|
|
Post by glc on Apr 3, 2011 15:51:48 GMT
The planet knows little or nothing of these minute perturbations, which have, at any rate, been occurring throughout the Holocene and long, long before.
Maybe - maybe not - but there is one difference about the "minute perturbation" since ~1975. It was actually predicted by certian scientists. Now you can argue that Hansen et al got lucky and that the predicted temperature increase was simply a coincidence, but there was no similar prediction from the solar crew or from any of the other theorists.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 3, 2011 18:19:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by handyman on Apr 4, 2011 19:02:09 GMT
Hi Twawki, Thanks for posting. I have La Nina finally waning in late August in my forecast. Until then, we will remain in this colder-than-normal phase overall. You may notice temperature spikes in the general climate in North America, with one day being above normal, mid-70s, then the following days cooler than normal. Spring wants to come, but La Nina keeps temperatures from stabilizing to seasonal temps. Overall, the spring is cooler than normal going into summer as La Nina values begin to show more slippage towards neutral phase, however. Until then the northern hemisphere will be cooler than normal overall during the spring season, according to my calculations. Your "calculations"; are wrong. This spring has been warmer than normal by a large degree. You should look at some actual data occasionally. It has been much cooler than normal this late winter/early spring here in Ohio, on average by about 10 degrees. We have had a couple of warm periods here and there, but a cold front will come in and knock the temps in half for another week or so. This week's forecast is looking to be back to normal or (if we're lucky) a little above. My theory is that the longer the cold spells, the warmer the brief hot spells we occasionally get, until the jet kicks north for the summer. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Apr 5, 2011 2:41:42 GMT
Your "calculations"; are wrong. This spring has been warmer than normal by a large degree. You should look at some actual data occasionally. It has been much cooler than normal this late winter/early spring here in Ohio, on average by about 10 degrees. We have had a couple of warm periods here and there, but a cold front will come in and knock the temps in half for another week or so. This week's forecast is looking to be back to normal or (if we're lucky) a little above. My theory is that the longer the cold spells, the warmer the brief hot spells we occasionally get, until the jet kicks north for the summer. Hi Handyman, Yes, this is basically the kind of climate we'll see this spring into early summer, spikes in temperatures followed by several days of cooler-than-normal temperatures. Despite what some 'think' they are not watching the real world temperatures and reading whatever they want into monthly data sets like Matt who makes things up to reflect "warming" everywhere. We will have a colder spring season, as forecasted, until summer fully kicks in with La Nina values returning to neutral by August. |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Apr 5, 2011 3:37:29 GMT
Sigurdur, ENSO is intrinsically an oscillation. Current observations at noaa show progression away from the negative phase. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/enso.shtmlMore interesting is the question of how rapidly the positive phase returns. Even more interesting is how climate change will alter the back and forth. |
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Apr 5, 2011 4:03:50 GMT
The planet knows little or nothing of these minute perturbations, which have, at any rate, been occurring throughout the Holocene and long, long before. Maybe - maybe not - but there is one difference about the "minute perturbation" since ~1975. It was actually predicted by certian scientists. Now you can argue that Hansen et al got lucky and that the predicted temperature increase was simply a coincidence, but there was no similar prediction from the solar crew or from any of the other theorists. Hmm. Hansen said it was already warming when he said it would warm. Are you saying the IPCC knew even less in AR4 concerning level of understanding of solar effects on weather/climate than was known by Hansen and the "solar crew" in 1988? |
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Apr 5, 2011 4:17:08 GMT
Sigurdur, ENSO is intrinsically an oscillation. Current observations at noaa show progression away from the negative phase. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/enso.shtmlMore interesting is the question of how rapidly the positive phase returns. Even more interesting is how climate change will alter the back and forth. Apparently you don't know the significance of SOI with respect to ENSO. Regardless, any forecasts from NOAA should be taken with a grain of salt. Click on the following and substitute the date '201001' with later dates such as '201006' and so forth and refresh to see just how realistic their forecasts turn out to be  Maybe then a light will turn on as to our "understanding" of the climate system. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/people/wwang/cfs_fcst_history/201001/images3/nino34SSTMonE120.gif Maybe this will get the gears turning....  |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Apr 5, 2011 4:30:42 GMT
Sigurdur, ENSO is intrinsically an oscillation. Current observations at noaa show progression away from the negative phase. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/enso.shtmlMore interesting is the question of how rapidly the positive phase returns. Even more interesting is how climate change will alter the back and forth. Apparently you don't know the significance of SOI with respect to ENSO. Regardless, any forecasts from NOAA should be taken with a grain of salt. Click on the following and substitute the date '201001' with later dates such as '201006' and so forth and refresh to see just how realistic their forecasts turn out to be Maybe then a light will turn on as to our "understanding" of the climate system. www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/people/wwang/cfs_fcst_history/201001/images3/nino34SSTMonE120.gif Maybe this will get the gears turning.... Magellan, I agree, we all love to talk about the weather. But I am more interested in climate. |
|
|
|
Post by handyman on Apr 5, 2011 16:42:32 GMT
Yes, this is basically the kind of climate we'll see this spring into early summer, spikes in temperatures followed by several days of cooler-than-normal temperatures. Despite what some 'think' they are not watching the real world temperatures and reading whatever they want into monthly data sets like Matt who makes things up to reflect "warming" everywhere. We will have a colder spring season, as forecasted, until summer fully kicks in with La Nina values returning to neutral by August. When I originally read your 2010-11 mundane weather forecast in January, 2010, for some reason I thought your La Nina forecast referred to the period between Dec 2009-Summer 2010. I noticed some of the others misread it as intended for those dates as well. Later, you clarified that the La Nina reference/forecast was for THIS winter. In that regard, it has turned out to be very accurate. I have also read parts of your astrology blog. I have until now remained silent on the whole mundane astrology/astrometeorology issue, but I find it to be rather fascinating. Astromet, do you consider yourself a scientist in this field or more a practitioner of applied science? |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Apr 5, 2011 20:04:21 GMT
Yes, this is basically the kind of climate we'll see this spring into early summer, spikes in temperatures followed by several days of cooler-than-normal temperatures. Despite what some 'think' they are not watching the real world temperatures and reading whatever they want into monthly data sets like Matt who makes things up to reflect "warming" everywhere. We will have a colder spring season, as forecasted, until summer fully kicks in with La Nina values returning to neutral by August. When I originally read your 2010-11 mundane weather forecast in January, 2010, for some reason I thought your La Nina forecast referred to the period between Dec 2009-Summer 2010. I noticed some of the others misread it as intended for those dates as well. Later, you clarified that the La Nina reference/forecast was for THIS winter. In that regard, it has turned out to be very accurate. I have also read parts of your astrology blog. I have until now remained silent on the whole mundane astrology/astrometeorology issue, but I find it to be rather fascinating. Astromet, do you consider yourself a scientist in this field or more a practitioner of applied science? Hi Handyman, I am a polymath, a scientist who is a mundane astrologer and astrometeorologist. Since astrology is an applied science that is what I practice. One of the problems some people have is that they are not familiar with long-range climate/weather forecasts. They tend to read whatever they want into what is forecasted and treat long-range forecasts as 'predictions,' another label some like to slap onto matters they do not understand. The only way to forecast the world's climate and weather in the medium and long-range is by astronomic means. There is no other way. Some spend too much time on short-range weather events and confuse that with what they guess may happen in down the road. That's hardly a successful way to ascertain what the climate will do in the future in the real world. My forecast of El Nino to be followed by La Nina was made by application of astrometeorological principles. I saw ENSO coming for 2009-2011 back in 2006 and repeated my forecast every year since. El Nino arrived in mid-2009 and La Nina followed, as forecasted. We remain in a La Nina state into spring 2011. The estimated global average lower tropospheric temperature anomalies for March 2011 fell to -0.10 deg. C along with continued colder readings in both northern and southern hemispheres. Temperatures will be found to be cooler-than-normal for this spring and into summer. Though some say we will be in a La Nina phase for the next two years, I expect La Nina to wane back to neutral values later this year, say by mid-to-late August. This will be followed by rising warmer temperatures for 2012 - a dry and windy year with droughts in various global regions. The year 2013 remains warm, a bit on the wet side. Most likely, we haven't heard the last of the AGW ideologists who like to see "warming" everywhere they look. It is my forecast that the next six (6) years will see warmer climate conditions, but with colder "shock" anomalies that prefigure the next world phase - global cooling. We've got a few years left of solar-forced global warming, to the year 2016, when that cycle comes to a complete end and officially opens a new phase of global cooling, in my forecast. |
|
|
|
Post by w7psk on Apr 5, 2011 21:41:25 GMT
A scientist that never went college, interesting.
More like a guesser trying to make money off of parlor tricks.
|
|
|
|
Post by handyman on Apr 5, 2011 22:12:17 GMT
It is my forecast that the next six (6) years will see warmer climate conditions, but with colder "shock" anomalies that prefigure the next world phase - global cooling. So, are you forecasting a return of those deep subzero (Fahrenheit) temperature anomalies (ranging for days to weeks) that have not been around the Ohio Valley since the winters of 1993/4 and the mid-late 1980's? You know, those cold spells that some have cited as examples of global warming, while others threw them out as outer fences in their global warming data? |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Apr 5, 2011 23:37:23 GMT
It is my forecast that the next six (6) years will see warmer climate conditions, but with colder "shock" anomalies that prefigure the next world phase - global cooling. So, are you forecasting a return of those deep subzero (Fahrenheit) temperature anomalies (ranging for days to weeks) that have not been around the Ohio Valley since the winters of 1993/4 and the mid-late 1980's? You know, those cold spells that some have cited as examples of global warming, while others threw them out as outer fences in their global warming data? Yes, we've observed these colder anomalies increasingly over the past two decades. Whether these were cited as examples of global warming is a misnomer considering the high variability of the Earth's climate. However, the astronomic signals of the colder anomalies since the 1980s can be applied to look at climate trends on a longer scale, based on the activity of the Sun and the modulation of the solar winds by the planets. I've completed several long-range climate runs into the 2040s, and all show the Earth in a global cooling phase. I've calculated this cooler global phase to start in the year 2017, when we should see radical temperature extremes against those of the previous years 2012-2016. Back in the year 2000, the late astrometeorologist Theodor Landscheidt maintained that variations of the solar wind correlated to Earth's global temperature. Abstract - Near-Earth variations in the solar wind, measured by the geomagnetic aa index since 1868, are closely correlated with global temperature (r = 0.96; P < 10-7).
Geomagnetic activity leads temperature by 4 to 8 years. Allowing for this temperature lag, an outstanding aa peak around 1990 could explain the high global temperature in 1998.
After 1990 the geomagnetic aa data show a steep decline comparable to the decrease between 1955 and 1967, followed by falling temperatures from 1961 through 1973 in spite of growing anthropogenic CO2 emissions.
This points to decreasing global temperature during the next 10 years.
The total magnetic flux leaving the Sun, dragged out by the solar wind, has risen by a factor of 2.3 since 1901 (Lock-wood et al, 1999). Concomitantly, global temperature has increased by 0.5° C.
The energy in the solar flux is transferred to the near-Earth environment by magnetic reconnec-tion and directly into the atmosphere by charged particles.
There are indications that this energy has meteorological effects within days after solar eruptions which generate high-speed streams in the solar wind (Roberts and Olson, 1973; King, 1974; Stolov and Shapiro, 1974; Schuurmans, 1979; Prohaska and Willett, 1983; Neubauer, 1983; Bucha, 1983; Herman and Goldberg, 1985; Tinsley, 1996).
As there is a linear relationship between magnetic flux and solar irradi-ance, the 130% rise in the Sun's magnetic flux since 1901 indicates a rise in the average total solar irradiance of 1.65 W m-2 (Lockwood and Stamper, 1999).
The respective radiative forcing in the atmosphere is 0.29 W m-2, corresponding to 0.23° C at a moderate climate sensitivity of 0.8° C/W m-2.
This increase of 0.23° C potentially accounts for nearly half of the change in the Earth's global temperature over the same period. Charged particles and indirect solar wind effects make a strong additional contribution.
Svensmark and Friis-Christensen (1997) have shown that global cloud cover, observed by satellites, is linked to the strength of galactic cosmic rays modulated by the solar wind (r = 0.95).
This effect, attributed to cloud seeding by ionized secondary particles (Pruppacher and Klett, 1997), induced a change in cloud cover by more than 3% within 3 Vi years.
The corresponding change in radiative forcing is in the range 0.8 tol.7 W m-2. This is significant, as the total radiative forcing by CO, accumulated in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times is about 1.5 W m-2.
Measurements of cosmic ray flux registering myons instead of neutrons go back to 1937. When Svensmark (1998) compared these data with temperature in the Northern Hemisphere, his results were corroborated.
Short-term observations confirm the connection. Forbush decreases - sudden deep drops in cosmic ray flux within 2 days after energetic solar eruptions - coincide with local shrinking of cloud cover by 3% (Pudovkin and Veretenenko (1995).
In the long run, climate would not be affected if the amplitude of the indirect solar wind effect on clouds did not change. The strength of the solar wind, however, has increased by a factor of 2.3 since 1901.
Direct and indirect effects, taken together, point to a dominant role of solar activity in climate change.
Accordingly, many of the recent publications in the field of solar-terrestrial relationships range the Sun's contribution between 50 and 100 % (Friis-Christensen and Lassen, 1991; Lean et al., 1995; Lau and Weng, 1995; Landscheidt, 1995; Soon et al., 1996; Svensmark and Friis-Christensen, 1997; Reid, 1997; White et al., 1997; Svensmark, 1998; Cliver et al. 1998 a, b; Labitzke, 1999).
In tracking the Sun's activity, we see it waking up out of minima as a collection of planets emerge from the Sun's far side as viewed from the Earth. If we observe a lag in geomagnetic activity leading world temperatures between 4 to 8 years, then we should see by the year 2017 radical temperature extremes globally - officially opening a new phase - that of global cooling. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Apr 6, 2011 1:17:20 GMT
LOL! Last I checked GLC and Matt, Jan and Feb is winter, not spring. Spring officially started a little over a week ago. Why don't you try following the discussion instead of quoting comments out of context. This exchange of comments was initiated by Astromet who stated Overall, the spring is cooler than normal going into summer as La Nina values begin....Note the word 'is' - implying the present tense. Astromet is trying to convince you that the La Nina has produced cooler than normal temperatures. It hasn't. Sorry, guys, despite your much awaited La Nina, this year will probably still end up warmer than the El Nino year of 1987. Listen Glc, if you have been unaware that we've been in a La Niña phase then you are surely clueless. You cannot be serious. This is the same kind of silliness that continues to come out of the so-called anthropogenic warming camp that can't forecast next month's weather, much less anything resembling forecasting in the longer-range. The facts are that we continue to be in the La Niña state I forecasted several years ago. We see global average lower tropospheric temperatures for the month of March 2011 fell to -0.10 deg. C with colder readings in both northern and southern hemispheres. Even NOAA states that ~ "La Niña will continue to have global impacts even as the episode weakens through the Northern Hemisphere Spring. Expected La Niña impacts during March-May 2011 include suppressed convection over the west-central tropical Pacific Ocean and enhanced convection over Indonesia. Potential impacts in the United States include an enhanced chance of below-average precipitation across much of the southern states and the Central Rockies and Central Plains.
An increased chance of below-average temperatures is predicted for much of the West Coast and across the northern tier of states (excluding New England.) A higher possibility of above-average temperatures is favored for much of the southern half of the contiguous U.S."
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Apr 6, 2011 3:58:35 GMT
"Bastardi: no return of El Niño til 2012" "The amazing thing is that the high priests of high temps keep claiming co2 is the cause, then admit its not because of the obvious relationship of the enso to global temps! Its simple to see that when the nino comes on, the earth warms, the nina comes on its cool. I don’t understand why they can not, through simple deduction, understand that the warm PDO ( 1978 to 2007) leads to a warming of the globe, especially when there is part of that time the amo is warm) and the cooling will follow when the PDO turns colder, as it is now? In addition we have to remember that a lot of these folks ( NOT Dr. Jeff Masters who is trying to nail the forecast here though he does see different from me on AGW) but some of the non meteorologists in the field, simply don’t understand that its tough to sustain a warm enso in a cold PDO. And that the cold Enso is much more likely. Actually they WILL NOT SEE IT because it means they were wrong about the eternal warmth, the feedback, everything. More preposterous is the supposition that a trace gas needed for life on the planet, a very minor weight in the atmosphere as it is, would influence the ocean, which is far more important in total energy contribution to the planet than the atmosphere, or anything we are putting into the atmosphere. Do the math good friend.. take the weight of the ocean and atmosphere together and the energy implications of the gas and the liquid and then stack co2 against it."  wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/05/bastardi-no-retrun-of-el-nino-til-2012/ |
|
