|
Post by dwerth on Dec 14, 2009 0:38:26 GMT
I think that we are going to be warmer than '09, but cooler than '98. The next year depends heavily on the duration of the current el Nino. I believe that its behavior will be the primary driver of temperature in the NH in the next year.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 14, 2009 21:02:13 GMT
So, because there is less ocean near the equator in the Atlantic, the temperature lags more in Europe. Is that US or skeptic reasoning? It seems to be more reasonable that smaller bodies of water nearby would lead to less temperature lag... Maybe "The Great United States of America" has warmed less because of the large inertia of the Pacific Ocean nearby. I can state many more "reasons" which might prove the points you or I want to make, but they are more likely to be incorrect than correct. However, I could understand your point if you consider that the climate in Europe is very much dependent on the temperature in the Northern Atlantic. Maybe more dependent on gulf stream fluctuations than the temperature in the US is on Pacific variability. I'm not completely sure however. I think the reason why (Western) Europe has warmed so much (way more than global average) is because of a pattern change with more dominant warm southwesterlies (strong NAO?) especially in the winter. If the westerlies decrease only a little bit in winter, temperatures will drop substantially in Europe. Maybe the US is getting more often a northerly flow from Canada, I don't know if somebody has data on that? Local climate is not a good indicator for global warming...
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 14, 2009 22:17:57 GMT
So, because there is less ocean near the equator in the Atlantic, the temperature lags more in Europe. Is that US or skeptic reasoning? It seems to be more reasonable that smaller bodies of water nearby would lead to less temperature lag... Maybe "The Great United States of America" has warmed less because of the large inertia of the Pacific Ocean nearby. I can state many more "reasons" which might prove the points you or I want to make, but they are more likely to be incorrect than correct. However, I could understand your point if you consider that the climate in Europe is very much dependent on the temperature in the Northern Atlantic. Maybe more dependent on gulf stream fluctuations than the temperature in the US is on Pacific variability. I'm not completely sure however. I think the reason why (Western) Europe has warmed so much (way more than global average) is because of a pattern change with more dominant warm southwesterlies (strong NAO?) especially in the winter. If the westerlies decrease only a little bit in winter, temperatures will drop substantially in Europe. Maybe the US is getting more often a northerly flow from Canada, I don't know if somebody has data on that? Local climate is not a good indicator for global warming... "I think the reason why (Western) Europe has warmed so much (way more than global average) is because of a pattern change with more dominant warm southwesterlies (strong NAO?) especially in the winter. If the westerlies decrease only a little bit in winter, temperatures will drop substantially in Europe. Maybe the US is getting more often a northerly flow from Canada, I don't know if somebody has data on that? Local climate is not a good indicator for global warming"Or to put it another way - the polar vortex governs the westerlies that run in over UK and western Europe. If the vortex moves south as it did last year then it can get cold as the depressions off the Atlantic run through the Iberian peninsula and across the Balearic islands into the Mediterranean, instead of crossing Ireland and UK into Holland and Northern Germany. Similar cold can occur after an SSW disrupts the flow of the polar vortex with the same knock on to the depressions. If I were looking for a progenitor of real climate change I would be looking at what causes changes to the polar vortices - especially in the NH as there is a lot of land in the NH that could rapidly lose heat.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Dec 15, 2009 0:23:50 GMT
So, because there is less ocean near the equator in the Atlantic, the temperature lags more in Europe. Is that US or skeptic reasoning? Thats a recognition that there may be many forces affecting regional climate that we know very little about. Natural systems usually are very complicated. Since the equatorial region is responsible for most of the warming and cooling it makes sense it could be a contributor just like the southern ocean is recognized as a contributor. As for your statement that western Europe has warmed so much may not matter. After all it was a late comer to the LIA recovery as GLC likes to point out suggesting that instead there was no LIA recovery just some mysterious regional fluctuations instead. So maybe w. eur warming may actually be smaller over the entire multicentennial period. . . .and belated. And no doubt currents play a role also. I would suspect there are plenty of processes that have been ignored by the warmers. Perhaps the US peaked in 1940 or at least so far that seems to fit the temp profile so far. Bottom line those are just maybees I am not going to pick one and suggest you give me a few grand a year to fix it. I'll leave that to the medicine shows.
|
|
|
Post by walterdnes on Dec 15, 2009 4:09:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lamont on Dec 19, 2009 18:34:34 GMT
we just set a Nov record and the global temperature record lags ENSO temperatures by about 6 months, so we're already setting records off the ENSO-neutral to El Nino transition this summer. next summer is going to be warm.
about the only chances of not setting a record next year would be a summertime transition to a very strong la nina (unlikely, apart from 1997-1998, one year of El Nino is usually not sufficient to recharge the Pacific to produce a strong la nina) or a climactically significant volcano. barring the volcano, we should set a new heat record in all measurements (NOAA, NASA, UAH, RSS, etc).
the heat pulse of the El Nino should also lead to arctic warming in 2010 or 2011. and by 2012 we should have experienced both the heating and weather patterns to set a new low in arctic sea ice.
by 2012 SC24 will also be outputting more TSI and the OHC will be rising again.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 19, 2009 19:01:14 GMT
Since the equatorial region is responsible for most of the warming and cooling it makes sense it could be a contributor just like the southern ocean is recognized as a contributor. As for your statement that western Europe has warmed so much may not matter. After all it was a late comer to the LIA recovery as GLC likes to point out suggesting that instead there was no LIA recovery just some mysterious regional fluctuations instead. So maybe w. eur warming may actually be smaller over the entire multicentennial period. . . .and belated. And no doubt currents play a role also. I would suspect there are plenty of processes that have been ignored by the warmers. Can you please explain why the tropical atlantic ocean (with its relatively small area) is most important for warming and cooling? Ah, you -suspect- plenty of processes have been ignored by warmers. Why do you think they are ignored? I hope you don't think that the relatively simple (and often inaccurate) reasons which can be found on this board have not been looked into by "the warmers", if you define "the warmers" as the scientists doing climate research.? If you do, I suggest you start reading some more literature. However, some are "ignored" because research has shown that they do not have a substantial influence relative to other forcings/feedbacks, or that they are not ignored, but listed as "uncertainty". And -of course- there may be things which haven't been found yet. Mankind does not have a precise understanding of nature.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 19, 2009 19:26:04 GMT
we just set a Nov record and the global temperature record lags ENSO temperatures by about 6 months, so we're already setting records off the ENSO-neutral to El Nino transition this summer. next summer is going to be warm. about the only chances of not setting a record next year would be a summertime transition to a very strong la nina (unlikely, apart from 1997-1998, one year of El Nino is usually not sufficient to recharge the Pacific to produce a strong la nina) or a climactically significant volcano. barring the volcano, we should set a new heat record in all measurements (NOAA, NASA, UAH, RSS, etc). the heat pulse of the El Nino should also lead to arctic warming in 2010 or 2011. and by 2012 we should have experienced both the heating and weather patterns to set a new low in arctic sea ice. by 2012 SC24 will also be outputting more TSI and the OHC will be rising again. Even as a "warmer" I'm not so confident about that. If solar variability has any influence on short term climate variability we might be in for some relatively (i.e. deviant from the expected AGW trend) cool weather if the sun remains rather inactive or especially if it becomes more inactive. GCM do not have this feature, because nobody knows exactly how to predict the sun's variability, so they have used a rather "constant" solar forcing I believe. Solar variability has still explained most of the warming of the previous centuries (note: not all), and there are indications of a lull in solar activity (e.g. Livingston and Penn) to a Dalton or Maunder minimum. Current (AGW based) climate science will probably agree that some temporary? relative cooling is likely IF this will happen (TSI and CR-cloud relations might explain some of it). However, it is "a travesty" that we know so little about the influences of solar/space weather on the earth's climate, (maybe also climate in general, because it is such a complicated system) and that we can't predict any major solar/space weather changes ahead, even with so many scientists (astronomers) working on it. Not only for climate, but also for satellite and other electrical devices it might be very important. That we are seeing some unexpected changes in solar activity makes this very interesting times for all science. (Let's ignore all the terrible political and media fuss for a moment.)
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 19, 2009 19:59:31 GMT
we just set a Nov record and the global temperature record lags ENSO temperatures by about 6 months, so we're already setting records off the ENSO-neutral to El Nino transition this summer. next summer is going to be warm. about the only chances of not setting a record next year would be a summertime transition to a very strong la nina (unlikely, apart from 1997-1998, one year of El Nino is usually not sufficient to recharge the Pacific to produce a strong la nina) or a climactically significant volcano. barring the volcano, we should set a new heat record in all measurements (NOAA, NASA, UAH, RSS, etc). the heat pulse of the El Nino should also lead to arctic warming in 2010 or 2011. and by 2012 we should have experienced both the heating and weather patterns to set a new low in arctic sea ice. by 2012 SC24 will also be outputting more TSI and the OHC will be rising again. Even as a "warmer" I'm not so confident about that. If solar variability has any influence on short term climate variability we might be in for some relatively (i.e. deviant from the expected AGW trend) cool weather if the sun remains rather inactive or especially if it becomes more inactive. GCM do not have this feature, because nobody knows exactly how to predict the sun's variability, so they have used a rather "constant" solar forcing I believe. Solar variability has still explained most of the warming of the previous centuries (note: not all), and there are indications of a lull in solar activity (e.g. Livingston and Penn) to a Dalton or Maunder minimum. Current (AGW based) climate science will probably agree that some temporary? relative cooling is likely IF this will happen (TSI and CR-cloud relations might explain some of it). However, it is "a travesty" that we know so little about the influences of solar/space weather on the earth's climate, (maybe also climate in general, because it is such a complicated system) and that we can't predict any major solar/space weather changes ahead, even with so many scientists (astronomers) working on it. Not only for climate, but also for satellite and other electrical devices it might be very important. That we are seeing some unexpected changes in solar activity makes this very interesting times for all science. (Let's ignore all the terrible political and media fuss for a moment.) I totally agree with you. What is happening now is a great learning experience. When one looks at major climate shifts in the past, they are easily seen, but no one really knows why this happens. I am mainly referring to D-O events, Bond events etc. So very very much to learn. WE need to get over this fetish with co2. co2 is squat in the whole climate picture. It is a very realiable indicator of past temps as it rises AFTER the temp does, not before. Sure, it may help maintain a bit of warmth, but it certainly does not PROVIDE any warmth in and off itself. I really do think Svensmark is onto something and I am looking at his theory with an open mind. The main reason I have an open mind is that the little that I do know about climate only shows how much no ONE knows about the climate in whole. So......exciting as all get out for me as I am open to suggestions/papers/thoughts...and esp out of the AGW box ideas.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 19, 2009 21:18:57 GMT
Well, the CO2 "fetish" has triggered a lot of climate funding, and meanwhile many things are discovered, so we have a much better understanding of climate, even IF CO2 wouldn't matter at all, which is -I think- is not likely.
A friend of mine is working on the link between the stratosphere (including sudden stratospheric warming) and the polar vortex and NAO oscillation, because of the importance for the weather in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 19, 2009 21:40:04 GMT
And we need the climate funding....there is no question about that.
I look forward to the publication of your friends findings.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 20, 2009 11:30:34 GMT
Well, the CO2 "fetish" has triggered a lot of climate funding, and meanwhile many things are discovered, so we have a much better understanding of climate, even IF CO2 wouldn't matter at all, which is -I think- is not likely. A friend of mine is working on the link between the stratosphere (including sudden stratospheric warming) and the polar vortex and NAO oscillation, because of the importance for the weather in Europe. Unfortunately, the climate funding only exists as long as the research is to show that CO 2 is the driver for climate change/calamity. Try to get funding for a paper that supports Svensmark or Landscheidt hypotheses. This bias exists in all research areas in all subjects - if you can add CO 2 and climate change you will get funding.
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Dec 20, 2009 14:41:56 GMT
The coming year's weather will be well within the range of natural variability. The temperatures will be, as well.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 20, 2009 16:33:12 GMT
I'll let you know Sigurdur, three are now going through the peer review process, one has been accepted I think.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Dec 20, 2009 18:38:20 GMT
We've already had a layer of global warming here on the valley floor of California. Very unusual. We just don't get snow down this low.
|
|