Download A Realty Check on Global Warming

A Realty Check on Global
Warming
Roger A. Pielke Sr.
Senior Research Scientist
University of Colorado, Boulder
Professor Emeritus, Colorado State University
January 17, 2008
Four States Irrigation Council 55th Annual Meeting
“Irrigation Transitions to the Future”
ABSTRACT
While the political climate change train has clearly left the station,
climate science and global warming in particular are actually less
understood than communicated by the 2007 IPCC Report. As one example,
despite what is indicated in that report, there has actually been no lower
tropospheric warming since the late 1990s, and no upper ocean warming in
the last several years. Moreover, while Arctic sea ice cover is at an historic
low amount, the Antarctic sea ice cover reached a maximum coverage this
past month.
This diversity of trends illustrates that the climate, and the human
forcings of climate, are much more complex than generally assumed.
Conclusions from a 2005 National Research Council Report will be used to
frame the diversity of human climate forcings, including forcings that are
more spatially and temporally complicated than the radiative forcing of the
well-mixed greenhouse gases.
Recommendations from a 2004 International Geosphere-Biosphere
Progamme (IGBP) will be presented to show how we should move to a
bottom-up, resource based approach to reduce the vulnerability of society
and the environment to climate change and variability, as well as other types
of environmental effects.
What Does the Recent Data
Actually Tell Us?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Near Surface Temperature Trends
Lower Tropospheric Temperature Trends
Ocean Heat Content Changes
Arctic Sea Ice Areal Coverage
Antarctic Sea Ice Areal Coverage
Tropospheric Water Vapor Trends
Regional Climate Model Downscaling Does
Not Provide Added Skill In Propagating
Weather Features Beyond What Is Already
Present In the Parent Global Climate Model
1.
1. measurement of minimum temperature at just one level ( a significant
warm bias when the nocturnal boundary layer is warming; a significant
cold bias when the nocturnal boundary layer is cooling);
2. poor siting of the instrumentation (probably mostly a warm bias but
needs further study; regardless the data is not spatially
representative).
3. effect of multi-decadal trends in near surface absolute humidity (for
the same multi-decadal trend in heat content, a drying trend results in
a warm bias while a moistening trend results in a cool bias when
surface air temperature trends are used by itself in the construction of
land averages);
4. the quantification of uncertainties in the homogenization of surface
temperature data (results in an uncertainty of an unknown magnitude,
but appears to be significant; further study needed);
5. the influence of land use/land cover (LULC) change (primarily a warm
bias, with some exceptions - such as when an arid region is irrigated);
6. the completion of the global analysis of multi-decadal surface air
temperature trends by the different groups (NCDC, CRU, GISS) are not
independent of each other, as they each draw raw data from
essentially the same surface observation sites. Only their specific
analysis routines are different.
Several Of Our Peer-Reviewed Papers on These Issues
Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., R.A.,
R.A., C.
C. Davey,
Davey, D.
D. Niyogi,
Niyogi, S.
S. Fall,
Fall, J.
J. Steinweg-Woods,
Steinweg-Woods, K.
K. Hubbard,
Hubbard, X.
X. Lin,
Lin, M.
M. Cai,
Cai, Y.-K.
Y.-K. Lim,
Lim, H.
H.
Li,
Li, J.
J. Nielsen-Gammon,
Nielsen-Gammon, K.
K. Gallo,
Gallo, R.
R. Hale,
Hale, R.
R. Mahmood,
Mahmood, S.
S. Foster,
Foster, R.T.
R.T. McNider,
McNider, and
and P.
P. Blanken,
Blanken, 2007:
2007:
Unresolved
Unresolved issues
issues with
with the
the assessment
assessment of
of multi-decadal
multi-decadal global
global land
land surface
surface temperature
temperature trends.
trends. J.
J.
Geophys.
Geophys. Res.,
Res., 112,
112, D24S08,
D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229.
doi:10.1029/2006JD008229.
Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., R.A.
R.A. J.
J. Nielsen-Gammon,
Nielsen-Gammon, C.
C. Davey,
Davey, J.
J. Angel,
Angel, O.
O. Bliss,
Bliss, N.
N. Doesken,
Doesken, M.
M. Cai.,
Cai., S.
S. Fall,
Fall, D.
D. Niyogi,
Niyogi, K.
K.
Gallo,
R.
Hale,
K.G.
Hubbard,
X.
Lin,
H.
Li,
and
S.
Raman,
2007:
Documentation
of
uncertainties
and
Gallo, R. Hale, K.G. Hubbard, X. Lin, H. Li, and S. Raman, 2007: Documentation of uncertainties and
biases
biases associated
associated with
with surface
surface temperature
temperature measurement
measurement sites
sites for
for climate
climate change
change assessment.
assessment. Bull.
Bull.
Amer.
Meteor.
Soc.,
88:6,
913-928.
Amer. Meteor. Soc., 88:6, 913-928.
Fall,
Fall, S.,
S., D.
D. Niyogi,
Niyogi, R.A.
R.A. Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., A.
A. Gluhovsky,
Gluhovsky, and
and E.
E. Kalnay,
Kalnay, 2007:
2007: Impacts
Impacts of
of land
land surface
surface properties
properties
on
on temperature
temperature trends
trends using
using North
North American
American regional
regional reanalysis
reanalysis over
over the
the USA.
USA. Int.
Int. J.
J. Climatol.,
Climatol.,
submitted.
submitted.
Lin,
Lin, X.,
X., R.A.
R.A. Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., K.G.
K.G. Hubbard,
Hubbard, K.C.
K.C. Crawford,
Crawford, M.
M. A.
A. Shafer,
Shafer, and
and T.
T. Matsui,
Matsui, 2007:
2007: An
An examination
examination of
of
1997-2007
1997-2007 surface
surface layer
layer temperature
temperature trends
trends at
at two
two heights
heights in
in Oklahoma.
Oklahoma. Geophys.
Geophys. Res.
Res. Letts.,
Letts., 34,
34,
L24705,
L24705, doi:10.1029/2007GL031652.
doi:10.1029/2007GL031652.
Pielke,
Pielke, R.A.
R.A. Sr.,
Sr., K.
K. Wolter,
Wolter, O.
O. Bliss,
Bliss, N.
N. Doesken,
Doesken, and
and B.
B. McNoldy,
McNoldy, 2006:
2006: The
The July
July 2005
2005 Denver
Denver heat
heat wave:
wave:
How
How unusual
unusual was
was it?
it? Nat.
Nat. Wea.
Wea. Dig.,
Dig., 31,
31, 24-35.
24-35.
Chase,
Chase, T.N.,
T.N., K.
K. Wolter,
Wolter, R.A.
R.A. Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., and
and I.I. Rasool,
Rasool, 2006:
2006: Was
Was the
the 2003
2003 European
European summer
summer heat
heat wave
wave
unusual
unusual in
in aa global
global context?
context? Geophys.
Geophys. Res.
Res. Lett.,
Lett., 33,
33, L23709,
L23709, doi:10.1029/2006GL027470.
doi:10.1029/2006GL027470.
Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., R.A.,
R.A., C.
C. Davey,
Davey, and
and J.
J. Morgan,
Morgan, 2004:
2004: Assessing
Assessing "global
"global warming"
warming" with
with surface
surface heat
heat content.
content.
Eos,
85,
No.
21,
210-211.
Eos, 85, No. 21, 210-211.
Davey,
Davey, C.A.,
C.A., and
and R.A.
R.A. Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., 2005:
2005: Microclimate
Microclimate exposures
exposures of
of surface-based
surface-based weather
weather stations
stations -implications
for
the
assessment
of
long-term
temperature
trends.
Bull.
Amer.
Meteor.
implications for the assessment of long-term temperature trends. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,
Soc., Vol.
Vol. 86,
86,
No.
4,
497–504.
No. 4, 497–504.
Poor Microclimate Exposure At
Many Climate Observing Sites
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/
Davey,
Davey, C.A.,
C.A., and
and R.A.
R.A. Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., 2005:
2005: Microclimate
Microclimate exposures
exposures of
of surface-based
surface-based
weather
weather stations
stations -- implications
implications for
for the
the assessment
assessment of
of long-term
long-term temperature
temperature
trends.
trends. Bull.
Bull. Amer.
Amer. Meteor.
Meteor. Soc.,
Soc., Vol.
Vol. 86,
86, No.
No. 4,
4, 497–504.
497–504.
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/R-274.pdf
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/R-274.pdf
Fort Morgan site showing images of the cardinal directions
from the sensor (from Hanamean et al. 2003)
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/category/weather_stations/
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/category/weather_stations/
As shown in Pielke et al. [2004], the heat content of
surface air is given by
H=CpT+Lq
where H is the heat in Joules, Cp is the heat capacity of
air at constant temperature, T is the air temperature,
L is the latent heat of vaporization and q is the
specific humidity. This equation can be rewritten as
Pielke,
Pielke, R.A.
R.A. Sr.,
Sr., K.
K. Wolter,
Wolter, O.
O. Bliss,
Bliss, N.
N. Doesken,
Doesken, and
and B.
B. McNoldy,
McNoldy, 2006:
2006:
The
The July
July 2005
2005 Denver
Denver heat
heat wave:
wave: How
How unusual
unusual was
was it?
it? Nat.
Nat. Wea.
Wea. Dig.,
Dig.,
31,
31, 24-35.
24-35. http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/R-313.pdf
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/R-313.pdf
Land Use/Land Cover Change Generally Produces
A Warm Bias
“Temperature trends were primarily insignificant prior to the
period during which the greatest single type of LULC change
occurred around Normals stations. Additionally, those trends
that were significant were generally divided equally between
warming and cooling trends (Table 5). However, after periods of
dominant LULC change, significant trends in minimum,
maximum, or mean temperature were far more common, and
90% or more of these significant trends were warming trends.”
Pielke
Pielke Sr.,
Sr., R.A.,
R.A., C.
C. Davey,
Davey, D.
D. Niyogi,
Niyogi, S.
S. Fall,
Fall, J.
J. Steinweg-Woods,
Steinweg-Woods, K.
K. Hubbard,
Hubbard, X.
X. Lin,
Lin, M.
M. Cai,
Cai, Y.Y.K.
Lim,
H.
Li,
J.
Nielsen-Gammon,
K.
Gallo,
R.
Hale,
R.
Mahmood,
S.
Foster,
R.T.
McNider,
K. Lim, H. Li, J. Nielsen-Gammon, K. Gallo, R. Hale, R. Mahmood, S. Foster, R.T. McNider,
and
and P.
P. Blanken,
Blanken, 2007:
2007: Unresolved
Unresolved issues
issues with
with the
the assessment
assessment of
of multi-decadal
multi-decadal global
global land
land
surface
surface temperature
temperature trends.
trends. J.
J. Geophys.
Geophys. Res.
Res. in
in press.
press.
Documentation Of A Significant
Warm Bias In Long-Term
Trends of Minimum
Temperatures
Climate Feedbacks Cumulatively
Must Be Negative So Far
• Assess Radiative Imbalance From the Oceans
(Pielke Sr., R.A., 2003: Heat storage within the
Earth system. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84,
331-335.
• Estimate Global Average Radiative Forcing
(IPCC 2007)
• These Two Values Provide an Estimate Of the
Radiative Feedback
2007 IPCC SPM View
Global
Radiative
Imbalance
From Lyman, J.M., J. Willis, and G. Johnson, 2006: Recent cooling of the
upper ocean. Geophys Res. Lett., 33, L18604, doi:10.1029/2006GL027033.
Correction completed April 2007 which eliminates cooling but finds no
warming
warming in
in recent
recent years.
2007 IPCC Total
Radiative
Radiative Forcing
Forcing =
=
1.72 (0.66 to 2.7)
Watts per meter
squared
Best Estimate of
Total Radiative
Imbalance
(1993-2005) =
0.33 (0.10
to 0.56) Watts
per meter
squared
If the
the IPCC
IPCC
Forcing is
accepted as the
current
current forcing,
forcing,
than the
the net
net
global
global radiative
feedbacks
feedbacks are
are
negative!
• ".... a revised estimate of upper-ocean
ocean heat content suggests than
no significant warming or cooling has
occurred in recent years, with
ocean heat content increasing by only
1 (± 16) 11 × 1021 J between 2004 and
2006."
Lyman, J. and G.C. Johnson, 2007: Estimating Annual Global
Upper Ocean Heat Content Anomalies Despite Irregular In Situ
Ocean Sampling. Submitted to the J of Climate (Sept 2007).
What Do SST and Anomalies
and Trends Look Like?
Figure by Tom Chase University of
Colorado at Boulder
What are the Tropospheric and
Lower Stratospheric
Temperature Trends?
.
http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_description.html
Stratospheric Temperature TLS 1979 to Jan 2008
http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_description.html
Lower
Lower Tropospheric
Tropospheric Temperature TLT 1979 to Jan 2008
http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_description.html
http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_description.html
What About Sea Ice Trends?
What Are the Trends In Arctic
and Antarctic Sea Ice
Coverage?
What Is the Trend In
Tropospheric Water Vapor?
Wang, J.-W., K. Wang, R.A. Pielke, J.C. Lin, and T. Matsui,
2007: Does an atmospheric warming trend lead to a
moistening trend over North America? Geophys. Res. Letts.,
submitted.
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/R-337.pdf
“…….the
“…….the Tcol
Tcol from
from 1979
1979 to
to 2006
2006 was
was significant
significant and
and positive;
positive; however,
however,
the
the PWAV
PWAV and
and PWAT
PWAT were
were not.
not. This
This suggests
suggests that
that atmospheric
atmospheric
temperature
temperature and
and water
water vapor
vapor trends
trends do
do not
not follow
follow the
the conjecture
conjecture of
of
constant
constant relative
relative humidity…..”
humidity…..”
Is There Value In Dynamic
Downscaling with Regional
Climate Models
• Castro, C.L., R.A. Pielke Sr., and G. Leoncini, 2005: Dynamical
downscaling: Assessment of value retained and added using the
Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS). J. Geophys. Res. Atmospheres, 110, No. D5, D05108, doi:10.1029/2004JD004721
• Castro, C.L., R.A. Pielke Sr., J. Adegoke, S.D. Schubert, and P.J.
Pegion, 2007: Investigation of the summer climate of the contiguous
U.S. and Mexico using the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System
(RAMS). Part II: Model climate variability. J. Climate, 20, 3866-3887.
• Rockel, B., C.L. Castro, R.A. Pielke Sr., H. von Storch, and G.
Leoncini, 2007: Dynamical downscaling: Assessment of model
system dependent retained and added variability for two different
RCMs. J. Geophys. Res., submitted.
• Lo, J.C.-F., Z.-L. Yang, and R.A. Pielke Sr., 2007: Assessment of
dynamical climate downscaling methods using the Weather
Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model. J. Geophys. Res.,
submitted.
Projections of an Imminent Transition to a More
Arid Climate in Southwestern North America
Richard Seager et al. 2007: Science 316, 1181
ABSTRACT
“How anthropogenic climate change will affect hydroclimate
in the arid regions of southwestern North America has
implications for the allocation of water resources and the
course of regional development. Here we show that there is
a broad consensus among climate models that this region
will dry in the 21st century and that the transition to a more
arid climate should already be under way. If these models
are correct, the levels of aridity of the recent multiyear
drought or the Dust Bowl and the 1950s droughts will
become the new climatology of the American Southwest
within a time frame of years to decades.”
http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/Drought/
Kevin Trenberth
Climate Analysis Section, NCAR and Lead
Author of Chapter 3 of WG1 of the 2007 IPCC Report
“Predictions
“Predictions of
of climate”
climate”
1.
1. “In
“In fact
fact there
there are
are no
no predictions
predictions by
by IPCC
IPCC at
at all.
all. And
And there
there never
never have
have been.”
been.”
2.
2. “None
“None of
of the
the models
models used
used by
by IPCC
IPCC are
are initialized
initialized to
to the
the observed
observed state
state and
and
none
none of
of the
the climate
climate states
states in
in the
the models
models correspond
correspond even
even remotely
remotely to
to the
the
current
current observed
observed climate.”
climate.”
3.
3. “Moreover,
“Moreover, the
the starting
starting climate
climate state
state in
in several
several of
of the
the models
models may
may depart
depart
significantly
significantly from
from the
the real
real climate
climate owing
owing to
to model
model errors.
errors. II postulate
postulate that
that
regional
regional climate
climate change
change is
is impossible
impossible to
to deal
deal with
with properly
properly unless
unless the
the models
models
are
are initialized.”
initialized.”
4.
4. “The
“The current
current projection
projection method
method works
works to
to the
the extent
extent it
it does
does because
because it
it utilizes
utilizes
differences
from
one
time
to
another
and
the
main
model
bias
and
systematic
differences from one time to another and the main model bias and systematic
errors
errors are
are thereby
thereby subtracted
subtracted out.
out. This
This assumes
assumes linearity.
linearity. It
It works
works for
for global
global
forced
forced variations,
variations, but
but it
it can
can not
not work
work for
for many
many aspects
aspects of
of climate,
climate, especially
especially
those
those related
related to
to the
the water
water cycle.”
cycle.”
5.
5. “However,
“However, the
the science
science is
is not
not done
done because
because we
we do
do not
not have
have reliable
reliable or
or regional
regional
predictions
predictions of
of climate.”
climate.”
Is There Consensus With the
2007 IPCC Report?
ABSTRACT. An online poll of scientists' opinions
shows that, while there is strong agreement on the
important role of anthropogenically-caused radiative
forcing of CO2 in climate change and with the largest
group supporting the IPCC report, there is not a
universal agreement among climate scientists about
climate science as represented in the IPCC's WG1.
Claims that the human input of CO2 is not an
important climate forcing, or that 'the science is
more or less settled', are found to be false in our
survey. The IPCC WG1 perspective is the mean
response, though there are interesting differences
between mean responses in the USA and in the EU.
There are, also, a significant number of climate
scientists who disagree with the IPCC WG1
perspective.
Brown, F., J. Annan, and R.A. Pielke Sr., 2007: Is there
agreement amongst climate scientists on the IPCC AR4 WG1?
Eos, submitted.
1. There
There is
is no
no warming;
warming; it
it is
is aa fabrication
fabrication based
based on
on
inaccurate/inappropriate measurement. Human activity is not having
any significant effect on Climate. The data on which such
assumptions are made is so compromised as to be worthless. The
physical science basis of AGW theory is founded on a false
hypothesis.
2. Any recent warming is most likely natural. Human input of CO2 has
very little to do with it. Solar, naturally varying water vapour and
similar variables can explain most or all of the climate changes.
Projections based on Global Climate Models are unreliable because
these are based on too many assumptions and unreliable datasets.
3. There are changes in the atmosphere, including added CO2 from
human activities, but significant climate effects are likely to be all
within natural limits. The 'scares' are exaggerations with a political
motive. The undue emphasis on CO2 diverts attention away from
other, important research on climate variability and change.
4. There is warming and the human addition of CO2 causes some of it,
but the science is too uncertain to be confident about current
attributions of the precise role of CO2 with respect to other climate
forcings. The IPCC WG1 overestimates the role of CO2 relative to
other forcings, including a diverse variety of human climate forcings.
5. The scientific basis for human impacts on climate is well
represented by the IPCC WG1 report. The lead scientists
know what they are doing. We are warming the planet,
with CO2 as the main culprit. At least some of the forecast
consequences of this change are based on robust
evidence.
6. The IPCC WG1 is compromised by political intervention; I
agree with those scientists who say that the IPCC WG1 is
underestimating the problem. Action to reduce human
emissions of CO2 in order to mitigate against serious
consequences is more urgent than the report suggests.
This should be done irrespective of other climate and
environmental considerations.
7. The IPCC WG1 seriously understates the human influence
on climate. I agree with those scientists who say that
major mitigation responses are needed immediately to
prevent catastrophic serious warming and other impacts
projected to result from human emissions of CO2. We are
seriously damaging the Earth's climate, and will continue
to face devastating consequences for many years.
The Focus Needs To Be On
Vulnerability [A Bottom-Up]
Perspective Rather Than On A MultiDecadal Global Model Prediction
Downscaled To Regions [A Top-Down
Perspective]
From:
From: Pielke,
Pielke, R.A.
R.A. Sr.,
Sr., and
and L.
L. Bravo
Bravo de
de Guenni,
Guenni, 2004:
2004: Conclusions.
Conclusions. Chapter
Chapter E.7
E.7
In:
In: Vegetation,
Vegetation, Water,
Water, Humans
Humans and
and the
the Climate:
Climate: A
A New
New Perspective
Perspective on
on an
an
Interactive
Interactive System.
System. Global
Global Change
Change -- The
The IGBP
IGBP Series,
Series, P.
P. Kabat
Kabat et
et al.,
al., Eds.,
Eds.,
Springer,
Springer, 537-538.
537-538. http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/CB-42.pdf
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/publications/pdf/CB-42.pdf
Schematic
Schematic of
of the
the relation
relation of
of water
water resource
resource vulnerability
vulnerability to
to the
the spectrum
spectrum of
of the
the
environmental
environmental forcings
forcings and
and feedbacks
feedbacks (adapted
(adapted from
from [3]).
[3]). The
The arrows
arrows denote
denote
nonlinear
nonlinear interactions
interactions between
between and
and within
within natural
natural and
and human
human forcings.
forcings. From:
From: Pielke,
Pielke,
R.A.
R.A. Sr.,
Sr., 2004:
2004: Discussion
Discussion Forum:
Forum: A
A broader
broader perspective
perspective on
on climate
climate change
change is
is needed.
needed.
IGBP
IGBP Newsletter,
Newsletter, 59,
59, 16-19.
16-19.
Resource Specific Impact Level with Respect to
Water Resources - June 2004
Humans are significantly altering the global
climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond
the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC
assessments have been too conservative in
recognizing the importance of these human
climate forcings as they alter regional and
global climate. These assessments have also
not communicated the inability of the models to
accurately forecast the spread of possibilities of
future climate. The forecasts, therefore, do not
provide any skill in quantifying the impact of
different mitigation strategies on the actual
climate responsethat would occur.
¾ The needed focus for the study of climate change and
variability is on the regional and local scales. Global
and zonally-averaged climate metrics would only be
important to the extent that they provide useful
information on these space scales.
¾ Global and zonally-averaged surface temperature trend
assessments, besides having major difficulties in terms
of how this metric is diagnosed and analyzed, do not
provide significant information on climate change and
variability on the regional and local scales.
¾ Global warming is not equivalent to climate change.
Significant, societally important climate change, due to
both natural- and human- climate forcings, can occur
without any global warming or cooling.
¾ The spatial pattern of ocean heat content change is the
appropriate metric to assess climate system heat
changes including global warming.
¾ In terms of climate change and variability on the regional and local
scale, the IPCC Reports, the CCSP Report on surface and
tropospheric temperature trends, and the U.S. National
Assessment have overstated the role of the radiative effect of the
anthropogenic increase of CO2 relative to the role of the diversity
of other human climate climate forcing on global warming, and
more generally, on climate variability and change.
¾ Global and regional climate models have not demonstrated skill at
predicting regional and local climate change and variability on
multi-decadal time scales.
¾ Attempts to significantly influence regional and local-scale climate
based on controlling CO2 emissions alone is an inadequate policy
for this purpose.
¾ A vulnerability paradigm, focused on regional and local societal
and environmental resources of importance, is a more inclusive,
useful, and scientifically robust framework to interact with
policymakers, than is the focus on global multi-decadal climate
predictions which are downscaled to the regional and local scales.
The vulnerability paradigm permits the evaluation of the entire
spectrum of risks associated with different social and
environmental threats, including climate variability and change.
Roger Pielke Sr. Research Websites
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/
http://cires.colorado.edu/science/groups/pielke/
Background Photograph Courtesy
of Mike Hollingshead
http://www.extremeinstability.com/index.htm
PowerPoint Presentation Prepared by
Dallas Jean Staley
Research Assistant and Webmaster
University of Colorado
Boulder, Colorado 80309
[email protected]