This is somewhat of a vicious cycle potentially exacerbating global warming," said Clement. "But these findings provide a new way of looking at clouds changes. This can help to improve the simulation of clouds in climate models, which will lead to more accurate projections of future climate changes. "

One key finding in the study is that it is not the warming of the ocean alone that reduces cloudiness -- a weakening of the trade winds also appears to play a critical role. All models predict a warming ocean, but if they don't have the correct relationship between clouds and atmospheric circulation, they won't produce a realistic cloud response.

Thought this would be interesting since i have been seeing threads about unusual clouds etc, So they are still unlear if more clouds etc will help global warming or increase it.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 11:51 AM
Yep, the Earth mirrors the weather on the Sun.
If there are lots of storms on the sun, we get storms down here..

So just imagine what it will be like here when / if the Sun kicks into high gear closer to 2012 solar max, as the Maya Say ! Birth of a NEW sun, the 6th sun. Simple this realy...

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:15 PM
reply to post by ronishia

The role of the clouds in any affect of global temperature, overall, is still up for some debate and question, as are the roles of Human industrial effects, along with naturally occuring events, such as forest fires and volcanic eruptions:

Aerosols and soot

The climatic impacts from aerosol forcing could have a large effect on climate through the indirect effect. Global dimming, a gradual reduction in the amount of global direct irradiance at the Earth's surface, has partially counteracted global warming from 1960 to the present. The main cause of this dimming is aerosols produced by volcanic activity and emissions of pollutants such as sulfur dioxide. These aerosols exert a cooling effect by increasing the reflection of incoming sunlight. James Hansen and colleagues have proposed that the effects of the products of fossil fuel combustion—CO2 and aerosols—have largely offset one another in recent decades, so that net warming has been driven mainly by non-CO2 greenhouse gases.

In addition to their direct effect by scattering and absorbing solar radiation, aerosols have indirect effects on the radiation budget. Sulfate aerosols act as cloud condensation nuclei and thus lead to clouds that have more and smaller cloud droplets. These clouds reflect solar radiation more efficiently than clouds with fewer and larger droplets. This effect also causes droplets to be of more uniform size, which reduces growth of raindrops by collision-coalescence. Clouds modified by pollution have been shown to produce less drizzle, making the cloud brighter and more reflective to incoming sunlight, especially in the near-infrared part of the spectrum.

Soot may cool or warm, depending on whether it is airborne or deposited. Atmospheric soot aerosols directly absorb solar radiation, which heats the atmosphere and cools the surface. Regionally (but not globally), as much as 50% of surface warming due to greenhouse gases may be masked by atmospheric brown clouds. When deposited, especially on glaciers or on ice in arctic regions, the lower surface albedo can also directly heat the surface. The influences of aerosols, including black carbon, are most pronounced in the tropics and sub-tropics, particularly in Asia, while the effects of greenhouse gases are dominant in the extratropics and southern hemisphere.

Solar variation

Variations in solar output have been the cause of past climate changes. Although solar forcing is generally thought to be too small to account for a significant part of global warming in recent decades, a few studies disagree, such as a recent phenomenological analysis that indicates the contribution of solar forcing may be underestimated.

Observations show that temperatures in the stratosphere have been steady or cooling since 1979, when satellite measurements became available. Radiosonde (weather balloon) data from the pre-satellite era show cooling since 1958, though there is greater uncertainty in the early radiosonde record.

A related hypothesis, proposed by Henrik Svensmark, is that magnetic activity of the sun deflects cosmic rays that may influence the generation of cloud condensation nuclei and thereby affect the climate. Other research has found no relation between warming in recent decades and cosmic rays. The influence of cosmic rays on cloud cover is about a factor of 100 lower than needed to explain the observed changes in clouds or to be a significant contributor to present-day climate change.


A positive feedback is a process that amplifies some change. Thus, when a warming trend results in effects that induce further warming, the result is a positive feedback; when the warming results in effects that reduce the original warming, the result is a negative feedback. The main positive feedback in global warming involves the tendency of warming to increase the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. The main negative feedback in global warming is the effect of temperature on emission of infrared radiation: as the temperature of a body increases, the emitted radiation increases with the fourth power of its absolute temperature.

And this gets interesting, as it relates to water vapor and clouds:

Water vapor feedback
If the atmosphere is warmed, the saturation vapor pressure increases, and the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere will tend to increase. Since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, the increase in water vapor content makes the atmosphere warm further; this warming causes the atmosphere to hold still more water vapor (a positive feedback), and so on until other processes stop the feedback loop. The result is a much larger greenhouse effect than that due to CO2 alone. Although this feedback process causes an increase in the absolute moisture content of the air, the relative humidity stays nearly constant or even decreases slightly because the air is warmer.

Cloud feedback
Warming is expected to change the distribution and type of clouds. Seen from below, clouds emit infrared radiation back to the surface, and so exert a warming effect; seen from above, clouds reflect sunlight and emit infrared radiation to space, and so exert a cooling effect. Whether the net effect is warming or cooling depends on details such as the type and altitude of the cloud, details that are difficult to represent in climate models.

Lapse rate
The atmosphere's temperature decreases with height in the troposphere. Since emission of infrared radiation varies with the fourth power of temperature, longwave radiation escaping to space from the relatively cold upper atmosphere is less than that emitted toward the ground from the lower atmosphere. Thus, the strength of the greenhouse effect depends on the atmosphere's rate of temperature decrease with height. Both theory and climate models indicate that global warming will reduce the rate of temperature decrease with height, producing a negative lapse rate feedback that weakens the greenhouse effect. Measurements of the rate of temperature change with height are very sensitive to small errors in observations, making it difficult to establish whether the models agree with observations

Overall, it seems that the various fluctuations are normal, in the short term. Perhaps the hysteria is unfounded?

new topics

top topics

log in