Joe D’Aleo reports via email that the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) Index has gone negative for this past month, see the graph below:
Source:http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/amon.us.data
This is the first time the November value has been negative since about 1996. It appears the down cycle has started. This portends a cooler period, especially winters.
The Monthly value plot also shows the down cycle in progress, though this one is only updated to 2009:
The AMO index is correlated to air temperatures and rainfall over much of the Northern Hemisphere, in particular, North America and Europe such as North Eastern Brazilian and African Sahel rainfall and North American and European summer climate. It is also associated with changes in the frequency of North American droughts and is reflected in the frequency of severe Atlantic hurricanes.
| Matt Vooro writes in this document: AMO, THE KEY GLOBAL CLIMATE INDICATOR |
The main climate indicator (in my opinion in the near term) is likely going to be the cool AMO, cool PDO. ENSO events and the changing polar jet stream which swings more often now north before coming south or heading east, bringing cold air to most of North America, and specially the western half and subsequently east, as the our climate moves from west to east.
The graph below shows the relationship between AMO and GLOBAL [ land and marine] TEMPERATURE ANOAMLIES [Hadcrut 3]. AMO appears to be like a thermostat or predictor of global temperatures. ENSO events if moderate or strong seem to modify, amplify or over-ride the AMO effects.
There are interesting times ahead.
Things are very dry in Central MN. After a few inches of snow in early November we’ve had nothing and nothing in the long range forecast.
Looking at McCabe 2004 at NOAA on the precipitation for our area during PDO + AMO negative is not encouraging. Still, we have water to begin.
Several readers have pointed-out that the linked November AMO data was negative in 1999 and 2000.
How has this discrepancy happened?
Hello All, First off I have been following this site and your posts for over a year now and enjoy stopping by here daily. I have never posted before. I am not scientifically inclined so I keep my ears and eyes open and my mouth shut. Just going back to elementary science class and the four seasons of the year (which are all beautiful in Arkansas) I tend to remember that the suns position in relation to our planet accounts for the warm temps in the summer and is the driving force in our significant temp declines in the winter. With that being said, how come the warmist side of the whole AGW argument completely refuses to accept that the sun (along with the jet stream and the ocean) could possibly be responsible for less than one degree of warming over the past 100 years? sorry if my question has a negative effect on the overall IQ rating of your site Anthony (lol)! Thanks for helping keep all of us laymen informed and for fighting this battle.
Watched the UK Metoffice explain their medium-term climate model forecasting process at AGU and they are now using the AMO as one of their components describing it as “highly statistically significant”.
Werner Brozek,
My point was that virtually no one believes that simple logarithmic projections of the greenhouse activity of CO2 gives a fair treatment of sensitivity. Feedbacks must always be taken into account, as as the activities of clouds are especially highly uncertain in this regard– hence the controversial nature of the discussion of sensitivity. The bulk of both GCM’s and paleoclimate data seems to be pointing to an average of 3C of warming per a doubling of CO2 from 280 to 560 ppm. Yes, there are outliers that claim less than 1C and more than 4C, but the average is 3C.
Bill Illis
Thanks for the AGU reference above . Yes the MET OFFICE is finally accepting the signifigance of AMO . They seem to have accepted the fact that AMO was involved in the cooling of 1965-1976 and in the warming 1977-2005 as I noted in my earlier post. This is the first time that I have noted that they have said that in the public . They also noted a 4 month [spread of 3-6] lead time for ENSO events to affect global temperatures and are calling for a global temperature anomaly for 2012 of about 0.46 C which is slightly warmer than they are calling for 2011.
Further to RobWansbeck above: has anyone yet explained why the graphic (first chart above) shows positive AMO values for November 1999 and 2000 when the linked-to NOAA AMO data clearly show that these months were negative? This also means that the statement “This is the first time the November value has been negative since about 1996” is factually incorrect.
Also, why should a single month’s negative AMO portend “a cooler period, especially winters”? The AMO index was negative for five continuous months, Jan-May 2009, yet what it portended was the warmest continuous 18-month period in the NOAA temperature record (Jun 2009-Nov 2010).