|
Post by Pooh on Dec 7, 2012 6:40:47 GMT
msphar: As you should. When i looked at it initially, I was looking for historic data. But now realizing that historic data is not there, present day data has come to mind. So, being you brought it up again, I have bookmarked it. There is historical data beginning Jan 2008. See topic: Medieval Warm Period/Little Ice Age solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=globalwarming&thread=1805&post=85543Jet Stream Analyses and Forecasts at 300 mb squall.sfsu.edu/crws/jetstream.htmlThe " Archives" link (second line in the yellow title bar) takes you to a menu of various regions by month, and animations. However, the detail may not take you earlier than Jan 2008. Not too bad, seeing that the existence of the jet stream was unknown before WW II. Glennkoks responded that a preliminary detection of the jet stream was earlier: "In the 1920s, a Japanese meteorologist, Wasaburo Oishi,[5] detected the jet stream from a site near Mount Fuji. He tracked pilot balloons, also known as pibals (balloons used to determine upper level winds),[6] as they rose into the atmosphere. Oishi's work largely went unnoticed outside Japan.
"I suspect but have no way of proving it that it was his work that gave rise to the incendiary bombs that the Japanese used against the U.S. during WWII. They had to have some idea of the height and speed of the jetstream to set the timers on the bombs they dropped on us." solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=globalwarming&thread=1805&post=85547
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 7, 2012 14:14:18 GMT
Apparently there is a Sudden Stratospheric Warming event in progress. (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_stratospheric_warming for a description) Its like a Rossby wave breaking at the tropopause rather than dissipating. "Met Office observation systems have picked up a minor SSW in the stratosphere over the past few days, suggesting that this may have an impact on the UK.
Jeff Knight, a Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Satellite and other observation data show that there is a minor SSW going on and this is one factor amongst many others which could perpetuate the colder than average conditions we have seen recently.
“It could take anything from a few days to a few weeks if it is going to have an impact. However, it’s consistent with the current 30-day outlook from the Met Office which favours colder than average conditions – albeit with a fair amount of uncertainty.”"metofficenews.wordpress.com/So the polar vortex and associated jets could reverse for a while.
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Dec 8, 2012 11:05:49 GMT
Apparently there is a Sudden Stratospheric Warming event in progress. (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_stratospheric_warming for a description) Its like a Rossby wave breaking at the tropopause rather than dissipating. "Met Office observation systems have picked up a minor SSW in the stratosphere over the past few days, suggesting that this may have an impact on the UK.
Jeff Knight, a Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Satellite and other observation data show that there is a minor SSW going on and this is one factor amongst many others which could perpetuate the colder than average conditions we have seen recently.
“It could take anything from a few days to a few weeks if it is going to have an impact. However, it’s consistent with the current 30-day outlook from the Met Office which favours colder than average conditions – albeit with a fair amount of uncertainty.”"metofficenews.wordpress.com/So the polar vortex and associated jets could reverse for a while. Again thanks for your contribution! Learned new concepts for me, new questions: These natural stratospheric warmings, at different scales and time-lenghts, keep any correlation with solar activity?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 8, 2012 22:51:58 GMT
Apparently there is a Sudden Stratospheric Warming event in progress. (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_stratospheric_warming for a description) Its like a Rossby wave breaking at the tropopause rather than dissipating. "Met Office observation systems have picked up a minor SSW in the stratosphere over the past few days, suggesting that this may have an impact on the UK.
Jeff Knight, a Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Satellite and other observation data show that there is a minor SSW going on and this is one factor amongst many others which could perpetuate the colder than average conditions we have seen recently.
“It could take anything from a few days to a few weeks if it is going to have an impact. However, it’s consistent with the current 30-day outlook from the Met Office which favours colder than average conditions – albeit with a fair amount of uncertainty.”"metofficenews.wordpress.com/So the polar vortex and associated jets could reverse for a while. Again thanks for your contribution! Learned new concepts for me, new questions: These natural stratospheric warmings, at different scales and time-lenghts, keep any correlation with solar activity? Looks like it might - as it affects the meridonality of the jetstreams leading to Rossby waves that project up into the Stratosphere. But you should read: journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAS-3297.1"ABSTRACT The interaction of the 11-yr solar cycle (SC) and the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and their influence on the Northern Hemisphere (NH) polar vortex are studied using idealized model experiments and ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40). In the model experiments, the sensitivity of the NHpolar vortex to imposed easterlies at equatorial/subtropical latitudes over various height ranges is tested to explore the possible influence from zonal wind anomalies associated with the QBO and the 11-yr SC in those regions. The experiments show that the timing of the modeled stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWs) is sensitive to the imposed easterlies at the equator/subtropics. When easterlies are imposed in the equatorial or subtropical upper stratosphere, the onset of the SSWs is earlier. A mechanism is proposed in which zonal wind anomalies in the equatorial/subtropical upper stratosphere associated with the QBO and 11-yr SC either reinforce each other or cancel each other out. When they reinforce, as in Smin–QBO-east (Smin /E) and Smax–QBO-west (Smax /W), it is suggested that the resulting anomaly is large enough to influence the development of the Aleutian high and hence the time of onset of the SSWs. Although highly speculative, this mechanism may help to understand the puzzling observations that major warmings often occur in Smax/W years even though there is no strong waveguide provided by the QBO winds in the lower equatorial stratosphere. The ERA-40 data are used to investigate the QBO and solar signals and to determine whether the observations support the proposed mechanism. Composites of ERA-40 zonally averaged zonal winds based on the QBO (E/W), the SC (min/max), and both (Smin/E, Smin/W, Smax/E, Smax/W) are examined, with emphasis on the Northern Hemisphere winter vortex evolution. The major findings are that QBO/E years are more disturbed than QBO/W years, primarily during early winter. Sudden warmings in Smax years tend to occur later than in Smin years. Midwinter warmings are more likely during Smin/E and Smax/W years, although the latter result is only barely statistically significant at the 75% level. The data show some support for the proposed mechanism, but many more years are required before it can be fully tested." But your head may hurt afterward
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Dec 9, 2012 7:44:08 GMT
Again thanks for your contribution! Learned new concepts for me, new questions: These natural stratospheric warmings, at different scales and time-lenghts, keep any correlation with solar activity? Looks like it might - as it affects the meridonality of the jetstreams leading to Rossby waves that project up into the Stratosphere. But you should read: journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAS-3297.1"ABSTRACT The interaction of the 11-yr solar cycle (SC) and the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) and their influence on the Northern Hemisphere (NH) polar vortex are studied using idealized model experiments and ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40). In the model experiments, the sensitivity of the NHpolar vortex to imposed easterlies at equatorial/subtropical latitudes over various height ranges is tested to explore the possible influence from zonal wind anomalies associated with the QBO and the 11-yr SC in those regions. The experiments show that the timing of the modeled stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWs) is sensitive to the imposed easterlies at the equator/subtropics. When easterlies are imposed in the equatorial or subtropical upper stratosphere, the onset of the SSWs is earlier. A mechanism is proposed in which zonal wind anomalies in the equatorial/subtropical upper stratosphere associated with the QBO and 11-yr SC either reinforce each other or cancel each other out. When they reinforce, as in Smin–QBO-east (Smin /E) and Smax–QBO-west (Smax /W), it is suggested that the resulting anomaly is large enough to influence the development of the Aleutian high and hence the time of onset of the SSWs. Although highly speculative, this mechanism may help to understand the puzzling observations that major warmings often occur in Smax/W years even though there is no strong waveguide provided by the QBO winds in the lower equatorial stratosphere. The ERA-40 data are used to investigate the QBO and solar signals and to determine whether the observations support the proposed mechanism. Composites of ERA-40 zonally averaged zonal winds based on the QBO (E/W), the SC (min/max), and both (Smin/E, Smin/W, Smax/E, Smax/W) are examined, with emphasis on the Northern Hemisphere winter vortex evolution. The major findings are that QBO/E years are more disturbed than QBO/W years, primarily during early winter. Sudden warmings in Smax years tend to occur later than in Smin years. Midwinter warmings are more likely during Smin/E and Smax/W years, although the latter result is only barely statistically significant at the 75% level. The data show some support for the proposed mechanism, but many more years are required before it can be fully tested." But your head may hurt afterward For sure this one is for next course! Thank your!
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 12, 2012 23:55:43 GMT
E. M. Smith gives a nice exposition on the atmosphere and how the drop in UV causes loopy jet streams (read and you'll get to it ) He has a good way with words. See his blog entry here: chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/12/tropopause-rules/(It is worth reading his financial forecasts etc as well)
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 13, 2012 2:16:43 GMT
Smith had his thinking cap on for that one Nautonnier.
That was an excellent read.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 13, 2012 7:45:06 GMT
E. M. Smith gives a nice exposition on the atmosphere and how the drop in UV causes loopy jet streams (read and you'll get to it ) He has a good way with words. See his blog entry here: chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/12/tropopause-rules/(It is worth reading his financial forecasts etc as well) Some time back there was quite a debate with steve and glc on convection which I said was the dominant feature up through the troposphere and radiation played a more dominant role (and minor one) during night time when the sun doesn't shine. One issue though with E.M. Smith's excellent essay; he says the stratosphere IS cooling. In short, the system is dynamic and has a convection driven lower layer, with a radiative driven upper layer. More CO2 means more radiative heat loss, not less. THAT is why the stratosphere has been cooling There were two step changes in stratospheric temp after the El Chichón and Pinatubo volcanoes in 1983/1992 respectively. However, since 1994/1995, the stratosphere has not been cooling but in fact IS warming. I'm not sure E.M. Smith realizes that based on reading his essay. Is the atmosphere simply recovering from those volcanoes is anyone's guess, but the data does not support claim the stratosphere IS cooling for over 17 years.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 13, 2012 17:01:49 GMT
magellan: I noticed that bias as well, but am not sure that the results are not within measurement error. As documented recently, GRACE is having serious problems measureing mass.
I could have told them that as GPS is useful to a point, but to have a reliable guidance system accurate enough to use for planting etc you have to have land based towers.
I think the gist of his article is spot on concerning convection and radiation. And this is why we are not warming as the models had predicted we would.
Now, if we can just get the loud mouthed scientists, who very obviously do not know science, to shut their traps and get back to research.
Who woulda thunk that the 10M-1000M area of the atmosphere had been studied so little. As well as Jet Stream documention. Un frickin believable.
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Dec 13, 2012 17:42:30 GMT
E. M. Smith gives a nice exposition on the atmosphere and how the drop in UV causes loopy jet streams (read and you'll get to it ) He has a good way with words. See his blog entry here: chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/12/tropopause-rules/(It is worth reading his financial forecasts etc as well) Thanks Nautonnier, I am eagerly reading it... and then happened to remember when you first mention Sudden Estratospheric Warming Episodes in the Poles... and well, look at the animation: www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/intraseasonal/temp50anim.gifIs it that?
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Dec 13, 2012 17:43:50 GMT
E. M. Smith gives a nice exposition on the atmosphere and how the drop in UV causes loopy jet streams (read and you'll get to it ) He has a good way with words. See his blog entry here: chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/12/tropopause-rules/(It is worth reading his financial forecasts etc as well) Some time back there was quite a debate with steve and glc on convection which I said was the dominant feature up through the troposphere and radiation played a more dominant role (and minor one) during night time when the sun doesn't shine. One issue though with E.M. Smith's excellent essay; he says the stratosphere IS cooling. In short, the system is dynamic and has a convection driven lower layer, with a radiative driven upper layer. More CO2 means more radiative heat loss, not less. THAT is why the stratosphere has been cooling There were two step changes in stratospheric temp after the El Chichón and Pinatubo volcanoes in 1983/1992 respectively. However, since 1994/1995, the stratosphere has not been cooling but in fact IS warming. I'm not sure E.M. Smith realizes that based on reading his essay. Is the atmosphere simply recovering from those volcanoes is anyone's guess, but the data does not support claim the stratosphere IS cooling for over 17 years. So the troposphere would be cooling... Read that right?
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 13, 2012 17:58:34 GMT
magellan: I noticed that bias as well, but am not sure that the results are not within measurement error. As documented recently, GRACE is having serious problems measureing mass. I could have told them that as GPS is useful to a point, but to have a reliable guidance system accurate enough to use for planting etc you have to have land based towers. I think the gist of his article is spot on concerning convection and radiation. And this is why we are not warming as the models had predicted we would. Now, if we can just get the loud mouthed scientists, who very obviously do not know science, to shut their traps and get back to research. Who woulda thunk that the 10M-1000M area of the atmosphere had been studied so little. As well as Jet Stream documention. Un frickin believable. Oh I think he's right too, just that because of the two volcanoes the column in the atmosphere was rearranged. As it has been 20 years since Pinatubo, the stratosphere hasn't cooled further, and the troposphere hasn't warmed (both being tropical region where the GHE should be most intense), something is seriously wrong with the GHE "theory". Who woulda thunk that the 10M-1000M area of the atmosphere had been studied so little. As well as Jet Stream documention. Un frickin believable.Well, it goes further. That means the Coriolis Effect is not well understood either in that while it is the reason for jet streams (and ocean currents) existence, what influences the CE?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 13, 2012 18:56:30 GMT
magellan: Correct. Lots of theories, but not much actual documentation.
The more one digs with the idea of learning, the more frustrating this becomes. There is really a lot of supposition involved here.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 21, 2012 17:16:39 GMT
We analyze the periods 1878–1944 and 1944–2008. The quasi-stationary wave in the North Atlantic region was stronger and the baroclinity steeper in 1878–1944 than in 1944–2008. The North Atlantic Oscillation Index—as defined by the Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia—was higher in the former period too. We illustrate these statements by maps of sea level pressure and air temperature at the surface. The long-term trends in the North Atlantic Oscillation Index are linked to the trend in sunspot number such that when, in the mean, the sunspot numbers were high (Gleissberg maxima) the trends in the two quantities were parallel; and when the mean sunspot numbers were low (Gleissberg minima) the trends in the North Atlantic Oscillation Index and sunspots were opposite. www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012JD017502.shtmlDog gone it....my source for papers is on vacation. This is most deff one that I want to read.
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Dec 22, 2012 11:44:11 GMT
We analyze the periods 1878–1944 and 1944–2008. The quasi-stationary wave in the North Atlantic region was stronger and the baroclinity steeper in 1878–1944 than in 1944–2008. The North Atlantic Oscillation Index—as defined by the Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia—was higher in the former period too. We illustrate these statements by maps of sea level pressure and air temperature at the surface. The long-term trends in the North Atlantic Oscillation Index are linked to the trend in sunspot number such that when, in the mean, the sunspot numbers were high (Gleissberg maxima) the trends in the two quantities were parallel; and when the mean sunspot numbers were low (Gleissberg minima) the trends in the North Atlantic Oscillation Index and sunspots were opposite. www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012JD017502.shtmlDog gone it....my source for papers is on vacation. This is most deff one that I want to read. Good one! So we should see NAO index moving around mostly negative values for some years... and that would mean a lot as for Ag production and weather extreme events, I fear... Look at the 2012 UK met Office annual briefing, it got some interesting facts as to how extreme -from hot to cold- has been weather in UK recently. metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/infographic-2012-weather-review-of-the-year/
|
|