Image Credits: Soft Pixel – clker.com – Cagel.com
By WUWT Regular “Just The Facts”
For anyone who was witness to the absurdity of the recent warming makes it cold meme, it should come as no surprise that even ardent Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming believers are trying to distance themselves from the meme before it causes more damage. After the White House took a run at it, and the willfully gullible media, e.g. Bloomberg Businessweek, BBC and NPR lapped it up, now everyone, including the scientist credited with starting it, are walking away. Let us start with this Washington Post – Capital Weather Gang article yesterday, “Scientists: Don’t make “extreme cold” centerpiece of global warming argument“:
“It’s an intriguing theory – that recently has gotten legs: the melting Arctic – spurred by global warming – is causing the weather’s steering flow, the jet stream, to become more extreme. This extreme jet stream – rather than zipping around the world in a straight circle (right below) – is more frequently meandering off course (left below) and getting stuck in place, sending bitter, prolonged blasts of cold southward and conversely, see-sawing strong heat domes northward. It’s a fascinating paradox: global warming as the culprit for bone-chilling cold.
But more and more scientists are expressing reservations about this hypothesis, first proposed by Rutgers climate scientist Jennifer Francis and collaborators.
“It’s an interesting idea, but alternative observational analyses and simulations with climate models have not confirmed the hypothesis, and we do not view the theoretical arguments underlying it as compelling,” write five preeminent climate scientists (John Wallace, Isaac Held, David Thompson, Kevin Trenberth, and John Walsh) in a recent letter published in Science Magazine.
Elizabeth Barnes, an atmospheric scientists from Colorado State University, after an attempt to dismantle Francis’ theory last summer, published a second challenge in January.
“…the link between recent Arctic warming and increased Northern Hemisphere blocking is currently not supported by observations,” Barnes’ study concludes.”
Funny stuff and it gets even better, from this Princetonian article from two days ago, “U. lecturer argues global warming doesn’t cause polar vortex”
“The polar vortex is a ring of Westerlies, prevailing winds that blow from west to east around the poles that are strongest in the winter, Wallace explained. Wallace is a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington.
Wallace noted that the vortex continually changes its shape, and when its lobes sweep down over temperate areas, those regions get periods of cold weather.
“I don’t think the slowing down of the polar vortex is enough to really affect behavior of the vortex very much,” he said.
He also noted that the belief that human-induced climate change could cause more extreme cold was, in fact, held by only a small minority of researchers.”
“Like Held, University Physics professor William Happer said this year’s weather is not anomalous.
“It’s exactly the same as weather we’ve had in my own lifetime many times,” Happer said. “Why should it suddenly be climate change?”
Happer explained that this year’s record lows have been emphasized in order to support the climate change “myth.”
“You know, for years we were told we’re going to fry, and the earth refused to cooperate. And so they desperately look for something else to hang their hat on,” he said, referring to supporters of the global warming theory.
Held also said this year’s extreme cold is most likely part of natural fluctuations in global climate.”
And then, to top it all off, Jennifer Francis, who first proposed the warming causes cold meme, and had previously blessed us with pearls of wisdom like;
“‘It’s basically the jet stream on a drunken path going around the Northern Hemisphere,’ explains Rutgers University climate scientist Jennifer Francis.” Grist
“Scientists tend to call the jet stream a “polar vortex,” Francis says.” Bloomberg Businessweek
has now has seen the light:
“The media certainly had a field day with the “attack of the polar vortex” in early January, and in their hyping of the story, some misquoted me (and others) by saying that climate change caused the unusual cold spell. Of course this sort of event has happened before, and this one wasn’t unprecedented.
I also agree that greenhouse-gas induced warming will reduce, not increase, the likelihood of breaking cold temperature records — the data already show this.” New York Times – Dot Earth
Gotta love when we can all agree on something. If you would like to learn more about what might actually have caused the recent “weak vortex event” and associated “cold-air outbreaks”, this article and associated comments offers a reasonably detailed analysis.
jmorpuss says: February 22, 2014 at 12:27 am
All the pause lines are drawn back to the surface at or near the poles through electromagnetism http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magearth.html
Yes, the magnetosphere looks like this, note the CME impact that occurs about 30 seconds into this video;
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy4HgirSwjo&w=480&h=390]
which is referenced here:
http://www.spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=03&month=08&year=2010
This simulation provides a good visualization of how auroras occur:
However, the structure of the magnetosphere does not change the fact that I have not seen evidence that sufficient energy can be transported low enough in the atmosphere to influence Earth’s climate.
The “consensus” folks are covered. They say both cooling and warming are caused by warming! Also, Climate Change is caused by changing climate! White is green only when painted green.
John F. Hultquist says:
February 22, 2014 at 9:32 am
I thought ‘ari nailed it.
“As the earf spins…”
@ur momisugly richardscourtney
My main interests are energy, energy policy and society. Since climate policy lies at the core of energy policy I am inclined to do whatever I can to bring “reality” whatever that is to the climate debate. I believe there is a serious risk in NW Europe over the next 30 years experinecing some serious winter cold events that are outside of the range considered normal and that a few windmills and depleting gas production will leave our electricity delivery systems wanting.
I didn’t know about the cancelled Thames projects. The Jubilee River seems to follow the course of an abandoned channel. I’m not sure how they could build an artificial channel from Staines (?) to the sea through central London. If I were living down stream of the confluence of Jubilee River and River Thames and had been flooded – I’d be pissed off!
E
I listened to the NPR piece which included an interview with Dr Francis and she specifically referred to weather like this as being a result of climate change.
Integrity – it’s optional.
http://www.weatheraction.com/resource/data/wact1/docs/USA%201312DEC%2030d%20SLAT9A%20prod29Nov.pdf
Piers Corbyn predicts the path of the polar vortex a month in advance .
He presumes the Suns sunspot activity and surmises its effect on the Earths magnetosphere.
This PDF contains his predictions for Dec 2013.Looks accurate to me.Extreme events are his forte.
Anthony I hope you will take a look.
REPLY: Meh, none of his forecasts are verifiable IMHO, as they are written like astrology in broad generalities. I’ve long since given up on him since he’s so into OTT self-promotion of “successes” – Anthony
Mac the Knife says:
February 22, 2014 at 1:56 am
Stephen Richards says:
February 22, 20morning 14 at 1:36 am
Good morning Stephen!
How are things in your bit of the world? I’m ‘restless in Seattle’ and feeling a bit peckish with the late night trolls. They usually don’t elicit my ire but I’ve bloody well had my fill of them, of late.
Mac
——————————————————-
Here are some of ren’s contributions brought forth to the endless pursuit of all things “Polar Vortex.”
ren says: January 18, 2014 at 11:45 pm
http://geo.phys.spbu.ru/materials_of_a_conference_2012/STP2012/Veretenenko_%20et_all_Geocosmos2012proceedings.pdf
Interesting, i.e. THE POLAR VORTEX EVOLUTION AS A POSSIBLE REASON FOR THE TEMPORAL VARIABILITY OF SOLAR ACTIVITY EFFECTS ON THE LOWER ATMOSPHERE CIRCULATION S.V. Veretenenko:
“It was revealed that the detected earlier ~60-year oscillations of the amplitude and sign of SA/GCR effects on the troposphere pressure at high and middle latitudes are closely related to the state of a cyclonic vortex forming in the polar stratosphere…
……
ren says: January 19, 2014 at 11:39 pm
Solar activity decreases. Grows cosmic rays. Winter will be long ..
http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/webform/monitor.gif
………………..
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 31st ICRC, Ł ´ OD´Z 2009 1
Dynamics of the ionizing particle fluxes in the Earth’s atmosphere
http://icrc2009.uni.lodz.pl/proc/pdf/icrc0228.pdf
…………………
Modulation of galactic cosmic rays during the
unusual solar minimum between cycles 23 and 24 2
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1310.7076.pdf
etc..etc..etc..
………………
But that’s not why I’m here today..
How would vortices like the following found in Earths magnetosphere, finally dissipate. Wonder if they are vertical or horizontal? Another contribution of the energy and particle transportation system from the sun…
“”””“These vortices were really huge structures, about six Earth radii across,” says Hiroshi Hasegawa, Dartmouth College, New Hampshire who has been analysing the data with help from an international team of colleagues. Their results place the size of the vortices at almost 40 000 kilometres each, and this is the first time such structures have been detected.”””””
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Cluster_finds_giant_gas_vortices_at_the_edge_of_Earth_s_magnetic_bubble
More good info Just the Facts, Wilde’s post was pretty good too..
One of us should check for changes in Earth’s differential rotation rate over the last solar min, as compared with other solar min.. And what about the plasmasphere’s co-rotation to a more super rotational state anything new? Or changes in the cusp locations?
How would vortices like the following found in Earths magnetosphere, finally dissipate. Wonder if they are vertical or horizontal? Another contribution of the energy and particle transportation system from the sun…
“”””“These vortices were really huge structures, about six Earth radii across,” says Hiroshi Hasegawa, Dartmouth College, New Hampshire who has been analysing the data with help from an international team of colleagues. Their results place the size of the vortices at almost 40 000 kilometres each, and this is the first time such structures have been detected.”””””
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Cluster_finds_giant_gas_vortices_at_the_edge_of_Earth_s_magnetic_bubble
More good info Just the Facts, Wilde’s post was pretty good too..
One of us should check for changes in Earth’s differential rotation rate over the last solar min, as compared with other solar min.. And what about the plasmasphere’s co-rotation to a more super rotational state anything new? Or changes in the cusp locations?
@JohnWho you forgot:
Stirring your coffee with a spoon makes it hotter.
Rabe says:
February 23, 2014 at 3:06 am
@JohnWho you forgot:
Stirring your coffee with a spoon makes it hotter.
I didn’t drink coffee when in the 8th Grade,
But I believe you are correct – my spoon does get hotter when I stir hot coffee.
noaaprogrammer says:
February 22, 2014 at 9:33 am
JohnWho: …Global Warming does not cause a cooling climate.
Global Cooling does not cause a warming climate.
Question: how’s my Eight grade education doing so far?
🙂
Global Warming does cause Global Cooling because what goes up must come down, and Global Cooling does cause Global Warming because what goes down must come up. How’s my Seventh grade education doing?
Dang, we may be candidates for honorary Climate Science PhDs!
Although, I do believe it is not either Global Cooling or Global Warming that causes the opposite, it is the change in the underlying causes of either the Global Cooling or Global Warming that causes the climate to change.
I’m saying that, just ’cause I can.
so tell me why we have so warm February in Poland ? is it vortex ?
justthefactswuwt says:
February 21, 2014 at 10:22 pm
“How does the energy from the ionosphere and upper mesosphere propagate downward at least ~40 km when atmospheric pressure above 50 km is essentially nil?”
Because mass flow downward transports energy downward, finally forming the temperature inversion of which I spoke, at a much lower altitude than your diagram would seem to indicate.
http://createarcticscience.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/temperature-inversion-in-the-arctic/
This inversion is sporadic and depends on solar activity. It puts a ceiling on convection in the lower troposphere, but at high altitude it becomes the high velocity steering wind of the polar vortex. The return flow (and there surely is a return flow) is an altitude of several km. This will result in surface warming because the lapse rate links the maximum adiabat (temperature corresponding to pressure altitude at constant entropy) to the surface temperature. When the vortex is disrupted as at present, the continents cool but the pole warms and polar sea ice melts, especially if influx of North Atlantic seawater is also a factor.
Carla what do you think?
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djak%2Bdosz%25C5%2582o%2Bdo%2Bblokady%2Bwiru%2Bpolarnego%2Bfacebook%26rlz%3D1C1CHWL_plPL548PL548%26espv%3D210%26es_sm%3D93&rurl=translate.google.pl&sl=pl&u=http://losyziemi.pl/jak-doszlo-do-blokady-wiru-polarnego-2&usg=ALkJrhh30Ux66t2HP7g1YGMEhFvpAkLsbg
ren says:
February 23, 2014 at 1:12 pm
Carla what do you think?
—————————————–
We could use more vertical columns of warm air moving towards the poles to raise that thing back up. The warm air seems to be lacking some power behind and is being kept at bay from making any major impact on the N. pole..
Any predictions for how long this polar Vortex will continue on?
Still very energetic at 70 hPa and 10 hPa on the Earth Wind Map.
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/10hPa/orthographic=-89.71,86.40,381
If you use the temperature with wind, you can still find it by temp at 250 hPa. Well by temp., all the way down..
More flannel lined jeans and long underwear for me this week..
And it wasn’t mild or pleasant, around these parts, but wind howling and cold..
Another blast of cold air is expected in the central and eastern U.S. for the upcoming week
“”After a mild and pleasant weekend for many, winter will make a harsh return to much of the central and eastern United States. Frigid air will first impact the northern Plains on Monday before diving south and east throughout the week. By Wednesday, most of the Great Lakes will have single digit high temperatures and parts of the Tennessee Valley will struggle to rise above freezing. ”’
So many variables and so many different kinds of vortices impacting Earth parameters..
Travelling Convection Vortices, yes sir, TCV.
Simultaneous traveling convection vortex events and Pc1 wave bursts at cusp latitudes observed in Arctic Canada and Svalbard
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgra.50604/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
J. L. Posch, M. J. Engebretson, A. J. Witte, D. L. Murr,
M. R. Lessard, M. G. Johnsen, H. J. Singer, M. D. Hartinger
Article first published online: 18 OCT 2013
[1] Traveling convection vortices (TCVs), which appear in ground magnetometer records at near-cusp latitudes as solitary ~5 mHz pulses, are a signature of dynamical processes in the ion foreshock upstream of the Earth’s bow shock that can stimulate transient compressions of the dayside magnetosphere. These compressions can also increase the growth rate of electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) waves, which appear in ground records at these same latitudes as bursts of Pc1 pulsations. In this study we have identified TCVs and simultaneous Pc1 burst events in two regions, Eastern Arctic Canada and Svalbard, using a combination of fluxgate magnetometers and search coil magnetometers in each region. By looking for the presence of TCVs and Pc1 bursts in two different sequences, we have found that the distribution of Pc1 bursts was more tightly clustered near local noon than that of TCV events, that neither TCVs nor Pc1 bursts were always associated with the other, and even when they occurred simultaneously their amplitudes showed little correlation……….
These TCV’s are interesting enough all by themselves..
Multi-instrument observations from Svalbard of a traveling convection vortex, electromagnetic ion cyclotron wave burst, and proton precipitation associated with a bow shock instability
6 June 2013
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgra.50291/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
“””This burst was associated with one of a series of ~50 nT magnetic impulses observed at the northernmost stations of the IMAGE magnetometer array. Hankasalmi SuperDARN radar data showed a west-to-east (antisunward) propagating vortical ionospheric flow in a region of high spectral width ~ 1–2° north of Svalbard, confirming that this magnetic impulse was the signature of a traveling convection vortex”””
Carla says: February 22, 2014 at 4:08 pm
Hasegawa et al.- Click the pic to view at source[/caption]
http://geo.phys.spbu.ru/materials_of_a_conference_2012/STP2012/Veretenenko_%20et_all_Geocosmos2012proceedings.pdf
Interesting, i.e. THE POLAR VORTEX EVOLUTION AS A POSSIBLE REASON FOR THE TEMPORAL VARIABILITY OF SOLAR ACTIVITY EFFECTS ON THE LOWER ATMOSPHERE CIRCULATION S.V. Veretenenko:
“It was revealed that the detected earlier ~60-year oscillations of the amplitude and sign of SA/GCR effects on the troposphere pressure at high and middle latitudes are closely related to the state of a cyclonic vortex forming in the polar stratosphere…
Yes, I like that they at least took a shot at a mechanism versus just parsing correlations, i.e.:
” So, we can suggest that the mechanism of SA/GCR influence on the troposphere circulation involves changes of the vortex strength associated with changes of the heat-radiation balance in the stratosphere. These changes maybe caused by variations of atmosphere transparency in visible and infrared range associated with the effects of ionization and atmospheric electricity variations on cloudy and aerosol particle characteristics [Tinsley, 2008]. Indeed, a considerable increase of aerosol concentration at high latitudes which was most pronounced at the heights 10-12 km and accompanied by the temperature decrease in overlying stratospheric layers was
detected during a series of powerful solar proton events on January 15-20, 2005 [Veretenenko et al., 2008]. In turn, the increase of the vortex strength intensifies temperature gradients at its edges (see Fig.4). At the stages of a strong vortex this increase of temperature gradients may be transferred to the troposphere via planetary waves and contribute to the increase of temperature contrasts in tropospheric frontal zones and the intensification of extratropical cyclogenesis.”
How would vortices like the following found in Earths magnetosphere, finally dissipate.
I am not sure that they ever “finally dissipate” per se, i.e.:
“Magnetospheric vortex formation: self-organized confinement of charged particles.” “A magnetospheric configuration gives rise to various peculiar plasma phenomena that pose conundrums to astrophysical studies; at the same time, innovative technologies may draw on the rich physics of magnetospheric plasmas. We have created a “laboratory magnetosphere” with a levitating superconducting ring magnet. Here we show that charged particles (electrons) self-organize a stable vortex, in which particles diffuse inward to steepen the density gradient. The rotating electron cloud is sustained for more than 300 s. Because of its simple geometry and self-organization, this system will have wide applications in confining single- and multispecies charged particles.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20867249
Wonder if they are vertical or horizontal?
Vertical or horizontal in relation to what?
[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="400"]
The following 2010 paper offers helpful background:
“Here instead, the plasma density inside each vortex is nearly uniform and of “low-density”of the order of the magnetospheric initial value. The vortices also show the presence of a thin external ring of density n ring 0.6. By looking at the dynamics of passive tracers (not shown), we found that the plasma vortices are a mixing in equal share of both magnetospheric and magnetosheath plasma. As a results, during the vortex formation process, a strong rarefaction of the magnetosheath plasma occurred together with the formation of shock like structures inside the magnetosheath super-magnetosonic MRf >1 region. These shock structures will be discussed in a forthcoming paper. In Figure 3 we show, for the simulations with V0 = 2:5, the profiles of the velocity components Vx, Vy along an ideal straight trajectory that across a vortex of Figure 2 from (x =35, y =150) to (x = 50, y = 90). By comparing Figure 1 and Figure 3 we see a good qualitative correspondence between the simulations and the observations concerning the correlation of the velocity components inside the vortex observed by the probes (in particular, Vx changes sign when Vy assumes a maximum value). However, the observations show a Vph of vortices in the anti-sunward direction lower than that one observed in the simulation. This and other aspects will be discussed in a forthcoming paper.”
http://sait.oat.ts.astro.it/MSAIS/14/PDF/189.pdf
pochas says: February 23, 2014 at 9:38 am
Because mass flow downward transports energy downward, finally forming the temperature inversion of which I spoke, at a much lower altitude than your diagram would seem to indicate.
http://createarcticscience.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/temperature-inversion-in-the-arctic/
The inversion you are referring to occurs;
“between the surface and 5 km during the winter, on 2 March 2013, and half a year earlier during the summer, on 30 August 2012. A strong inversion can be seen in the winter profile, where the temperature increases from the ground to almost 1 km in the winter by 20°C (from -50°C to -30°C).”
The Mesosphere starts 45 km above that and has almost no mass, i.e.;
“Mesosphere, the layer of the Earth’s atmosphere between about 50 km and 80 km (31 mi and 50 mi) above the surface. It lies above the stratosphere and below the thermosphere. The stratosphere and mesosphere together are sometimes called the middle atmosphere. The interface between the stratosphere and the mesosphere is called the stratopause, and the interface between the mesosphere and the thermosphere above is called the mesopause.
Despite the fact that the mesosphere contains only about 0.1 per cent of the total mass of the atmosphere below 80 km (50 mi), it is important because of the ionization and chemistry which occur there. The middle atmosphere is made of the same constituents as the troposphere (mostly nitrogen and oxygen), but also includes some minor, but very important, gas constituents-chiefly ozone which, although it reaches a maximum in concentration low in the stratosphere, causes a maximum of solar heating near the stratopause. The mesosphere differs from the stratosphere below. This is mainly because as the ozone heating falls with height from its maximum near the stratopause, so too does the mesospheric temperature. The consequent rapid decrease in temperature with altitude is the major defining characteristic of the mesosphere.”
http://library.thinkquest.org/21418/spacee/Mesos.htm
The closest to a transport mechanism I see is this;
“The decrease in temperature coupled with the low density of the air in the mesosphere (about 1 gm-3; at the stratopause, or a thousandth of the density at sea-level, to 100 times less at the mesopause) means that the mesosphere includes both turbulence and atmospheric waves which have a wide range of spatial and temporal scales. Such motions are important not only because of the mixing of chemicals that occur as a result, but also because the mesosphere is the region of the atmosphere where spacecraft on re-entry start to feel the background wind structure, rather than just aerodynamic drag. Some of the small-scale waves drive an average seasonal flow upwards from the lower summer polar mesosphere across the equator and down deep into the winter polar stratosphere.”
http://library.thinkquest.org/21418/spacee/Mesos.htm
though the flow is likely slow and would transport minimal energy over a period of months.
Carla will be now very cold in the U.S.. Clearly visible blockade over the Siberia.
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/70hPa/orthographic=-125.01,58.49,635
Such is forecast Jetstreamu. You can see the impact of shifts polar vortex.
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/250hPa/orthographic=-125.01,58.49,635
Excuse me. There seems to be a consensus, or am I missing something, among the commenters above that the global warming/climate change crowd and its pseudoscientists have been silenced once and for all. Dream on my friends. When sheep have been convinced to run over the cliff you don’t stop them with words of truth and wisdom. They will continue to believe that the (pseudo) science of GW/CC is a done deal. After all our president (term used loosely) just recently stated without reservation that the California drought is caused by GW/CC. The VP agrees (loose again), not to mention the Secretary of State (omg). And don’t forget Al Gore. Where’s he hanging out these days? The sheep will simply dutifully follow their leaders. They will continue the charade with their bottomless bag of rationalizations, and big money will continue to pour into the coffers of sold out “scientists.”
” Sundownerdean says:
February 24, 2014 at 2:31 pm
And don’t forget Al Gore. Where’s he hanging out these days?”
Al Gore is making the speaking rounds as the political debate over Climate Change heats up.
Last place was in Kansas City.
And that darn Polar Vortex is expected to return, bringing down temps to as much as 30 degrees below average.
Where did the warm air go that displaced the Polar Vortex?
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
Looks like it came in waves to 80N.
And what do you suppose happened to that heat energy in the Arctic night?
My guess is that it radiated out to space. It surely didn’t pour forth down on Canada and the US.
How’s the ocean temp anomaly doing these days?
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.gif
Looking rather on the cool side of things.
What a year it’s been. Antarctica spent a full year in record high sea ice territory.
I honestly don’t understand how anyone could logically conclude that the Earth is warming.
Oh well, to each his own.