*EL NINO/LA NINA FORECAST 2010-2011*

[twawki]

Sea surface temps continue to plummett, 30 day SOI starting to falter though 90 day still rising

[socold]

Jun 18, 2010 5:47:45 GMT magellan said:

socold you still don't get it, and attempting to have a constructive conversation is near impossible as your MO is to make up new things as the discussion progresses.

Well sorry but here I go again

First, I posted detailed information on GISS non-measured Arctic temperature values. There is no argument to made using empirical evidence to support Hansen's recent runaway warming based on untested assumptions.

You cite a sea surface record which is described on the website as:
"The analysis uses in situ and satellite SSTs plus SSTs simulated by sea ice cover."
www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/research/cmb/sst_analysis/

Note the last part "simulated by sea ice cover". That's the kind of thing that could be described as "phony", "made up", etc. So why cite this to dismiss Hansen's extrapolation of land station data using those terms "phony" and "made up"?

It is made up, pure and simple. Get over it. Gavin Schmidt was a loss for words to defend his boss once Tilo started to unravel the mystery.

Or perhaps Gavin Schmidt didn't know the details off the top of his head.

Hansen did test the use of extrapolation in one of his earlier papers. It's not supposed to be iron cast accurate, it's an estimation method afterall. The idea is that the temperature anomalies are farily similar over large areas. Anyway as I said before, we know what the record looks like with and without the use of extrapolation, so even if it is wrong there really is no problem.

Second, the 2009 Christy paper clearly identifies errors in the surface station network and despite your efforts to redirect, the facts are laid bare. It is not a comparison of satellite to surface, it is surface to surface. Read the damn paper before making ignoramus statements of whether he constructs temperature records or not.

So how did Christy deal with the arctic in his surface record?

Finally, now that you've taken the bait trying to explain (incoherently) why or why not the satellite doesn't match surface, if I've said it once I've said it a hundred times; they shouldn't match.

They shouldn't match in particular months or even years. But both should show warming over the past 30 years if warming has indeed occured.

What part of this is too difficult to understand? Unfortunately, some, as does you, make the claim HadCRUT don't include Arctic temperature. Sorry, you're wrong about that as well.

I mean of course that HadCRUT chops off a lot of data in the arctic, not that they don't include a single grid cell in the arctic.

On GISS vs UAH, read carefully:
wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/17/gistemp-is-high/

(1) It is well known, and widely published, that year-to-year surface temperature anomalies are magnified with height, This is due to moist convective transport of heat from the surface to the atmosphere by evaporation and precipitation; It’s been seen in radiosonde data before there were ever satellites.

(2) It is similarly well known that this heat transport takes some time to occur, especially on large space scales (e.g. the tropics) with a 2 month or so average time lag between peak surface temperatures and peak tropospheric temperatures in the case of El Nino/La Nina.

It is true that these things are well known. Although I have to mention I find it a bit ironic to be told this by a blog that iirc posted a comparison of a high GISTEMP to a lower UAH in a month during the run up to the last el nino. The implication being that GISTEMP was wrong because it was too high compared to UAH.

Got it? GISS no longer shows this amplification which is well documented in meteorological records long before the satellite era. So, once again, GISS is getting results that don't agree with observations, they are making it up to match satellite. Both UAH and RSS should have zoomed well past GISS the past few months.

The skeptic response would be to claim that this "well documented" relationship was recorded during a positive PDO and now that the PDO has switched to negative you cannot rely on that relationship anymore. I only raise the point because I am interested in how you would actually defend your argument against the "PDO Excuse".

On the otherhand, we know the reason GISS doesn't match HadCRUT and therefore reaches the same peak as the satellite records is because it has more arctic warming in recent years. If GISTEMP is right about the arctic, then the only way the satellite records would go higher is if they were amplified not only by the El Nino, but also by the arctic warming GISTEMP claims there to be. The satellite amplification of surface relationship during El Ninos doesn't tell us that.

Personally it is my belief that James Hansen is a dishonest individual who at some point crossed the moral line of integrity into corrupting his field of science by working for an agenda rather than just doing the science. If he thinks civil disobedience (destruction of private property) and jailing "contrarians" is acceptable to "save the planet", what makes you think he wouldn't stoop to making up the science, or at least allow confirmation bias to cloud his judgment?

We know why GISTEMP is as warm as it is, and Hansen doesn't control the reported temperatures from high latitude land stations. As far as I am aware Hansen implemented the arctic extrapolation method before the divergence happened. Therefore Hansen couldn't have deliberately created warming in GISTEMP (confirmation bias or not), unless he was a psychic who knew what temperature at very high latitude land stations would do over the past few years.

Furthermore as I said before, if those high latitude land stations cool in coming years then GISTEMP is going to extrapolate that cooling all over the arctic and as a result it will show pronounced cooling trend. So even if someone wanted to maliciously guarantee a larger warming trend in GISTEMP, arctic extrapolation will not do that.

[nautonnier]

SoCold and Magellan - this discussion is interesting but it should not be in an El Nino thread - perhaps one of you could start one on accuracy of gridded metrics for temperature or even whether 'temperature' is a good metric ?

[dontgetoutmuch]

Looks like the chances of an La Nina are climbing rapidly...

SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES (SSTS) ALONG THE EQUATOR IN THE EAST-CENTRAL PACIFIC
ARE UNDERGOING A RAPID TRANSITION FROM ABOVE NORMAL IN APRIL, TO BELOW NORMAL
IN THE EARLY PART OF JUNE. THIS INDICATES A TRANSITION IN THE ENSO STATE FROM
EL NINO IN SPRING TO NEUTRAL CONDITIONS IN EARLY JUNE. THE MOST RECENT 7-DAY
MEAN SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES ARE BELOW NORMAL ALONG THE EQUATOR FROM ABOUT
170W TO THE SOUTH AMERICAN COAST, WITH SSTS PREDOMINATELY MORE THAN 1 DEGREE C
BELOW NORMAL FROM ABOUT 150W TO 90W. THIS SUGGESTS THE POSSIBILITY OF
DEVELOPING LA NINA CONDITIONS BY LATE SUMMER. ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS OVER THE
TROPICAL PACIFIC ARE ALSO SHOWING SOME SIGNS OF A TRANSITION TO LA NINA
CONDITIONS, CHARACTERIZED BY ABOVE NORMAL EASTERLY TRADE WINDS, SUPRESSED
CONVECTION OVER THE EAST CENTRAL PACIFIC, AND ENHANCED CONVECTION OVER
INDONESIA. LA NINA-LIKE CONDITIONS HAVE ONLY RECENTLY APPEARED AND THE CURRENT
ENSO STATE IS BEST CLASSIFIED AS NEUTRAL. AN OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION OF LA
NINA REQUIRES AT LEAST THREE CONSECUTIVE MONTH OF LA NINA CONDITIONS.

THERE IS CURRENTLY A DEEP LAYER OF BELOW NORMAL OCEAN TEMPERATURES EXTENDING
FROM THE SURFACE TO 250 METERS DEPTH THROUGHOUT THE EASTERN PACIFIC, MAKING IT
UNLIKELY FOR SST ANOMALIES TO RETURN TO POSITIVE VALUES THIS SUMMER. THE
MAJORITY OF STATISTICAL AND DYNAMICAL MODELS PREDICT NEGATIVE SST ANOMALIES
THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR, SUGGESTING THE POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF LA NINA
CONDITIONS BY AS EARLY AS LATE SUMMER AND CONTINUING THROUGH THE END OF THE
YEAR. PROBABILISTIC PREDICTIONS FROM THE CONSOLIDATION FORECAST INDICATE A
NEARLY 70% CHANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF LA NINA BY WINTER. SOME CONSIDERATION
OF LA NINA RELATED CLIMATE IMPACTS WERE CONSIDERED FOR OUTLOOKS FROM JAS 2010
THROUGH TO THE SPRING OF 2011, WITH THE LARGEST POTENTIAL IMPACTS OCCURRING IN
WINTER.

[twawki]

Jun 20, 2010 11:15:17 GMT nautonnier said:

SoCold and Magellan - this discussion is interesting but it should not be in an El Nino thread - perhaps one of you could start one on accuracy of gridded metrics for temperature or even whether 'temperature' is a good metric ?

Great idea and easy to do.

[dartman321]

The original premise of this thread is dead. The "astromets" lengthy, regionally specific, forecast of weather events, years in advance, and centered on a prognostication of ENSO lasting into 2012 has collapsed proven itself to be flat out wrong.

Quote-" For over two years, I continued to forecast that a new El Nino was on the way from my astronomic calculations. This ENSO will dominate the world's weather events through all of 2010, into 2011 and 2012, via very strong teleconnections when the world can expect increased flooding from powerful storms with resulting mudslides from torrential rains to the coasts of Ecuador and Peru and to the coasts of southern California.

Droughts can spread through the countries of Australia, China, India, Indonesia, India, Philippines, and Africa. One region of the world - South Asia - will see an powerful series of climate-related disasters as a result from the Sun's activity and effects on the world's coverall climate. It is calculated that world's population at risk from ENSO-related disasters is somewhere between 187 to 250 million people globally.

Forecasters, climatologists, meteorologists, and those who are weather and climate spotters and watchers will have their hands very full dealing with ENSO-related weather patterns from now through to June 2012, according to my forecast.

Another example of junk science.

[icefisher]

Check this latest 10 day CFS monthly ensemble. The mean line drops below minus 2 line in October/November which if it results in a 3 month average would equals the deepest La Ninas on record all the way back to 1973 and 1955. A number of models exceed minus 2.5 and a couple exceed minus 3.

1999/2000 hit bottom at minus 1.6 and 2008 at minus 1.4.


Proportional to a 2.0 La Nina that would be 1.25 degree change, subtracted from the recent high takes you almost .2 below the UAH record monthly low at about a minus .6.

If you proportionalize a minus 2 La Nina to 2008 you get one degree and fall just short of the UAH record of roughly minus .4 and minus .35, .15 lower than 2008.

Exciting times! Take a seat and get the popcorn out of the microwave!



Also notice how the later reporting members dominate lower than earlier reports.

[dontgetoutmuch]

Wow,

The models have the temp dropping like a rock! Of course these are models, and frankly it looks like they have a spread of... about two degrees after just a month... One of them is bound to be right...

I have a question... I know what to expect from a big El Nino, but, supposing that a large, deep La Nina occurs over the course of the next year or so are there any adverse weather events that can be expected?

[icefisher]

Jun 28, 2010 19:16:04 GMT dontgetoutmuch said:

Wow,

The models have the temp dropping like a rock! Of course these are models, and frankly it looks like they have a spread of... about two degrees after just a month... One of them is bound to be right...

I have a question... I know what to expect from a big El Nino, but, supposing that a large, deep La Nina occurs over the course of the next year or so are there any adverse weather events that can be expected?

My experience suggests that a cold ocean is a calm ocean. Cold water is usually the result of storms not the cause of them. Though my knowledge in that area is geographically limited. Menacing arctic storms may imply something else.

The results of a La Nina for my area generally means less rainfall and when you already live in a desert that isn't a good thing.

I noted this developing a week ago and if somebody has some links to the old powerpoints preceding the 1999/2000 and 2008 La Ninas in particular the subsurface and central and eastern Pacific 0-300 heat content anomalies it would be interesting to compare details and watch the progress.

[william]

In Canada there has been anomalous heavy rainfall this summer and a very cold May/June. Svensmark's mechanism has the greatest affect from 40 degree to 60 degrees.

It seem the prediction is now for La Niña conditions by the end of this summer. (See paper 30 in this presentation.)

www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf

Summary•ENSO-neutral conditions are present across the equatorial Pacific.
•Sea surface temperatures continue to decrease across much of the Pacific Ocean.
•Conditions are favorable for a transition to La Niña conditions during June-August 2010.

[socold]

This is bad news, in La Nina conditions I hear that the oceans will be absorbing a lot of heat.

[icefisher]

Jun 29, 2010 21:22:52 GMT socold said:

This is bad news, in La Nina conditions I hear that the oceans will be absorbing a lot of heat.

Actually La Ninas do not change the absorption rate in the ocean except maybe as a function of negative feedback (reduction of cloud cover allowing more sunlight to hit the surface).

[glc]

Jun 29, 2010 21:52:25 GMT icefisher said:

Jun 29, 2010 21:22:52 GMT socold said:

This is bad news, in La Nina conditions I hear that the oceans will be absorbing a lot of heat.

Actually La Ninas do not change the absorption rate in the ocean except maybe as a function of negative feedback (reduction of cloud cover allowing more sunlight to hit the surface).

Won't the cooler SSTs mean the oceans will be radiating less heat?

[icefisher]

Jun 29, 2010 23:19:13 GMT glc said:

Won't the cooler SSTs mean the oceans will be radiating less heat?

Since according to Trenberth the atmosphere captures almost 90% of that surface radiation. . . .less SST radiation means colder temperatures, not the dramatically warmer that you need to catch up with your predictions.

[twawki]

The Great Global Temperature collapse - potentially this year. A perfect storm of cold is brewing!

www.twawki.com/?p=7366