From NASA’s PR engine:
NASA Sees Hurricane Sandy as the “Bride of Frankenstorm” Approaching U.S. East Coast
NASA’s TRMM satellite revealed Hurricane Sandy’s heavy rainfall and the storm is expected to couple with a powerful cold front and Arctic air to bring that heavy rainfall to the Mid-Atlantic and northeastern U.S. Some forecasters are calling this combination of weather factors “Frankenstorm” because of the close proximity to Halloween. However, because Sandy is a woman’s name, the storm could be considered a “bride of Frankenstorm.”
NASA satellites have provided forecasters at the National Hurricane Center with rainfall data, infrared, visible and other data on Sandy and will continue to do so. Dr. Marshall Shepherd who works with TRMM data provided an insight into the storm’s development.
NASA’s TRMM Satellite Sees Sandy Drench Jamaica and Eastern Cuba
The Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) satellite had a partial view of hurricane Sandy on Oct. 25 at 1425 UTC (10:25 a.m. EDT) after it had passed over Cuba and moved into the Bahamas. An eye was hard to find but TRMM’s Microwave Imager (TMI) data showed that a large area of intense rainfall was occurring around Sandy’s center of circulation. Hal Pierce of NASA’s TRMM Team at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. used a GOES-13 satellite image captured at the same time to fill in the part of the image not viewed by TRMM to create a total picture of the storm.
TRMM rainfall totals were tallied for the seven-day period from Oct. 18-25, 2012. The heaviest rainfall occurred over open ocean where totals were as high as 325 millimeters. Rainfall amounts as high as 250 millimeters were measured over eastern Cuba and some extreme southern areas of Hispaniola. Hurricane Sandy’s track with appropriate symbols is shown overlaid in white. Credit: SSAI/NASA, Hal Pierce
With its combination of passive microwave and active radar sensors, TRMM is ideally suited to measure rainfall from space. For increased coverage, TRMM can be used to calibrate rainfall estimates from other additional satellites. The TRMM-based, near-real time Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis (TMPA) made at NASA Goddard can be used to rainfall over a wide portion of the globe. TMPA rainfall totals were tallied for the seven-day period from Oct. 18-25, 2012.The heaviest rainfall occurred over open ocean where totals were as high as 325 millimeters. Rainfall amounts as high as 250 millimeters were measured over eastern Cuba and some extreme southern areas of Hispaniola.
› View larger image On Oct. 25 at 1425 UTC (10:25 a.m. EDT), NASA’s TRMM satellite saw that rain associated with Hurricane Sandy storm’s center, was moderate (in green and blue) and falling at a rate of 20 to 40 mm per hour. The heaviest rainfall at the time of this image was falling over the Dominican Republic at more than 2 inches/50 mm per hour (red). Credit: SSAI/NASA, Hal Pierce
Hurricane Sandy passed over the islands of Jamaica and Cuba causing at least 21 deaths. Extensive flooding and other damage were reported near the capital city of Kingston and other areas of Jamaica.
National Hurricane Center Rainfall Expectations
The heavy rainfall potential is evident in the National Hurricane Center’s (NHC) forecast on Oct. 26. The NHC noted that Sandy is expected to produce total rainfall amounts of 6 to 12 inches across Haiti and the Dominican Republic with isolated maximum totals of 20 inches possible. Rainfall totals of 3 to 6 inches are expected over portions of the Bahamas with isolated maximum amounts of 12 inches possible. Rainfall totals of one to three inches are expected across the Florida Keys into southeastern and east-central Florida with isolated maximum amounts of six inches possible. Rainfall totals of 4 to 8 inches are possible over far eastern North Carolina.
Interview with Research Meteorologist Dr. Marshall Shepherd
Dr. Marshall Shepherd, University of Georgia Professor and Research Meteorologist has worked with TRMM satellite data since its launch in 1997. Dr. Shepherd provided his take on the storm event. “Models are coming into consensus on a landfall, if you will, in the DelMarVa area. Comparisons are being made to the Perfect Storm of 1991, but many folks won’t remember that. Storm will bring very strong winds (hurricane force) over a strong area. Remember the Derecho of June 29, 2012. Expand that to the entire Delaware/Maryland/Virginia and New York/New Jersey region.”
Shepherd said that the event will bring significant rains and inland freshwater flooding , that he said was often the deadliest threat from tropical systems. He also cited concerns about the storm surge and coastal flooding as full moon will mean elevated water levels/tides coupled with the storm-induced surge. Finally, he noted, there is likely to be heavy wet snow into the inland and higher elevations of the effected region. “Pay attention to the cone or area of influence rather than a specific track as the storm will affect an area not a point,” he said.
“Advances from NASA satellites, aircraft, and models are essential for ingest into the models, assessing storm locations and intensity, and testing future modeling techniques. It may not be obvious to many, but our warning and prediction capability does have traceability to the NASA program in numerous ways and I have been happy to play some small role as a former NASA scientist and current member of the NASA Precipitation Science Team and Earth Science Subcommittee of the NASA Advisory Council.”
Where is Sandy on Friday, Oct. 26?
A Hurricane Warning is in effect for the Northwestern Bahamas Except Andros Island. A Tropical Storm Warning is in effect for the Central Bahamas, Florida East Coast from Ocean Reef to Flagler Beach, Lake Okeechobee and Andros Island in the northwestern Bahamas. A Tropical Storm Watch is in effect for Savannah River to Oregon Inlet North Carolina, Pamlico Sound, the Florida east coast from North of Flagler Beach to Fernandina Beach, the Florida Upper Keys from Ocean Reef to Craig Key, and Florida Bay.
On Friday, Oct. 26, at 8 a.m. EDT, Hurricane Sandy’s maximum sustained winds were near 80- mph (130 kph). Sandy is a category one hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane wind scale. Some weakening is possible during the next day or so, according to the National Hurricane Center. It was centered near latitude 26.4 north and longitude 76.9 west. Sandy is moving northwest near 10 mph (17 kph) and is expected to turn north and then northeast on Oct. 27, while slowing down.
Storm surge is expected to be big factor as Sandy approaches the Mid-Atlantic coast. Very rough surf and high and dangerous waves are expected to be coupled with the full moon. The National Hurricane Center noted that the combination of a dangerous storm surge and the tide will cause normally dry areas near the coast to be flooded by rising waters. The water could reach the following depths above ground if the peak surge occurs at the time of high tide. Some storm surge forecasts include: 5 to 8 feet in the hurricane warning area in the Bahamas and one to three feet along the Florida coast in the warning areas on Oct. 26.
GOES-13 Satellite Shows Sandy and Powerful Cold Front
NOAA’s GOES-13 satellite monitors weather over the eastern U.S. and the Atlantic Ocean. In a visible image taken from NOAA’s GOES-13 satellite on Friday, Oct. 26 at 1415 UTC (10:15 a.m. EDT) Hurricane Sandy’s huge cloud extent of up to 2,000 miles extended into the Atlantic, while its center was over the Bahamas. At the same time a long line of clouds associated with a powerful cold front approaching the U.S. east coast stretched from the upper Midwest to the Gulf coast. The image was created by the NASA GOES Project at NASA Goddard.
“Bride of Frankenstorm”
Hurricane Sandy is expected to mix with a powerful cold front approaching the east coast, and cold Arctic Air mass, setting up for a powerful storm, a “Bride of Frankenstorm.”
The cold front stretching from the upper Midwest to the Gulf coast is moving eastward and is expected to temporarily push Sandy away from the coast. However, the front is expected to break down as it moves toward the coast, allowing Hurricane Sandy to come back toward the coast.
As happens when any storm becomes extra-tropical, Sandy will go from a warm to cold core center and the strongest winds spread out and the storm will expand. According to the National Hurricane Center, hurricane force winds extend outward up to 35 miles (55 km) from the center and tropical storm force winds extend outward up to 275 miles (445 km). The wind field of Sandy is expected to grow in size during the next couple of days. The storm’s circulation almost reaches 2,000 miles.
Although landfall is expected in southeastern Delaware early Tuesday morning as a hurricane, the Mid-Atlantic is expected to start feeling the storm’s effect starting Sunday, Oct. 28.
For updates on Hurricane Sandy’s forecast, go to the National Hurricane Center: www.nhc.noaa.gov
For the GOES-R and JPSS National Centers Perspective Blog: http://goesrnatcentperspective.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/what-to-do-with-sandy-pt-ii/
Text credit: Rob Gutro/Hal Pierce/Marshall Shepherd
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
NZ Willy says:
October 26, 2012 at 5:10 pm
A “consensus” on where the landfall will be, huh?
I predict that it will follow its current path and come ashore in Jersey in 10 days. Perhaps Boston might get some rain but I doubt that the MET would predict out that far.
Buncha’ east coast lightweights.
Mike in Houston
Anthony:
About a week and a half ago you featured a prediction of a sharply colder incursion of Canadian air running from eastern Montana down through central Nebraska. Whoever made the prediction hit it pretty well.
Franknstorm? Who the hell is Frank, and who the hell is Storm?
James Schrumpf says:
October 26, 2012 at 4:12 pm
“Girl’s name what?”
Context is important.
. . . Patty, Rafael, Sandy, Tony, Valerie . . .
http://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/2012hurricane.htm
Kent Beuchert says:
October 26, 2012 at 4:30 pm
> “Sandy” can be male or female.
Oh come on all of you, names alternate between male and female. The previous storm was Rafael, the next is Tony. Sandy is used as a female name.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutnames.shtml
Regardless of the weather, they continue to push it.
Just sayin, look for yourself in the MSM.
We have upon us what will be spun as “Dirty Weather”.
> Some forecasters are calling this combination of weather factors “Frankenstorm” because of the close proximity to Halloween.
No – as I mentioned elsewhere, it’s a reference to the storm assembled from parts. http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/discussions/hpcdiscussions.php?disc=preepd&version=4&fmt=reg says, but I think is not the first reference:
DESPITE A MODEST CLUSTER OF OUTLYING DETERMINISTIC SOLUTIONS AND
ENSEMBLE MEMBERS FROM THE VARIOUS MODELING CENTERS, THE LION’S
SHARE OF GUIDANCE INDICATES THAT THE CIRCULATION ASSOCIATED WITH
HURRICANE SANDY WILL PASS CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE AMPLIFYING POLAR
TROUGH OVER THE EASTERN UNITED STATES TO BECOME INCORPORATED INTO
A HYBRID VORTEX OVER THE MID ATLANTIC AND NORTHEAST NEXT TUESDAY.
THE HIGH DEGREE OF BLOCKING FROM EASTERN NORTH AMERICA ACROSS THE
ENTIRE ATLANTIC BASIN IS EXPECTED TO ALLOW THIS UNUSUAL MERGER TO
TAKE PLACE, AND ONCE THE COMBINED GYRE MATERIALIZES, IT SHOULD
SETTLE BACK TOWARD THE INTERIOR NORTHEAST THROUGH HALLOWEEN,
INVITING PERHAPS A GHOULISH NICKNAME FOR THE CYCLONE ALONG THE
LINES OF “FRANKENSTORM”, AN ALLUSION TO MARY SHELLEY’S GOTHIC
CREATURE OF SYNTHESIZED ELEMENTS.
H.R. says:
October 26, 2012 at 5:10 pm
“Still we’ll just have to wait and see.””
Of interest in the case of where H. Sandy might go is what is to the NE of it and not so much as to what is coming from the west. And again, this is not new as explained here – March 1953:
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/081/mwr-081-03-0067.pdf
Recent view of the setup is here:
http://imgur.com/Ec5Ll
Which reminds me of the old question:
http://www.elyrics.net/read/j/jane_s-addiction-lyrics/irresistible-force-lyrics.html
eric1skeptic says:
October 26, 2012 at 5:31 pm
Keep in mind it didn’t reach land. Todd Gross, who may have named it, wrote an interesting report about going out during the storm to look at the waves breaking near Boston, I think he reported them as 30′ tall. Of course, you remember the 100′ waves reported by a buoy.
The storm is one of nine storms listed in http://www.stormsurge.noaa.gov/event_history.html , this storm is described:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Perfect_Storm says in part:
In Massachusetts, where damage was heaviest, over 100 homes were destroyed or severely damaged. To the north, more than 100 homes were affected in Maine, including the vacation home of then-President George H. W. Bush. More than 38,000 people were left without power, and along the coast high waves inundated roads and buildings. In portions of New England, damage was worse than that caused by Hurricane Bob two months earlier.
Aside from tidal flooding along rivers, the storm’s effects were primarily concentrated along the coast. A buoy off the coast of Nova Scotia reported a wave height of 100.7 feet (30.7 m), the highest ever recorded in the province’s offshore waters. In the middle of the storm, the Andrea Gail sank, killing its crew of six and inspiring the book, and later movie, The Perfect Storm. Off the shore of New York’s Long Island, an Air National Guard helicopter ran out of fuel and crashed; four members of its crew were rescued, and one was killed….
The Perfect Storm originated from a cold front that exited the east coast of the United States. On October 28, the front spawned an extratropical low to the east of Nova Scotia. Around that time, a ridge extended from the Appalachian Mountains northeastward to Greenland, with a strong high pressure center over eastern Canada. The blocking ridge forced the extratropical low to track toward the southeast and later to the west. Hurricane Grace was swept aloft by its cold front into the warm conveyor belt circulation of the deep cyclone on October 29. The cyclone significantly strengthened as a result of the temperature contrast between the cold air to the northwest and the warmth and humidity from the remnants of Hurricane Grace. The low pressure system continued deepening as it drifted toward the United States.[2] It had an unusual retrograde motion for a nor’easter, beginning a set of meteorological circumstances that occur only once every 50 to 100 years.[3] Most nor’easters affect New England from the southwest.[4]
While situated about 390 miles (630 km) south of Halifax, Nova Scotia, the storm attained its peak intensity with winds of up to 70 mph (110 km/h).[2] The nor’easter reached peak intensity at approximately 12:00 UTC on October 30 with its lowest pressure of 972 millibars. The interaction between the extratropical storm and the high pressure system to its north created a significant pressure gradient, which created large waves and strong winds.[2] Between the southern New England coast and the storm’s center, the gradient was 70 mbar (2.1 inHg).[5] A buoy located 264 miles (425 km) south of Halifax reported a wave height of 100.7 feet (30.7 m) on October 30. This became the highest recorded wave height on the Scotian Shelf, which is the oceanic shelf off the coast of Nova Scotia.[6] East of Cape Cod, a NOAA buoy located at 41°06’N 66°36’W / 41.1°N 66.6°W / 41.1; -66.6 reported maximum sustained winds of 56 mph (90 km/h) with gusts to 75 mph (121 km/h), and a significant wave height (average height of the highest waves) of 39 feet (12 m) around 15:00 UTC on October 30. Another buoy, located at 40°30’N 69°30’W / 40.5°N 69.5°W / 40.5; -69.5, reported maximum sustained winds of 61 mph (98 km/h) with gusts to 72 mph (116 km/h) and a significant wave height of 31 feet (9.4 m) near 00:00 UTC on October 31.[2]
Upon peaking in intensity, the nor’easter turned southward and gradually weakened; by November 1, its pressure had risen to 998 millibars (29.5 inHg). The low moved over warm waters of the Gulf Stream, where bands of convection around the center began to organize.[7] Around this time, the system attained subtropical characteristics. On November 1, while the storm was moving in a counter-clockwise loop, a tropical cyclone had been identified at the center of the larger low.[8] (Although these conditions are rare, Hurricane Karl during 1980 formed within a larger non-tropical weather system.)[9]
“because Sandy is a woman’s name”.
Rubbish.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20106270
The good old BBC are on the case as well “‘Frankenstorm’ bears down on US east coast”.
But judging by lots of other news in the UK the BBC can take 40 years to spot what’s going on under their noses.
“””””…..beng says:
October 26, 2012 at 4:16 pm
What are the blue areas in the Bahamas that show up on sat pics? Very shallow water? Corral?…..”””””
They are “Blue holes” very deep holes in shallower surroundings.
” It’s never difficult to tell the difference between a bright sunny day and a Scotsman with a grudge.” P. G. Wodehouse.
“However, because Sandy is a woman’s name…” Anthony Watts
Not in Scotland, it is exclusively a man’s name, and having served in the forces with many Scots, their legendary valour is only matched by their sensitivity to criticism. I’d keep a look out for a Scotsman with a grudge if I were you Anthony.-:)
Dr. Ryan Maue has a great discussion called “Warm Seclusion Sandy” on the WeatherBELL Professional Site. Forsome the artical might be worth a free trial subscription, as he dives into the science of things in a wonderful way.
In a nutshell, it suggests that there could be some strong gales on the north side, away from the center, as Sandy transitions from a Hurricane to a North Atlantic Gale. Even though the storm may head inland down in New Jersey, Boston shouldn’t lower its guard.
There’s no “Italian dilemma.” Overstating the risk is better than understating, because overpreparing is INFINITELY better than underpreparing. The Italian court was exactly right.
@John F. Hultquist says:
October 26, 2012 at 10:07 pm
@H.R. says:
October 26, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Of interest in the case of where H. Sandy might go is what is to the NE of it and not so much as to what is coming from the west. And again, this is not new as explained here – March 1953:
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/081/mwr-081-03-0067.pdf
That was a good read along with the better satellite image. Thanks!
What is a ”strong” area. Does the good doctor mean large and if so why not say it.
Can I make a suggestion. Can we have a day of mourning for the AGW disciples who were and always are trying to capatilise on normal weather events and deaths there from, in order to try to persuade people that the earth is in turmoil.
Surely, Sandy is a diminutive of Alexander and hence also of Alexandra and so can denote either a man or a woman.
Of course Alexander / Alexandra also has as diminutives:
– Sasha (female only in English but either gender in Russian I believe)
– Sandra (female only in English)
– Alex (either gender in English)
Sandy can also be a diminutive of Sandra (as someone else has pointed out), so it can be a two-stage diminutive of Alexandra or of Cassandra.
Jim
since I published my first data set summarizing all results from 47 weather stations I found that my sine wave for the drop in maximum temps. gives me best correlation:
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
The point I have been trying to make for a long time:
Earth stores energy in its waters, vegetation, chemicals, even in currents and weather, etc. On top of that we have earth’s own volcanic actions which also provides heating/cooling, whatever. Ice, more or less of it, also becomes a factor. Movements of earth’s iron core may also cause temporarily changes in the average mean temp. on earth. So whatever comes out as average temp. is bound to be very confusing.
Maxima is a much better parameter to look at as it gives us a sense of energy in. There must be a lag between energy out and energy in, so even though my sine wave indicates a wavelength of 88 years for energy-in , I am more inclined to believe in a 100 year cycle consisting of 2 x 50 year cycle (44 + ca.5 ; remember 7 x 7 + 1 jubilee year?) for energy out.
To explain this cycle, before they started with the carbon dioxide nonsense, they did look in the direction of the planets, rightly or wrongly.See here.
http://www.cyclesresearchinstitute.org/cycles-astronomy/arnold_theory_order.pdf
To quote from the above paper:
A Weather Cycle as observed in the Nile Flood cycle, Max rain followed by Min rain, appears discernible with maximums at 1750, 1860, 1950 and minimums at 1670, 1800, 1900 and a minimum at 1990 predicted.
(The 1990 turned out to be 1995 when, according to my dataset, cooling started!)
Indeed one would expect more condensation (bigger flooding) at the end of a cooling period and minimum flooding at the end of a warm period. This is because when water vapor cools (more) it condensates (more) to water (i.e. more rain, snow, clouds, etc).
Now put my sine wave next to those dates? Not too bad, heh?
1900- minimum flooding : end of warming
1950 – maximum flooding: end of cooling
1995 – minimum flooding: end of warming
I want to postulate something here, seeing that I am right, and nobody has yet proven me wrong. What we are seeing with this storm is exactly as predicted by me: we are now nearing the bottom of the sine wave curve at maximum speed of cooling. We see increased cloud formations and more precipitation (I even notice this here in SA, I have similar reports from AU and UK and NL) exactly as predicted, as we are moving toward the next maximum flooding of the Nile which would occur around 2040.
But now I am thinking, it is this curve, this change in the speed of warming/cooling over time that actually produces the weather as we know it. Without it, there would be little or no weather. There would be little or no rain as the clouds would not move but stay where they are. It is this curve, mainly that ultimately causes and initiates the differences in pressures, meaning it “spreads” the weather (rain) over the earth. Isn’t that amazing?
What say you?
HenryP says:
October 27, 2012 at 5:08 am
“I want to postulate something here, seeing that I am right, and nobody has yet proven me wrong.”
Most posters, including me, rarely go out of our way to enter debates which could border on argument. (Usually, especially to save time, I just respond if someone says something to me directly first). However, in the spirit of constructive criticism:
Your prior post includes, among other aspects:
(1) noting temperature readings from an assortment of stations from the 1970s through now
(2) assuming that segment of data means temperatures followed a 88 / 100 year sine wave throughout the past century or beyond, on the basis of similarity over the 1970s-now period but plotting no pre-1970s temperature data
#1 is quite good, relatively proven.
#2, though, is a different matter
HenryP says:
October 27, 2012 at 5:08 am
“Now put my sine wave next to those dates? Not too bad, heh?
1900- minimum flooding : end of warming
1950 – maximum flooding: end of cooling
1995 – minimum flooding: end of warming”
From this plus prior posts, it sounds like you are assuming there was overall global cooling from 1900 to 1950. That is utterly not so, not for global average temperatures (regardless of whatever rainfall pattern in a single locality like the Nile River may be doing). For instance, for temperature history from sources even before the global warming movement existed, look at the following:
1976 National Geographic, northern hemisphere average:
http://img240.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=40530_DSCN1557_nat_geog_1976_1200x900_122_75lo.JPG
1975 Newsweek:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o30PNIBahS0/T2KTNlu3RsI/AAAAAAAAAkY/cItxzMamChk/s1600/newsweek-global-cooling.jpg
I don’t like referencing a Hansen source, but, for southern hemisphere data, the following one back from 1981 probably was not heavily adjusted yet:
http://hidethedecline.eu/media/PERPLEX/fig30.jpg
I have never seen any source with specific temperature data or reconstructions, neither skeptic nor CAGW movement, which has suggested net overall global cooling from 1900 to 1950.
Overall, as a global average, there was warming during the first half of the 20th century.
In fact, global sea level rise was faster in the first half of the 20th century than the second half:
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006GL028492.shtml
“The rate of sea level change was found to be larger in the early part of last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904–1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954–2003).”
Global average temperature is not a 88 / 100 year sine wave. It may come close to overlapping with such if only 3 or 4 decades of temperature data are plotted, but more data from further back is available. For what it has looked like over several centuries as well as recently, see
http://s10.postimage.org/l9gokvp09/composite.jpg
HenryP says:
October 27, 2012 at 5:08 am
But now I am thinking, it is this curve, this change in the speed of warming/cooling over time that actually produces the weather as we know it. Without it, there would be little or no weather. There would be little or no rain as the clouds would not move but stay where they are. It is this curve, mainly that ultimately causes and initiates the differences in pressures, meaning it “spreads” the weather (rain) over the earth. Isn’t that amazing?
What say you?
Well, there would still be weather even if the planet did not have change in its global average temperature from decade to decade.
For instance, as a thought experiment: Have a giant block of ice or an air conditioner at one end of a room, while having an electric heater running on the opposite end of the room. The temperature difference would result in convective heat transfer, in convective and turbulent air flow, as smoke trails (like we use in wind tunnel demonstrations of turbulent air flow in a different context) or anything else would demonstrate. Such would occur even if the room’s overall total average temperature over time was constant.
A planet is much larger than a room, but, when there is a temperature difference between the cold poles and the warm tropics, that is among factors contributing to air flow and weather.
There is also the jet stream of air moving relative to the surface which is most fundamentally due to the planet’s rotation.
And there is much more including on smaller scale, but presumably I need not get long-winded.
HenryP says:
October 27, 2012 at 5:08 am
“What we are seeing with this storm is exactly as predicted by me: we are now nearing the bottom of the sine wave curve at maximum speed of cooling.”
Although I can’t overall share the same sine wave assumption, we are indeed in a period where relative global cooling has started and looks likely to continue. (You put peak warmth and the end of warming at 1995; I put it at the 1998 El Nino, but both are in the mid to late 1990s basically). And, much as I recall a study which showed there were more storms in Europe during the cold Little Ice Age than during the warm Medieval Warm Period, cooling seems to tend to correspond to more storminess. (Such is not really surprising; since the arctic and high latitudes change temperature more than the equator, cold periods correspond to greater temperature difference between the poles and the equator).
HenryP says:
October 27, 2012 at 5:08 am
I think it’s pretty bizarre that you’re trying to a 100 year cycle and give it credit for daily weather. All you need for rain is heat on wet surfaces at the bottom of the atmosphere and cooling at the top. Combine with a trace of heating gradient from surface features or a spherical surface and presto – convective cells. Throw in some Coriolis Effect and you get rotating systems and things like the Hadley cell. No 100 year cycle necessary.
Also, the EE in me has a lot of trouble with your single sine wave solution. We’re a lot happier with Fourier transforms that look at many cycle lengths.
All in all, I prefer the analysis in http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/07/in-china-there-are-no-hockey-sticks/ . I reference it in my Guide to WUWT as one of my favorites:
I thought “cold” was anathema to hurricanes. I can see the lotsa rain part but won’t the cold front kill the hurricane if not wind shear. Also, Do these analysts believe that the paths of the hurricane and the cold front are completely independent and fortuitous? if the cold front were to have arrived a few days earlier, the hurricane would have curved back out to sea.
Ric Werme says
All you need for rain is heat on wet surfaces at the bottom of the atmosphere and cooling at the top.
Henry says
true. But how did you get the rain (clouds) to move from above the oceans to land, involving movement over great distances