Bastardi: Just Say No to El Nino, at least till 2012

Good persrective there John Ware,
Mr Gates believes that this trace invisible gas wafting around in the air above the waves,somehow, through some “back radiation” warms the water beneath more than the sun would normally do so. You’ve got to be extremely thick or just looney to concieve of that.
I wonder which Mr Gates is.

R. Gates says:
July 22, 2011 at 9:56 pm
“Joe, I don’t agree with you on many points but I can’t help but to like your style.”
You’re a typical warmist Gates.
You don’t agree but fail to produce the arguments so as a last resort you tell a guy with an incredible track record of short, medium and long term weather forecasts that you don’t agree with him but “like his style”.
Either you come up with hard fact arguments explaining at at what points you don’t agree with Bastardi or you “Foxtrot Oscar”.

Here’s a thing that has always amused me. We all know most of the heat energy in the earth system resides in the oceans – something to do with thermal capacity or some such. So if the atmosphere is showing a warming ‘anomaly’ seems to me that this must needs mean that heat energy has passed from the ocean to the atmosphere and from there it has nowhere to go but into space. So when like 1998 we have an El Nino spike in global surface temperatures the earth system is actually cooling. How cool is that!

Mr Gates also believes that this “radiative forcing” from the trace gas somehow steps up to the plate with the convection forces generated by the earth’s rotation. More crackpot thinking?

Much mention is made of late about aerosols this century. Has the rate of aerosol production per ton of CO2 changed from the 1990s to 2000s?

Note: I am assuming, that like myself, people know where to get the objective global satellite temperatures. May I suggest a visit to Dr. Roy Spencer’s site about the 10th of every month where he posts it.
As for NASA/GISS and the temperature record, if you keep adjusting temps down BEFORE the satellite era, as they have been doing, of course it looks warmer. Anthony’s look at how bad the temp measurements with surface instrumentation is now shows that. I don’t think many on the side of AGW understand how hot it really was in the 30s through 50s here in the US, and I suspect globally, buy we could not measure it objectively like we can now. . I say suspect because the reporting from other areas was poor at best then.
Look this is getting to be silly. Seriously. Its not Brain Surgery, and I dont know why this
is even argued about ( the test of right and wrong I have set up) But let me again state how this works: We have had an objective way of measuring temperatures since the late 70s. Temps moved up for 20 years, have leveled off the last 10-15. The pdo flipped to warm in the late 70s, the atlantic in the 90s. Its stands to reason that would warm the atmosphere above. The PDO is now cold, the atlantic will head that way, so it should cool in the same jagged way it warmed before. WE CAN NOW MEASURE THIS FROM START TO FINISH! Temps before the satellite era are suspect relative to the satellite era, which are superior Its a very easy hypothesis to test the next 20-30 years. What is so darn hard, or non science about that? Why is that hard for some of you to see?. If the cold pdo and soon to be cold amo result in the fall of temps by 2030 back to where we were in the late 70s, then we would have gone through a warm/cold cycle with an OBJECTIVE measuring tool, and we have our answer. In the meantime, there is no el nino coming on and quite the contrary, there is increasing model agreement that in the ‘NORMAL” cold PDO fashion, this cold event will
come back again, though not as strong as the first part of it. ITS THE NASA MODEL THAT WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WITH A STRONG NINO FOR THIS WINTER. There is where Hansens Hope came from. The response 6-12 months later would have been the global temp spike which would put 2012 temps up and this is what Hansen was hoping for. He doesn’t understand, as Joe D’Aleo has shown, that in cold PDOs’ la ninas last an average of 21 months, and the warm
episodes are less than a year. The very act of enso warming in a cold PDO invites its own destruction. In warm PDO’s the opposite is true.
By the way, the best model I have seen over the past 3 years is from the Frontier Research Center, if you wish to take a look at that. But YOU HAVE TO GO DO THE WORK YOURSELF.
There is nothing here that is not easy to see. I assume the people in this debate are watching the way I am, but some of the comments asking me for this and that indicate to me that it is not the case. If it is not, then why bash me before you have looked at all the evidence? . More important, why are you in a debate where you seem to not know where to look for data that may challenge your own ideas? i am constantly looking at sites that challenge mine since I know, and can refute the other argument, then I know I am right. If I cant, then I have to change mine. But this is a simple test of a very simple theory. So how does it raise so much ire? It is or it isnt, we will find out over the coming 2 decades
its out there for you to see, and I assumed people have been watching this, so the update was written for those familiar enough to know where to see these things. I guess I thought everyone knew where the data sources were.
Okay, I am done with this for now, In 3 months, lets see if this is coming back on enough for all to see, though I suspect even if it is, someone will find something that calls into question the validity of the forecast and result

Joe says:

But the point was to again call attention to the Hansen super nino idea because he knows there is a global temp response to warmer after a warm event.

Can someone clue me in on what Hansen’s super nino idea is?
Anyway, it looks like Joe is going to be right about no nina until 2012. In his original post, back in April, he included a CFS forecast graph. It showed a predicted anomaly hovering just below zero. The current graph found on the ENSO reference page is quite different and shows the anomaly well below zero until April 2012 (which is as far as it shows). http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/enso/

R. Gates says:
“to not mention the increase in sulfur aerosols over the past decade (regardless of cause) is to miss a big part of the story.”
You’re quite right, and as AW pointed out in his July 18 post, “New NASA paper contradicts Kaufmann et al saying it’s volcanoes, not China coal,” NASA itself says “we demonstrate with these satellite measurements that the observed trend is mainly driven by a series of moderate but increasingly intense volcanic eruptions primarily at tropical latitudes.”
No AGW here, R. Sorry, keep moving…

Quick question for Mr Gates, What fraction of that apostrophe is man-made (as if there were such a thing) co2?

Hey Joe,
Big fan. But brother, you wear your heart on your sleeve too much. Who cares that some random bean head doesn’t like the way you write? Life is too short. You’re never going to prove your worth to everyone in the world, not should you have to.
Pick your battles more wisely.