Hvor kommer vindene fra?

[Amateur2]

I dag tikket det inn en interessant link til Tallbloke sin blogg: Anastassia Makarieva: Science: One Bar For All.

Makarieva tar i et innlegg i den interactive delen av tidsskriftet "Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussion" et oppgjør med en reviewer som ikke anbefalte hennes paper Where do winds come from? A new theory on how water vapor condensation influences atmospheric pressure and dynamics for publikasjon.

Reviewerens anbefaling er heldigvis ikke tatt hensyn til, men hans reviewkommentarer kaster et ubehagelig lys på holdningene til enkelte peer-reviewere innenfor den etablerte klimavitenskapen.

Selv om det er en ytterst alvorlig sak hun tar opp så var det tilløp til humring her  da jeg leste hennes kommentar Hun bruker språkets virkemidler  godt.

[Jostemikk]

Amateur2, dette er meget interessant stoff, selv om jeg sliter fælt med selve publikasjonen. Jeg fulgte derimot med på alt som ble diskutert om Makarieva et als stoff den gangen det ble presentert på flere av skeptiker- og lukewarmerbloggene. Hun slapp til og med til hos J. Curry. Gjengs for hennes deltakelse i debattene var at Makarieva var uhyre høflig, saklig og profesjonell. Det er mer enn man kan si om de som gikk til frontalangrep på forskningen hun og partnerne presenterte.

Curry skrev dette første gang hun presenterte Makarievas forskning, og der vil du også finne andre linker, blant annet til the Air Vent, der debatten gikk heftig:

I first became aware of Makarieva's research about a year ago, I encountered her at a blog (probably climateaudit) and suggested that she send me copies of her papers. My curiosity was struck initially by her hurricane papers.  We began an extensive e-dialogue about her work, and I started to dig deeply into her hurricane papers.  And then climategate struck, and my attention unfortunately became diverted.  I am delighted to take this opportunity to revisit her work and discuss her new paper at Climate Etc.  Anastassia Makarieva is one of the people that I have invited to host a thread at Climate Etc.

In my opinion, the most significant characteristic of an important paper is that it changes the way you think about a problem.  This qualifies as  an important paper, by my standards.  While the paper is controversial, it has potentially far reaching implications for our understanding of how the climate system works.

Summary: This paper presents a theory as to how condensation influences atmospheric pressure through the mass removal of water from the gas phase with a simultaneous account of the latent heat release. The mechanism described by Makarieva et al. is correct, and it is not currently included in climate models. It is not clear to what extent this mechanism "matters;" their thermodynamic analysis is insufficient to demonstrate the relative magnitude of this effect. Nevertheless, this mechanism raises important issues regarding the structural adequacy of the atmospheric dynamical core used in climate models.  Given the overwhelming importance of water vapor and cloud  feedbacks in climate model simulations, re-examination of the atmospheric dynamical core used in climate models is called for.