Above: Sea Surface Temperature anomaly map from NOAA/NESDIS. Note the La Nina building in the Pacific.
By Dr. Roy Spencer
Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) measured by the AMSR-E instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite continue the fall which began several months ago.
The following plot, updated through July 29, 2010 shows that the cooling in the Nino34 region in the tropical east Pacific continue to be well ahead of the cooling in the global average SST, something we did not see during the 2007-08 La Nina event (click on it for the large, undistorted version; note the global SST values have been multiplied by 10):
There is some really cold water off the coast of Peru. At least -5C anomaly…
I’ve often seen graphics like this one and I wonder about the justification for the colour-coding. The scale doesn’t allow the possibility of “no anomaly”. Surely there should be a colour for at least a small range either side of zero meaning “no discernable anomaly”? Except for the icy areas and land the graphic shows everywhere is anomalous. That just can’t be.
Even with the help of gridded, interpolated, homogenized and UHI-corrupted surface data, it doesn’t look like 2010 is going to be the “hottest year ever” on record. The negative PDO, increased frequency of La Ninas and continued weakness in solar activity are going to eventually put the kibosh on global warming alarmism. Earth’s ever-changing climate is not subject to the fantasies of Playstation modelers.
Just curious — as the ocean temps drop might that also show up as a reduction in atmospheric CO2, assuming the cooler water sequesters more CO2?
I overlaid 2010 (turquoise/yellow) on top of 2007 (red/blue.) Both peaked later this year, and Nino 3.4 is falling much faster.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukQbJ1q0kE0]
Sorry, Dr Spencer, but you are clearly wrong. The UK Met Office says we’re warming even more now including the oceans as well as land surfaces, so too does NOAA in unison with them (the rehearsals must have been a jolly affair I’m sure). Of course they left out the bit about data on Antartica because there was no “clear trend” observed, psuedo-science speak meaning there is no warming:-)) I just love this unambiguous language they & the IPCC too. When there is cooling it is merely referred to as “consitent with a lack of warming” (AR4SPM)! Nice one Cyril! Rather as the Northern Hemishpere winter was consistent with a lack of warming, & so too now the Southern Hemisphere winter (still no word on the Beeb).
Is there a measurable reduction in atmospheric CO2 when the ocean “anomaly” drops by as much as 4C? The Mauna Loa values for CO2, over the last couple of El Ninos, seem to be rather impervious to ocean temps and that doesn’t seem right.
btw Compulsive gamblers are always willing to expect their run of bad luck to change with the next roll of the dice. Has anyone heard cries of “Baby needs a new pair of shoes!” coming from behind the closed doors of GISS? 😉
From the fourth paragreaph of:
http://www.ccb.ucar.edu/lanina/report/mantua.html
with the title “La Niña Impacts in the Pacific Northwest”:
“Generally speaking, periods with strong La Niña conditions have been associated with anomalously cool, wet climate conditions from October through March in the Pacific Northwest. Conversely, moderate La Niña conditions have not been associated with strong and consistent climate anomalies in the Pacific Northwest.”
Hi Anthony,
that’s cool! I wonder if we’ll get (in Europe) another hard winter 🙂
Unrelated but a great cartoon on global warming.
http://diversitylane.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/cold-day-in-hell/
The rate of decline for Nino 3.4 is particularly remarkable, at about 5 K/decade. This appears faster than all the declines since 2002.
Will Alexander finds a strong correlation between the 22 year solar cycle and river flows in the Southern African region. See:
The End of the Road
Note especially the Fig. on page 5 “Periodicity of sunspot activity with closely synchronous characteristics of the annual flows in the Vaal River.”
From his models, Alexander has been accurately predicting major droughts and floods.
Is there enough of a satellite record to check for a similar 22 year correlation?
Does this back up the implication that the “warmest half-year on record” was caused / helped / influenced by the residual effects of the 2009 to early 2010 El Nino?
Why do you think the lag is as much as it is this time?
Eyeballing the rate it seem much faster than the 2007/8 fall.
Is it just the size of the thing that is causing the drag?
Please help me!!!
1) Does GISS, etc. also adjust this raw temperature data??
2) SEA temperature are satellite based and accurate??
3) If the satellites are good for the SEA, why don’t we have accurate LAND based satellite measurements??
4) Why don’t we have “100,000s” of LAND based satellite temperature measurements??
5) Why do we need LAND and WATER based stations??
6) If LAND based measurements are so “inaccurate(need to be adjusted)”, why not just use “accurate” Satellite based SEA temperatures to measure AGW?? The planet is 70% water, we would at least be 70% accurate ;-).
WUWT???
Some advice, are Figures 2 & 4 in the following webpage on El Nino/La Nina useful as a broad introduction into the phenomenon – I haven’t seen a summarized map of the various effects anywhere else, and this is unsourced.
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/el-nino-and-la-nina-weathers-sibling-rivalry.html
Today, Bloomberg has an article titled “Argentina has colder winter than antartica, spurring record power imports”
Satellite records to not go back very far and are not directly comparable with land-based records?
This La Nina is showing all the hallmarks of being massive. The early stages of a cooling PDO now starting to impact the power of ENSO. The PDO was briefly dragged back into positive with the just finished strong El Nino and is now back to negative. The tide is turning…. this just might be the expected trend for the next 20 years?
http://www.landscheidt.info/images/pdo.png
Phil’s Dad says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:05 am
Why do you think the lag is as much as it is this time?
Eyeballing the rate it seem much faster than the 2007/8 fall.
Is it just the size of the thing that is causing the drag?
It’s waiting for the equinox to hit and start pumping all that warm water energy in the N. Hemisphere out to space.
The S. Hemisphere won’t heat as rapidly, and the N. Hemisphere will plunge.
With the Sun dragging it’s Cycle 24 feet, this might be AGW’s Last Ride in a very leaky boat… in the rapids of a great La Nina.
Dr. Jeff Masters, an acolyte of AGW, asserted yesterday on his hurricane blog at WeatherUnderground.com that Atlantic sea surface temperatures are at a record high. Is this true? it sure doesn’t seem to be to me. Any clarification on this statement would be greatly appreciated.
Always interesting to watch the natural ups and downs of the La Nina/ENSO cycles. I will be especially interested to see how low this La Nina goes, and even more interested to see how strong the next upward cycle is, as it will coincide with the higher solar irradiance of Solar Cycle 24, and when we get a El Nino occuring (as we did in 1998) on the upward side of a solar cycle, we get that little extra boost in temps on top of the general upward trend in temps from AGW.
NINO3.4 SST anomalies are now well below -1 deg C.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/08/no-preliminary-sst-data-for-july-2010.html
When will Dr. Roy release his July, 2010 UAH satellite temp anomoly?
Scott in VA says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:42 am
Dr. Jeff Masters, an acolyte of AGW, asserted yesterday on his hurricane blog at WeatherUnderground.com that Atlantic sea surface temperatures are at a record high. Is this true? it sure doesn’t seem to be to me. Any clarification on this statement would be greatly appreciated.
Scott,
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) is in its warm phase, hence the higher sea surface temperatures. If both the PDO and AMO were in the negative phase, the coming cool-down would be even more widespread and severe.
The tropical Pacific Ocean has dumped a lot of heat into the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere. The NH is now losing that heat to space quite fast via the hot, dry places like Russia. Expect air temperatures to slump this fall/winter. Meanwhile the Pacific Ocean, being cold, is emitting less heat to space so it’s starting to warm up again. Simples.
The 2007 Atlantic hurricane season was something of a dud. I wonder if we will see a repeat this year.
Scott in VA says: “Dr. Jeff Masters, an acolyte of AGW, asserted yesterday on his hurricane blog at WeatherUnderground.com that Atlantic sea surface temperatures are at a record high. Is this true? it sure doesn’t seem to be to me. Any clarification on this statement would be greatly appreciated.”
Still waiting for the July SST update from NOAA, but for June…
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/07/june-2010-sst-anomaly-update.html
…North Atlantic SST anomalies are not at record levels:
http://i45.tinypic.com/2iln1ww.jpg
South Atlantic SST anomalies peaked in February at a new high:
http://i49.tinypic.com/zt97cn.jpg
However, that was after a 15 year period when South Atlantic SST anomalies were flat. Refer to:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/05/200910-warming-of-south-atlantic.html
Also, keep in mind, the South Atlantic is the only ocean basin where heat is transported from high latitudes toward the equator. It then continues northward, so, in the wake of the El Nino and this additional warmth from the South Atlantic, tropical North Atlantic SST anomalies are also high, but I haven’t cranked out a graph of that.
The Great Lakes look really hot. My God, we’re all going to die!!! Pass Cap ‘n’ Tax before it’s too late!!!
David L. Hagen says: “The rate of decline for Nino 3.4 is particularly remarkable, at about 5 K/decade. This appears faster than all the declines since 2002.”
Just happened to have plotted the NINO3.4 SST anomaly transitions from El Nino to La Nina for 1988, 1998, 2007, and 2010.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/08/no-preliminary-sst-data-for-july-2010.html
This one’s not unusual yet.
Randall Hilton says:
August 3, 2010 at 6:36 am
Just curious — as the ocean temps drop might that also show up as a reduction in atmospheric CO2, assuming the cooler water sequesters more CO2?
______
There is no assuming.
A cooler ocean will always dissolve and therefore absorb more CO2 in the normal temperature range. There may be some tiny factors, like salinity, that could have an affect on the absorption rate though, either way.
If you are speaking of absolute amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, it would depend on how much and fast the seas cool compared to rate being added. If you are speaking relatively and strictly on temperature, my very first statement stands.
Bob Tisdale says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:59 am
NINO3.4 SST anomalies are now well below -1 deg C.
__________________________________________________________
Bob,
In a guest post earlier this year, you discussed how unlikely a LaNina was (this year) following an El Nino Modoki, which the last one was. I am wondering if you have, or will be, preparing an update theorizing what is different this time, as it appears that a moderate or even a strong LaNina is virtually inevitable at this point.
How exactly is temperature correlated to the amount of heat energy in the atmosphere unless the the density of heat absorbing molecules are taken into consideration at same time and place? Desert temperatures over 100 degrees do not carry as much total heat energy as humid areas with a lower temperature, which contain multitudes more H2O molecules. Furthermore, the density of the latter can change within hours as cold fronts encounter warm humid areas. How can an accurate world heat energy be estimated with constant change?
Do these measurements do temperature or heat energy?
Geoff Sharp says: August 3, 2010 at 7:30 am
http://www.landscheidt.info/images/pdo.png
………………
Hi Geoff
Nice graphic. I am told that the cause for the Pacific oscillation is currently unknown.
One can speculate.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/PDO.htm
Philip Finck says: {incredulity on}“Hold it now! Let me get this straight. The first diagram of SST temp. anomalies….. the y-axis is multiplied by 10?”
You got it!! Just as it says on the graph: “Global Oceans (x10)”
“So the .5 degree is really .05 degree ……… is this clearly marked on the original graphic as it isn’t on this one?”
Yes, indeed. “Global Oceans (x10)” means the global anomaly has been multiplied by ten in order to more clearly show how the two parameter curves vary with each other.
“I’m not doubting you at all….. I’m just incredulous. Even if it is stated in text (metadata) it would never be allowed by our scientific editor yet alone our internal review yet alone an external review……. its bizarre!!!!!”{incredulity off}
The graph is quite clear and is obviously intended to allow easy comparison of the lag in peak temperatures and the relative slopes and paths of the normalized data.
“So the whole anomaly is really +/- .25 degrees! I could pee overboard on my fathers fishing boat and raise temperatures that much!”
If you wish to attempt to hide the decline in that manner, feel free to do so. I’d strongly suggest facing the lee side of the craft.
Does anyone have data on rate of Pacific or global sea level rise, i.e mm /y ? I would expect this to fall with decreasing SST and OHC down to a few hundred m depth.
Dr. Spencer,
What is the baseline period used for these SST anomalies? At http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/methodology/methodology.html , there’s a discussion of a baseline of “the time period of 1985-1993, with observations from the years 1991 and 1992 omitted”, but it isn’t clear to me that’s the baseline for the particular map and chart you’ve presented. Can you confirm or correct?
Thanks.
Philip Finck,
As I understand Dr. Spencer’s note, the temperatures shown in Figure 1 are not multiplied by 10. The spatial distribution of SST anomaly does range from -5 C to +5 C.
As to Figure 2, if you add up all the SST anomaly around the globe, you’ll get a number that is much closer to zero. To compare it visually with the NINO 3.4 index it is necessary to scale the global SST by a factor of 10.
Philip Finck says:
August 3, 2010 at 8:10 am
So the whole anomaly is really +/- .25 degrees! I could pee overboard on my fathers fishing boat and raise temperatures that much!
Where you live it would be an icicle before it hit the water!
Philip Finck says: “Hold it now!”
August 3, 2010 at 8:10 am
Graphs and charts are frequently plotted in a manner that illustrates a particular point. In this case the idea is to show how the “global” oceans that are massive and slow to change have a pattern-of-change often but not always similar to the Nino 3-4 region. With out the X10 factor this would be less clear. I commend the chartist for thinking of this and for making it clear, at least to me, what has been done. Others may not agree.
R. Gates says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:46 am
“…..we get that little extra boost in temps on top of the general upward trend in temps from AGW.”
Unless it becomes dark energy, or hidden heat.
Or just simply radiates into space, and is ….gone.
On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:
Hi Tom
How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where close to knowing where energy is going or whether clouds are changing to make the planet brighter. We are not close to balancing the energy budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty!
Kevin
David L. Hagen says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:01 am
The rate of decline for Nino 3.4 is particularly remarkable, at about 5 K/decade. This appears faster than all the declines since 2002.
Will Alexander finds a strong correlation between the 22 year solar cycle and river flows in the Southern African region…..
Is there enough of a satellite record to check for a similar 22 year correlation?
__________________________________________________________
Yes the Nile river also shows a sun correlation:
NASA Finds Sun-Climate Connection in Old Nile Records
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=1319
“The researchers found some clear links between the sun’s activity and climate variations. The Nile water levels and aurora records had two somewhat regularly occurring variations in common – one with a period of about 88 years and the second with a period of about 200 years. “
This is another interesting study: on Sun – Volcanoes and climate:
Study of Dust in Ice Cores Shows Volcanic Eruptions Interfere with the Effect of Sunspots on Global Climate
http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-execute.cgi/article-page.html?article=57350009
Dr. Lurtz says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:08 am
Please help me!!!
1) Does GISS, etc. also adjust this raw temperature data??
2) SEA temperature are satellite based and accurate??
3) If the satellites are good for the SEA, why don’t we have accurate LAND based satellite measurements??
4) Why don’t we have “100,000s” of LAND based satellite temperature measurements??
5) Why do we need LAND and WATER based stations??
6) If LAND based measurements are so “inaccurate(need to be adjusted)”, why not just use “accurate” Satellite based SEA temperatures to measure AGW?? The planet is 70% water, we would at least be 70% accurate ;-).
WUWT???
_____________________________________________
Dr. Spencer explains the Satellite records on his blog. The home page is here:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/
Dr. Lurtz says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:08 am
Please help me!!!
Oh, I forgot to say you can put Spencer in the search box on the upper right (WUWT) and get all sorts of good articles.
Philip Finck says:
August 3, 2010 at 8:10 am
Dr. Spencer;
Hold it now! Let me get this straight. The first diagram of SST temp. anomalies….. the y-axis is multiplied by 10?
_____________________________________________________________-
It is the SECOND picture -the graph, AMSR-E Sea Surface Temperature Variations. So the Y axis is actually [ -0.25 to +.30C]
And yes the CAGW crowd is jumping up and down screaming about tenths of a degree temperature changes. Changes based on data great great grand paw gathered from his cotton field or his son recorded from dumping a bucket over the side of a ship grabbing a sample of sea water and sticking a thermometer in it.
vukcevic says:
August 3, 2010 at 9:38 am
It is not an speculation. There are different levels of searching for causes: The shiest would only dare to say: “It’s the trade winds”…and so on.
Only the brave spirits will prevail!
Well I don’t know what sort of thermometers NOAA is using but they need to get some new ones.
Their SST map shows the entire Sea of Cortez as being somewhere between +0.5 and +1.5 deg C anomaly (I presume).
Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact the sea of Cortez is currently WAY BELOW its norm for July 29th; probably about 5 deg C cooler than normal; and I just made some measurments last week (yes in one region), and have other (also anecdotal) numbers from others who measured in an entirely different location; and if you remember ANOMALIES ARE GOOD FOR 1200 KM so between the two of us we have pegged the entire Sea of Cortez ANOMALY as being about -5 deg C. so NOAA is all wet.
wayne says:
August 3, 2010 at 9:20 am
Randall Hilton says:
August 3, 2010 at 6:36 am
Just curious — as the ocean temps drop might that also show up as a reduction in atmospheric CO2, assuming the cooler water sequesters more CO2?
________________________________________________________________
Do not expect to actually see the data showing this.
From Mauna Loa Obs.
“4. In keeping with the requirement that CO2 in background air should be steady, we apply a general “outlier rejection” step, in which we fit a curve to the preliminary daily means for each day calculated from the hours surviving step 1 and 2, and not including times with upslope winds. All hourly averages that are further than two standard deviations, calculated for every day, away from the fitted curve (“outliers”) are rejected. This step is iterated until no more rejections occur.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/about/co2_measurements.html
Check out this web site run by a couple of scientists. http://www.co2web.info/
This particular pdf looking at the dogma and politics behind the 70 years of CO2 measurement as well as the science. It is a very interesting read. http://www.co2web.info/ESEF3VO2.pdf
If you want the other side of the story so you can weigh both sides Willis discusses it here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/07/some-people-claim-that-theres-a-human-to-blame/
It’s been said once ,its been said a thousand times. There is no experimental data that proves that the greenhouse gas effect exist,therefore Mann-made global warming is a hoax.
Now lets get some definitions on “climate and weather”
weather changes are not climate changes.
Definitions of the Climate Discussion
What is Climate?
Definition:A few thousand weather days end to end for a specific location.
How many climates are there in the world?
Every part of the country and the world has a unique climate -the south of France, the North slope of Alaska, the heart of Africa, the northeast Great Lakes region of the US ,the north of Italy, the south of Italy,thousands of different climates etc.
What is weather?
The atmospheric conditions where you are.
Can mankind control the weather?
We have tried for thousands of years from the Indian rainmaker, to the cloud seeders of the 1950-60. Man can not control the weather, then how the hell can man be controlling the climate. This whole B.S of MANN-made global warming is a fairy tale. The MANNipulation of temperature data is a crime against humanity and these criminals should be put in jail.
GW says:
August 3, 2010 at 9:24 am
I remember the thread — where Bob went out on a limb, and predicted there wouldn’t be a La Nina this year. I took a coward’s bet, and said that while I wouldn’t bet on a La Nina, I wouldn’t bet against it, either. Looks like I won. But since I didn’t bet, I won nothing. 🙂
re: Bob Tisdale says: August 3, 2010 at 8:21 am
I love graphs like the jpg Bob included here – the old adage ‘a picture is worth a thousand words.’ The problem is that all too often with linked jpg graphs, as with this one, there is no attribution included. That makes the jpg graph alone virtually worthless for discussions with other folks, or for use as a link on comment sections, etc. It would REALLY help if folks included a graph title/footnote that contained the source of the graph.
Similar problem with the linked PDO chart – there we not only didn’t have source referenced, but no scale on the x axis either….
Does anyone know of a good article that provides good basic information (periodicity, historical range of associated change, etc.) about all the known cyclic/periodic occurrences, such as the PDO, AMO, La Nina, El Nino, etc? Ideally a single article that covers them all, and any known ties between them… Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Bob Tisdale says:
August 3, 2010 at 8:59 am
The 1998 El Nino fall was at a time of a healthy, ramping Solar Cycle.
Not this one. That much is different.
Thanks for the best laugh of the day!
Last but not least: This is a more serious map
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
rbateman says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:40 am
You are correct. Now it is quite different, so do not expect “weather as usual ” as La Nina “usual” consequences in US weather . Everything will be unusual. Buy more popcorn!
George E. Smith says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:26 am
Well I don’t know what sort of thermometers NOAA is using but they need to get some new ones.
This kind:
http://www.google.com.pe/imgres?imgurl=http://www.brf-puericultura.com/images/top_termometrobano_pato.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.brf-puericultura.com/aseo-infantil-termometros-bano-c-29_52.html%3Fsort%3D2d%26page%3D1%26osCsid%3Dc9b49472094efe45d130307dc53f879c&usg=__d_D0rx3IM8zq2-CVvfXCptHr1Os=&h=400&w=500&sz=17&hl=es&start=0&tbnid=Jr9pWinWVrgxiM:&tbnh=143&tbnw=167&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtermometro%2Bpatito%26hl%3Des%26sa%3DG%26biw%3D996%26bih%3D592%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=706&vpy=236&dur=1147&hovh=201&hovw=251&tx=175&ty=156&ei=OG1YTOXCPIq4sQOh3ayqCA&page=1&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:9,s:0
rbateman says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:40 am
“…The 1998 El Nino fall was at a time of a healthy, ramping Solar Cycle.
Not this one. That much is different…”
This is what makes weather/climate so enjoyable – it never seems to repeat the exact same pattern twice. Worth remembering that we also have Katla hanging like the proverbial ‘sword of Damocles’ hanging over our heads this time!
Kirk 8:03 AM,
According to an unbiased source (ahem) the AMO is headed down:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_multidecadal_oscillation
John F. Hultquist says:
August 3, 2010 at 10:36 am
Philip Finck says: “Hold it now!”
August 3, 2010 at 8:10 am
“Graphs and charts are frequently plotted in a manner that illustrates a particular point. In this case the idea is to show how the “global” oceans that are massive and slow to change have a pattern-of-change often but not always similar to the Nino 3-4 region. With out the X10 factor this would be less clear. I commend the chartist for thinking of this and for making it clear, at least to me, what has been done. Others may not agree.”
Right, the convention for showing two data sets with vastly different scales on a common graph is to show the scale for the y-axis of one data set on the left side of the graph with one common colour for scale, data points and trend line and the scale for the other y-axis on the right side of the graph with another corresponding colour that applies to its respective data points and trend line.
Microsoft Excel permits to do that with ease, but it may not be so easy to accomplish that with the graphing tool used by Dr. Spencer to construct the SST anomaly graph.
The Microsoft Excel help text for adding a second y-axis reads:
Add a second axis
When the values in a 2-D chart vary widely from data series (data series: Related data points that are plotted in a chart. Each data series in a chart has a unique color or pattern and is represented in the chart legend. You can plot one or more data series in a chart. Pie charts have only one data series.) to data series in a 2-D chart, or when you have mixed types of data (such as price and volume), you can plot one or more data series on a secondary value (y) axis. The scale of the secondary axis reflects the values for the associated data series.
1.On a chart sheet (chart sheet: A sheet in a workbook that contains only a chart. A chart sheet is beneficial when you want to view a chart or a PivotChart report separately from worksheet data or a PivotTable report.) or in an embedded chart (embedded chart: A chart that is placed on a worksheet rather than on a separate chart sheet. Embedded charts are beneficial when you want to view or print a chart or a PivotChart report with its source data or other information in a worksheet.), click the data series that you want to plot along a secondary value axis.
2.On the Format menu, click Selected Data Series.
3.On the Axis tab, click Secondary axis.
Tip After you add a secondary value axis to a chart, you can also add a secondary category (x) axis, which may be useful in an xy (scatter) chart. Select a chart that displays the secondary value axis, and then click Chart Options on the Chart menu. On the Axes tab, select the Category (X) axis check box.
Hope that helps,
Walter
The switch to this La Nina was evident by November 15th, 2009. The Enso is (usually) born at the Equator 130E to 155E – 150M to 200M depth – where the deep ocean ends and warmer-than-average water or cooler-than-average water is pushed down to 150M to 200M depth and the circulation pattern starts going back to the East. Nov. 15, 2009 cross-section.
http://www.ecmwf.int/products/forecasts/d/getchart/catalog/products/forecasts/ocean/real_time/xzmaps!20091115!Anomaly!Temperature!chart.gif
This counter-circulation is called the Equatorial Under Current or the Cromwell Current.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_m5SP3FgQSPY/S80EYBQcd2I/AAAAAAAAAQ0/Tzcmdv3Kg7g/s1600/Picture2.png
It is almost like a continuous circulation loop (East-West at the surface, West-East at depth) although it can be short-circuited by other factors – there are also two other significant ocean currents which feed into the Enso as well, the North-Equatorial Counter-Current (left-over from the previous Enso event) and the Peru-Humbolt current (which flows up from the southern ocean). So, you have an El Nino – its warm waters are pushed down near Indonesia to spend one year in purgatory in the Cromwell Current where it can then resurface at the Galapagos Islands and join in a new El Nino party. Meanwhile, the Trade Winds are making sure this circulation pattern continues indefinitely sometimes speeding up, sometimes slowing down, sometimes driven by the temperature of the ocean itself. In other words, an oscillation.
We can also see that an El Nino is going to follow this La Nina and it will likely start earlier than the normal cycle although there is still lots of cooler than normal water to sustain the La Nina for quite awhile.
http://www.ecmwf.int/products/forecasts/d/getchart/catalog/products/forecasts/ocean/real_time/xzmaps!20100803!Anomaly!Temperature!chart.gif
Your money should now be on an El Nino following this one and while this circulation pattern provides some predictability, it is not a sure thing.
I think most of us here are agreed that there is a greenhouse effect from CO2 — we’re just skeptical about how catastrophic (or controllable) it will be. Were there no greenhouse effect from H2O, CO2, etc, the earth’s temperature would be 30-some dC colder than it is. Think moon.
“”” Enneagram says:
August 3, 2010 at 12:26 pm
George E. Smith says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:26 am
Well I don’t know what sort of thermometers NOAA is using but they need to get some new ones.
This kind: “””
I guess they couldn’t get a licence to put out a Mickey Mouse Thermometer.
I predict this dead cat will continue bouncing for 15 years or more. We’ll see SST’s and LT temps see-sawing as the ocean burps out the excess heat it has acquired since the 1960’s. But the trend will be downwards as OHC falls. I did a comparison graph of the end of the 1800’s against recent temps which indicates how it might go. The timing and magnitudes of the two big el nino’s in 1879 and 1890 and the two in 1998 and 2009 are uncannily similar, as was the timing of the solar cycles.
http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/sst-ssn1870.jpg
George E. Smith says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:26 am
“Well I don’t know what sort of thermometers NOAA is using but they need to get some new ones.”
I’m always interested in ground truth, so please tell us if you see consistent discrepancies from your vantage point, or is this just this month? BTW, as an old Baja trekker, I’m curious whether you’re amongst the hoi polloi of San Felipe or the jet-setters of Cabo.
rbateman says: “The 1998 El Nino fall was at a time of a healthy, ramping Solar Cycle.
Not this one. That much is different.”
That much might be different, but you’re also going to have to consider that ENSO events also shift cloud cover around the tropical Pacific. Convection and clouds accompany the warm water as it sloshes east and west. The variations in Downward Shortwave Radiation due to the changes in cloud amount can peak as high as 45watts/sq. meter, dwarfing any perceived impact from the solar cycle.
“Rational Debate says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:40 am
Does anyone know of a good article that provides good basic information (periodicity, historical range of associated change, etc.) about all the known cyclic/periodic occurrences, such as the PDO, AMO, La Nina, El Nino, etc? Ideally a single article that covers them all, and any known ties between them… Thanks in advance for any suggestions.”
A good question.
Over two years ago I started stating that what really mattered for the temperature of the troposphere was the combined net effect of ALL the ocean cycles at any given moment.
“We need to identify all the separate oceanic cycles around the globe and ascertain both the current state of their respective warming or cooling modes and, moreover, the intensity of each, both at the time of measurement and in the future.”
from here: http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=1302&linkbox=true&position=6
No such assessment exists or has ever been attempted so far as I know.
Tenuc says:
August 3, 2010 at 1:10 pm
rbateman says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:40 am
“…The 1998 El Nino fall was at a time of a healthy, ramping Solar Cycle.
Not this one. That much is different…”
This is what makes weather/climate so enjoyable – it never seems to repeat the exact same pattern twice. Worth remembering that we also have Katla hanging like the proverbial ‘sword of Damocles’ hanging over our heads this time!
_________________________________________________________________-
Not to mention several others:
http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/
especially the Russian ones (five code orange or yellow)
http://www.avo.alaska.edu/activity/avoreport.php?view=kaminfo
Kirk 8:03 AM,
According to an unbiased source (ahem) the AMO is headed down:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_multidecadal_oscillation
________________________________
Another set of graphs:
From NOAA: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/teledoc/nao.timeseries.gif
http://i39.tinypic.com/m7wf7t.jpg
http://i40.tinypic.com/11j98bl.png
And site with lots of graphs: http://research.iarc.uaf.edu/multidecadal_variability/intro.php
Rational Debate says: “The problem is that all too often with linked jpg graphs, as with this one, there is no attribution included.”
Sorry. I normally include a link to the specific post a graph was taken from. Here’s a link to the post:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/07/june-2010-sst-anomaly-update.html
The data source is listed at the bottom.
GW wrote: “In a guest post earlier this year, you discussed how unlikely a LaNina was (this year) following an El Nino Modoki, which the last one was. I am wondering if you have, or will be, preparing an update theorizing what is different this time, as it appears that a moderate or even a strong LaNina is virtually inevitable at this point.”
The post you are referring to is this one:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/05/typical-average-el-nino-traditional-el.html
In it, I didn’t attempt to explain why some El Nino events are followed by La Nina events and others are not, so I have no plans for a post you’re asking about. Sorry.
Basil says: “I remember the thread — where Bob went out on a limb, and predicted there wouldn’t be a La Nina this year.”
I did not make or imply a prediction in that post, Basil. I showed that the majority of El Nino Modoki events are not followed by La Nina events. That’s all.
Here’s are the links to the two cross posts:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/05/typical-average-el-nino-traditional-el.html
And here at WUWT:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/01/history-suggests-dont-bet-on-la-nina-this-year/
A La Nina may affect the bragging rights battle AGW vs Anti-AGW …
… But Clear La Nina Skies mean BIG Arctic Melts. It appears Aug 5-on (and for at least 5 days) will be High Pressure ~ usually sunny.
If the Arctic melts off (a question literally “up in the Air”), it is 3% of the Earth’s surface. Times the amount of Sun difference between Ice & SeaWater ~ 6 degrees F for the Planet (or 12oF Northern Hemisphere), right ?
Tell me why this is not the REAL explanation for the Ice Age End.
Nino34 region in the tropical east Pacific continue to be well ahead of the cooling in the global average SST, something we did not see during the 2007-08 La Nina
There is magenta beginning to head west of the Galápagos Islands:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/global_ncom/anims/eqp/sst30d.gif
Nino34 region cooling looks to continue.
Charles Wilson:
What?
Rational Debate says: “Does anyone know of a good article that provides good basic information (periodicity, historical range of associated change, etc.) about all the known cyclic/periodic occurrences, such as the PDO, AMO, La Nina, El Nino, etc? Ideally a single article that covers them all, and any known ties between them… Thanks in advance for any suggestions!”
How basic are you looking for?
Bob Tisdale says:
August 3, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Basil says: “I remember the thread — where Bob went out on a limb, and predicted there wouldn’t be a La Nina this year.”
I did not make or imply a prediction in that post, Basil. I showed that the majority of El Nino Modoki events are not followed by La Nina events. That’s all.
I remember that post too. And I remember you were talking about odds and chances, things of that nature, and not saying anything definitive. Going by previous record the odds were that there wouldn’t be a La Nina. But the odds weren’t 100%.
It’s like saying when an athlete retires the odds are he means it. But then there’s Brett Favre. Maybe this should be called the Brett Favre La Nina.
Philip Finck says:
August 3, 2010 at 8:10 am
So the whole anomaly is really +/- .25 degrees! I could pee overboard on my fathers fishing boat and raise temperatures that much!
From South America to north of Australia. Man, you got a large bladder!
“”” sky says:
August 3, 2010 at 3:01 pm
George E. Smith says:
August 3, 2010 at 11:26 am
“Well I don’t know what sort of thermometers NOAA is using but they need to get some new ones.”
I’m always interested in ground truth, so please tell us if you see consistent discrepancies from your vantage point, or is this just this month? BTW, as an old Baja trekker, I’m curious whether you’re amongst the hoi polloi of San Felipe or the jet-setters of Cabo. “””
Hey Sky ,
I’ve been to Cabo precisely once in July 1973 just to try out the new road. Drove a VW squareback sedan, pulling a 13 ft Boston Whaler. Spent enough time at Cabo to do a U-turn and get the hell out of there; never to return.
I’ve also been to San Felipe probably zero times if I recall correctly, since I don’t think that is on the main Hiway-1 route.
No I have been making the Hotel Oasis in Loreto my home for a week every July since 1974 pretty much. I go just to fly fish for whatever pulls on the string; althoguh I used to go in March as well for the Yellowtail season (also on fly).
I just got back last Sunday from Loreto; and I measured the air and sea surface temperature pretty much all over the Loreto Bay Marine preserve; and got a fairly consistent temperature of 88 deg F in air and shade, and 82 deg F in the water; with a good fishing thermometer.
Of course the ground and air Temperatures in Loreto were considerably higher but MUCH COOLER than a normal July.
As a result; there were NO Sardinas; NO Humboldt Squid, almost no sailfish, and no striped Marlin; and very damn few Dorado.
But a good number of BIG Roosterfish which is highly unusual, since only the 2 pounders are supposed to be ther in July, and the biggies don’t come till October.
So it was totally screwed up. But we always have fun anyway; and catch whatever will grab. I caught a Moray eel on a live bait; and caught a Loreto Grand slam on fly (Triggerfish, Giant Needlefish, and Cornet fish) Well it’s the Loreto trash slam anyway.
The cornet fish is a very poor excuse for a fish.
And basically the Loreto Dorado fishery has been off kilter, since about May; and likely isn’t going to come back this year.
People were catching 30 pound yellowtail in July; for crying out loud; they are a March species in Loreto.
Amino Acids in Meteorites says: “I remember that post too. And I remember you were talking about odds and chances, things of that nature, and not saying anything definitive. Going by previous record the odds were that there wouldn’t be a La Nina. But the odds weren’t 100%.”
That’s a reasonable paraphrasing. I concluded the post with: Will a La Nina follow the 2009/10 El Nino? Considering that only 2 of 10 El Nino Modoki events since 1950 were followed by La Nina events, the odds are against it. But nature does provide surprises.
Bob Tisdale says:
August 3, 2010 at 3:45 pm
Rational Debate says: “The problem is that all too often with linked jpg graphs, as with this one, there is no attribution included.”
Sorry. I normally include a link to the specific post a graph was taken from. Here’s a link to the post:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/07/june-2010-sst-anomaly-update.html
The data source is listed at the bottom.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Hi Bob,
Thanks for the reply. You did include a link to your blog post in your comment here – and I followed it and did find the source referenced at the bottom of the post.
The thing is that often its nice to be able to refer someone to a single graph to make a specific point… but to do that, one has to either bookmark the graph separately with its contents as the bookmark title, or try to remember just where/what article one found a graph about xyz on… often you KNOW you found a graph that perfectly addresses some issue, but can’t recall where unless you’ve bookmarked it separately. If you bookmark the entire article, then you’d have to also enter tags or comments for each and every graph the article contained to have any hope of finding that one particular graph again – and that’s pretty labor intensive.
So, a single graph’s usefulness is lost, if there’s no source given on the graph itself. If you generated the graph, then of course I’d expect to see you take credit for it – but even then it would be most helpful if the graph carried not only your name (or url link to the article) but also the data source you used – on the graph itself.
Unless I’m misunderstanding you and you’re saying that you usually include a link to the article on the graph? Even then, having the source right there sure would help. Many people won’t read a full article that perhaps is addressing other issues also, in order to find graph source attribution at the very end of the article. It really helps to have the data source right there below the graph even just as text immediately below the graph before the article continues, but ideally entrained in the graph jpg, so one can bookmark the graph and others can judge it from the graph itself. Most graphing programs allow you to do that pretty easily.
re:
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for your reply. Yes, I would think that logically we would have to factor in all of the various known cycles in order to be able to get a good handle on why temperatures were changing one way or the other – and before we would be able to do a very good prediction of where things are likely heading also. Of course, sun cycles, major volcanic eruptions, and things of that nature would also have to be factored in as well.
I’ve seen a few papers (or abstracts or blog posts) that hit on parts of that equation – for example if I recall correctly one that factored in El Nino’s and La Nina’s and concluded that some fair percentage of the perceived ‘global warming’ could be accounted for that way alone. Others of course looking at sun cycles…
Frankly I’m rather amazed that there haven’t been in depth studies done trying to factor in all the known cycles, historically, along with CO2 and temperature levels! It just seems that if one is trying to figure out something so complex, then you’ve pretty much got to try to consider/look at all the known variables up against each other….
Sort of a trivial aside – it would be quite fun and enlightening to see someone put together a compendium of sorts of all the various research out that that has found “x percentage of global warming since… can be attributed to this or that factor OTHER than CO2.” I mean, we’ve got a few papers now saying 50 to 60% is from black soot, another large percent from the interaction of cosmic rays affecting cloud cover levels, and so on and so on. At this point I’d bet adding all the different “x percent from other than CO2” would wind up being far far more than 100% of the supposed total warming that has occurred since the little ice age – or at least since man was supposedly adding significant amounts of CO2 to the atmosphere!!
re: Bob Tisdale says: August 3, 2010 at 4:40 pm
Hi Bob,
Ideally pretty basic, but comprehensive in terms of including the basics on all of the known cycles. Next preferred would be a middle of the road sort.
Even better I suppose would be one very basic article of that nature, one pretty technical, and one in between. The Three Bears versions. :0)
I’d be appreciative of a link to any decent article on the subject, however, regardless of where it falls on the basic/technical spectrum, if you don’t happen to know of a really good basic one. I’m not looking to buy a book – hoping very much for free resources that way online, that I can easily access.
Rational Debate: Regarding labeling of graphs. I understand your wants on this matter, but I don’t foresee every producer of graphics taking the time to add a source note to every one. I produce hundreds of graphs per year for my blog and for the posts that Anthony cross posts here at WUWT. And for discussions here at WUWT and at other blogs, I’ll crank out another couple of hundred per year that portray datasets I’ve studied but haven’t written a post about. I don’t add my website address to the bottom of each simply because it’s yet another production step in a process that I would like to shorten.
Regards
Rational Debate & Stephen Wilde
.
Frankly I’m rather amazed that there haven’t been in depth studies done trying to factor in all the known cycles, historically, along with CO2 and temperature levels! It just seems that if one is trying to figure out something so complex, then you’ve pretty much got to try to consider/look at all the known variables up against each other….
.
There have been in depth studies and for a long time .
Even if the school stating that climate is dominated by the (non linear) interaction of
low frequency oceanic pseudo oscillations is much less “media intensive” than the classical computer model AGW school , there are dozens of papers .
Here is one for example which is pretty much right in the middle of what you look for :
https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/aatsonis/www/2007GL030288.pdf
In this paper Tsonis looks for a mechanism that caused an unexplained climate shift in the 70ies . He looks on all known oceanic cycles (PDO , ENSO , NAO , NPO) and explains low frequency (multi decadal) events as a result of interaction of the oceanic cycles .
This approach has of course for consequence that the system is chaotic and presents brutal regime shifts that can’t be deterministically predicted .
You have then plenty of references in the paper that will allow you to explore this subject farther if you want .
Alternatively you may have a look at the chaos theory too .
.
So as you see there have been many in depth studies looking at the problem from this perspective 🙂
>>I could pee overboard on my fathers fishing boat and raise
>>temperatures that much!”
>>If you wish to attempt to hide the decline in that manner,
>>feel free to do so. I’d strongly suggest facing the lee side of the craft.
Ha, ha.
I feel another video brewing, by the Minnesotans For Global Warming !
(hide the decline)
.
Bob Tisdale says:
August 3, 2010 at 3:01 pm (Edit)
you’re also going to have to consider that ENSO events also shift cloud cover around the tropical Pacific. Convection and clouds accompany the warm water as it sloshes east and west. The variations in Downward Shortwave Radiation due to the changes in cloud amount can peak as high as 45watts/sq. meter, dwarfing any perceived impact from the solar cycle.
However, alot of that variation occurs after the el nino is underway, raising humidity levels. A lot of the warm water gathering in the PWP for years in advance of big el nino’s comes from places where the the cloud variation is less than it is near the equator, where the ITCZ may or may not be at the time, taken as an average around the globe at those higher latitudes. The solar cycle does affect that decadal cloud variation, as Nir Shaviv showed us with his oceans as a calorimeter experiment.
It’s not a pure coincidence that the big el ninos of 1998, 2009 and the big el ninos of 1879 and 1890 were 11 years apart, the solar cycle length.
http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/sst-ssn1870.jpg
Dr. Spencer,
The map shows a markedly large volume of area in the southern hemisphere cooling.
Through my own studies, climate DOES NOT CROSS the equator.
Joe Lalonde: You wrote, “Through my own studies, climate DOES NOT CROSS the equator.”
But the Pacific ITCZ is where the trade winds from the Northern and Southern Hemispheres converge and it wanders north and south of the equator over the course of a year with the average position about 5N to 10N. Also, doesn’t the Southern Equatorial Current actually straddle the equator?
http://s5.tinypic.com/of0d1t.jpg
The map is from this post:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/02/equatorial-currents-before-during-and.html
tallbloke: You wrote, “It’s not a pure coincidence that the big el ninos of 1998, 2009 and the big el ninos of 1879 and 1890 were 11 years apart, the solar cycle length.”
The two largest El Nino events in the latter part of the 20th century occurred in 1982/83 and 1997/98, separated by 15 years. And SST anomalies in the late 1800s have to be taken with a grain of salt. There’s little to no equatorial SST data back then.
Tom Vonk,
Thanks for pointing up the Tsonis work that I am aware of.
Opinions may differ but I wouldn’t class it or the references as ‘in depth’ or ‘for a long time’. They are on the right track but barely scratching the surface in terms of working out a comprehensive global net effect at any given time.
There are lots of other relevant factors as well of course but in terms of scale nothing else internal to the climate system comes anywhere close.
tallbloke wrote, “A lot of the warm water gathering in the PWP for years in advance of big el nino’s comes from places where the the cloud variation is less than it is near the equator…”
The tropical Pacific OHC that fueled the 1998/98 El Nino of the Century was created during the 1995/96 La Nina:
http://i36.tinypic.com/eqwdvl.png
Graph is from this post:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/09/enso-dominates-nodc-ocean-heat-content.html
Look up “Global Circulation Models” for information on all the various oscillations and heat transfers.
“Pamela Gray says:
August 4, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Look up “Global Circulation Models” for information on all the various oscillations and heat transfers.”
Hi , Pammy.
I just did that.
Where’s the bit about the net global effect of all the ocean cycles combined ?
Stephen.
The various ocean circulation regimes do not create nor destroy heat; they only move it around. Thus the changes in ENSO, PDO, etc neither warm nor cool the Earth. The heat they release or absorb is just moved around. It may go to a different section of the ocean surface, it may mix with deeper water or it may exchange heat with the atmosphere.
They don’t prove or disprove Global Warming.
“GregL says:
August 4, 2010 at 3:07 pm
The various ocean circulation regimes do not create nor destroy heat; they only move it around. Thus the changes in ENSO, PDO, etc neither warm nor cool the Earth. The heat they release or absorb is just moved around. It may go to a different section of the ocean surface, it may mix with deeper water or it may exchange heat with the atmosphere.
They don’t prove or disprove Global Warming.”
Quite so.
But they can explain most of the observed tropospheric warming and cooling and the latitudinal changes in air circulation positions.
Then all one needs to account for all the climate changes ever observed is solar variability contributing it’s own independent effect on latitudinal air circulation positions.
The combination of the two effects sometimes offsetting and sometimes supplementing one another.
That is all one needs.
Perhaps someone in disagreement could kindly supply an example of a climate change phenomenon NOT attributable to a combination those two main factors ?
WilliMc: Chiefio (E.M.Smith) has a little gem hidden away on comments to one of his excellent posts, which may go some way to answering your question about temp vs heat content. Comment is at http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/degree-days-view/#comment-5829
Global circulation models now include tandem atmospheric global circulation models and this indeed changes the amount of heat let in and let out through the atmosphere. Please go to the following example and start reading up on how the ENSO models have been created. Some are pure GCM’s and AGCM. Some also include GHG stuff. You just have to spend time reading their works. It will take a bit of your time to understand all of it. I certainly don’t yet.
http://iri.columbia.edu/climate/ENSO/currentinfo/models/Japan_Meteor_Agency.html
More info on OGCM’s (oceanic) and AGCM’s (atmospheric) that will get you started. Just keep reading and going through references. I picked the Japan model because so far, it has been pretty darned good at hind- and forecasting SST.
http://ddb.kishou.go.jp/climate/ElNino/jmamri_cgcm_doc.html
George E. Smith says:
August 3, 2010 at 6:18 pm
Hi George,
Every indication available to me also shows temperatures in the Sea of Cortez to be much cooler than normal this past July. Which makes me wonder not so much about the thermometers NOAA uses, but about their sense of datum levels and/or the lack of distinction in their gridding scheme between the greatly different climates on opposite coasts of the narrow Baja peninsula, whose length I’ve been traversing since my student days.
On a personal note, the Oasis in Loreto is still one of my favorite get-away spots. But I tend to go there in January, rather than July, to enjoy the warm contrast with the winter climate of California. And I prefer eating fresh seafood to catching it. Whereas in the old days I wouldn’t hesitate to go camping off-road anywhere between San Felipe and San Luis Gonzaga, the gringo influx into coastal condos has spawned a crime wave. While making Loreto through Cabo much more acessible, Highway 1 has ruined the attraction for me. Instead of finding ideal spots for skinny-dipping with a girlfriend in the secluded coves of Bahia de Los Angeles, nowadays one finds a bunch of Winnebagos parked there, watching sports on satellite TV. I even stopped going to Rosarito Beach on weekends for the world’s best margaritas at Los Pelicanos because of the violent drug wars and kidnappings near the border. The serenity of one of the least-inhabited, friendliest regions of the world has been lost forever.
Thanks for the links, Pam.
I like the Japanese products too and I’ll have a look into those items.
However I still don’t see that anyone has a grip on the global net variations in the combined oceanic cycles as they occur.
Once they do get it right then some predictive skill should emerge and then they need to link the oceanic variations netted out globally to the average net latitudinal position of all the air circulation systems then link those to the level of solar surface turbulence at any given moment because that seems to affect the global air circulation from above.
Combining the oceanic efects from below with the solar effects from above should produce predictability in the multi decadal latitudinal shifts in the air circulation systems and that is probably the best one can do. When one gets down to periods of less than a couple of decades the background chaos of weather starts to obscure the underlying trend.
I’m not aware of any climate changes in any specific region that cannot be explained by a change in that region’s position relative to the air circulation moving across it.
Changing the global climate is very different to changing a regional climate but even changing the global climate just comes down to shifting the regional climate zones a bit because when all is said and done all of climate is just a matter of energy distribution, not necessarily a matter of absolute overall temperature or energy content of the system.
“”” Joe Lalonde says:
August 4, 2010 at 3:52 am
Dr. Spencer,
The map shows a markedly large volume of area in the southern hemisphere cooling.
Through my own studies, climate DOES NOT CROSS the equator. “””
So if climate does not cross the equator, that would imply some sort of barrier at the equator; a barrier that is able to nullify the consequences of the seasons, with say the sun high in northern summers; leaving the south cold in the southern winters. Such a Temperature gradient would surely drive climate cross the equator.
The only way such a barrier could exist then would be if the equator acts like a mirror, so that any climate change in the northern hemisphere is reflected in the equator to form an image climate n the southern hemisphere; resulting in all zeros on the equator.
Which ever way you choose to think the net result is that climate did cross the equator; either by reflection, or simply conduction/convection.
Stephen Wilde says:
August 4, 2010 at 3:53 pm
“But they can explain most of the observed tropospheric warming and cooling”.
You said “can” not “do”; was that intentional?
GregL
It’s my natural caution.
I think they do but it’ll be a while before that can be proved or disproved.
Stephen Wilde says:
August 5, 2010 at 10:06 am
“it’ll be a while before that can be proved or disproved.”
So what you posted is speculation? Speculation by who pasted on what?
Yes. Greg, but speculation based on observations thus a realistic hypothesis, unlike AGW.
That’s where we disagree Stephen. I prefer to put my trust in science and peer reviewed research rather than speculative blog posts by non-experts in the subject matter.
So you trust stuff that doesn’t work ?
And which is wholly speculative despite hiding under cover of ‘science’ and ‘peer review’.
Got an issue with a specific item in the IPCC WG1 AR4 report?
Interesting that Nino 3.4 shows it. That segment of ocean sits directly on top of the equatorial countercurrent, the pathway that an El Nino wave follows on its way from west to east. It is easy to understand the La Nina that follows after the El Nino has come ashore and is retreating: water level drops behind it and cool water wells up. But in the middle of the ocean? Could this El Nino we just experienced be an El Nino Modoki or partly Modoki? If so, something had to block the countercurrent to cause its warm water to spread. After it overcame the obstacle and got going again cool water welling up behind it just may be the cause. I don’t know but these guys playing with satellites could easily check this out if they use my theory that has been out since December.