I knew it wouldn’t take long. The 2014/15 El Niño has yet to form and there’s already a well-commented blog post about it that spreads more speculative nonsense than one would think possible. Even the title Monster El Nino Emerging From the Depths: Nose of Massive Kelvin Wave Breaks Surface in Eastern Pacific is remarkable. (H/T to Ric Werme.) The article was written by Robert Scribbler, who appears to be fiction novelist Robert Marston Fanney. It seems appropriate since that blog post is filled with fiction. Robert has a follow-up post this week El Nino Update: Monster Kelvin Wave Continues to Emerge and Intensify. It appears as though the author, who has little understanding of El Niño processes, or how the data are presented, or the history of ENSO events, is trying to suck in some blog traffic from persons with even less knowledge.
Since Robert is a storyteller, let’s tell the tale of the data.
NOTHING IN THE INSTRUMENT TEMPERATURE RECORD INDICATES ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING HAS HAD ANY IMPACT ON THE SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES OF THE TROPICAL PACIFIC IN 32+ YEARS
El Niño events take place in the tropical Pacific. Figure 1 is a model-data comparison of the sea surface temperature anomalies of the tropical Pacific since the start of the Reynolds OI.v2 satellite-enhanced sea surface temperature dataset in November 1981. The models are represented by the multi-model ensemble-member mean of the climate models stored in the CMIP5 archive, which was used by the IPCC for their 5th assessment report. (Figure 1 is from the post Maybe the IPCC’s Modelers Should Try to Simulate Earth’s Oceans. See that post for further information.) According to the most current generation of climate models—the latest and greatest climate models—if manmade greenhouse gases warmed the sea surface temperatures of the tropical Pacific, they should have warmed about 0.58 deg C over the past 32+ years, based on the linear trend. But the observed sea surface temperatures of the tropical Pacific show little warming in 32+ years.
Figure 1
Let’s look at a few subsurface temperature-related datasets, since much of the fuel for an El Niño comes from below the surface. Because Robert used the phrases “extraordinarily powerful”, “global warming riled monster”, “hot water pool had grown into a vast abyss of heat”, and “may be hotter and stronger than even the record-shattering 1997-98 El Niño”, we’ll compare the starting point of this El Niño to the start of the 1997/98 El Niño.
Many persons have been wondering how the background for this El Niño compares to the benchmark of El Niños, the 1997/98 super El Niño, so this is a logical post to show it.
OCEAN HEAT CONTENT FOR THE TROPICAL PACIFIC IS LOWER NOW THAN IT WAS BEFORE THE 1997/98 EL NIÑO
The NODC’s ocean heat content data are available through the KNMI Climate Explorer for the depths of 0-700 meters, and that’s deep enough as the vast majority of the ENSO-related subsurface processes take place in the top 300 meters. We’ve also shown in the past that the source data for the depths of 0-700 meters and 0-2000 meters in the tropical Pacific are exactly the same (see the graph here, from the postAn Odd Mix of Reality and Misinformation from the Climate Science Community on England et al. (2014)), so there can be no speculation that maybe the heat is hiding below the depths of 700 meters in the tropical Pacific.
The NODC has not yet published its ocean heat content data for the 1st quarter of 2014. So for the ocean heat content data for the tropical Pacific, we’ll have to compare the October-December 2013 value to the October-December 1996 value. See Figure 2. The ocean heat content for the tropical Pacific (24S-24N, 120E-80W) in the last quarter of 2013 is considerably less than it was in the last quarter of 1996, leading up to the 1997/98 El Niño.
Figure 2
In the western tropical Pacific (24S-24N, 120E-180), which captures the West Pacific Warm Pool, the October-December 2013 value is much closer to the October-December 1996 value, but it doesn’t exceed it. See Figure 3.
Figure 3
And that means the warm water for this El Niño has been flooding into a much cooler eastern tropical Pacific (24S-24N, 180-80W) as shown in Figure 4. Will that have an impact? We’ll have to watch and see.
Figure 4
It’s tough to claim that manmade greenhouse gases are responsible for the warm water associated with this El Niño, when the ocean heat content of the tropical Pacific is lower now than it was before the 1997/98 El Niño.
But El Niño events are focused along the equator in the Pacific. So let’s look at the TAO Project H300 data, which represents the average subsurface temperature anomalies for the top 300 meters of the equatorial Pacific.
SUBSURFACE TEMPERATURES FOR THE EQUATORIAL PACIFIC ARE LOWER NOW THAN THEY WERE BEFORE THE 1997/98 EL NIÑO
The Tropical Ocean-Atmosphere (TAO) Project H300 (depth-averaged temperature for the top 300 meters) data for the equatorial Pacific are broken down into eastern and western subsets, divided at 155W. For the western equatorial Pacific (5S-5N, 120E-155W), the data are here, and for the eastern equatorial Pacific (5S-5N, 155W-85W), they are here.
Curiously, the most recent monthly data are for April 2014, so I suspect the data are listed for the previous month, or maybe the April 2014 data are for the month-to-date. Regardless, in Figures 5 and 6, I’ve highlighted the January to April 1997 data in orange, and the January to April 2014 data in light blue. The average subsurface temperatures for the January to April 1997 are presented as the red horizontal lines and the average subsurface temperatures for the January to April 2014 are presented as the dark blue horizontal lines. In both the eastern and the western equatorial Pacific, according to the TAO project buoys, the subsurface temperature anomalies for the first 4 months of 2014 are lower than they were for the first 4 months of 1997.
Figure 5
# # #
Figure 6
So much for unprecedented nonsense.
COULD SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE ANOMALIES IN THE EASTERN EQUATORIAL PACIFIC FOR THE 2014/15 EL NIÑO REACH 5 TO 6 DEG C?
I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a blog post written with more unfounded speculation than Robert’s Monster El Nino Emerging From the Depths: Nose of Massive Kelvin Wave Breaks Surface in Eastern Pacific. So far, we’ve shown that most of his post can be dismissed as nonsense. But, after ending a discussion of the sea surface temperatures of the eastern equatorial Pacific, he closes his post with:
Should the rest of the Kelvin wave follow, temperature anomalies in this region will spike well above 4 C and possibly has high as 5-6 C. Such an event would be even stronger than the one seen in 1997-98, drive global temperatures about .05 to .2 C hotter than previous records in a single year, and set off a series of extreme weather that, when combined with the already severe conditions set in place by human-caused warming, may well be far in excess of those seen during past events.
Can an El Niño produce sea surface temperatures in excess of 5 deg C in the eastern equatorial Pacific? Yup. Would it be unprecedented? Nope. It happened during the peak of the 1997/98 El Niño, contradicting Robert’s speculation.
Animation 1 presents weekly sea surface temperature anomalies, for the eastern tropical Pacific, from the first week of September 1997 through the last week of January 1998. It captures the impact of the peak of the 1997/98 El Niño. As shown, the sea surface temperatures west of the Galapagos Islands reached anomalies in the 5.0 to 6.0 deg C range.
Animation 1
The maps are available through the NOAA NOMADS website. Figure 7 is the map for one of the peak weeks, November 26, 1997.
Figure 7
According to the TAO Project’s U-component (east-west) wind data, which are based on measurements from the weather stations atop the TAO buoys, in 1997 the trade winds in the western tropical Pacific (normally easterlies) had changed to westerlies a number of times and at varying strengths throughout the year. See Figure 8. (The TAO Project U- & V-component wind data are also available through the KNMI Climate Explorer.)
Figure 8
This caused the equatorial countercurrent to engorge, pumping more warm water from the west Pacific Warm Pool into the eastern equatorial Pacific. (See the post Equatorial Currents Before, During, and After The 1997/98 El Nino.) Basically, warm water that is normally in the western equatorial Pacific had been transported as far east as the Galapagos. Figure 9 uses the Reynolds OI.v2 sea surface temperature climatology for the week of November 26, 1997 as a reference. The anomalies in Figure 7 are based on the climatology shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9
Only time will tell how strong the westerlies will become during this El Niño and how long they will persist…and how much warm surface water they will push to the east.
Over the next few months, I suspect they’ll be news articles that include interviews of with oceanographers who specialize in El Niño events. Those oceanographers will be mentioning that it’s a little early to tell how strong the El Niño will become, because much will depend on what the trade winds decide to do. The question isn’t whether they’ll reverse in the western equatorial Pacific. It’s how strong the westerlies will become and how long they will last.
ONE LAST NOTE
In Figure 1, we showed that the sea surface temperatures of the tropical Pacific haven’t warmed in 32+ years, while the climate models showed they should have warmed considerably. Just in case you’re new here, see Figure 10. The sea surface temperatures of the entire East Pacific Ocean, from pole to pole (90S-90, 180-80W) also show little to no warming for the entire duration of the satellite-enhanced Reynolds OI.v2 sea surface temperature data. And once again, the climate models show that, if the surface of the East Pacific Ocean were warmed by manmade greenhouse gases, the sea surface temperatures there would have warmed about 0.48 deg C. Now, the East Pacific is not a small subset. Based on the coordinates used, the East Pacific data covers about 33% of the surface of the global oceans. Again please see the post Maybe the IPCC’s Modelers Should Try to Simulate Earth’s Oceans.
Figure 10
CLOSING
You really should spend a few moments to read Robert’s posts and his comments on those threads. I have never read so much unfounded conjecture in any post about El Niño events. Never. For that, we’ll have to call on Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.’s handy buttonfor RobertScribbler’s two posts about El Niño. I suspect there will be more, since he appears to really enjoy writing about the upcoming El Niño, a subject he clearly does not comprehend.
Pielke Jr. BS Button
The very sad part: Based on the comments on the threads of Robert’s posts, there are people who believe his nonsense.
FURTHER READING
The first post in this series is The 2014/15 El Niño – Part 1 – The Initial Processes of the El Niño.
Portions of this post should help to confirm the processes of El Niño discussed in An Illustrated Introduction to the Basic Processes that Drive El Niño and La Niña Events.
I went into much more detail to explain ENSO processes and the aftereffects of El Niño and La Niña events in my ebook Who Turned on the Heat? I’ve lowered the price of Who Turned on the Heat? from U.S.$8.00 to U.S.$5.00…with hope of increasing sales a little bit. A free preview in pdf format is here. The preview includes the Table of Contents, the Introduction, the first half of section 1 (which was provided complete in this post), a discussion of the cover, and the Closing. Take a run through the Table of Contents. It is a very-detailed and well-illustrated book—using data from the real world, not models of a virtual world. Who Turned on the Heat? is only available in pdf format…and will only be available in that format. Click here to purchase a copy. Thanks.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well I see, everywhere, (as a reason) here volcanoes. Without close (in time) the great eruption will not be the great El Niño …
(http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00471.1)
pokerguy, thank you for your generosity. The tip is very much appreciated.
Cheers
Bob
Kim allen,
The AGW fanatics condemn or dismiss well studied non-scientists for disagreeing with their cliamte obsession. Heck, they even dismiss scientists who have deeply researched the issue and dare to disagree. Certainly we can cast a harsh light on a self-published surfer dude who is regurgitating alarmist tripe?
The article was written by Robert Scribbler
============
A much more informative and important work was written some years ago by Earnest Scribbler, long lost cousin to Robert.
El Niño is not Godzilla. Despite what the warmists think. thanks, Bob..
Now having visions of a Scaly Algore rising out of the boiling pacific waters.
Gonna put on some Vivaldi…
Bob, how did the older data get interpolated with the different resolutions used for TCHP pre 2005, 2005-2008, and subsequently 2008 to now. The methods used to calculate such changed a bunch. Were they all recalculated to the current standards or am I just off target?
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/cyclone/data/method.html
Kim Allen is right. Stick to the science.
ossqss, sorry. I can’t answer your question and I wouldn’t want to speculate.
Regards
You realize that there is no cost at all to the Scribbler for engaging in this hyperventilating, but there is a significant opportunity. That’s why he’s doing it – if he’s right (even though there is a small chance of that) then he will get all the notoriety and fame that will come to the Great Predictor of the Future – he may even make a career out of it.
On the other hand, if he’s wrong, then he’ll just change his name and change his blog and go on like before, with nothing really lost, and within a year everyone (even us) will have forgotten all about him. That’s how the media game is played.
tgmccoy, if you’re having “visions of of a Scaly Algore rising out of the boiling pacific waters”, would Wagner’s “Flight of the Valkyries” fit better?
Just remember that even a stopped clock is correct 2x/day. If this guy is wrong, he’ll be forgotten in a month, only to be replaced by another counting on the clock stopping at some other minute and hour.
Sooner or later one of ’em will get it right and be heralded as a modern day Nostradamus.
It’s consistency and a long term track record that counts, and an understanding of the meteorology and physics that counts!!!
Stay tuned, but be prepared for a lot of those “tunes” to be off key !!!
Thanks for the reply Bob. The question then stands as to if we are comparing apples and oranges with respect to todays information against that of the late 90’S.
I would hope someone could answer how the 2 techniques for measurement would compare. They are certainly not the same by any means. Hence, the comparison of the 2014 observations to those done in late 90’s may not be comparable in the end. I would hope reanalysis was done, but cannot verify if that had indeed happened or if it is even possible based upon the resolution differences.
I am not being critical. I am simply trying to understand if our comparisons are accurate and not being embellished by the government entities involved by virtue of the technical changes that do exist in measurement techniques.
I think it a valid question for all involved.
We have a blend of the 57-58 02-03,09-10 enso events and emerging more is 65-66. We have stated this for over 2 months. The fact is cold PDO enso events last much less than warm pdo events. In addition these are what I term “reactionary” enso events to balance out a 3-5 year overall cool enso 3.4 before, They are much more the Modiki type. Consider this though. This will be the 5th Super Nino speculation since the 97-98 el nino. The people doing this know there is a global temp spike and are hoping for it. However by doing this they are admitting its the oceans that control the global temps. Without any true warming, there is built in thermostat to the earths temps, the oceans, specifically the tropical oceans which supply the most energy ( heat) to the atmosphere. So in screaming el nino, they are screaming the earths temps react to the oceanic cycles. Precisely Bill Grays point in his Holy Grail debunking of this scam
http://typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/gray2012.pdf
Joe D Aleo has a paper on the length and strength of enso events in the cold pdo/warm pdo regime. There are roughly flipped with warm PDO having and average length of 21 months for the warm enso, 9 months for the cold events , and vice versa for cold pdo
we are already out with a cold winter for the US. The global temp spike which will be promoed will be followed by a bigger drop so the jagged downturn continues in the longer term. But expect the agenda driven storm of jibberish to likely match any storm the nino produces. The insanity grows with each day, and I am now seeing statements that defy bounds of sane thought, in my opinion
To the contrary. “I’m a Little Teapot”, played on a glockenspiel and sung by an adenoidal four-year-old would be appropriate for the Goracle
Isn’t there typically an uptake of heat into the tropical Pacific prior to El Nino events? There doesn’t appear to be one this time if it does happen.
I think his / her point is that we shouldn’t alienate loyal readers, commenters, and skeptics by unnecessary bile. You never know who your friends are, and the fight against misguided AGW politics is likely to be a long slog.
Bob: The interesting question is what is going to happen to the “pause” in global warming if we have a moderate or 97/98 El Nino. How likely is it that incessant claims (especially from Monckton) about the absence statistically significant warming for X, Y and Z years (depending on what temperature index is used) will be OBSOLETE?
Perhaps it would make sense for WUWT to focus on the slow rate of warming rather than the absence of warming. It will take at least a decade of extraordinary warming to return to the IPCC’s projections of warming. It might take one strong El Nino for the ABSENCE of warming to vanish.
Joseph Bastardi says: “Joe D Aleo has a paper on the length and strength of enso events in the cold pdo/warm pdo regime”
Please identify this paper, Joe, and provide a link.
Thanks
Trenberth’s Revenge.
the climate never achieves equilibrium
it is either storing energy in the ocean or releasing it.
When it releases it, it does so in oscillatory ways.
get ready for a periodic burp and stair step change.
El Nino doesnt cause global warming, it is how global warming expresses itself.
it is the effect, not the cause. The cause of global warming? increased forcing.
Steven Mosher says:
The cause of global warming? increased forcing.
That there is one fine assertion. ☺
But it is meaningless, unless you specify the major forcings. I double dog dare you to say CO2.
Frank says: “Bob: The interesting question is what is going to happen to the “pause” in global warming if we have a moderate or 97/98 El Nino. How likely is it that incessant claims (especially from Monckton) about the absence statistically significant warming for X, Y and Z years (depending on what temperature index is used) will be OBSOLETE?”
If memory serves, Christopher Monckton works backwards in time from the most recent month’s data, looking for the earliest start point that will provide him with a zero trend. As the El Nino develops and starts to impact the RSS TLT data, his start point would have to shift.
Steven Mosher says: “…it is the effect, not the cause. The cause of global warming? increased forcing.”
Not supported by data. Did you read the post?
Robert W Turner says: “Isn’t there typically an uptake of heat into the tropical Pacific prior to El Nino events?”
According to the NODC ocean heat content data for the tropical Pacific, that only really happened with the 1995/96 La Niña, leading to the 1997/98 El Niño.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/22-trop-pac-ohc-1995-96-la-nina-and-1997-98-el-nino.png
The graph is from this post:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/is-ocean-heat-content-data-all-its-stacked-up-to-be/
Now consider the following animation of the subsurface temperature anomalies at the start of this Kelvin wave, which are the right-hand maps. Does the warm water in the pocket just north of the equator (the leftovers from an earlier Rossby wave) in the western tropical Pacific feed the equator as the Kelvin wave is forming? If so, then the build-up is along the equator in the western tropical Pacific, but not necessarily the tropical Pacific as a whole.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/animation-1-sst-v-h300-jan-3-thru-mar-29.gif
Regards
So the El Nino / La Nina events are cyclical, and regularly perform planetary heat input outgo transfers thus staging a constantly evolving regulation or re-equilibrium of planetary surface temps. This in response to the greatest heat input source the sun, which has hotter and cooler spells. The system is looking scarily stable for gosh darn long periods of time… until an ice age happens when the sun takes a nap. I am floored that Mr. Scribbler would go so far out on a limb making statements and authoring whole articles about so in depth a subject where clearly he is out of his depth! I for one would not venture into predicting anything about future unfoldment of an El Nino event when I am still struggling with the flood of information Mr. Tisdale and Anthony et al provide here. I thank all for helping me gain solid information and understanding of the science to push back against the tide of ignorant lemming like religiousity of CAGW doomsayers.
George
” Perhaps it would make sense for WUWT to focus on the slow rate of warming rather than the absence of warming. It will take at least a decade of extraordinary warming to return to the IPCC’s projections of warming. ”
By “slow rate of warming” you mean statistically irrelevant warming? Are you reducing the debate to semantics? The debate at is core is not whether there is global warming; but, the projected rate of warming based upon the concentrations of CO2 and GHGs. Taken from that perspective, the Team has a real problem. The modeled projections of global warming are so over-done on the warmside that even the IPCC has to admit (rather begrudgingly) that they may have over-stated the sensitivity of global temperature trends to GHGs. That, and not splitting hairs about semantics is the debate.
We shall soon see if Trenbeth’s hidden heat will suddenly plum across the Equatorial Pacific durig this ENOS event, and wreak the havoc so much of the Team is praying for.