|
Post by acidohm on Sept 2, 2017 7:05:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Sept 2, 2017 7:49:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Sept 2, 2017 15:53:13 GMT
As a decadal mover and shaker of global warming, ENSO seems to be out of steam. Even with the strong positive event of 2015-16, the decadal balance of positive versus negative months is not taking off. The Pause can be seen in this statistic just as well as in the satellite temperature record. If solar activity continues downward, one might expect, at minimum, a repeat of the 1960s-70s, when negative ENSO months outweighed positive months on a decadal basis of 80 to 40. Pessimists might expect an even greater negative balance. The oceanic heat engine does appear to move with the sun, which is probably not surprising to most of us ... although the magnitude of the second half of the Grand Solar maximum versus the first half, is strangely reversed in comparison to solar and temperature metrics. Graph 2 shows the decadal sum of the ENSO stats for all months, positive months and negative months. Comments added Sept. 3: I have not forgotten Icefisher's warning that data for the Pacific prior to the 1920s(?) may be suspect as there were few observations prior to that. That upward trend in El Nino values MAY/Might/Could be the result of 'nefarious' adjustments similar to what has been done with temperature records. However, if this is the case, then they did a p_ss poor job of hiding the cyclical nature of the data. Will we know them by the incompetence of their hired help? Apologies in advance if my insinuations are false. One measure that might judge the value of the insinuation would be an assessment of the strength of that monster 1939 El Nino in comparison to later ones. Icefisher mentioned this one in a long-ago post. ,
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Sept 2, 2017 20:10:25 GMT
That's extremely interesting MOboy!! The contrast between known warm and cool periods is striking!!
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Sept 3, 2017 18:05:29 GMT
That's extremely interesting MOboy!! The contrast between known warm and cool periods is striking!! These comments are additions to my ENSO post. I have not forgotten Icefisher's warning that data for the Pacific prior to the 1920s(?) may be suspect as there were few observations prior to that. That upward trend in El Nino values MAY/Might/Could be the result of 'nefarious' adjustments similar to what has been done with temperature records. However, if this is the case, then they did a p_ss poor job of hiding the cyclical nature of the data. Will we know them by the incompetence of their hired help? Apologies in advance if my insinuations are false. One measure that might judge the value of the insinuation would be an assessment of the strength of that monster 1939 El Nino in comparison to later ones. Icefisher mentioned this one in a long-ago post.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 5, 2017 9:42:03 GMT
Yes prior to 1920 there was no full time US naval command in the Pacific. And that command did not suddenly become robust the minute there was. It became robust with the rise of Japanese naval power. So some time before WWII the US fleet was robust in the Pacific and recording lots of oceanographic data.
However, zero focus was given to ENSO until well into the second half of the 20th century. Everything prior to that is via random observation and modeling that may or may not have hit the pretty small patch in the Pacific that makes up ENSO 3.4. Certainly nothing prior to 1979 comes close to what came after 1979 in terms of measuring ENSO.
+So the 1939 super El Nino, which isn't so super in NOAA terms was so from the perspective of a 90 plus year old purse seiner who is still active in tropical tuna fisheries. I haven't grilled him on specifics except to note that 1939 is the only year in recorded history where a tropical cyclone with tropical storm strength winds ever made landfall on the US west coast. All others have petered out before arriving at the west coast from encountering the cold water of the California current.
My own personal perspective changed with the last El Nino. Having lived through El Ninos as a fisherman since the 1950's the last El Nino was the only the second time n my observation frame of reference that sent quantities of hammerhead sharks to westcoast EEZ waters. Those sharks were missing in the El Ninos of the 1980's and 90's but not the big El Nino of 1957. Since from NOAAs perspective the 1957 El Nino was modeled from other climate data it seems realistic to believe the lack of a climate connection with the 2015 El Nino might have also occurred in 1957. Cold ocean oscillation phases may explain why the climate connection is weak and perhaps the rating on the 1957 El Nino might have suffered because of that lack of connection. Indeed NOAA was shocked by what they were assuming was a strong connection to climate. This may also explain why Theodore missed the call on the 2015 El Nino He is measuring it in a different way than NOAA and measuring it perhaps based on criteria related to the climate connection.
I think what it means is the science here is too young to be reliable. NOAA is still casting around for the cause of ENSO. Perhaps they need to give Theodore a call. One thing for sure they could do a lot worse.
My skepticism hit full bloom when I saw the ocean oscillation connection as I had been intimately dealing with ocean oscillations long before being even aware of the global warming issue. Dr. Syun Akasofu put the pieces together and for the first time I saw a fit that conceivably explain all the abnormalties I have ever observed. Graywolf likes to imagine we are back into the positive PDO phase. But extended divergences fill the climate record. The biggest divergence in the last cold phase, 1945 to 1979 was in fact the 1957 El Nino and you can see that on your chart. It may be the case that the ENSO data isn't manipulated. My recollection is ENSO MEI is based upon a "centered" 30 year ocean baseline. Meaning current data will not be complete for another 15 years. So your charts include an era where sampling was extremely small, followed by an era where ENSO is recontructed using models, followed by the modern era where new methods like satellites supplement information, and the th final era being a running period where the last 15 years of data aren't final. This last problem is identical to the warmist pooh poohing solar control of climate arguing about the divergence of the solar data from the temperature data since the mid 1980 when solar activity peaked. There the problem was that NOAA which favored the theory before the coming of climate change was finding the correlation using 60 years of data smoothing, meaning the data isn't final for 30 years after the most recent data collected. If Theodore is right the coming cooling will pull the last 30 years of data in line. And of course the entire modern warming has occurred in the last 30 years. And the entire divergence in your ENSO data appears to have occurred in the last 15 years.
Cooling baseline data over the next 15 years will move the redlines up ad the greenlines down, and identify the current period as the crossover point, if ENSOs also respond as we see them doing over the past 80 some odd years.
I am also interested in some of the things Theodore only hinted at, next little ice age and such. Ocean oscillations may be only the tip of the iceberg. But since astrometeorology is an empirical science resting on only about 300 years of data pressing him on that is really unfair. Its like asking my 90+ year old fishing friend to opine on ENSO events before he was born.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 7, 2017 5:34:03 GMT
Thinking about this a little more a couple other thoughts come. During the cold ocean oscillations we get northern non-migratory fish species along our coast. We have been seeing good numbers of these now for several years, even during the El Nino. The dominant current is the cold California current. But that current wasn't strong enough or inshore enough to bring those northern species down for several decades. The 80's, 90's, and naughts. In my experience they were here in the 50's and 60's but went missing for several decades.
So what explains the stronger El Nino ocean current effects during these periods of enchance cold water running down the coast? Well the warm water currents off southern California are classified as counter currents. The stronger the main current the stronger the counter currents. Those counter currents are seasonal especially in the late spring and summer when we get dominant southwest winds. And the stronger cooler offshore water seems to allow northern storm tracks to drop further south to bring more south and southeast winds as storms move offshore to the south side of the southern california bight further enhancing the counter currents. The counter currents tend to closer to shore than the dominant California current and makes for a corridor for migratory fish to come into the bight.
This doesn't explain much about climate but it does say something about how little we understand the oceans affect on the climate.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Sept 15, 2017 7:53:23 GMT
I declared a watch about two months ago.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 15, 2017 8:56:59 GMT
The NCEP definition of ENSO and Theo's definition are different. However, Theo has forecast a very distinct La Nina at the end of this decade 2020/2021. As Theo's forecast is that by December this year - three month's time -- there will be global cooling a strong La Nina. In theory a La Nina with less cloud over the equatorial Pacific, is a recharge of heat energy for the Pacific and North Pacific, but if it actually does not receive significant energy due to a weak sun or a Sun whose radiation is biased toward longer wavelengths that do not penetrate into the oceans, it could result instead in radiative loss of heat.
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Sept 15, 2017 11:34:38 GMT
While the AMO is coming off the positive peak.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Sept 18, 2017 5:23:05 GMT
That cold plume is really growing!
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Sept 18, 2017 6:11:42 GMT
That cold plume is really growing! ... and it's coming to get me! There is also a South Atlantic Nina.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 18, 2017 12:22:01 GMT
It is looking colder than just a La Nina. Now imagine if those cold anomalies were instead hot anomalies - do you think that the alarmists and the gullible would be so quiet about it?
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Sept 18, 2017 16:11:30 GMT
Looks waaaay cooler on nullschool.
Nearly 3°c under in 1+2 it reckons...
And definitely not!!!
You can tell when there's not much to report as a warmist cuz our one and only Graywolf goes quiet 😉
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Sept 18, 2017 16:52:08 GMT
That hot stuff coming off the east coast of the US is an atmospheric-SST coupled phenomenon caused by all the hot air escaping from Washington.
|
|