What if the 'Godzilla' El Niño is a dud?

By Larry Kummer at the Fabius Maximus website.

Summary:  After months of hype about this “Godzilla” El Niño, the peak approaches. The major climate models warn that it might be just another strong cycle, as NOAA & the WMO have predicted — not the precedent-breaking event predicted in the news headlines. As a thought experiment, consider how might this — another blown forecast — affect the public’s confidence in climate scientists.

“Climate change journalism is mostly crap if you didn’t notice because it’s not done by journalists. Mostly advocacy & self promotion.”

Climate scientist Ryan Maue (@RyanMaue), 14 July 2015.

Contents

  1. Experts forecasts about this El Niño.
  2. What if there is no “Godzilla” El Niño?
  3. Good advice from NOAA & others.
  4. Should we care about weather records?
  5. What’s a strong El Niño?
  6. For More Information.
  7. To better understand extreme weather…

(1)  Experts’ forecasts about this El Niño

“This definitely has the potential of being the Godzilla El Niño.”

— Bill Patzert, a climatologist with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in the LAT.

NOAA’s current forecast, as of October 15 expects a strong El Niño. There have been 8 strong El Niño cycles in the 64 years since 1951, including the 1997-98 “super” El Niño.

“THE ONGOING EL NINO EVENT IS EXPECTED TO PEAK IN STRENGTH IN LATE AUTUMN OR EARLY WINTER WITH SEASONAL AVERAGE SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE (SST) ANOMALIES IN THE NINO 3.4 REGION NEAR OR EXCEEDING +2.0 DEGREES CELSIUS, DIMINISHING IN MAGNITUDE THROUGH THE LATE WINTER AND SPRING.”

The May forecast of this cycle by NOAA’s CFSv2 models had its highest peak, predicting aprox 3.2°C for November 2015 — which would have been exciting if it occurred. Since then its forecasts have fallen. The latest run, as of October 25, predicts a peak of aprox 2.6°C in November (it’s now 2.5°C). That would be a record in the brief 64-year long record (slightly above 1982 and 1997), but not a “Godzilla” event. Unless Godzilla visits every decade or so.

clip_image001

clip_image002

clip_image003

NOAA and the International Research Institute (IRI) provides a plume showing a wider range of models, each type with their own average forecast. Unlike the CFSv2 model, the wider forecast averages continue to rise. They were below the CFSv2 forecast, but have now risen to equal it — all at aprox the peak level of 1997-98.

The October forecast of the dynamic models predicts peaks at 2.5°C during the Oct-Nov-Dec and Nov-Dec-Jan rolling 3-month averages. The statistical models predict peaks at 2.4°C during the same periods. Note the wide range of the individual forecasts.

clip_image004

(2) What if there is no “Godzilla” El Niño?

Months of hype have raised expectations, as journalists broadcast alarming speculations about the extreme weather we can expect from this El Niño (some examples here). Climate scientists have tended to either joined the frenzy, or stay on the sidelines.

But what if the current model forecasts are correct and we get a strong El Niño roughly like that in 1997-98? Just weather; no “Godzilla”. Would that be a “dud” vs. expectations (like a big-budget summer film that earns only $100 million, and so loses money)? There have been so many blown forecasts, as in the following examples. Might another be a tipping point in the public’s (already low) confidence?

NASA in 2001: melting arctic sea ice could open “the Northern Sea Route across the top of Russia {allowing} “shipping for at least two months a year in as little as five years” (2006) and “the North-West Passage could be open to ordinary shipping for a month each summer” in 2011.

Dr David Viner (senior research scientist at the climatic research unit at U of East Anglia) said in 2001 that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”  (“Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past“ in The Independent.)

After the 2007 low in arctic sea ice there were predictions of a “death spiral” in sea ice and “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′”. No, neither.

Remember the predictions for more and stronger hurricanes after Katrina in 2005? Plus years of wild hype about individual storms, as we recently saw. On Monday: “Stunning, Historic, Mind-Boggling, and Catastrophic: Hurricane Patricia“. On Tuesday: “Megastorm Patricia Inflicts Little Damage on Mexican Coast” (“quickly dissipated into a low-pressure system that posed little threat beyond heavy rain.”).

These blown predictions occur against the larger background of the pause in most forms of extreme weather during the past decade (see examples here, and more here). No wonder polls of the American public (and the world’s) rank climate change at their bottom of high-profile public policy concerns. Another high-profile failure might further erode the public’s confidence in climate scientists.

(3)  The weather agencies give us good analysis. We should listen.

“Democracy can’t continue to prosper if we can’t immediately and effectively reject frank BS. Whose job is that? Journalists say ‘not us’.”

— Climate scientist Michael Tobis (@mtobis), 14 July 2015.

The major national and international climate agencies have provided a stream of good analysis about this El Niño cycle. Journalists have too often preferred to instead focus on the more exciting statements of individual scientists and even activists. But the internet puts the reliable information at our fingertips, if we care to use it.

(4)  Should we care about new weather records?

Even if this cycle is slightly stronger than 1997-98, should we care? Magnitudes matter more than records, as explained by climate scientist Roy Spencer (U AL-Hunsville) …

“We could have a record warm year, every year, but what really matters is just how much that warming is. If there was no natural variability, and we had perfect measurements, each successive year could be 0.01 C warmer than the prior year and thus be a new, record warm year … but would we really care?”

(5)  What’s a strong El Niño?

NOAA defines 3 levels of strength for El Niño events (source: NOAA). A weak El Niño is a peak in the Oceanic Niño Index (ONI) greater than or equal to 0.5°C and less than or equal to 0.9°C. A moderate El Niño is an ONI greater than or equal to 1.0°C and less than or equal to 1.4°C. A strong El Niño is an ONI greater than or equal to 1.5°C.

(6)  For More Information

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See these other posts about El Nino …, especially Worry again about a huge El Niño (droughts, floods, etc)! Or listen to the prosChoose your facts: learn about the El Niño from journalists or activists — and Prepare for a clickbait avalanche about the super El Niño!

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

159 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Hanley
October 26, 2015 11:49 pm

“The major climate models warn that it might be just another strong cycle, as NOAA & the WMO have predicted — not the precedent-breaking event predicted in the news headlines …”.
====================================
But surely the fact that the predicted precedent-breaking event did not eventuate is in itself unprecedented and therefore an indication of ‘climate weirding’.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Chris Hanley
October 26, 2015 11:55 pm

… and therefore would be an indication …

Reply to  Chris Hanley
October 27, 2015 7:28 am

Chris,
Your humor touches on a serious note. The lurid headlines in 2014 and again this year about the coming super-monster El Nino were unsupported by the official statements of NOAA, and contradicted by a few scientists (willing to ruin the game with science).
Examples from 2014: http://fabiusmaximus.com/2014/06/16/el-nino-monster-threat-69110/
This post gives some examples from 2015’s hysteria. When will we learn not to listen to activists?

ColinD
October 27, 2015 1:08 am

On the east coast of Australia where I have lived for over 60 years this has been nothing like previous el nino with plenty of rain.

Charles Nelson
Reply to  ColinD
October 27, 2015 10:19 am

Thank you ColinD for confirming what anyone with any intelligence can see.
The so called El Nino is not an integrated ocean system allowing for prediction.
It is a ‘folk’ observation. (I’m in Coffs…dry here too!)

Scottish Sceptic
October 27, 2015 1:47 am

The simple fact is the whole scam was one total waste of public money:
[ https://youtu.be/c7FjdYO68o8 ]

AB
Reply to  Scottish Sceptic
October 27, 2015 3:39 pm

An excellent summary by Monckton.

October 27, 2015 2:35 am

Para. 3.
“Journalists say “Not us.”
I say, “Yes, you”.
Or at least the investigative ones.
Oh, wait, I forgot, there aren’t any of those any more.

rtj1211
October 27, 2015 3:46 am

The lessons that the general public need to learn concern the nature of ‘the media’ nowadays.
1. Proper journalism costs money – you need skills and experience to be able to divine the truth in a world of bullshitters.
2. The business models of ‘newspapers’/’media websites’ nowadays does not have the budget for that – it is far more ‘profitable’ to purchase an ‘advertorial’ where an interest group (through a suitable ghost writer) is allowed to put their case forward. The evidence of this is clear: you get two articles the same day putting diametrically opposed views forward. This of course makes the paper twice as much profit, if such approaches are profitable and it leaves the reader to have to acquire the skills of top journalists in order to be able to determine who is telling the truth or not. 99% of readers do not have the time, the inclination or the ability to do that, so an essential function of the media has been lost – namely acting as the representatives of the public in ensuring that their interests are safeguarded.
3. Most media websites are channels for the communication of gambling fixes – of course, you need to be savvy as to the signals, but trust me, it goes on. A lot. So if you wonder why an article has been written, ask yourself: ‘is this a message to insider traders?’
As a result of this, most of traditional media functions in ‘old style democracy’ are disappearing fast.
I now use reading the ‘traditional media pages’ not to be educated or informed but to determine what the official party lines are on various matters. For climate education, I come here or elsewhere. For politics, I search out old-style journalists who run blogs, amongst other things. For sport, I rarely bother now as too much is fixed and in the hands of the mafia.
The critical thing children nowadays need to be educated about is: ‘how do you determine which sites tell the truth and which are official propaganda channels?’ The answer is not an easy one: ‘you need to educate yourself sufficiently in a lot of fields to be able to judge that for yourself’. Thing is then, what’s the point of going to a website to educate yourself if you have to educate yourself the hard way anyway? Who do you trust to evaluate the evaluators?? Well it certainly wouldn’t be Amazon book reviewers, would it?? WOULD IT??
Education in the 20th century took too much on trust. 21st century education must be all about how to determine why to trust someone…….

goldminor
Reply to  rtj1211
October 27, 2015 2:52 pm

Nicely stated!!!

Pat Paulsen
Reply to  rtj1211
October 28, 2015 8:33 am

(Fake screen name of banned commenter. ~mod.)

charplum
October 27, 2015 5:47 am

I thought this might be the right time to put forth what I have been doing for about a year now. I have made extensive use of Dr. Evans OFT analysis of several datasets. The information is in the link below:
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=A14244340288E543!12158&authkey=!AGK1rrtL0qH_I-g&ithint=file%2cdocx
I hope I got the link in correctly. I am not that confident.

Editor
October 27, 2015 6:08 am

First, an aside to Editor of the Fabius Maximus website wrt posting images, see http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/26/what-if-the-godzilla-el-nino-is-a-dud/#comment-2057416 above.
About:

“This definitely has the potential of being the Godzilla El Niño.”
— Bill Patzert, a climatologist with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in the LAT.

Patzert seems to be a Godzilla fan. When this story came out, I Googled |Godzilla Patzert| and there were lots and lots of links, many years old. There must be lots and lots new ones, including one to this post.

Reply to  Ric Werme
October 27, 2015 7:01 am

Ric,
Thanks for that great research! It appears Patzert uses “Godzilla” to describe moderately strong El Nino events (2+ vs. strong being 1.5+ on NOAA’s scale). Quite an over-the-top name for what are relatively common events. It’s pathologising the weather, all too common these days.
In 2010: “El Niños come in small, medium, large and Godzilla, The last Godzilla El Niño we had was in l998, and the one before that was in l983. The others are mostly wanna-bes. But the ’97-’98 El Niño triggered something deep in the cortex of reporters, and now whenever the word is mentioned, they start salivating.”
http://www.vcreporter.com/cms/story/detail/el_nino_2010_small_medium_large_or_wanna_be/7558/
But why waste a good term?
“This time, they have lasted three days and gusted with the force of a minor hurricane – what Dr Patzert calls “Godzilla-sized” Santa Anas.”
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/10/24/mother-natures-revenge-against-human-development
This kind of vivid but often exaggerated language helps climate scientists’ careers — today. The profession might reconsider its norms if we don’t get the great extreme weather they’ve predicted for so long, and their credibility with the public eventually crashes to that of used car salesmen.

AndrewZ
October 27, 2015 6:44 am

Any scientist who has to communicate with the media should follow this process:
Firstly, write a statement that accurately expresses your views, with all the necessary caveats about probabilities and margins of error.
Secondly, strike out all the caveats and any predictions that don’t involve anything dramatic. Whatever’s left is what the media will actually use.
Repeat the process until the media version is sufficiently close to what you really mean that you won’t mind seeing it in a headline.

Smokey
October 27, 2015 6:47 am

Having read the full post, and all of the following commentary, I’m still curious about one thing (cue the Clue quotation: “Just ONE thing…?”) —
“Climate scientists have tended to either joined(sic) the frenzy, or stay on the sidelines.”
Did they have any other options?

richard verney
Reply to  Smokey
October 27, 2015 7:22 am

The third option was to have discredited by the use of data.

John Herron
Reply to  Smokey
October 27, 2015 8:20 am

Sell used cars

Reply to  Smokey
October 27, 2015 8:53 am

Smokey,
Climate scientists could fight the frenzy, reminding journalists and the public about the limitations of current data and theories. As have a brave few, such as Roger Pielke Sr. and Judith Curry.
The great American fighter pilot and strategist John Boyd (Colonel, USAF, deceased) wrote about this choice choice in his famous “To be or to do” speech: http://dnipogo.org/john-r-boyd/to-be-or-to-do/

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Smokey
October 27, 2015 10:37 pm

Los Angeles homicide detective Lieutenant Columbo

Tom O
October 27, 2015 8:27 am

I rather think it will be less than the 1998 el nino based mostly on “intuition” and looking at the overall surface temperatures of the Pacific. I see too much overall warm water which I am anticipating is caused by undersea eruptions, and not enough cool to really rev this one up, regardless of how warm the eastern tropical Pacific is.

David in Cal
October 27, 2015 8:40 am

In the SF Bay Area, we’re counting on a big El Nino to cause a big amount of winter precipitation. We need it to refresh our water supply. So far, there’s been little rain this season, but it’s early yet…

RWturner
October 27, 2015 9:05 am

If you own a home in CA you should probably review your insurance policies to make sure you are covered for Godzillas.

Charles Nelson
Reply to  RWturner
October 27, 2015 10:17 am

For the last three years or four the top ‘scientists’ have failed to predict its appearance or intensity. Now that it has appeared the top ‘scientists’ have failed to predict its effects on global or regional weather systems…but RWturner knows what’s going on! We can all relax now.

Reply to  Charles Nelson
October 27, 2015 11:32 am

Charles,
(1) I thought RWTurner’s comment was meant as humor, and was quite funny.
(2) As for “top ‘scientists” have failed to predict” — last year NOAA’s staff over-estimated the odds of an El Nino, but were properly cautious in their forecasts. As they did this year, they gave us their best call — with appropriate warnings about the uncertainly. These things are difficult to get right.
Last year’s forecasts, before the “Spring barrier”: http://fabiusmaximus.com/2014/05/02/monster-el-nino-67779/
In June 2014: http://fabiusmaximus.com/2014/06/16/el-nino-monster-threat-69110/
(3) Checking your home insurance policy is always a good idea. It’s too late after this…
http://velociraptor.cc/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/godzilla-breath.jpg

October 27, 2015 11:38 am

So, if this El Niño thing is supposed to warm the planet…
…How come we have had six El Niño events since 2003 (one every two years, well above the mean) and yet no warming?
http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/teleconnections/eln-5-pg.gif
I guess a lot of people have this El Niño thing backwards. Lots of El Niño events are keeping the planet from warming. High ENSO activity reduces the latitudinal thermal gradient and puts a lot of heat into space. We are having a lot of El Niño events because the planet is venting excess heat. It is a safety valve triggered by high latitudinal thermal gradient. That’s why there is no ENSO activity during Bond events. There is no need if the planet is cool and the latitudinal thermal gradient is low.
My prediction… For as long as the planet is as warm as it is now we are going to have a lot of El Niño events. If it cools down we will have less, and if it warms up we will have even more. The more Los Niños we have the less the planet will warm.

kramer
October 27, 2015 5:09 pm

The data masseuse’s will make sure that this is the HOTTEST year in recorded history.

James at 48
October 27, 2015 5:31 pm

There are duds and there are disasters. If it is a mere dud, and is something like 1983, I will still rejoice. If it is a disaster, and dies like the ones last decade, I may start to pack up to move somewhere with more fresh water. On a different note, if it is a disaster and there is no end to the drought, but of course, the continuation of the drought will be blamed on AGW – even though the death of El Nino means that there was less of an ENSO warm spike than predicted. You see, ENSO warm spike = AGW and ENSO cold wave also = AGW.

Joe Bastardi
October 27, 2015 6:38 pm

October will likely be the warmest month on record for NCEP REAL TIME temps, which to me are the gold standard, a real time temp measurement every 6 hours. Records go back to 1981. While the NCEP temps have solidly debunked claims of warmest month ever through September, this October is .05C warmer than the previous and looks likely to beat it

richard verney
Reply to  Joe Bastardi
October 27, 2015 7:40 pm

But what the temps in the 1930s?
It may well be the case that the land based thermometer record will show the next 6 or so months as the warmest on record, but that will be quite irrelevant if this El Nino does not result in a step change in temperature (like we have seen with the Super El Nino of 1997/8).
IF, and this is a big IF, there is no such step change and temperatures fall back with a following La Nina, we will be getting to 2018 with the ‘pause’ more than 21 years long and during which period man will have emitted more than 36% of all manmade CO2 emissions and all without a statistically significant rise in temperature. This will cause immense problems for AR6, especially since one can expect to see peer reviewed papers published in 2017 and 2018 suggesting that Climate Sensitivity must be less than 1.5degC per doubling, and some may be suggesting less than 1.3degC per doubling.
To answer the question posed in the title (what if this El Nino is a dud), the answer is that AR6 may be scrapped, or the IPCC will be forced to recognise that all the Climate models are outside their 95% confidence band and hence cannot be regarded as valid projectors of future climate trends, and the IPCC will be forced to reduce Climate Sensitivity probably down to 1 to 3 degC, without being able to express a best consensus view since that would no doubt be under 2degC and the IPCC cannot publish such a consensus estimate. The IPCC has to keep alive the possibility that Climate Sensitivity could be over 2 degC. This will be very difficult given the papers already published on this post 2011, so all recent papers will be coming in under 2 degC. What are they going to say about these papers? They cannot be ignored this time round (the recent papers were ignored for AR5 but they were only few in number, and hot off the press, this will not apply for AR6) .
This is why Paris is such a big deal. It may well be the last ditch saloon. Of course, matters may not unfold as detailed above because the El NIno may not turn out to be a dud, and there may be some natural warming/ a step change which will be massaged as part of a straight line linear trend even though it is no such thing.

Reply to  richard verney
October 27, 2015 8:09 pm

Richard,
“To answer the question posed in the title (what if this El Nino is a dud), the answer is that AR6 may be scrapped, or the IPCC will be forced to recognise that all the Climate models are outside their 95% confidence band and hence cannot be regarded as valid projectors of future climate trends, and the IPCC will be forced to reduce Climate Sensitivity probably down to 1 to 3 degC,”
As this post shows quite decisively, the official forecasts for this El Nino have already proven accurate — since this is already a strong El Nino.
The news headlines refer to unofficial statements. Such as last year’s prediction for a “super monster El Nino — which proved false, but with none of the consequences you describe. And this year’s headlines, which began with predictions of a “Godzilla El Nino” (city destroying?) and became even more dire. The public knows not and cares not about the ONI and other technical indexes, but can match the lurid headlines with the actual weather (as you so well described in earlier comments).
It’s these unofficial forecasts, which the news presents as science, that might be proved to be “duds”. Adding to the already long list of confident predictions in the headlines which proved false.

richard verney
Reply to  richard verney
October 28, 2015 1:01 am

Fabius
My point is this. The current El Nino may be a strong El Nino. It may well turn out to be one of the strongest on record. Even if that is the case, and even if the predictions in this regard are correct, it will nonetheless be a “dud” if it does not produce a step change in temperature as occurred with the 1997/8 Super El Nino.
As can clearly be seen from the satellite record, there is a step change of about 0.25degC coincident upon the 1997/8 Super El Nino (incidentally, this is the only temperature change, over and above short term noisy variation, to be seen in that record which is 36 years long). Unless the current El Nino produces a similar step change in temperature, then the following La Nina, which will probably happen in 2017, will completely cancel out what short term warming that resulted from the current El Nino. This will mean that in the satellite data, the current strong El Nino will produce a peak much like 2010, but by late 2017/2018 temperatures will be back down tracking along the 2001 to 2003 level.
In that scenario by late 2018/2019 as AR6 is being prepared, the ‘pause’ will be over 21 years in duration. Santer at one time suggested that 15 years with no temperature rise would be significant as potentially causing problems for cAGW, then he suggested the period to be 17 years. I consider that if the ‘pause’ is over 21 years, it will be difficult not to consider it important and material for the assessment of Climate Sensitivity. If this happens (ie., the ‘pause’ extends past 20 years), many ‘Climate Scientists’ will be running around like headless chickens in the run up to AR6
Thus the testing as to whether the current strong El Nino is a “dud” or not, is not whether the land thermometer data set shows 2015 and the first half of 2016 as the warmest ever on record, but rather whether it has long term impact in the satellite data set such that it busts the ‘pause’ AND the ‘pause’ remains busted in the run up to the preparation of AR6.
If there is no step change in temperatures coincident with this current El Nino, it will be a “dud” even if it creates a short term blip equal to the blip of 1998 or 2010 in the satellite data set.
I am not challenging that the current El Nino is a strong El Nino, but we need to wait and see the aftermaths of this El Nino and whether it has had any long term (I am using that expression in relative terms) impact on the satellite data set such that it means that the ‘pause’ is no longer apparent in the satellite data set when the IPCC are preparing AR6

Reply to  richard verney
October 28, 2015 9:51 am

Richard,
I agree with you about the best way to measure the effects of El Nino vs. the news headlines that create expectations of the public.
I disagree about the effects if this El Nino fails to match the lurid headlines. This would be yet another blown prediction, like the others I list in this post (add to that list the 2014 “super monster El Nino”). But most of these were unofficial predictions — although journalists seldom make that clear to the public.
Hence a failure of this event to live up to the “Godzilla” (an extraordinary city-destroying monster) would not, imo, have the effects you suggest on the IPCC. Nor should it, imo.
More broadly, I doubt that anything will break the gridlocked public policy debate about climate change — unless both sides agree to a fair test, such as that proposed here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/24/climate-scientists-can-restart-the-climate-change-debate-win-test-the-models/
If nothing is done, the weather will eventually decide the debate. The result might prove unpleasant.

Reply to  Joe Bastardi
October 27, 2015 8:01 pm

Joe,
Can you tell us anything about your forecasts for this El Nino? Your October 20 headline looked interesting: “CFSV2 November Forecast: No Affection for…”.

Matt Rogers
October 28, 2015 6:12 am

This El Niño is already at 1997 super intensity (+2.5C). We’re already getting a robust Pineapple Express (mudslides in California last week, super-rains in Texas). It didn’t fail. It’s already here and contributing to global temperature records (in addition to their hiatus-busting tweak they made last spring).

Reply to  Matt Rogers
October 28, 2015 8:04 am

Matt,
Your excitement is evident, but I suspect misplaced. Pineapple Expresses and mudslides are commonplace events in California (I live there); and the weather so far has been nothing unusual.
Can you provide a citation saying that the rainfall in Texas was due to this El Nino? It seems unlikely that it could have had such effect so soon.
We’ll see if events afterwards justify the hype — or fail to do so.

markl
Reply to  Editor of the Fabius Maximus website
October 28, 2015 9:11 am

Editor of the Fabius Maximus : ” …Pineapple Expresses and mudslides are commonplace events in California (I live there); and the weather so far has been nothing unusual.”
Not sure what part of California you reside in but my part….coastal South….has seen some VERY unusual weather. Usually by this time of year surfers are wearing 2 – 3 mm wetsuits and they are still in their rash guards. Tuna have been schooling within 10 miles of the Orange County coast most of the year and some very exotic fish have been showing up in local waters. Humidity has been over the top for months and only recently settled to near normal. Anecdotal? Yes, but the numbers match. I’ve been here almost 70 years, and this one is a whopper….precipitation isn’t the only indicator but my guess is that will come too.

Reply to  Editor of the Fabius Maximus website
October 28, 2015 9:54 am

Matt,
The comments at WUWT and other climate-related websites overflow with such anecdotal claims. They mean nothing. People’s memories cannot clearly recall an event that occurred five minutes ago. Claims of comparisons with decades ago are fun, but immaterial.
Data is not the plural of anecdote. That’s why we have science, and quantitative records.

wws
October 28, 2015 8:50 am

Note all the hype about the recent “super hurricane/cyclone” that was due to hit Mexico (with the remains going through Texas soon)
The news reports all focused on how it was the biggest (true) the strongest (slightly true) and was certain to cause the most damage ever (unwarranted speculation/doom mongering)
the day after the storm hit, most outlets pretended it hadn’t happened and the few that reported it said only “amazingly, there was very little damage and the storm went mostly unnoticed”.
No one ever is called to task for the failed predictions, they just forget about them and go on to the next.

Reply to  wws
October 28, 2015 10:24 am

wws,
“No one ever is called to task for the failed predictions, they just forget about them and go on to the next.”
I understand that perspective. But this post suggests another way to see this. These failure of these lurid predictions (many unofficial) probably have had an effect: they are in part responsible for the American public’s disinterest. Polls show that Americans consistently rank climate change at the bottom of major public policy concerns.
Here’s Gallup’s annual poll:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/182105/concern-environmental-threats-eases.aspx
It seems that activists are proving the accuracy of AA’s adage: “insanity is repeating actions while hoping for a different outcome.”

ironicman
October 29, 2015 10:43 pm

Is the UK Met correct in thinking this El Nino will bring freezing conditions to Europe this winter?
I’m of the opinion that a negative NAO is the real culprit.

Reply to  ironicman
November 9, 2015 11:18 am

Ironicman,
A cautionary note plus forecast from the November issue of the Browning World Climate Bulletin:

“Europe has experienced El Niños in the past. It has also experienced Icelandic volcanic eruptions. Never in known recorded history has Europe had to deal with such a strong sulfuric volcano eruption and a strong El Niño at the same time.
“This winter forecast is attempting to take the weather that occurs 60% of the time from a strong El Niño and combine it with the known impact of Icelandic volcanic eruptions. The El Niño and the cold blob can change drastically and updates will continue as we keep an eye on these two short-term natural climate events. Thankfully for Europe, despite a potentially difficult winter, record-breaking cold or snowstorms seem very unlikely.”

Reply to  Editor of the Fabius Maximus website
November 10, 2015 10:50 am

Ironicman,
I forgot the link to the excerpt about Europe from the Nov issue: El Niño, The Media Star: Separating Hype from Probability.

November 9, 2015 11:37 am

Another dot of evidence suggesting that this might not be a “super monster” or “Godzilla” El Nino, just another very strong one, more or less like 1982-83 and 1997-98. This is the CFSvs2 model forecast as of 9 November 2015 from the weekly ENSO report by NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.
The forecasts in October predicted that it would peak soon. The data (not forecast) on this one says it has peaked. Unexpected and contrary to most forecasts.comment image

Verified by MonsterInsights