|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 20, 2021 5:10:07 GMT
Minus 0.8 C in one month. What causes that kind of change? My theory, supported by a quick scan through recent surface winds going back to April on nullschool. Blocking around Greenland which produced anomalous cool conditions NW Europe, also held Atlantic depressions to the west Atlantic, ie, off coast of labrador. This produced an increase in wind velocity anomalies in the region, the extra pushing of surface waters promoted upwelling of deeper, cooler water. OK, not really my theory, there's a paper out there on the 2015 cold blob that pretty much states surface winds as responsible. I just checked that recent conditions allow this idea to be copy/pasted from historic ones. Salinity could be checked once argo updates which would be a bit of a wait..... A cold patch has developed in this area about this time of year every year that I've been watching, perhaps less so last year.... It has been strengthening earlier then would seem logical if Greenland meltwater is responsible tho the Atlantic bound labrador current was often cooler and appeared to be feeding the cold patch, as if it was intruding into the Atlantic more then following the newfoundland Coast as its traditionally described as doing. In research I found that freshwater entering Hudson Bay accounts for the greater proportion of all freshwater entering the Arctic circle, Hudson Bay discharges to the lab current. I could not however find records for the rivers entering Hudson Bay, so couldn't verify any changes in volumn of water entering the bay. There does appear to be some disruption to normal current flows perhaps as the gulf stream south of newfoundland has been anomalously warm the past 6/7 years. Here I think? it's been proposed its not discharging North as efficiently as usual, the waters are effectively trapping in situ and the heat isn't being transported north. I have not seen any documentation describing the phenomena. Currently as others here have pointed out, heat transport from the gulf stream appears to be heading more south east across mid latitudes then normal. This pattern, along with the current cold anomalies stretching from newfoundland to NW Europe, and a band of warmer waters at the southern edge of the Arctic, are forming a warm,cool,warm tripole pattern. Last time such a well defined tripole occurred was 2010. This tripole pattern at this time of year as an indication for a coming colder European winter. Reasons for this I'm not so sure. As with much of long-range forecasting, hindsight and accumulation of data allows us to see what happened before notable events and then suggest these are indicators, but that doesn't mean we understand why, or that they're definitive. Possibly, weather patterns existing now (blocking, until recently) show their hand, so as I described above, winds may be cooling the NW Atlantic. These conditions continuing into winter produce cold. Or, is it the sea surface temp anomalies altering the atmospheric state? I've seen forecasters confidently state unlikeliness of certain conditions arising based on ssta patterns and be right. Or, is it a bit of a feedback system. Ultimately, it all comes back to chaos, a slight tip one way or another in one metric can cause a cascade effect on other processes for which there is no possible mathematical equation to resolve it. This is one of the reasons I kinda stepped back from investigating every detail in the past year or so as it is a huge rabbit hole! It's almost more fruitful to step back a little a observed the processes over time to get an intuition. Being human however, and with some of these processes taking as much as 60 years, the whole thing can make oneself feel a little small and insignificant.....which is a little different to the mindset of a warmist where we're all powerful and everything is very immediate. In fact come to think of it, they really are perceiving this whole thing profoundly wrong and too linear. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 20, 2021 15:43:05 GMT
As for the current SST drop 45-65N. I remember a guy who made the argument that various N Atlantic ups and downs was based on lunar gravitational pulses. Trying to remember his name. But the following is a screen grab I took at the time.  |
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 20, 2021 19:49:30 GMT
There does seem to be a tendency to attribute more to 'humanity' than can be justified. People do not realize how huge the world is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 20, 2021 23:39:31 GMT
Minus 0.8 C in one month. What causes that kind of change? My theory, supported by a quick scan through recent surface winds going back to April on nullschool. Blocking around Greenland which produced anomalous cool conditions NW Europe, also held Atlantic depressions to the west Atlantic, ie, off coast of labrador. This produced an increase in wind velocity anomalies in the region, the extra pushing of surface waters promoted upwelling of deeper, cooler water. OK, not really my theory, there's a paper out there on the 2015 cold blob that pretty much states surface winds as responsible. I just checked that recent conditions allow this idea to be copy/pasted from historic ones. Salinity could be checked once argo updates which would be a bit of a wait..... A cold patch has developed in this area about this time of year every year that I've been watching, perhaps less so last year.... It has been strengthening earlier then would seem logical if Greenland meltwater is responsible tho the Atlantic bound labrador current was often cooler and appeared to be feeding the cold patch, as if it was intruding into the Atlantic more then following the newfoundland Coast as its traditionally described as doing. In research I found that freshwater entering Hudson Bay accounts for the greater proportion of all freshwater entering the Arctic circle, Hudson Bay discharges to the lab current. I could not however find records for the rivers entering Hudson Bay, so couldn't verify any changes in volumn of water entering the bay. There does appear to be some disruption to normal current flows perhaps as the gulf stream south of newfoundland has been anomalously warm the past 6/7 years. Here I think? it's been proposed its not discharging North as efficiently as usual, the waters are effectively trapping in situ and the heat isn't being transported north. I have not seen any documentation describing the phenomena. Currently as others here have pointed out, heat transport from the gulf stream appears to be heading more south east across mid latitudes then normal. This pattern, along with the current cold anomalies stretching from newfoundland to NW Europe, and a band of warmer waters at the southern edge of the Arctic, are forming a warm,cool,warm tripole pattern. Last time such a well defined tripole occurred was 2010. This tripole pattern at this time of year as an indication for a coming colder European winter. Reasons for this I'm not so sure. As with much of long-range forecasting, hindsight and accumulation of data allows us to see what happened before notable events and then suggest these are indicators, but that doesn't mean we understand why, or that they're definitive. Possibly, weather patterns existing now (blocking, until recently) show their hand, so as I described above, winds may be cooling the NW Atlantic. These conditions continuing into winter produce cold. Or, is it the sea surface temp anomalies altering the atmospheric state? I've seen forecasters confidently state unlikeliness of certain conditions arising based on ssta patterns and be right. Or, is it a bit of a feedback system. Ultimately, it all comes back to chaos, a slight tip one way or another in one metric can cause a cascade effect on other processes for which there is no possible mathematical equation to resolve it. This is one of the reasons I kinda stepped back from investigating every detail in the past year or so as it is a huge rabbit hole! It's almost more fruitful to step back a little a observed the processes over time to get an intuition. Being human however, and with some of these processes taking as much as 60 years, the whole thing can make oneself feel a little small and insignificant.....which is a little different to the mindset of a warmist where we're all powerful and everything is very immediate. In fact come to think of it, they really are perceiving this whole thing profoundly wrong and too linear. Good post, Acid. In particular ... Doesn't stop some from drawing conclusions and positing them as fact. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 21, 2021 2:03:01 GMT
There does seem to be a tendency to attribute more to 'humanity' than can be justified. People do not realize how huge the world is.
And it is but a drop when compared to the sun. |
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jun 21, 2021 2:31:22 GMT
The problem I have with chaos theory and climate is there are too many cyclical patterns. We have the seasons, Milankovich Cycles, AMO's, PDO's and probably an endless other number of cycles and feedbacks we do not know about.
I don't doubt we are in a warmer pattern. I was around in the 1970's. But the same factors that have driven our climate long before the Industrial Revolution are still doing so. And those cycles will certainly repeat themselves. A little bit of Chaos only makes it harder to forecast.
|
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 21, 2021 5:04:40 GMT
The problem I have with chaos theory and climate is there are too many cyclical patterns. We have the seasons, Milankovich Cycles, AMO's, PDO's and probably an endless other number of cycles and feedbacks we do not know about. I don't doubt we are in a warmer pattern. I was around in the 1970's. But the same factors that have driven our climate long before the Industrial Revolution are still doing so. And those cycles will certainly repeat themselves. A little bit of Chaos only makes it harder to forecast. The elegance of chaos is that if, for example, you run a random equation infinitely (as discovered almost at the root of our understanding as to what we now call chaos is) pockets of stability...or order occur. It's complicated but worth looking into, books by Gleick are good. Naut pointed out to me years ago that strange attractors are very important to climate. A system can orbit an attractor, essential the chaotic processes attract to certain values creating stability, but if inputs exceed or reduce to certain levels, they flip to new attractors and orbit in a new plane. It is really worth reading into how our understanding of chaos came about, its very revealing and applicable in a well reasoned way to much of the world around us. (Assuming you haven't, which I maybe I'm assuming wrong?) |
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 21, 2021 14:11:37 GMT
The problem I have with chaos theory and climate is there are too many cyclical patterns. We have the seasons, Milankovich Cycles, AMO's, PDO's and probably an endless other number of cycles and feedbacks we do not know about. I don't doubt we are in a warmer pattern. I was around in the 1970's. But the same factors that have driven our climate long before the Industrial Revolution are still doing so. And those cycles will certainly repeat themselves. A little bit of Chaos only makes it harder to forecast. There are differences between patterns based on actual physical behaviors and those based on 'emergent behaviors'. An orbit around a new 'strange attractor' is an emergent behavior and is "chaotic"; an actual physical orbit - e.g. a Milanković cycle - is a physical instantiation of chaos theory and is itself an emergent behavior. That made sense when I typed it out a few hours ago - not so sure now  |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jun 21, 2021 14:56:55 GMT
The problem I have with chaos theory and climate is there are too many cyclical patterns. We have the seasons, Milankovich Cycles, AMO's, PDO's and probably an endless other number of cycles and feedbacks we do not know about. I don't doubt we are in a warmer pattern. I was around in the 1970's. But the same factors that have driven our climate long before the Industrial Revolution are still doing so. And those cycles will certainly repeat themselves. A little bit of Chaos only makes it harder to forecast. There are differences between patterns based on actual physical behaviors and those based on 'emergent behaviors'. An orbit around a new 'strange attractor' is an emergent behavior and is "chaotic"; an actual physical orbit - e.g. a Milanković cycle - is a physical instantiation of chaos theory and is itself an emergent behavior. That made sense when I typed it out a few hours ago - not so sure now I agree with that assessment Naut. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 21, 2021 16:05:55 GMT
The problem I have with chaos theory and climate is there are too many cyclical patterns. We have the seasons, Milankovich Cycles, AMO's, PDO's and probably an endless other number of cycles and feedbacks we do not know about. I don't doubt we are in a warmer pattern. I was around in the 1970's. But the same factors that have driven our climate long before the Industrial Revolution are still doing so. And those cycles will certainly repeat themselves. A little bit of Chaos only makes it harder to forecast. There are differences between patterns based on actual physical behaviors and those based on 'emergent behaviors'. An orbit around a new 'strange attractor' is an emergent behavior and is "chaotic"; an actual physical orbit - e.g. a Milanković cycle - is a physical instantiation of chaos theory and is itself an emergent behavior. That made sense when I typed it out a few hours ago - not so sure now Chaos - A state of utter confusion. Chaos Theory - An attempt to impose order (or at least, explanation) on chaos. "Most" events deemed chaotic are probably extreme outliers of otherwise imperfectly known distributions. And thus, a lack of data, or an inability to extract an event from the data stream. Even engineers occasionaly have this problem. Key in on Toba, the 1700 Cascadia Event, and the unfortunate intersection of Earth's orbit with the occasional large space body. Now THAT is chaos ... referring more to the reaction to the event, than the event itself. This does not exclude the possibility of a new "dark" attractor ... although one could question the term "new". AND, in the religious realm. if GOD ever said "Now that's enough!", and pulled the plug on the experiment, then that too would be chaos, although short lived.  I think I have just been bannished from most public media. |
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 21, 2021 17:37:15 GMT
There are differences between patterns based on actual physical behaviors and those based on 'emergent behaviors'. An orbit around a new 'strange attractor' is an emergent behavior and is "chaotic"; an actual physical orbit - e.g. a Milanković cycle - is a physical instantiation of chaos theory and is itself an emergent behavior. That made sense when I typed it out a few hours ago - not so sure now Chaos - A state of utter confusion. Chaos Theory - An attempt to impose order (or at least, explanation) on chaos. "Most" events deemed chaotic are probably extreme outliers of otherwise imperfectly known distributions. And thus, a lack of data, or an inability to extract an event from the data stream. Even engineers occasionaly have this problem. Key in on Toba, the 1700 Cascadia Event, and the unfortunate intersection of Earth's orbit with the occasional large space body. Now THAT is chaos ... referring more to the reaction to the event, than the event itself. This does not exclude the possibility of a new "dark" attractor ... although one could question the term "new". AND, in the religious realm. if GOD ever said "Now that's enough!", and pulled the plug on the experiment, then that too would be chaos, although short lived. I think I have just been bannished from most public media. Missouri, its a bit like you were in a job where everything was organised and neatly produced 😊 |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 21, 2021 18:58:45 GMT
Chaos - A state of utter confusion. Chaos Theory - An attempt to impose order (or at least, explanation) on chaos. "Most" events deemed chaotic are probably extreme outliers of otherwise imperfectly known distributions. And thus, a lack of data, or an inability to extract an event from the data stream. Even engineers occasionaly have this problem. Key in on Toba, the 1700 Cascadia Event, and the unfortunate intersection of Earth's orbit with the occasional large space body. Now THAT is chaos ... referring more to the reaction to the event, than the event itself. This does not exclude the possibility of a new "dark" attractor ... although one could question the term "new". AND, in the religious realm. if GOD ever said "Now that's enough!", and pulled the plug on the experiment, then that too would be chaos, although short lived. I think I have just been bannished from most public media. Missouri, its a bit like you were in a job where everything was organised and neatly produced 😊 I think there is some truth in that. The world of numbers is like that. That's why accountants wear glasses.  And those numbers that lie outside of the standard confidence intervals are always the most interesting. Rarely, variations explode, and it is generally noticible before you have any numbers. It would be much more exciting to be "on call" when something that "will be" numbers has exploded and the powers that be want to know just what the Hell has just happened, and the operational order is "Fix It". |
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 22, 2021 13:41:03 GMT
Engineers do not have problems they have the occasional challenges....  |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 22, 2021 16:46:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 22, 2021 18:36:44 GMT
Engineers do not have problems they have the occasional challenges.... We plumbers never have problems, only solutions 🤣 |
|
I think I have just been bannished from most public media.
And those numbers that lie outside of the standard confidence intervals are always the most interesting. Rarely, variations explode, and it is generally noticible before you have any numbers. It would be much more exciting to be "on call" when something that "will be" numbers has exploded and the powers that be want to know just what the Hell has just happened, and the operational order is "Fix It". 