|
Post by icefisher on Sept 1, 2018 21:48:10 GMT
On June 11, I posted the following….. “NOAA's prediction totally missed the (2017-2018) La Nina that was as I predicted. (In fact, they had predicted an El Nino.) We are now at the end of that prediction, so let me extend the prediction through the end of 2018. Like NOAA's current prediction, my model says the ONI’s will increase toward El Nino levels (ONI of 0.5) over the next several weeks. But while NOAA says the El Nino levels will hold through the end of 2018, I see a peak in late August/ early September and a decline lasting through year end.” The ONI climbed to 0.5 as both NOAA and I had foreseen. There has been a recent decline. But I’ve decided to drop my prediction of a decline through the end of 2018 based on further evidence. That evidence is an insistence by Joe Bastardi in his recent daily updates that an El Nino is coming this year and I don’t like to be on the opposite side of Bastardi’s predictions. So I’m going to stand aside and see what happens. I think you should stick to your guns Duwayne, but you have explained it fairly. I would say so also. Simple fact is all current prediction skill on ENSO was built during one ocean regime. California is strongly affected by ENSO because the ocean currents that feed it at the equator run southward along our coast. It feeds directly out of the zone of the ocean that defines the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. I am strongly favoring the idea that El Ninos in the 1950's and 60's (despite the dominance of La Ninas in that ocean regime) have been strongly underestimated by models. I don't think one can look at the 1950's to get a flavor either. The solar maximum in 1957 was the strongest one in the entire solar record. Now we are in the midst of a solar event not seen for at least a 100 years, if not 200 or 300. We also have to be aware that the zone in the ocean that defines ENSO has changed since it was first established quite possibly because of ocean regime changes. The 2015 El Nino hit California hard in the summer of 2014 but wasn't reflected in Nino 3.4 until late fall 2014. This year we have very warm water again but its a lot different as its localized to southern California and upper baja california unlike 2014 where it was coast wide.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Sept 1, 2018 22:07:08 GMT
Seems that Joe will get his east-central pacific warm-water modoki event, whether or not it "technically" meets the 0.5C+ for 6 mths or more threshold. I don't think he ever suggested that it was going to be big ... just warm and central.
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Oct 2, 2018 23:04:56 GMT
There will be no El Nino (or La Nina for that matter) in 2018 and there hasn't been either since 2009-2010 (El Nino) and 2010-2011 (La Nina) which I forecasted from 2006.
There is no such thing as ENSO-Neutral, as I have been saying for years.
Regarding ENSO, I will remind everyone again what El Nino and La Nina truly is:
These ENSO events are solar-planetary forced and occur every 10-11 years. The last ENSO, which I forecasted, was a El Nino in mid-2009 that was followed by a La Nina in 2010-11.
Think of ENSO as climate change in action. You are seeing what amounts to a large scale variability in the circulatory system, and when you take out ENSO you are removing a climate mechanism where the thermal/kinetic exchange to equilibrium is achieved.
ENSO is externally forced through the polar annular modes/AAM, and ENSO is climate change in action. What confounds the computer modellers about ENSO's cycle is that the thermodynamic response to perturbation is not linear.
ENSO responds to fluctuations by the external forcing from the Sun.
Understand at the dynamics of ENSO and what forces it.
ENSO is forced by the Sun externally because the strength of the trade winds, that's Walker Cell dynamics, and the AAM integral come before ENSO SST variation.
Now, the atmosphere is the less energetic body, so by definition there has to be an 'external' perturbation present.
Evidence of such Solar forcing exists and the relationship is significant:
Corotating coronal holes of the Sun induce fluctuations of the solar wind speed in the vicinity of the Earth. These fluctuations of solar wind speed are closely correlated with geomagnetic activity and the resultant geophysical climate and weather effects on Earth. It is basic to Astrometeorology. That is what I do.
Now, solar wind speeds have been observed and monitored by orbiting Earth satellites since the mid-1960s. The long-term series of solar wind speed clearly reveals enhanced amplitudes at the solar rotation period of 27.3 days and at its harmonics 13.6 and 9.1 days.
The amplitude series are modulated by a quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) that has a period of 1.75a (that's 21 months) as bispectral analysis reveals.
A 1.75a QBO component is also present in the equatorial, zonal wind of the stratosphere at 30 hPa, in addition to the well-known QBO component at the period 2.4a (at 29 months.)
The solar wind QBO influences the stratospheric QBO, the global electric circuit, and cloud cover by modulation of ionospheric electric fields, cosmic ray flux and particle precipitation.
And the series of solar wind speed fluctuations are bandpass-filtered at the period 1.75a. The filtered series provide the amplitude of the solar wind QBO as function of time.
The maxima of the solar wind QBO series correlate with those of the ENSO Index. Analysis confirms that the solar wind QBO helps to trigger ENSO activity.
The solar forcing of ENSO is done by changes in meridional flux through the NAM/SAM and that ties directly right back into planetary wave action.
In volume 36, issue 17, of the September 2009 Geophysical Research Letters, Rodrigo Caballero and Bruce T. Anderson state that:
"Stationary planetary waves are excited in the mid-latitudes, propagate equatorward and are absorbed in the subtropics. The impact these waves have on the tropical climate has yet to be fully unraveled.
"Previous work has shown that interannual variability of zonal-mean stationary eddy stress is well correlated with interannual variability in Hadley cell strength. A separate line of research has shown that changes in midlatitude planetary waves local to the Pacific strongly affect ENSO variability.
"Here, we show that the two phenomena are in fact closely connected. Interannual variability of wave activity flux impinging on the subtropical central Pacific affects the local Hadley cell. The associated changes in subtropical subsidence affect the surface pressure field and wind stresses, which in turn affect ENSO.
"As a result, a winter with an anomalously weak Hadley cell tends to be followed a year later by an El Niño event."
Moreover, there is a link from the Pacific Meridional Mode to ENSO, as Ping Chang and Link Ji from Texas A&M University at College Station, Texas wrote in late 2008:
"The occurrence of a boreal spring phenomenon referred to as the Pacific Meridional Model (MM) is shown to be intimately linked to the development of El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) in a long simulation of a coupled model.
The MM, characterized by an anomalous north–south SST gradient and anomalous surface circulation in the northeasterly trade regime with maximum variance in boreal spring, is shown to be inherent to thermodynamic ocean–atmosphere coupling in the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) latitude, and the MM existence is independent of ENSO.
"The thermodynamic coupling enhances the persistence of the anomalous winds in the deep tropics, forcing energetic equatorially trapped oceanic waves to occur in the central western Pacific, which in turn initiate an ENSO event. The majority of ENSO events in both nature and the coupled model are preceded by MM events."
Now, the reasons why NOAA/NWS and every other conventional climate center on Earth, along with climatologists and their computer models cannot forecast ENSO is that their computer models are shit.
ENSO is an *astronomically-caused* climate event. And clearly the algorithms in their overblown and error-filled computer models are not programmed to understand ENSO. That is why they cannot forecast it and every single year they come out with forecasts on ENSO and they fail. They did it last time when I forecasted the 2009-2011 ENSO three years in advance, from 2006.
Rather, what conventional modellers do is that they take an initial condition and then they apply their own perturbation theories to attempt to get a future projection - and those projections are always wrong, wrong, wrong.
In truth, in the real world of climate, ENSO is NOT an internally driven or a chaotic phenomenon.
ENSO is a solar and planetary magnetically-driven event that forces upper stratospheric U-flow/QBO and you can witness the results and impact on the N/S annular modes.
Reports from the CFS project on the 2011 La Nina that I forecasted fell to -4C because those expensive computer models are founded on absolutely useless methods on the given boundary conditions that they use to project from.
It means that they are essentially using a system dynamic that *drives* the system state, rather than the other way around. They have it ass backwards.
For instance, if you subtract ENSO, then you also have to subtract the poleward migration of Hadley cells/expansion of the Ferrel cells seen since solar year 1976.
Now, once you do that, you will lose the 3-4 percent decrease that's observed in tropical cloud cover. Therefore, you lose essentially all of the warming that has occurred since the 1970s and that relates to about 3.5W/m^2 of loss since 1982.
NOAA/NWS and every other climate forecast center do not successfully produce accurate seasonal forecasts.
Again, that's because their models are only programmed to the general governing equations that are put into them.
For years now, with all that money they've wasted, the computer climate modeling world is a total disaster and they have to know it after busting every season, every year, year in and year out.
Again, there will be no ENSO until earliest 2019-2020. We will see signatures by mid-2019 when things really begin to get interesting, but by 2021-2022 there will a full blown La Nina, the first under this new climate of global cooling.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Oct 12, 2018 15:31:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Oct 12, 2018 20:01:21 GMT
So if enso develops april to june, and peaks october to feb (typically), this current slightly positive anomaly so far, may not be expected to develop into nino territory?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Oct 12, 2018 22:19:05 GMT
Tiny Bubbles (massive actually) ... Rising From the Depths? ARGO June 2018 west to east cross-section taken at 0 S and 1 N Latitude from 0 to 500 Meters Depth May 2009 with Index Map
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Oct 13, 2018 9:55:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Oct 14, 2018 16:51:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 23, 2018 21:27:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 23, 2018 23:24:10 GMT
Your present observation is correct, as I see it.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Nov 24, 2018 6:23:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 24, 2018 9:42:14 GMT
Indeed, the pressure causes the winds or vice versa - but either way it doesn't look like a major ENSO event in the near future. I seem to remember someone saying that sometime ago
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Nov 24, 2018 12:54:21 GMT
Indeed, the pressure causes the winds or vice versa - but either way it doesn't look like a major ENSO event in the near future. I seem to remember someone saying that sometime ago IIRC, that was me .... I think.
|
|
|
ENSO 2018
Nov 24, 2018 18:03:51 GMT
via mobile
Post by acidohm on Nov 24, 2018 18:03:51 GMT
Indeed, the pressure causes the winds or vice versa - but either way it doesn't look like a major ENSO event in the near future. I seem to remember someone saying that sometime ago Pressure causes winds Naut surely??
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 24, 2018 18:29:19 GMT
Indeed, the pressure causes the winds or vice versa - but either way it doesn't look like a major ENSO event in the near future. I seem to remember someone saying that sometime ago Pressure causes winds Naut surely?? I give you a minor convective eddy rising from the surface of the sea, the cooler drier air is drawn in to replace the rising warm air is warmed and rises and more cooler drier air is drawn in to replace the rising warm air ... as the convective current builds there is a Coriolis effect and the winds start to circle the updraft.... The updraft has caused a drop in pressure into which the drier air is drawn. Eventually it can be given a number and then a name and destroy whole cities.
|
|