Note: the image below is an animation, on some browsers you may have to click on it to get it to animate.
Above: Image from Unisys showing the circumpolar vortex during the last big outbreak and decay in the CONUS. Animation by Anthony h/t to Scott Sabol Fox 8 for the source.
Guest essay by Dr. Tim Ball
Recently Talk Show host Conan O’Brien played a compilation of TV news people all making essentially the same comment. They were using a phrase prepared by some central PR agency, something like their subscription to a news agency like Associated Press (AP).
It’s orchestration of a message using artificial words or phrases to control and promote misinformation and deception. A good example was the use of the word “glitch” in reference to the abject failure of the Affordable Care Act web site. Sometimes the words are created, to marginalize and denigrate a group; “birther” is a person who questions the President Obama’s resume. Climate has two prime examples; Global Warming Skeptic and Climate Change Denier. They are forms of collective personal attacks, if that isn’t a contradiction.
Manufactured terminology appeared in climate in conjunction with its use as a political vehicle. Catch phrases appeared that created false, but threatening images such as the Greenhouse Effect (Artificial Heat) or the Ozone Hole (Leaking). Mechanisms of climate change were presented as something new even though they were well known and in the literature for decades. The idea that they were “new” played into the deliberate attempt to link them to human causes. I recall when El Nino first appeared in the public forum because it moved north and impacted California in 1983. Most thought it was a new phenomenon, therefore caused by humans. The common denominator of most environmental and climate science of the last 40 years is the determination to find a human cause for everything. The IPCC ensured this because the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) limited their research by definition to human causes of climate change.
The latest example of phrase creation is the resurrection by Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren of the term “polar vortex”. It’s resurrected because the term was used by Time magazine in 1974 when they explained global cooling as follows,
“Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds — the so-called circumpolar vortex — that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world.”
In January 2014 they said
“It may well be that global warming could be making the occasional bout of extreme cold weather in the U.S. even more likely. Right now much of the U.S. is in the grip of a polar vortex, which is pretty much what it sounds like: a whirlwind of extremely cold, extremely dense air that forms near the poles.”
Notice the first says “circumpolar vortex” and the second “polar vortex”. Holdren attributed the recent cold spell to his invented term of “Polar Vortex” and took the unusual step of producing, a two minute video. It only served to illustrate his ignorance. He is a master at changing terminology such as his introduction of “climate disruption” as adjectives ‘warming’ and ‘change’ lose their effect. Disruption implies it is anomalous or new. It doesn’t matter if the term or the explanation is wrong, the goal is to get a headline and imply a human cause; with Polar Vortex it worked well.
Originally the Circumpolar Vortex (CV) was the middle latitude wind that blew around the Poles from west to east. The faster moving segments with speeds above 30 m/sec (108 kph), were designated as Jet Streams. Over time the entire circulation became the Jet Stream. The CV is also called the westerlies referring to the overall direction of flow of winds and weather systems in the middle latitudes (35 to 65°). The CV is a strong wind at altitude first identified by pressurized US B29 (Flying Fortress) bombers going to bomb Japan.
Figure 1
As early as 1925 Carl Rossby began his study of the Polar Front, the boundary between the cold polar air and the warmer tropical air. (Figure 1) Temperatures across the Front are the greatest so above the surface, away from the effect of friction, they combine to create the CV. Waves in the CV determine the shape of the Polar Front and the associated surface weather patterns.
The Front is coincident with the boundary between surplus and deficit energy or line of Zero Energy Balance (ZEB) (Figure 2). By 1946 Rossby identified the large planetary waves given his name (Figure 4).
Figure 2
The challenging issue in the early days was to explain the development of sinuosity in the Vortex. Apparently, if a liquid or gas flows through a uniform medium it will begin as a straight line flow and develop a sine wave pattern. This applies to rivers flowing through sediment to develop meander waves and also to the sinuous pattern of the Gulf Stream (water through water). The CV is air flowing through air.
The CV as upper level winds are affected by the high mountain chains that run north/south across their flow, such as the Andes in the Southern Hemisphere Andes and Rockies. Standing waves develop in the flow downwind of these obstacles. Since the latitude of the CV moves north and south with the seasons the influence and downwind effect varies. For example, when the CV crosses the Rockies in central Alberta a very confused turbulent pattern develops downwind making forecasting very difficult. In Alberta they say only a fool or a newcomer tries to predict the weather.
The strength of the CV is different between the hemispheres because of the land/ocean distribution. In the Southern Hemisphere it is more clearly defined and the winds much stronger because you have a very cold Antarctica surrounded by continuous open warmer southern oceans. This is an important difference in the pattern of distribution of ozone. In the Northern Hemisphere it is an Arctic Ocean surrounded by land creating a very different juxtaposition.
A recent paper by Barnes et.al., discussed at WUWT claims there is no pattern, which implies no cause/effect, between atmospheric blocking, Arctic warming and sea ice conditions. They wrote
“…an increase in blocking could mean an increase in weather extremes as Arctic sea ice continues to decline. However, both observational and modeling studies suggest that any potential link between sea ice and midlatitude weather may be masked by internal variability.” and, “…the link between recent Arctic warming and increased Northern Hemisphere blocking is currently not supported by observations.”.
As usual the data base is completely inadequate in space and time as their diagrams illustrate. More problematic is the implication that sea ice is a cause of blocking and the changing wind conditions determine sea ice patterns. This was the situation that resulted in the dramatic change of ice conditions in 1816 during the cold temperatures associate with the Dalton Minimum. The extreme Meridional Flow was caused by the eruption of Tambora as we determined at the 1992 conference in Ottawa. It was also finally acknowledged by NASA as the major cause of changing ice conditions in 2007.
Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds. “Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” he said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.
This problem of inferring that surface conditions cause upper air patterns is prevalent in current climate science. The classic example is the weakening and even reversal of the subtropical easterlies that are the primary initiating factor in the El Nino/La Nina pattern. What causes the change in these upper level winds?
Figure 3
One way the surface affects conditions is the air sitting on the ground takes on the characteristics of the area. Historically this was known as the “Air Mass” system. For example, air that sat over cold snow covered Arctic land became a continental Arctic (cA) air mass (Figure 3). It was the same as the recent outbreak of Arctic air in eastern North America.
Marcel Leroux revisited this process in his 2005 book Global Warming: Myth or Reality? The Erring Ways of Climatology. Leroux simply renamed the cA air mass the Mobile Polar High (MPH). The important point is the air moves because of the upper flow enhanced by the density of the air.
Two basic patterns can occur in the CV, described as Zonal and Meridional (Figure 4). Zonal gives relatively stable weather in the middle latitudes with generally prevailing southwest winds in summer and northwest in winter. Meridional flow brings more north/south winds, variable weather especially of temperature and precipitation. So far the focus has been on averages and trends, but we must start considering variation. It is changing was Meridional Flow asserts itself. This is one positive side of the increased variability of weather that cooled Washington and forced Holdren to create the “Polar Vortex”. People are so conditioned most assume a new terminology means it is a result of human activities. This is possible because most are unaware of the historical patterns associate with cooling an Meridional flow.
Figure 4
The number of waves around the complete Vortex varies, but generally creates two groups of Rossby Waves; 1-4 with Zonal conditions or 5 – 8 with Meridional flow. The length of time over which each can last varies but can persist for decades, which is a major reason why the paper by Barnes is inadequate and the 30 – year normal is unhelpful.
Rossby Waves move along the Polar Front so that the weather pattern changes approximately every 4 to 6 weeks. As cooling occurs the Polar Front moves toward the equator and a Meridional pattern develops. When this happens amplitude reaches a certain depth (north/south) and blocking occurs. Usually this delays the movement of the Waves so weather patterns persist for 8 even up to 10 weeks. It is called Omega blocking reflecting the Greek letter shape on the weather map. (Ω)
With a Meridional pattern cold air pushes toward the Equator and warm air toward the Poles. This pattern was very apparent globally over the last few weeks. Normally media only look at the warmer areas, unless the cold hits politically sensitive regions, such as the eastern US. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate another problem with changes in the Rossby Wave pattern on global temperatures.
Figure 5 shows cold air over eastern North America and Western Europe and Figure 6 warm air over those regions. The black dots represent weather station but present a distorted picture because of the map scale, nonetheless they show how different positions of the Rossby Waves creates different emphasis on densely populated and Urban Heat Island affected stations of eastern North America and Western Europe.
Figure 5
As the dome of cold polar air expands (Figure 1) seasonally or because of global cooling the mean position of the Polar Front moves toward the Equator increasing the temperature contrast between the two air masses. Cold air is denser and heavier than warm air so it dictates what happens as we know from the evolution of mid latitude cyclogenesis. With this new pattern the surplus energy from the tropics is increasingly concentrated in the warm axes Waves thus increasing the temperature.
This likely explains why when extreme cold pushes south, as it did in the recent cold spell over eastern North America, very warm Wave regions develop.
Figure 6
The pattern of the Waves also determines precipitation events. For example, the extreme Meridional flow of 1816 caused an extreme drought in central and western North America. Agricultural droughts in the middle latitudes are related to blocking when dry conditions persist for 8 to 10 weeks. Similarly, flooding occurs in other regions. We can witness these patterns now with the flooding in Britain as the following headline attests: “Water, water everywhere: Britain at risk of more flooding as heavy rain looms.” Meanwhile drought is impacting northwest coast of America.
The U.S. Drought Monitor, released Dec. 26, showed abnormally dry to drought conditions across Oregon and abnormally dry conditions across much of Washington. Drought conditions were shown in other Western states, too.
UK Prime Minister David Cameron said he “suspects” the storms and floods are linked to climate change. He is right for the wrong reason. He believes the changes are the result of warming when they are actually due to cooling. It appears it is ignorance not a political distortion. Agenda 21 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) arose out of the works of members of the Club of Rome to which Holdren was a major contributor. When climate was chosen as a political vehicle it became a war. It became “us against them” or “if you are not with me you must be against me”. And as Aeschylus said, “In war, truth is the first casualty.”

A welcome post by Cliff Mass on the Polar Vortex:
http://cliffmass.blogspot.ca/2014/01/the-polar-vortex-myth-and-reality.html
Plenty of good information, but you need to have edited the article more carefully.
“I recall when El Nino first appeared in the public forum because it moved north and impacted California in 1983”
And for the next few years every news worthy weather event brought some mention of el nino/la nina as the cause. Sound familiar?
I concur with the comments about Holdren. He is attempting to misrepresent and misinform with the media being the prime target for influence. It looks a lot like the BBC 28Gate process except with lights and cameras. Meanwhile each Federal agency is wasting time and effort in following orders to misrepresent science and agency operations with seemingly random press releases of agency findings and predictions. The latest is a DOD study of strategic and mission effects from ice free Arctic predictions with more shipping routes and potential threats opening across the Arctic. Thus it’s worse than messaging and phrases, it’s time and effort research and planning investment in nonsense agency-by-agency to further a misguided agenda directive on a wide scale. I suspect this is all research and planning froth leading up to the final push for a major new funding effort comparable to another Homeland Security department or another EPA budget. The magnitude of the misinformation effort by agencies correlates with the new money funding goal that follows. The side agenda of voting block management is also there as in the cases of Labour Party involvement in the scheme in the UK-BBC and Australia.
What the CAGW kiddies don’t realise is that every new discovery they have is another bullet hole in their existing models. Ma Bakers car has lees holes then the models now.
I have to assume UV variation study with Scaife and others
http://i.imgur.com/1t3CL7D.jpg
has an impact as well. Yet I haven’t heard this mentioned in regards to the vortex talk. Have I missed something?
Cliff Mass Weather Blog: “The Polar Vortex: Myth and Reality”
http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-polar-vortex-myth-and-reality.html
There is a nice technical description there with a clever intro and a mention of WUWT.
I think the global warming skeptic claim was actually that global warming fanatics are misrepresenting the truth.
Thanks, Dr. Ball. Back in the earliest 90s, as part of a previous post as a geology professor in a multi-discipline department, I had to teach several courses/terms of meteorology, so I had to really bone up on the climatology and meteorology I had learned as part of my studies of Earth systems. This is a good summary article which I might want to excerpt for various venues, if that is all right with you.
So, the polar vortex is a feature of the upper atmosphere especially in winter. It doesn’t suddenly appear over the US as a symptom of Global Warming, as the Department of Silly Walks would have us believe.
There is a really good animation of this kind of event here: http://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/researchhighlights/SSW/
Thanks to Tim Ball for mentioning the late Professor Marcel Leroux! Albeit his sentence is slightly misleading: “Marcel Leroux revisited this process in his 2005 book Global Warming: Myth or Reality? The Erring Ways of Climatology. Leroux simply renamed the cA air mass the Mobile Polar High (MPH).”
For those who wish to know exactly what Marcel Leroux’s contribution to understanding atmospheric circulation really is, they should read his seminal 1993 peer reviewed paper published in Global & Planetary Change:
http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/2/32/25/79/Leroux-Global-and-Planetary-Change-1993.pdf
Abstract from Leroux 1993:
“Air-mass and energy transportation is chiefly made by large lenses of cold air, the Mobile Polar Highs, the key factor of meridional air exchanges, which organize migratory units of circulation in troposphere low levels. Mobile Polar Highs (MPHs) originate in the downwards air motion in high latitudes. The cold air injection organizes a dipolar vortex of very large size (2000/3000 km), the anticyclonic side of this vortex (precisely the MPH) is thin, about 1.5 km thick, by reason of cold air density. Mobile Polar Highs migrate roughly eastwards, with a meridional component towards the tropical zone, through the middle latitudes where they are responsible for weather variability and for rain-making conditions Their own thermo-dynamic evolution and relief divide them into fragments, and they supply the low-layer of the trade circulation, and eventually the monsoon (previously trade) circulation of a cross-equatorial drift. Eastwards movement and disposition of relief govern the MPHs paths and determine distinct aerological domains, in one of these domains, China is precisely located at the eastern Asian exit of MPHs, stopped by the Himalaya/Tibet range, on their southern side during their eastwards migration. Power of the MPH, connected with its density, as observed in winter in the present conditions, is a function of the initial temperature, namely of the polar radiative conditions. It is precisely in the high latitudes that radiation balance and temperature changes are the most important, at all scales of time, from the seasonal to the palaeoclimatic scale, while in tropical latitudes the changes are comparatively always weak. Two modes of troposphere general circulation are a result of this mechanism (1) A rapid mode of circulation, connected with a cold situation in polar latitudes, is characterized by strong and extended MPHs and strong winds at all latitudes and all levels (2) A slow mode of circulation, connected with a warm situation in polar latitudes, is characterized by weak and less extended MPHs, and weak winds at all latitudes and all levels. Insolation and surface boundary conditions of high latitudes are the key control of MPHs dynamics, and therefore the key control of palaeoclimatic changes.”
Since Connolley’s intervention, the Wikipedia Marcel Leroux page in English was deleted in the fall 2012. However, his final book “Dynamic Analysis of Weather and Climate: Atmospheric Circulation, Perturbations, Climatic Evolution” published in 2010 by Springer is available, unfortunately at a fairly steep price tag: http://www.springer.com/earth+sciences+and+geography/atmospheric+sciences/book/978-3-642-04679-7
While Cameron’s mistake may have been of ignorance, instead of malice, he still wanted to be deceived in order to create his mistake.
Good post, but…the B-29 was the Superfortress; the B-17 was the Flying Fortress. Both developed by Boeing.
I just to love the part where Holdren says that warmer air at the poles equals colder air…
Does this guy not believe his own kool aid or understand thermodynamics?
This is quite extraordinary. The Sydney Morning Herald one of the most staunch AGW defenders and promoters has turned?
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/game-finally-up-for-carboncrats-20140113-30qqo.html
Yes – linguistic engineering has been essential to “framing” a variety of debates. The terms proffered will set in motion pre-assumptions that determine the lines of argument that will resonate and the moral yardsticks that will be used to measure people who engage in the debate.
Concretely – “Climate Change” allows alarmists to paint skeptics as saying the climate never changes. With that smear the attacks can be visceral and uncompromising – opponents “hate science” and “reject rationality” etc. Such language indulges tribalism and hatred for the other side. All by design.
“birther” is a person who questions the President Obama’s resume. “
Sorry, unfortunate attempt at equivalency. This is partly why we’re losing the war, or at least only fighting them to a standstill. “”Birther” is if anything too kind. “Conspiracy denier loon” more appropriate,
Want to win the war? Keep politics and religion out of it. Stick to the science and the failure of the models.
ya right, Holdren invented the term polar vortex. And we didnt land on the moon.
Check the glossary of meteorology. Holdren wrote that of course.
I think Dr Ball, and anyone else interested in linguistic engineering, would enjoy the intriguing essay at Sultan Knish blog on what he terms ‘Liberal Newspeak’ – http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/liberal-newspeak.html – a feminine-gendered version of Orwell’s Newspeak, intended in no way to empower and enable, but in equal measure terrify, soothe, and render (politically) somnolent. So who’s its Daddy?
Thanks for the very informative essay, Dr. Ball. I learned a lot from this.
One question: Did I miss something? Are we in a Zonal or Meriodional flow right now? Dr. Ball seemed to by implying Meriodonal because of the recent blocking condition, but I don’t think that he said it directly. I count 4 nodes in the animated gif – does that imply Zonal? How long have we been in the current flow state (Z or M), and, can we expect it to last for decades from now?
John Stewart did a similar piece on media coverage of Ron Paul….showing tens of talking heads from every channel and alleged political bias repeating verbatim the exact same talking points. Conan O’Brien also has another one on coverage of his show.
Neither man asks “Who is writing the script?”
Thanks for the correction on the B29.
Tom the geologist please feel free – I am flattered.
Temperatures differences across the Front are the greatest…
“Conspiracy denier loon” more appropriate,
A release of the relevant records might dispel a lot of this. I refuse to call them loons until I see the evidence.
The number of waves around the complete Vortex varies, but generally creates two groups of Rossby Waves; 1-4 with Zonal conditions or 5 – 8 with Meridional flow. The length of time over which each can last varies but can persist for decades…
Are any graphs available which depict how and when these two general modes have flipped over time? Do any correlations exist (one way or the other) with global warming/cooling?