|
|
Post by thermostat on Aug 22, 2011 3:12:09 GMT
Thermostat: I used to think the same thing. Now that I understand climate better, I am almost certain that ENSO does drive climate. Since ENSO cycles up and down, it's affect on temperatures also goes positive and negative. No, your assertion is most assuredly false. ENSO affects weather, not climate. I think I'm inclined to agree, ENSO affects weather, not climate. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 22, 2011 3:15:31 GMT
Thermostat: I used to think the same thing. Now that I understand climate better, I am almost certain that ENSO does drive climate. Since ENSO cycles up and down, it's affect on temperatures also goes positive and negative. No, your assertion is most assuredly false. ENSO affects weather, not climate. commonsense: No, when you look at the big picture, ENSO affects climate. You have to understand that the change in the Pacific is far reaching, and the most dominant on earth. Weather is a day to day thing, climate is a year to year thing. The implications of ENSO drive large scale regional changes that result in global changes. IF its effect was not so large and dispersed, I would agree that it is only a weather phenominum. The NAO causes snow in Tibet.......that is what opened my eyes to investigate what the ENSO does to world wide climate. It is not nearly as cut and dried as I had been led to believe. |
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Aug 22, 2011 3:40:33 GMT
semantics surely.
|
|
|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 22, 2011 3:49:30 GMT
Since ENSO cycles up and down, it's affect on temperatures also goes positive and negative. No, your assertion is most assuredly false. ENSO affects weather, not climate. commonsense: No, when you look at the big picture, ENSO affects climate. You have to understand that the change in the Pacific is far reaching, and the most dominant on earth. Weather is a day to day thing, climate is a year to year thing. The implications of ENSO drive large scale regional changes that result in global changes. IF its effect was not so large and dispersed, I would agree that it is only a weather phenominum. The NAO causes snow in Tibet.......that is what opened my eyes to investigate what the ENSO does to world wide climate. It is not nearly as cut and dried as I had been led to believe. Your contention that climate is a year to year thing is too short a period. Climate describes changes that take place over decades and centuries. All of a particular year's ENSO effects will have faded into the background by then. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 22, 2011 4:18:22 GMT
commonsense: No, when you look at the big picture, ENSO affects climate. You have to understand that the change in the Pacific is far reaching, and the most dominant on earth. Weather is a day to day thing, climate is a year to year thing. The implications of ENSO drive large scale regional changes that result in global changes. IF its effect was not so large and dispersed, I would agree that it is only a weather phenominum. The NAO causes snow in Tibet.......that is what opened my eyes to investigate what the ENSO does to world wide climate. It is not nearly as cut and dried as I had been led to believe. Your contention that climate is a year to year thing is too short a period. Climate describes changes that take place over decades and centuries. All of a particular year's ENSO effects will have faded into the background by then. Where did you learn such fluff? Only a non-forecaster could say such a thing. Looks like you've placed the climate outside the Earth so that you can then justify the word to mean just about anything that has nothing to do with the weather? Are you smoking your shoes man? |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 22, 2011 4:27:10 GMT
The reason the NOAA, NWS, and CFS Enso forecast are not good is simply because they are reactionary IMO. JAMSTEC on the other hand has been outling a double dip La Nina from ealry this year, March IIRC. I geuss this is hardly surprising given all the latest info regarding how bad the models actually are in regards to climate. It's amazing that in the year 2011, centers like NOAA/NWS and many other METs still do not understand ENSO. This La Nina has effects while it wanes. It's not a 'double-dip' but the last vestiages of ENSO, which we've experienced since mid-2009 with first El Nino, then, the La Nina I forecasted to follow. The models are bad because you don't have many true forecasters actually making forecasts. Meanwhile, the talking heads go on and on about the climate as if it really hasn't nothing to do with weather (?) and with total reliance on models, well, there's your Alice in Wonderland mentality. Everyone has an opinion as if they are experienced forecasters and yet you will strain hard to find those who actually do forecast climate and weather with any accuracy or consistency because most are unable to forecast outside of 5 days much less than two weeks, monthly or seasonal. But that doesn't stop many of them from falling over themselves trying to get attention. Not much progress has been made over the years because of AGW make-believe and reliance on ever-more expensive and inaccurate computer models along with the very bad forecasting, which is primarily guessing based on faulty models. Until we get back to proper forecasting - using what actually works in the real world - expect to hear more from the bozos who pretend that they can forecast when it is obvious to anyone with sense that they cannot. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Aug 22, 2011 15:20:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Aug 22, 2011 17:19:11 GMT
Steve, excuse me for interrupting all the fun you're having instead of working, but ... Have you read that article? Or checked it for veracity? or thought about the statistical methods being employed to get the results they are trying to put forward? Or even what it would mean that there was an above average showfall last winter that contributed to some of the so called billion dollar incidents? Or how much damage it takes to have a billion dollar incident today as opposed to 10 years ago, or 20 years ago? When talking F5 tornadoes, the year 1974 in this article really makes anything since look rather insignificant: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F5_and_EF5_tornadoesSorry, I could't resist chiming in on your profit squandering fun  . |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Aug 22, 2011 17:28:21 GMT
slh1234
I posted it because it is a list of weather events in 2011 (which seems to accord with my memory of reports from the US) that probably ought to have been mentioned in any useful long-term forecast. Sorry I really didn't mean it to be "alarmist"!
Well this forum is a huge distraction from me getting the highest Tetris score in my team.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 22, 2011 21:02:37 GMT
This is not surprising, as I had said many times over the past two years that this ENSO would be a record-breaker and nations continue to count up the list of weather damage and loss of life. A stormy year is ahead for many countries in 2010. According to my forecast the year will be warmer and much wetter than normal leading to widespread floods on three continents; parts of Asia, the Americas, and Europe.
Flooding of regions has been recorded in late December 2009 in parts of the Americas and Europe and continues into early January. Heavy rains have led to widespread floods in Argentina, Spain, and Portugal. This will become more common in other regions as 2010 progresses.
I expect many more regions to experience significant flooding in a year dominated by El Nino.
This particular El Nino, from my analysis, appears to be a combination of the 1982-83 ENSO and the 1997-98 ENSO, but will exhibit unusual features not seen in previously recorded ENSO states.
This will make the developing ENSO state not only an historic one, but also an unusual climate phenomena worthy of lengthy study after all is said and done.It wasn't just the US affected as many nations suffered - mainly from record precipitation - which is typical of ENSO. Long-range forecasts are read and followed only by those with the wisdom and knowledge to heed them. Most people, including some on this board, think and react in the short-term, and even those who mention the 'word' climate are as clueless about next month's weather as they are about next year's climate. This is often why disasters take place because people are 'educated' not to think ahead, but rather to take things for granted, only to become victims of climate conditions that can easily be prepared for in advance. There is nothing we can do about the climate and weather, but our power is in foreknowledge in forecasting and preparing. Learning to read long-range forecasts means to be paying attention to how climate impacts the weather and then to be able to make advanced preparations for the climate changes. The best ones are seasonal, since they allow months of preparation. Longer-range climate forecasts spread out over the years allow the more intelligent to make substantial adjustments in advance, such as the coming advent of global cooling I've forecasted. Climate forecasting is serious business Steve, so while you may continue to deny the laws of physics and thermodynamics, you'd be better off being able to learn to forecast your own local weather and climate conditions because what is coming down the pipe in the future will require you to do exactly that and sarcasm and fuzzy math will not keep you warm in winter. |
|
|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 22, 2011 21:13:48 GMT
This is not surprising, as I had said many times over the past two years that this ENSO would be a record-breaker And, of course, you were 100% wrong. "Record-breaker" is rather specific a claim, and it has been completely refuted. www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/ |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 22, 2011 21:20:28 GMT
This is not surprising, as I had said many times over the past two years that this ENSO would be a record-breaker And, of course, you were 100% wrong. "Record-breaker" is rather specific a claim, and it has been completely refuted. www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/We are not yet fully out of this recent ENSO, so for you to say that I am '100% wrong' is purely your opinion, which doesn't count for anything since everyone has one. How can you say that it has been completely 'refuted?" By whom and with what data? The facts are that the international count from the damages of this ENSO (of which I am sure you have not even considered because of your love of unsubstantiated data along with stupid attacks) has not come in yet. It will be at least until the end of 2011 and perhaps early 2012, before we will have a clear preliminary count - but the weather events, along with the record precipitation from ENSO - mid-2009 to the present - clearly show that many records have been broken. So, if you truly possess 'common sense,' then before you go telling people they are "100% wrong' why don't you learn to actually work for a living and get the climate/weather data counted and collected first before offering up your unlearned opinion with such '100%' certainty? Or, is this more of your AGW claim that humanity is responsible for 'climate change' which happens to be the Earth's natural climate state since the very origins of our planet? |
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Aug 22, 2011 21:52:09 GMT
slh1234 ... I posted it because it is a list of weather events in 2011 (which seems to accord with my memory of reports from the US) that probably ought to have been mentioned in any useful long-term forecast. Sorry I really didn't mean it to be "alarmist"! Ah, okay. You had me really scared.  |
|
|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 22, 2011 22:55:42 GMT
We are not yet fully out of this recent ENSO, so for you to say that I am '100% wrong' is purely your opinion, which doesn't count for anything since everyone has one. We are in ENSO neutral conditions. The latest EL NINO and the latest LA NINA are both over. Of course we will never be out of the current ENSO, unless you have some special definition of ENSO. So, we neither had a record breaking EL NINO nor a record breaking LA NINA, though the LA NINA was quite strong. Your attempt to divert your claim, of a "record-breaking ENSO" into some count of damage by all weather across the planet, is absurd. You are changing your predictions after the fact. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 22, 2011 23:25:47 GMT
We are not yet fully out of this recent ENSO, so for you to say that I am '100% wrong' is purely your opinion, which doesn't count for anything since everyone has one. We are in ENSO neutral conditions. The latest EL NINO and the latest LA NINA are both over. Of course we will never be out of the current ENSO, unless you have some special definition of ENSO. So, we neither had a record breaking EL NINO nor a record breaking LA NINA, though the LA NINA was quite strong. Your attempt to divert your claim, of a "record-breaking ENSO" into some count of damage by all weather across the planet, is absurd. You are changing your predictions after the fact. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdfListen, one of the things you are going to have to learn how to do 'commonsense' is to actually observe the world's climate and weather. Wean yourself from the 'products' from places like NOAA that does not forecast seasonal weather, much less significant climate events like ENSO. My past public long-range forecasts have remained the same, I have not changed them. Forecasters work for a living and all true forecasters strive to be as consistent and accurate as they can with the Earth's highly variable climate and weather. So get a grip why don't you? As for my definition of ENSO - Considering the fact that I am the forecaster who forecasted ENSO years in advance - El Nino to be followed by a strong and odd La Nina anomaly - I think I have a pretty good 'definition' of what constitutes ENSO. ENSO does not flick on and off like a light switch. I suggest you learn about this climate event and how I forecasted it in advance rather than coming off like a jerk. If you can't show respect then don't say anything at all, but don't come off sounding as if you are an expert on ENSO because you surely have not shown that in your own comments. Not only are you not observing the world's climate and weather (in the real world) you continue to make statements on the climate which are simply not true. If you are to discuss forecasting and climate science on this thread, and with me, at least show some intelligence and good manners rather than pissing off with silly, rank comments. That not only insults the intelligence of others, but shows that you'd rather cloud over your ignorance of climate than to truly learn about astronomic climate/weather forecasting. Or, should I ask: would this ENSO only be 'record breaking' if we tie it directly in with AGW? Is that the ticket? That seems to be the only way to get you baby boomer careerist AGW 'warmists' to accept the fact that humanity has no control or influence over the Earth's global climate and weather. The fact is that much of what accounts for conventional climatology and meteorology has been tainted with the bullshit of a generation of materialistic careerists playing 'climate science' who alter climate data, lie, steal and cheat making a mockery of what used to be a fine professional science. These careerists and their enablers fall over one another in a rush to consume and siphon huge resources so they can purchase million-dollar plus super computers, sit in their ivory towers (away from the weather & climate) to play with their computer models that don't work and cannot forecast next month's weather, much less the climate conditions of next year, or the year after, or the year after that. So go easy on those 'products' and use some real common sense. |
|
.