|
|
Post by glc on Dec 11, 2009 19:28:18 GMT
So your statement each La Nina is weaker than the previous is unfounded.
I didn't say weaker - I said warmer.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceman on Dec 11, 2009 20:50:11 GMT
Magellan,
That was a good article.
I think the points are made so that it contains enough technical detail, describes each position, and which one is a better fit and why.
|
|
|
|
Post by poitsplace on Dec 11, 2009 23:55:35 GMT
I think it'll cool off some. The El Nino has been running quite a long time so I assume it will run out (although if it's being partly driven by solar conditions it will just keep going).
I find it interesting that the Met Office seems to feel that this means a return to warming when we've been in an El Nino for many months and we're STILL no higher than the rest of the 2000's plateau. If we had a repeat of the 2008 La Nina with a similar drop relative to this current temperature...GISS, Hadley, UAH and RSS anomalies would all drop to or below zero.
|
|
|
|
Post by walterdnes on Dec 12, 2009 4:45:11 GMT
I've cobbled together an informal index, namely the average (or sum) of the Nino1+2, Nino3, Nino34, and Nino4 values at www.cpc.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst.for (updated Mondays approx 10:00AM EST / 1500Z). By scaling appropriately, you can roughly match the numbers with the Hadley/GISS/UAH/RSS numbers. The ENSO numbers are a leading indicator by approximately 1 to 3 months. The El Nino appears to be plateauing, so I would guess that February will be the warmest month of 2010, with a downward slope afterwards. The current situation, late 2009, looks similar to late 2006. So expect 2010 to be similar to 2007. No doubt GISS's inflated numbers will bear out Hansen's prediction of a record warm year. The other indices will be similar to their 2007 values. |
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Dec 12, 2009 4:55:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 12, 2009 14:16:25 GMT
Back to the topic of this thread.
I was looking at growlines last night for a bit. I was surprised to see that at least in North America, the grow line of sensative crops has not advanced north.
With that thought in mind, my prediction for 2010 will be that grow lines remain static. That is the best metric of temp that I have found. Mans nature is to expand where possible, so if the warming that has been indicated by had/crut.....Giss etc was real, that expansion would have happened.
Those that use the tree beetle destroying forests in North America as an indicator of temp have forgotten to look at the evolution of that beetle. It is adapting to the cold temps and surviving as it expands its range. I also found that quit interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Dec 12, 2009 18:26:39 GMT
"GISS “raw” station data – before and after" Hard to guess when someone behind the curtain is pulling the strings. Congress needs to investigate this completely and charge the people responsible. |
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 12, 2009 19:58:50 GMT
"GISS “raw” station data – before and after" Hard to guess when someone behind the curtain is pulling the strings. Congress needs to investigate this completely and charge the people responsible. It should but it won't - there is no stomach for a battle with the people behind this. There is no point in forecasting next year's anomalies when they can be adjusted by changing the baseline. The fact that the USHCN / GISS numbers can change fundamentally without specific comment on the effects also shows a lack of professionalism and a failed quality control system. |
|
|
|
Post by thingychambers69 on Dec 12, 2009 20:25:55 GMT
Met Office predicts a BBQ summer. I'll say it will be hot cause the Met Office is never wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimcripwell on Dec 12, 2009 21:50:06 GMT
Another interesting aspect of this forecast is the timing. In previous years, the Met. Office has waited until the middle of January; until they have the data for the previous December. So the forecast is made in the third week of January or so. This time they Met. Office does not even have the data for November, so they are really 2 months ahead of previous years.
Why? The reason is, of course obvious; politics. It is more important to get the forecast out during Copenhagen, rather than have as much data as possible before making the forecast. Clearly the politics is far more important for the Met. Office, rather than the science.
|
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Dec 12, 2009 23:06:07 GMT
Sigurdur - you have noticed one of the most sensitive indicators either for or AGAINST global warming. But it's not necessarily crops. For instance, back in 1989 I wrote that the tree line had stopped inching up Colorado mountains. Now they are inching down as the high altitude winters become more severe.
At the same time I was helping some fruit pickers, and was interested to learn that as late as 1970 the oranges were growing almost as far north as Lake City, Florida. Colder weather has largely pushed los naranjos sud de Ocala. I could continue this with a couple of dozen other examples, but Mother Nature does not lie. Although she is a whimsical old gal at times and full of surprises.
Stranger
|
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 13, 2009 17:50:33 GMT
Interesting. Here in Western Europe we clearly see the opposite.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Dec 13, 2009 21:05:52 GMT
Interesting. Here in Western Europe we clearly see the opposite. Seems western Europe is always last to catch a clue. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 13, 2009 21:20:47 GMT
Interesting. Here in Western Europe we clearly see the opposite. Western Europe is so small that any movement within its confines, unless huge, would not be statistically revelant. If one included all of Europe western and eastern and part of Russia? What happens then? Argentina is our only metric close to Antarctica, and if anything, their grow line has moved north. Looking at soys etc. |
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Dec 14, 2009 0:06:58 GMT
Interesting. Here in Western Europe we clearly see the opposite. Western Europe is so small that any movement within its confines, unless huge, would not be statistically revelant. If one included all of Europe western and eastern and part of Russia? What happens then? Argentina is our only metric close to Antarctica, and if anything, their grow line has moved north. Looking at soys etc. Western Europe was late on the LIA recovery it appears also. Might make perfect sense if it is because of the Atlantic possibily acting in some physical fashion to delay temperature changes. The Atlantic is somewhat pinched at the equator and it is the gateway to the arctic. With little equatorial area its not going to warm or cool perhaps as rapidly as the big ocean. The Pacific is a bit fatter at the equator. You have all these US east coast and UK universities getting the most excited at AGW. . . .took some western folks to point out PDOs to them (Akasofu, Easterbrook, etc). . . .unfortunately only long after they hung their reps on something else. The north Atlantic imight be the tail of the dog, perhaps making it seem more out of sync so maybe folks studying it are kind of studying something decades or maybe even a century out of sync. Even Hansen is reaching for century scale sinks to explain why the oceans aren't warming. Maybe he just has to open his mind a bit more. |
|
