From the University of Illinois and the “correlation is not causation” department comes this claim.
Study finds possible connection between U.S. tornado activity, Arctic sea ice
CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — The effects of global climate change taking place in the Arctic may influence weather much closer to home for millions of Americans, researchers report.
The United States has experienced many changes in severe-weather behavior over the past decade, including fewer tornado touchdowns than in the past. A new study suggests that atmospheric circulation changes that coincide with a loss of Arctic sea ice may be partly to blame.
Atmospheric scientists from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Purdue University report their findings in the journal Climate and Atmospheric Science.
“A relationship between Arctic sea ice and tornadoes in the U.S. may seem unlikely,” said (Robert) Jeff Trapp, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the U. of I. and a co-author. “But it is hard to ignore the mounting evidence in support of the connection.”
Photo by L. Brian Stauffer
The researchers performed statistical analyses of nearly three decades of historical weather and climate data and found significant correlations between tornado activity and the extent of Arctic sea ice – especially during the month July.
The team believes that the reduction in tornado activity boils down to how the diminishing Arctic sea ice controls the path of the jet stream. As Arctic sea ice retreats, the jet stream migrates from its traditional summer path over states like Montana and South Dakota to areas farther north, and the atmospheric conditions that are favorable for tornado formation follow suit.
“Tornadoes and their parent thunderstorms are fueled by wind shear and moisture,” Trapp said. “When the jet stream migrates north, it takes the wind shear along for the ride, but not always the moisture. So, even though thunderstorms may still develop, they tend not to generate tornadoes because one of the essential ingredients for tornado formation is now missing.”
The team believes that the correlation between Arctic ice retreat and jet stream migration may lead to advances in seasonal severe weather prediction.
“One of the reasons that we focused on sea ice is because, like the ocean and land, it is relatively slow to evolve,” Trapp said. “Because sea ice and the atmosphere are coupled, the response of the atmosphere is also relatively slow. We can use this property to help make long-term predictions for tornadoes and hail, similar to the way predictions are made for hurricane seasons.”
But before doing so, Trapp said they still need to understand the drivers of the sea ice changes and what role the tropics may be playing.
It remains unclear as to why this correlation is particularly dominant during the month of July, the researchers said, and they admit that they are only at the tip of the iceberg in terms of understanding the overall effects of climate change, and climate variability, on severe weather.
The paper:
The paper “Exploring a possible connection between U.S. tornado activity and Arctic sea ice” is available online and from the U. of I. News Bureau.
DOI: 10.1038/s41612-018-0025-9
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
…It remains unclear as to why this correlation is particularly dominant during the month of July, the researchers said, …
Perhaps Tyler Vigen can help… http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
I have noticed that there seem to be more tornadoes when I wear shorts.
Straws – clutching. That’s what comes to mind.
Scientifically trained people can easily see that climate alarmists and other pseudo-scientists of that kind use nonsense correlations to prove their assumptions, e.g.:
– the cold 30 year post WWII period with increasing CO2 was “just weather” (while it already then actually falsified the CO2 hypothesis completely)
– the following 30 year period (1976-2006) with both increasing temperature and increasing CO2 levels on the other hand, is coined “dramatic climate change”
What we actually observe however, is that fanatically blinded climate scientists claim a relationship between two variables that appear to have interdependence or association with each other – but actually do not. Nonsense correlation is often caused by a third factor that is not apparent at the time of examination, re my example above where e.g. natural cycles are overlooked and can explain the contradictive CO2-effects.
I can see Peter Stormare (the Russian from Armageddon) holding the wire after drawing lots saying “is this good or bad?”
The following is from Wiki
“However, in 1 billion years’ time, the Sun will be 10% brighter than it is now, making it hot enough for Earth to lose enough hydrogen to space to cause it to lose all of its water.”
Now this is something we should all wet our beds over. The time to get off this planet has now been reduced to 1 billion years. That means that we have to find another planet at least as large as ours somewhere in our galaxy. Since the nearest star is 4 light years away. we dont have any time to lose. We must explore outer space (in the realm of Star Trek ) for the survival of our species. Since the earliest plants only formed around 1 billion years ago, that means mankind will never be able to inhabit any planet for more than 2 billion years. Homo sapiens will be forever doomed to be a migrating form of life; reduced to planet hopping every 2 billion years. Star Trek got it right.
We must act now. The year 2525 is coming soon. 10,000 more will be too late!
From most North American severe thunderstorm creation, the southern branch of the polar jet is a critical component. This branch is influenced in a large part by ENSO and the Pacific North American teleconnection. Arctic sea ice has nothing to do with our severe weather patterns.
Another component is the interaction of ENSO and the strength and direction of the LLJ (low level jet) in the Southern Plains. The LLJ is of paramount importance in severe weather development.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00568.1
Again, Arctic ice has nothing to do with this. We’re talking tropical teleconnections and not action in the high latitudes.
Does the amount of Arctic Sea Ice affect the climate,
or does the climate affect the amount of Arctic Sea Ice?
Yes.
Thanks for clearing that up. 👍
So, tornado activity that was supposedly increasing due to climate change failed to materialise, and so now is decreasing due to climate change.
OK…I think I got it…
Let me see if I understand. A reduction in tornado activity has resulted in the reduction in sea ice?
Let me see if I understand. A reduction in tornado activity has resulted in the reduction in sea ice?
No, they are exploring for why tornadoes have become fewer.
They theorize that the jet stream, influenced (somehow) by sea ice changes, may be responsible.
“Tip of the iceberg”. I get it!
Actually, this study is just the tip of the ice cube.
Actually sounds reasnable.
Ye ol’ post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy..
Ironically, physics show global warming should decrease latitudinal temperature disparity, which decreases wind-shear incidence/severity, thus decreasing the incidence/severity of many types of severe weather phenomena: tornadoes, hurricanes, typhoons, cyclones, thunderstorms, hail, etc.
This is consistent with IPCC’s AR5 report which finally admitted to no increasing trends of incidence/severity in 60~100 years (depending on weather phenomena) for: tornadoes, hurricanes, typhoons, cyclones, thunderstorms, hail, etc.
Another irony is that if global temps do start falling when the PDO, AMO and NOA are all in their respective 30-year ocean cool cycles from the early 2020’s, and a 50~75-yr Grand Solar Minimum event starts cooling the planet from around 2020, it’s logical to assume that global latitudinal temperature disparity will increase, wind-shear severity/incidence will increase, and severe weather incidence/severity will all start trending up…
CAGW advocates will, ironically, switch the narrative away from ocean cycle/GSM global cooling to increasing trends of severe weather incidence/severity from global cooling…. (which is the sole purpose of why CAGW advocates switched the name of “The Cause” from Global Warming to Climate Change)…
Just another example of ILLI (Immutable Law of Leftist Irony)….
“if global temps do start falling when the PDO, AMO and NOA are all in their respective 30-year ocean cool cycles from the early 2020’s, and a 50~75-yr Grand Solar Minimum event starts cooling the planet from around 2020…”
Uh huh, and if temperatures continue to rise through all that then you can kiss your propter hoc goodbye right?
Your speculations go against both observed data, and physics. The Equatorial regions of the world will remain hot and humid regardless of what cycles the oceans are going through. However, the higher latitudes will undergo cooling, which will increase the global temperature gradient that exists between the equator and poles. Observation between 1945-1978 give us plenty of information concerning North American severe weather. During that period, there was slight global cooling which was brought on by cooling in the North Pacific and Atlantic SSTs. Not only did the Northern Hemisphere experience some of the coldest 20th Century winters, but also some of the worst severe thunderstorm outbreaks. The infamous tornado outbreak of April 2 1974 (The so-called Day of the Killer Tornado), where 200 separate tornadoes hit the US in a 24 hour period.
That said, looking for the specifics as to how tornado activity is reduced is a good thing.
I did not find the paper to be a fear mobgering hype of CO2 as the control knob of evil, which makes it better than most climate papers getting published today.
At first I couldnt believe the esoteric nature of this study. Attempting to relate tornados to arctic sea ice extent?????????????????????? However it finally dawned on me after reading the following:
“our exploration is also motivated by the U.S. tornado incidence over the past decade, which except for a few years has been abnormally low, as has the Arctic sea ice. The purpose of this paper is to present initial evidence in support of the basic hypothesis is that low Arctic sea ice extent (SIE) contributes to a reduction in U.S. tornado activity as quantified by EF1+ tornado days ”
I would guess that these researchers were told to do this study with the proviso that funding would be found. This could be a demonstration of just how evil the whole global warming climate science scam has become. The reason is that since the climate scientists can’t claim that there are more extreme weather events, they have to try to show that if there are decreases in an extreme weather event, these decreases are caused by something else which in turn is caused by global warming. Look for other crazy correlation studies in the future.
The following paragraph shows that these researchers know very little about the whole subject. It also shows that they should NOT have done this study before understanding the drivers of the sea ice changes and what role the tropics may be playing.
“Because sea ice and the atmosphere are coupled, the response of the atmosphere is also relatively slow. We can use this property to help make long-term predictions for tornadoes and hail, similar to the way predictions are made for hurricane seasons.” But before doing so, Trapp said they still need to understand the drivers of the sea ice changes and what role the tropics may be playing.”
“The following paragraph shows that these researchers know very little about the whole subject…”
A Professor of atmospheric sciences, what could he possible know about this stuff?
Thank christ we have the worlds greatest climate scientist right here to set us straight.
Ever heard of the Dunning Kruger effect Alan?
You are projecting, RyanS.
Bigtime.
Anybody that tries to correlate tornados with Arctic sea ice extent should be stripped of his PhD . For far too long climate scientists have been getting away with this nonsense.
All the world’s media and politicians keep saying that there are more extreme weather events now than before. The climate scientists have fed them this false information . Here is Canada’s tornado data. I have asked Environment Canada where is the data after 2009?
https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/65658050-7a80-4da3-9a09-da137c203a34
Canada’s tornado data like every other tornado data in the world DOES NOT SHOW ANY INCREASE IN ACTIVITY. The same goes for every other extreme weather event except for river hillcrest overflow which shows minor increase.
THERE ARE NO MORE TORNADOS,HURRICANES/CYCLONES,FLOODS,WILDFIRES,STORMS,DROUGHTS, NOR SURFACE TEMPERATURE EXTREMES THAN THERE EVER WERE.
THE BIG LIE OF THE MEDIA AND POLITICIANS HAS NOT BEEN COUNTERED BY CLIMATE SCIENTISTS. In fact climate scientists like Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt keep pushing this lie. Is there no honour left in this world or is it all groupthink and religion?
Why should lack of tornado activity or lack of sea ice be anything but good news for humans. Why does climate science try and spin change as negative.
If the past was so wonderfull why do humans spend trillions of dollars every year to change the world. Look at where you live. Does it look the same as 150 years ago. Then why expect the climate to have remained the same when all over the earth the same thing has happened. Everywhere you look humans have change the local landscape yet climate science thinks that change is bad. If it is bad why are we spending money to make changes.
What other branch of science tries to label observations as good or bad. Is it good or bad that 1+1=2. Change results in winners and losers.
If the climate is changing then it is way more effective economically to invest in change.
One can scour the classical literature concerning the formation and development of North American severe thunderstorms (See Miller 1972, Doswell 1984, Maddox, Ostby, Galway, etc…) and you will not see mention of arctic sea ice or any other high latitude parameters used to as either proxies or direct correlations concerning the trends of severe convection development.
In the paper, Figure 1 shows the correlation over 8 months for detrended series and original series. Also change of tornados with time – biggest R with time is July.
Both sea ice and tornados change with time, so only the detrended crossplots should be used. But when making multiple cross-plots by sub-dividing the data the probability of spurious correlation should be checked by taken into account of the number of comparisons performed. They claim significance for July with R = 0.48. However, if you do a Student T-test adjusted for 8 comparisons, with 26 samples the R=0.48 has probability = 0.1 ie it fails a significance test. (I bet they did 12 monthly comparisons originally!).
See Kalkomey (1997) for a nice simple explanation. Its an article entitled “Potential risks when using seismic attributes as predictors of reservoir properties”
Peer review should have caught this paper. Just 1 month has significant correlation, and the months either side have zilch? June has a flat line regressionand August is a pronounced negative. Really? That gives them the following comment in the introduction:
“Here, robust statistical correlations are found between tornado activity and SIE during boreal summer, specifically in July.”
That should read ONLY in July – and even then its spurious.
Having spent my career managing Illinois state educational facilities, I’ve watched as eccentrics build card house postulations which propel them to department chairmanship, where they become eccentric and egotistical until they either commit ethics breaches and are forced to resign, or drive out enough of the good faculty that the Dean of the school helps them move up to a larger university. Many of us at SIU considered UIUC to be the ultimate rest home for eccentric ideas and socialist group-think.
My own thoughts are that these folks missed the boat, so to speak, that ocean processes and SSTs may well be the causative influence both of polar sea ice cycles and of tornado activity cycles through the wonders of atmospheric water vapor, and its effect on pressures. Also, It takes very little water vapor to raise the air temperature of the Arctic in winter. I’d look for correlations of MJO activity, ENSO state, and jetstream activity if I were trying to connect sea ice and tornados.
By the way : https://www.google.at/search?client=ms-android-samsung&ei=f7p0W4eYOMT4wAKl1bvwAQ&q=Harald+Lesch+alpha-centauri+steuert+die+Sonne+unser+Wetter+&oq=Harald+Lesch+alpha-centauri+steuert+die+Sonne+unser+Wetter+&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.