Could we be in for a Super El Niño this year like the one in 1997/98?
Dr. Ryan Maue is seeing hints of a beginning in ocean heat content satellite visualizations.
Maue writes on Twitter:
Quick look at 1997 TC Ocean Heat content anomaly for April 4 shows equatorial extreme + anoms … compare to 2014
And here is April 2014:
Maue writes on Twitter:
Here’s the April 4, 2014 TC Ocean Heat content e.g. depth of 26° isotherm. Like 1997
Certainly, some similarities exist, and it appears the warm pool is just a bit bigger than the one in 1997. If the forecast is to be relied on, we expect to see some sort of ENSO event this year:
![nino34Mon[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/nino34mon1.gif)
More at the WUWT ENSO page
Of course, there’s no doubt that should this build into a full-blown ENSO event, we’ll hear things like “Trenberth’s missing heat has returned, and it’s angry” and “the global warming pause that we didn’t admit existed before is now over”
Greg says:
April 4, 2014 at 3:36 pm
“You apparently know very little of what is involved in satellite altimetry or those who perform it.”
..
When the satellite altimetry confirms the tidal gauge readings you need a better line of argument to confirm “bias”
What was 1966 like for ENSO? If it was a very strong to Super El Nino, then place early bets on 2030 also having one.
When the satellite altimetry confirms the tidal gauge readings you need a better line of argument to confirm “bias”
====
When the satellites are tuned to convenient tide gauges that happen to be the only ones showing sea level rise….it’s garbage
The Caroline hotspot, a mantle plume, could be warming up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CourtHotspots.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hotspots.jpg
http://www.dr-peter-schmidt.de/hs.htm
Is super El Nino warming from this mantle plume?
ntesdorf says:
April 4, 2014 at 3:17 pm
The terrifying thing about the prospect of a super El Nino is not the weather consequences, but the resumption of super alarmism yabbering by the CAGW Crowd.
===================================================
I have this :
http://www.dgf.uchile.cl/ACT19/COMUNICACIONES/Revistas/aceetal08.pdf
bookmarked just in case (:
check: says: When the satellite altimetry confirms the tidal gauge readings you need a better line of argument to confirm “bias”
My comment was not supposed to confirm bias , it was pointing out that you don’t know what you’re taking about.
Spend some time reading up on what is involved in calculating “average” sea height in a stormy sea from a few hundred thousand miles away to within a mm or two, then come back and tell me about how they have no possible “bias”, then we can talk about the political bias of those doing it and presenting the data.
What I dread will be the sure-to-come frankenstorms of stupid coming from the Alarmists if we get another super el nino. We could probably kiss the warming halt goodbye.
What is the sun doing? Is it fairly docile or active.
I would like to see all the April 4ths as well. Just sayin’
What is the position of the solarphiles regarding the prospect of an upcoming El Nino. We are supposed to be entering (or have entered) a Dalton-like period yet it’s clear that even a moderate El Nino could threaten the 1998 UAH temperature record.
I made the point some years ago that those who supported the solar-driven warming hypothesis were painting themselves into a corner. If solar activity declined – but temperatures didn’t they had nowhere else to go. Leif Svalgaard has received a lot of criticism on this blog for suggesting that solar activity has not varied anywhere near enough to explain global temperature fluctuations over the past few centuries, On the other hand, the “warmists” have used the apparent increase in solar activity as shown in Lean et al etc to explain the early 20th century warming.
Thanks for that, guys.
My god man! DO you realize what you just did? You just came up with the next SyFy movie thriller! LOL
Alarmists aren’t totally wrong about the possibility of some storm being slightly stronger from global warming, higher atmospheric temps when cold water happens to come up from the depth could make the storms that are created that way a little stronger. Not enough to change planning, and ,the vast majority of time, we would benefit from weakened storms and increases in more modest rainfall and moisture.
I think this possible light at end of the tunnel will be a train of destruction for CAGW.
It could incite the believers leave their bunkers and mount an assault- and it seem predictable to me, that if they do this, they will running across a open field against machine gun fire.
And so we should get the refrain, “I thought the turkeys could fly”:
That is not an element of the super El Nino, it is a typical Kelvin wave that carries an El Nino across the ocean.As you should know if you read my book, that is how the warm water that creates an El Nino is carried across the Pacific Ocean. When it reaches South America, it spreads out along the coast and warms the air above it. Warm air rises, interferes with trade winds, mixes with the westerlies, and we notice the start of an El Nino. But any water that runs ashore must also retreat. When this El Nino water retreats the water level behind it drops half a meter, cold water from below fills the vacuum, and a La Nina has started. As much as the El Nino raised global temperature the La Nina will now lower it. If there is no other action in the ocean this temperature see-saw can be rather precise as the eighties and nineties demonstrate. The source of this warm water is the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool, a pile of warm water forced up into a dome in the Philippines-New Guinea triangle by the trade winds. When the water level there is high enough gravitational flow along the equatorial counter-current starts and forms the Kelvin wave you noticed. As you know this is periodic and is part of the ENSO oscillation. Periodicity can be thought of as water sloshing back and forth from one side of a large bowl to the other, where the bowl itself is the Pacific ocean. The length of the period is determined by the width of the bowl and is about five years. The super El Nino differs from all other El Ninos by carrying much more water across than any of the others did. It is not possible to get that extra warm water from the regular ENSO oscillation and another source is required to explain it. I have speculated that it could be created if the Indonesian passage between the islands could be temporarily blocked but I cannot think of a mechanism that could do that. It is quite a rare thing because there has been only one super El Nino since the beginning of the twentieth century.
It’s nonsense, the only connection between red and the new super white is belief. el scorcho!
Have sympathy for London, this is day 4 of the zombie fog, It’s so severe they have upped it to the highest level of 11, That’s right! this fog is so terrible I’ve seen people turn inside out.
Fog is now classified as air pollution. Well done London, you’re breaking into new frontiers.
Could it be the Caroline hotspot?
http://humanssoftware.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/the-caroline-hotspot-a-dormant-mantle-plume/
I would put the odds on a strong El Nino as being 50%. A Super-El Nino at 25% and an El Nada at 25%.
The issue is how much cold water there is in the eastern Pacific. The warm water moving in to form an El Nino, has to fight its way through all this cold water and/or be strong enough to offset the cooling influences that are there.
Have a look at the cross-section for 110W going from south to north.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/mnth_gif/yz/mnth.anom.yz.temp.110w.2014.03.gif
While the most important latitude is right at 0N, there is still a lot of cold water to offset the warmth now moving in the equatorial under-current. Some of this cold water is really circulating back to the east so it might be moving out of range to influence the equator (since the Pacific ocean switches current direction each 8 degrees of latitude and each 150 metres of depth) but there is still lots there.
It is more than 50% probability that a strong El Nino will develop, but we have to watch closely over time because there are potential off-setting waters.
The zonal current anomalies, however, are well into the very strong El Nino range.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/mnth_gif/xy/mnth.anom.xy.u15m.2014.03.gif
In terms of how it will affect global temperatures, the formula is 0.10 times Nino 3.4 anomaly (of 3 months previous). At 2.0C Nino 3.4 index will increase global temperatures by 0.2C lagging 3 months later.
chuck says:
April 4, 2014 at 4:12 pm
“Greg says:
April 4, 2014 at 3:36 pm
“You apparently know very little of what is involved in satellite altimetry or those who perform it.”
.
When the satellite altimetry confirms the tidal gauge readings you need a better line of argument to confirm “bias””
Nonsense. Tide gauges are all over the place due to land masses moving vertically.
Altimetry Failure, TBTF Science, Fundamental!
Five or More Failed Experiments in Measuring Global Sea Level Change, Willie Soon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gmW9GEUYvA
ENVISAT totally re adjusted from 0.4 mm/yr to 2.4 !!!
55:00 : in 2001 IPCC chap 11 p 641 : from 1920 to 1990
eustatic sea level rise of about 0.7 mm/yr !!!!! (not 2.4 or anything like that)
There’s a cyclone sitting right over that spot as we speak. The temperature at the top of it is -70 to -80 degrees C.
David Williams (April 4, 2014 at 3:53 pm) “Here’s an interesting exercise. take the temp impact from the 97/98 EL Nino and the La Nina that follows and splice it on the end of the current UAH temp record. What you end up with is a flat temp trend for 20 years. Even adding +.2C to all the UAH temps in that splice you only end up with a temp trend at 0.1C per decade.”
It’s important to keep in mind there has been no “halt” in temperature rise over the past 17 years. The “pause” mostly means a statistically insignificant rise, but a rise nonetheless. A strong El Nino resulting in a rise to 0.5 or 0.55 in the 13 month moving average in UAH: http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_February_2014_v5.png would mean a continuation of a modest 0.1C per decade rise which essentially disproves alarmism.
gbaikie says:
April 4, 2014 at 5:49 pm
“open field against machine gun fire.”
Please don’t do that, gbaike. Seriously.
Greg says:
Thanks Greg, I wanted to say something too–but don’t understand the process well enough to refute someone. I just know something is wrong with those readings.
John Finn says:
April 4, 2014 at 5:42 pm
You are one twisted [self snip] Why? Hmmm.
So I was thinking about inviting a few people over for a party, does anyone know where I can buy cheep acrylic sheeting? by the look of things, I’m gonna run out.
John Finn says:
April 4, 2014 at 5:42 pm
“What is the position of the solarphiles regarding the prospect of an upcoming El Nino. We are supposed to be entering (or have entered) a Dalton-like period yet it’s clear that even a moderate El Nino could threaten the 1998 UAH temperature record.”
First, we are not yet there. There are still sunspots. They’ll be gone when the solarmagnetic field drops below a critical threshold. We’ll see what happens then, as we have never experienced it in the modern instrumental age.
“I made the point some years ago that those who supported the solar-driven warming hypothesis were painting themselves into a corner. If solar activity declined – but temperatures didn’t they had nowhere else to go. ”
Climate is weather averaged over 30 years. One ENSO peak is a blip on that timescale.
Also, if the CO2 warmists were right and CO2 were the major influence we would have to see a new temperature record every year. We don’t, so they’re wrong.