Are We Entering a New Period of Rapid Global Warming?

By: Bob Henson , 5:04 PM GMT on February 24, 2015

Residents of New England may understandably look back at 2015 as the year of their never-ending winter. For the planet as a whole, though, this year could stand out most for putting to rest the “hiatus”— the 15-year slowdown in atmospheric warming that gained intense scrutiny by pundits, scientists, and the public. While interesting in its own right, the hiatus garnered far more attention than it deserved as a purported sign that future global warming would be much less than expected. The slowdown was preceded by almost 20 years of dramatic global temperature rise, and with 2014 having set a new global record high, there are signs that another decade-plus period of intensified atmospheric warming may be at our doorstep.

The most compelling argument for a renewed surge in global air temperature is rooted in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). This index tracks the fingerprint of sea surface temperature (SST) across the Pacific north of 20°N. A closely related index, the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation (IPO), covers a larger swath of the entire Pacific. Both the PDO and IPO capture back-and-forth swings in the geography of Pacific SSTs that affect the exchange of heat between ocean and atmosphere (see Figure 1). We’ll use PDO as shorthand for both indexes in the following discussion.

The PDO typically leans toward a positive or negative state for more than a decade at a time. The positive phase, which features warmer-than-average SSTs along the U.S. West Coast, was dominant from the mid-1970s to the late 1990s. The PDO then flipped to a negative phase between about 1999 and 2013, with cooler-than-average SSTs along the West Coast. Figure 2 shows that even when a particular mode is favored, the PDO can still flip back to its opposite mode for periods of a few months or so.


Figure 1. Departures from average sea-surface temperature (degrees C) and wind (arrows) that typically prevail when the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is in its positive mode (left) and negative mode (right). Image credit: University of Washington.


It’s not clear exactly what drives the PDO, but in some ways it can be viewed as a geographically expanded version of the SST patterns created by El Niño and La Niña, averaged over a longer time period. (See Figure 2.) It’s well-established that El Niño can raise global temperature for a few months by several tenths of a degree Celsius, as warm water spreads over the eastern tropical Pacific and mixes with the overlying atmosphere. Likewise, La Niña can act to pull down global average temperature, as cooler-than-average water extends further west than usual across the tropical Pacific. The PDO mirrors these trends, but over longer periods. When the PDO is positive, there are more El Niño and fewer La Niña events, and heat stored in the ocean tends to be spread across a larger surface area, allowing it to enter the atmosphere more easily. When the PDO is negative, SSTs are below average across a larger area, and global air temperatures tend to be lower.


Figure 2. Typical warm and cool anomalies in sea-surface temperature during positive PDO years (left) and El Niño years (right). The patterns are similar, though with differences in intensity over some regions. The anomalies are reversed for negative PDO and La Niña years. Image credit: University of Washington Climate Impacts Group.


Figure 3 shows a striking connection between favored PDO modes (top) and global air temperature anomalies (bottom). The vast majority of atmospheric warming over the last century occurred during positive PDO phases, with negative PDOs tending to result in flat temperature trends. It’s easy to see how an atmospheric warming “hiatus” could occur during a negative PDO phase.


Figure 3. PDO values (top) and global air temperature anomalies (bottom). Gray shading indicates positive PDO periods, when atmospheric warming was most evident. The NOAA PDO values shown here vary slightly from those discussed in the article, which are calculated by the University of Washington. Image credit: Jerimiah Brown, Weather Underground. Data sources:NOAA (top) and NOAA/NCDC (bottom).


From the AMS meeting
The hiatus was discussed at length in a series of talks during the annual meeting of the American Meteorological Society last month in Phoenix. Jerry Meehl, from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (my former employer), gave a whirlwind 15-minute overview of hiatus-oriented research conducted over the last six years. Meehl’s talk can be viewed online. More than 20 papers have studied the hiatus and its links to the PDO/IPO, according to Matthew England (University of New South Wales). Most of the flattening of global temperature during the hiatus can be traced to cooler-than-average conditions over the eastern tropical Pacific, which pulled down global averages. An emerging theme is that natural, or internal, variability in the tropical Pacific can explain at least half of the hiatus. NCAR’s Clara Deser presented new modeling evidence along these lines (see video online). Other factors may be involved as well, including a series of weak volcanic eruptions that could explain a small part of the hiatus, according to a recent analysis by Ben Santer (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory).

One crucial point is that global warming didn’t “stop” during the hiatus: the world’s oceans actually gained heat at an accelerated pace. Trade winds blew more strongly from east to west across the Pacific, consistent with the tendency toward La Niña conditions, as described in this open-access article by NCAR’s Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo. Over parts of the central tropical Pacific, trade winds averaged about 3 mph stronger during 1999-2012 compared to 1976-1988. These speeds are higher than for any previous hiatus on record, bolstering the idea that other factors may have joined this negative PDO/IPO phase. The faster trade winds encouraged upwelling of cooler water to the east and helped deepen and strengthen the warm pool to the west—enough, in fact, to raise sea level around the Philippines by as much as 8 inches. Other parts of the deep ocean warmed as well. A new study led by Dean Roemmich (Scripps Institution of Oceanography) maps the areas of greatest ocean heating from 2006 to 2013 and finds that significant warming extended to depths of greater than 6600 feet.

What next for the PDO?
The PDO index, as calculated at the University of Washington, scored positive values during every month in 2014, the first such streak since 2003. By December it reached +2.51, the largest positive value for any December in records that go back to 1900. The January value from UW was 2.45, again a monthly record. (NOAA calculates its own PDO values through a closely related methodology.)

Because the PDO can flip modes for a year or more within its longer-term cycle, we don’t yet know whether a significant shift to a positive PDO phase has begun. If trade winds weaken throughout this year, and positive PDO values persist, that’ll be strong evidence that a new cycle is indeed under way. The last time we saw a two-year streak of positive values was in 1992-93. If this occurs, and assuming no spikes in major volcanic activity, we could expect greater rises in global temperature over the next 10 to 15 years than we’ve seen during the hiatus. In addition, we should watch for El Niño to make its presence known more often.

“I am inclined to think the hiatus is over, mainly based on the PDO index change,” NCAR’s Kevin Trenberth told me. While Matthew England isn’t ready to offer such a prediction, he emphasized that any post-hiatus global temperature rise is likely to be fairly rapid. Trenberth also commented on an interesting NOAA analysis (see Figure 4): “If one takes the global mean temperature from 1970 on, everything fits a linear trend quite well except 1998.”


Figure 4. When looking at global temperature over a full PDO cycle (1970s to 2010s), the overall rise becomes evident, despite the flattening observed in the last 15 years. Image credit: NOAA.


A record-strong El Niño occurred in 1998, providing an unusually powerful boost to global temperature and fueling years of subsequent declarations that “global warming stopped in 1998.” The record warmth of 2014 made it clear that global warming has no intention of stopping, and the next few years are likely to reinforce that point. Nevertheless, snowbound New Englanders, and millions of other easterners now dealing with record cold for so late in the year, may be wondering why eastern North America has seen so much cold and snow in the past few winters--especially this one--and how long that climatic quirk might continue. Stay tuned for a separate post on that topic.

Bob Henson


The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.

Reader Comments

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 393 - 343

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18Blog Index

Quoting win1gamegiantsplease:
Had a class cancelled today so I thought I'd go around and shoot a few photos at UNCW





Looks like a lot of droopiness but probably no long term damage. Are you above freezing yet? If so, are seeing some ice melting? As long as we don't get another Arctic blast, which doesn't appear likely for the next week or so, those plants should recover. At least the roads are open and you have power, two of the things that leave first in a really bad ice storm.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
The current speaker at the Portlight sponsored Getting it Right Workshop in Va.

June Isaacson Kailes, Disability Policy Consultant

June is a pioneer of emergency management and people with disabilities. Her breadth and depth of experience in access and functional needs and her work as a writer, trainer, researcher, policy analyst and advocate is widely known and well respected. June will discuss best practices for emergency managers regarding people with disabilities.

LIVESTREAM
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting SouthTampa:
Furthermore, there's a difference between truly being here to learn and feigning an effort to learn in an attempt to cast doubt on established science. It's a slimy technique used by a handful of frequent posters here. Nearly every blog has a retread regurgitation from some long debunked denialist site in the comments section. This comment is posted in such a way that it seems to be an innocuous question from someone here to "just learn". To me this dis-ingenuousness deserves sarcasm and ridicule.
I would agree about some posters but Opal is not one of them. He's trying to figure out the truth after being fed a line from other websites he frequents. He's indicative of a lot of people in the world right now. We can either try to share our knowledge or we can do what you apparently like to do. Even dogs don't generally learn anything from beatings except it's best to bite first and ask questions later.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
I don't think the goal here is to leetspeak another member. It's about education. Snarking might be good for the gaming world, but not here.

and of course it is against the rules here in the good doc's blog...but sometimes...you just have to tell an idiot they are an idiot....even if it means a ban
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Dats a very tender subject....



RHPS
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting SouthTampa:
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." Exactly. I don't post often because my method of communicating is not, well, in line with the standards of the community here. I mostly lurk - leaving the educated responses to those more patient than I am. Sometimes, though, I find it necessary to post because a response is so good (Xyrus') or a post is so far afield, that ridicule is called for.
That is why we have the plus sign here. I don't know you or your normal method of communication, but Xyrus and Naga generally get their points across with a minimum amount of pwnage. Unless that's really what you want to do, there are lessons to be learned.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 379. sar2401:

I don't think the goal here is to leetspeak another member. It's about education. Snarking might be good for the gaming world, but not here.
Furthermore, there's a difference between truly being here to learn and feigning an effort to learn in an attempt to cast doubt on established science. It's a slimy technique used by a handful of frequent posters here. Nearly every blog has a retread regurgitation from some long debunked denialist site in the comments section. This comment is posted in such a way that it seems to be an innocuous question from someone here to "just learn". To me this dis-ingenuousness deserves sarcasm and ridicule.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting weathermanwannabe:
In terms of any severe weather for parts of North Florida, it will depend on the track of the low later this evening per the discussion below. Don't see a big tornado threat due to the current stability (big cool rain shield over most of North Florida at the moment) but probably more of a strong strait-line wind threat; pretty impressive mid level jet and NWS discussion notes that some of that wind may dip down as low as 1500 feet.
I didn't want to quote the whole discussion but right now there's a good bit of lightning strokes from south of New Orleans to SE Mississippi. That's pretty good performance against a forecast of "isolated thunderstorms". I'm getting a little more concerned about the severe storm threat down here. As far as the snow, the lack of any readily apparent source of cold air puts all the possible snow on wetbulbing. That's a pretty tricky thing in terms of snow forecasts. There are going to be a few places that over perform (like North Carolina) but a lot more expecting snow who are either going to get much less than forecast or none at all. The WAA is doing a better job than the models indicated even 12 hours ago. I'm up to 48 while Birmingham is at 34. There's enough dewpoint depression that the metro area is going to see sleet but not enough that wetbulbing is going to turn it to all snow. Far north Alabama is going to get a pretty good snowstorm out of this, with 4-6" in a fairly narrow band right along the AL/TN border. I think a lot of people south of there who were expecting some decent snow accumulations are going to be disappointed.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." Exactly. I don't post often because my method of communicating is not, well, in line with the standards of the community here. I mostly lurk - leaving the educated responses to those more patient than I am. Sometimes, though, I find it necessary to post because a response is so good (Xyrus') or a post is so far afield, that ridicule is called for.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:
I don't think the goal here is to leetspeak another member. It's about education. Snarking might be good for the gaming world, but not here.
I disagree. Snark has its place, especially when dealing with the repeated musings of those who choose to ignore reality and substitute their own. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote: "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Continental United States Extremes
Tue's High Temperature: 88 at Fort Lauderdale Executive Fl
Wed's Low Temperature: 27 BELOW ZERO at Crane Lake Mn And International Falls Mn

Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 321. vis0:

I.  (Above of Dr. Masters' entry2923, in ¶8 L07) "The faster trade winds encouraged upwelling of cooler water to the east
and helped deepen and strengthen the warm pool to the west—enough, in
fact, to raise sea level around the Philippines by as much as 8 inches."  could this account for some seeing not as high water levels off the UsofA east coast as i read some WxU members described during their fishing off Florida?

(*play opening Twilight Zone music*)

II.  Anyone notice a 2:1* occurrence as to these PDOs.   Remember my clues as to when one see 2:1 ratios in natures' patterns, as how many fingers [sit Down SAR2401 this is not a sobriety test] of cooler vs. warmer & vice versa occur?  If they happen on both ends of a specific (as in PDO) catagory to observe "sounds"/resonances/vibrations from "space" and how that affects friction of fluids within a physical dimension, its a "Law of Galacsic" but then again i'm a nut.

When science eventually "reads" "sounds"/resonances/vibrations from black holes/q-Novaes, remember not to read them as plus/minus sine waves but inward / outward (squeezing,contracting / expanding). The Physical dimension reads the contracting as the energy being taken away thus cooler and expanding energy being added thus warmer, oh i must have hit my head on something   *clearing "cob webs"*    why am i writing Galacsics clues i stopped this last year forgive me for posting unknown sciences.

(*play closing Twilight Zone music*)

*2:1 as .666 to .333, the remainder .001 is for "nature" & "gawd" to communicate i.e. the trigger as to when to to recycle or switch this pattern ON/OFF.

PAY ATTENTION TO SUDDEN WIND SHIFTS & weather warnings.

Hi vis0.. I, for one, appreciate your occasional lapses in self-control and your future science input into the blog.. what you offer can make our 'big picture' bigger, if we so chose to follow you down the quantum rabbit hole of destiny.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 376. sar2401:

Alright, Bonnie. You get the gold star for today. All these years of looking at those maps and I never noticed it before. What a dunce! Much easier on the old eyes to look at the contours.

Thanks, sar! But no need to feel like a dunce...do you have any idea how often I discover, or even worse, re-discover stuff, that's probably common knowledge to some on here? Too often to think about :/
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting SouthTampa:
"Tangible". Bravo, Xyrus. This is one of the best and more thorough fiskings I've read in a long time. I am amazed by the time and effort Naga, Nea, you and others put forth defending sound science. Thanks to all of you... I am merely good for snark: opal, you got pwnd.
I don't think the goal here is to leetspeak another member. It's about education. Snarking might be good for the gaming world, but not here.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
High Point, NC forecast. The Triangle area, especially east of Raleigh to I-95 (includes US 70 and 64 corridors) looks to be the focus of this storm. Expecting more snow than a week ago but that storm didn't produce as much so here's to hoping that it's under the bar again but this has more potential if it goes as forecast:

THERE HAS BEEN A CONTINUED SLIGHT NORTHWARD SHIFT IN GUIDANCE SINCE
YESTERDAY...WHICH EQUATES TO A WETTER AND MARGINALLY WARMER SOLUTION
FOR CENTRAL NC...THOUGH THE OVERALL PATTERN REMAINS UNCHANGED WITH
THE DEAMPLIFICATION/ENE SHEARING OF A SHORTWAVE TROUGH FROM NEAR THE
RIO GRANDE THIS MORNING TO THE MIDDLE ATLANTIC COAST BY THU MORNING.
THE ASSOCIATED FORCING FOR ASCENT ATOP A PAIR OF CLOSELY-SPACED AND
STRONG FRONTAL ZONES DRAPED ACROSS THE NORTHERN GOM TO A SFC LOW
ABOUT MIDWAY BETWEEN CAPE HATTERAS AND BERMUDA...WILL RESULT IN THE
CONTINUED DEEPENING OF A SFC LOW OVER THE NW GOM THIS MORNING.
GUIDANCE IS THEN FAIRLY TIGHTLY CLUSTERED WITH THE TRACK OF A MILLER
"A" SFC LOW ACROSS THE NORTHERN FL PENINSULA THIS EVENING AND
ROUGHLY ALONG THE GULF STREAM TO JUST EAST OF CAPE HATTERAS BY 12Z
THU.

AS HAS BEEN NOTED IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS...THE LACK OF A PARENT
COLD HIGH IS ADMITTEDLY SOMEWHAT CONCERNING. AN ARCTIC SFC HIGH AT
1045 MB WILL BE CENTERED OVER SOUTHERN ALBERTA/SASKATCHEWAN AND WILL
CONSEQUENTLY HAVE LITTLE INFLUENCE AT OUR LATITUDE DURING THE HEIGHT
OF THE STORM TONIGHT. HOWEVER...A VERY FAVORABLE MILLER "A" CYCLONE
TRACK ALONG AND JUST OFFSHORE THE SE COAST...IN CONJUNCTION WITH A
PRECEDING ARCTIC HIGH THAT APPEARS TO BE JUST COLD ENOUGH DESPITE
BEING IN A DRAMATICALLY WEAKENED STATE FROM A COUPLE OF DAYS
AGO...BUT IS STILL CHARACTERIZED BY SFC TEMPERATURES AND DEWPOINTS
MOSTLY IN THE TEENS TO 20S OVER NC THIS MORNING...WILL SUPPORT A
SIGNIFICANT WINTER STORM **WITH A NARROW P-TYPE (SNOW/RAIN)
TRANSITION ZONE AND DEEP NEAR FREEZING ISOTHERMAL PROFILES
CHARACTERISTIC OF MILLER "A` SFC PATTERNS.** PRECIPITATION
RATES...OCCASIONALLY MODERATE TO HEAVY...WILL ONLY SERVE TO ENHANCE
THE DEEP NEAR FREEZING ISOTHERMAL PROFILES RIGHT ALONG THE SNOW/COLD
RAIN INTERFACE...OWING TO MELTING.

Wednesday Night 100% Precip. / 5-8 in
Snow. Snow will be heavy at times this evening. Low 29F. Winds ENE at 5 to 10 mph. Chance of snow 100%. 5 to 8 inches of snow expected.

Tarboro, NC

Wednesday Night 100% Precip. / 8-12 in
Snow...heavy at times. Some sleet or freezing rain possible. Low around 30F. Winds ENE at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of snow 100%. 8 to 12 inches of snow expected.

Thursday 90% Precip. / < 1 in
Snow during the morning will taper off and give way to cloudy skies during the afternoon. High 38F. Winds NNE at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of snow 90%. Snow accumulations less than one inch.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 339. jpsb:



Not at all, a luke warmest knows that CO2 is a green house gas and knows that the climate has been warming and knows that mankind is responsible for some of that warming. We just do not believe the IPCC computer models nor to we believe all the doom and gloom predictions coming from the alarmist camp. There are agents other than CO2 which drive climate.


First, he IPCC does not produce computer models. The report includes results of ensemble runs of climate models but the IPCC itself has nothing to do with modelling.

Second, what is your basis of disagreement? Is it the physics? The chemistry? Have you ever bothered even looking at a climate model? Do you know what data goes in? Do you know what results come out? Do you know know what's being modeled vs. what's being parameterized? Do you know how to perform a proper analysis? Do you know how to perform a proper error analysis?

Where's your evidence to back up your position? Where's your physics and chemistry? Where's your source code? Where's your data sets? Where's your papers?

You see, I can point you to any number of sources. Better yet, the methodologies, models, data sets, etc. are all laid out in the IPCC report itself. You can get the papers. You can go download the climate models themselves. You can download the data sets (though you may want a good connection for that, some of them are quite large). You can even run them on a decently powered computer (though not at full strength, that requires super computers).

If your alternative explanation vs. more than century of science is "we don't know", then you have no logical argument nor basis for disagreement.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LAbonbon:

There are others on here who've mentioned difficulty with the colors as well. Regarding the contours only, it's available for all of the QPFs. Need to click the 'contours only' link below the QPF:

Alright, Bonnie. You get the gold star for today. All these years of looking at those maps and I never noticed it before. What a dunce! Much easier on the old eyes to look at the contours.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
In terms of any severe weather for parts of North Florida, it will depend on the track of the low later this evening per the discussion below. Don't see a big tornado threat due to the current stability (big cool rain shield over most of North Florida at the moment) but probably more of a strong strait-line wind threat; pretty impressive mid level jet and NWS discussion notes that some of that wind may dip down as low as 1500 feet.


NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TALLAHASSEE FL
250 AM EST Wed Feb 25 2015

.Near Term [Today and Tonight]...

Active weather is expected through tonight as a potent upper
trough swings through with a moderately strong area of low
pressure developing along the northern Gulf coast. Divergence
aloft ahead of the upper system coupled with strong lift ahead of
the surface low will lead to a large area of rain spreading over
the forecast area during the afternoon. With the stationary
frontal boundary nearly bisecting the forecast area, high
temperatures will vary widely today, with highs ranging from the
mid 40s northwest to the lower 60s in the southeastern Big Bend.

As far as the threat of severe weather goes, there remains a non-
zero risk, particularly near the coast. Shear will be very strong
(even for our local cool season standards) thanks to very strong
wind fields just above the surface with 850 mb winds in the 60-70
knot range this evening. Expected 0-1 km shear values are up to 50
knots across the area with some of the convection allowing models
forecasting 50 knot environmental winds down as low as 1500 feet.

The track of the low pressure will be particularly important to
the severe risk as that will largely determine how much instability
makes it inland from the coast. Currently, we expect the best
chance of severe weather in a corridor stretching across Gulf,
Liberty, Franklin, and Wakulla counties starting late this
afternoon and lasting into the evening hours. It is in this area
where there is the best model agreement on a narrow wedge of
instability making it inland and overlapping with the very strong
shear values. Damaging winds and a tornado or two are the main
risks. Farther to the north, the degree of destabilization is
highly uncertain, although a marginal risk may exist into
southwest Georgia if the low tracks farther to the north.
Regardless, there is some elevated instability present according
to the BUFKIT forecast soundings, so isolated thunderstorms were
included up into Georgia.


																	
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Had a class cancelled today so I thought I'd go around and shoot a few photos at UNCW





Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 350. sar2401:

Gul dang it, another pay wall. I really don't know how they arrived at their conclusion without seeing the study, but it does appear that the authors are attempting to introduce yet another climate term which didn't exist before. It's %u201Cdeep-tropics squeeze%u201D (DTS), and a Google search shows the term comes back to this study. Unfortunately, DTS also has several established meanings, none of which are climatalogical. I'll leave it to you to check the Urban Dictionary, but you have been warned. :-)


When I was looking for a propeller screw for a Cox .049 engine some years ago I googled it.

The first several hundred thousand returns were completely irrelevant to my search.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"Tangible". Bravo, Xyrus. This is one of the best and more thorough fiskings I've read in a long time. I am amazed by the time and effort Naga, Nea, you and others put forth defending sound science. Thanks to all of you... I am merely good for snark: opal, you got pwnd.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"For us, It's called truth mingled with biased skewing of the data to fit an interpretation."

and who exactly is doing that?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 354. sar2401:

I'll take #2 over the deep purple haze version. At least I can read the contour numbers instead of blowing the map up and trying to figure out which color is which. Unfortunately, I haven't found the same style of map for anything other than the 24 hour forecast. I'd call 1.75" a hit and less a miss. We have to set a standard somewhere.

Lots more lighting now over New Orleans, and it looks like the cells are trying to form up in a line. I'm not sure if they end up in the Gulf or onshore but at least it's something interesting to look at.



A thousand pluses. Contour maps are so.. 1970s. But they are also BETTER!!!. I do prefer to pick the contour values rather than guess from fifty shades of (at least not gray) colors.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:



here come the snow for the south on wednesday night
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 357. FormosanBlackBear:

Love for that to happen so I can move to Norway!




I remember a humerous bumper sticker from the late 80s in Minnesota

"Minnesotans for Global Warming"

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 326. Xyrus2000:



There's been a few papers on the subject that basically boil down to the warmer temperatures/reduced sea ice have decreased the strength of the jet, allowing it to become more like a rubber band than a wall keeping arctic air locked up.

Here's a paper on the topic: Link



Thank you.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 354. sar2401:

I'll take #2 over the deep purple haze version. At least I can read the contour numbers instead of blowing the map up and trying to figure out which color is which. Unfortunately, I haven't found the same style of map for anything other than the 24 hour forecast. I'd call 1.75" a hit and less a miss. We have to set a standard somewhere.

Lots more lighting now over New Orleans, and it looks like the cells are trying to form up in a line. I'm not sure if they end up in the Gulf or onshore but at least it's something interesting to look at.

There are others on here who've mentioned difficulty with the colors as well. Regarding the contours only, it's available for all of the QPFs. Need to click the 'contours only' link below the QPF:

Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 276. opal92nwf:

Here is my response to those who say you cannot take people seriously if they are not in tandem with the modern day science boat.

For us, It's called truth mingled with biased skewing of the data to fit an interpretation.


If you're looking for truth, try philosophy. Truth is subjective. Science is objective. In fact, science has often clashed with "truth", and depending on what century you were the result was often unpleasant for the scientist.

As far as your implied "data manipulation" goes, science does not exist in a vacuum. It builds on itself. Your work now was built on top of work by someone else, which was built on someone else's work, so on and so forth. If you or someone else decides to fake the data or manipulate it, then eventually the dishonesty will be discovered. Sometimes this is discovered during the peer review process. Sometimes it's discovered a year later. Sometimes it can take a decade or longer if your paper is in some obscure branch of research. But someone somewhere will eventually try to use your research and find that you deliberately published garbage. And that is a stink that does not wash off in research circles.

And am a qualified scientist to be able to go in and analyze all the factors and determine if this is the case? no! but just like so many more people like me in America/this world, we can perceive the signs of when something phony like a GW phenonenon is crafted and fed into a world that would so generously give grateful allegiance to .


No, you can't mainly due to ignorance or willful ignorance. For example, you seem to imply the global warming is some sort of conspiracy. Ok, let's examine that for a moment.

Anthropogenic global warming was predicted well over a century ago by Svante Arrhenius (if you've taken a chemistry class, you probably heard of this guy). He developed the first physical model demonstrating the effects of increased greenhouse gases and how it impacts global temperatures. He determined that, if human activities kept adding CO2 to the atmosphere, the planet would warm as a result. This was back in the late 1800's, well before Al Gore, computers, and even the theory of relativity.

But his work wasn't developed in a vacuum. It built on work that went back to the early 1800's. Joseph Fourier (of Fourier Transform fame) determined in the 1820's that the Earth's atmosphere acted like a greenhouse. He quantified what the planet's temperature should be and compared it to what it actually was (based on the data at the time), and determined the approximate forcing added by the atmosphere. He couldn't break it down into components (Arrhenius did that some 70 years later) but he and others around his time were aware of how the atmosphere kept the planet warmer than it otherwise would be.

Since then there has been thousands of papers on the subject. The physics and chemistry became more refined. The models improved. Then computers came along. What once was a painstaking task of manual computation now became automated. As computers improved, so did the computer models' capabilities. They could add in more components. They could ingest more data. They could run at higher resolutions. So on and so forth.

So for you conspiracy theory to be correct, there would have to have been some global Illuminati type group strong arming scientists for at least past 120 years. A worldwide network of physcists and chemists working together to snowjob the planet, yet their work is so cleverly disguised that even with incorrect physics and chemistry we still have all of our modern conveniences.

An what would be the objective of this worldwide evil organization of scientists that has been around for over century? Clean air? Sustainable living? A coherent energy plan? Certainly it wasn't to make money as the vast majority of scientists make a middle class income. Or maybe it's a global incompetent organization, since fossil fuel companies make orders of magnitudes more money?

Objectively, that's tin foil hat level nuttery. There are JFK, alien, and Elvis conspiracies that make more sense.

And then you have little slip ups like those letters that were leaked, that helps give you an idea.


I can tell you never read them. Or rather, you never read all of them. You see, there's this thing called context. Context in communication is very important. Without context, even the most innocuous of statements can be twisted into something it's not. And that is precisely what was done. Members of the idiot brigade went through the emails and cherry picked statements out of them to try and show the scientists in the worst light possible. However, if you actually did a search for those statements in the emails and read the threads in context, the statements were nothing more than regular conversation. To my knowledge you can still get the archive online from various sources so there's no need to take my word for it.

I believe this position is not deemed valid by some because of a one-way view...


No, the view isn't valid because you'd have to throw out a lot of modern chemistry and physics for it to make any sense. Chemistry and physics that's used every day. Tangible. Used in major industries from steel production to weather forecasting.

Science is not a cherry picked graph of temperatures. Science is WHY those temperatures are happening in the first place. If you come across some research and disagree with it's conclusions, the correct approach is to formulate your own hypothesis, gather your own observations, develop your own models, and demonstrate why your theory is stronger/more correct than the other.

I know sites like WUWT would have you believe that random graphturbation somehow invaildates more than a century worth of multi-disciplinary science research, but it doesn't work that way. If you can't provide a coherent argument why the science is incorrect, if you can't provide an alternate model that explains observations and/or make useful predictions then the only thing your going to succeed at is making yourself look like an idiot, at least in scientific circles.

Nutty conspiracy theories and empty accusations don't cut it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 349. rjsenterp:

The earth gets warmer, the earth gets cooler as it goes through its natural cycles.

No news here. Move along.


The last record cold year globally was 1909, we have had 19 record warmest since then. So in the past 105 years we have seen 0 record cold years and 19 record warm. Care to calculate the the odds that this would occur by natural variation alone? What natural forcing is responsible for this? Please name the cycle, it's return period, and it's mechanism of action.

I'll help, here are the known forcings : downwelling radiation due to the greenhouse effect, solar radiation variability due to orbital changes, variability due to changes in solar irradiance, direct aerosol effects, indirect aerosol effects, and surface characteristics.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:


snow storm for the southeast!!
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 349. rjsenterp:

The earth gets warmer, the earth gets cooler as it goes through its natural cycles.

No news here. Move along.


the earth gets warmer when a positive radiative forcing is exerted upon it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 358. weathermanwannabe:


nice storm way off the coast
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Love for that to happen so I can move to Norway!

Quoting 346. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:




Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 339. jpsb:



Not at all, a luke warmest knows that CO2 is a green house gas and knows that the climate has been warming and knows that mankind is responsible for some of that warming. We just do not believe the IPCC computer models nor to we believe all the doom and gloom predictions coming from the alarmist camp. There are agents other than CO2 which drive climate.

Of course there are other factors that drive the climate. We know that. But the other known forcings aren't currently doing anything that would account for the warming, leaving increased greenhouse gas forcing as the obvious culprit.
Frankly I've always found the lukewarmist position more difficult to understand than greenhouse gas deniers, because basically you think that we can change the climate without really changing the climate. There's an acknowledgement of the risks that somehow still refuses to acknowledge the risks. And then you're left having to deny any possible connection between weather trends and warming trends, even though physically they only make sense, like the way people were insisting warmer ocean temps wouldn't effect coastal snowstorms at all.
It's like you understand the physics but are pretty much just counting on them failing to apply, or something.
I just don't understand.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Here is the NWS headline for today; a nice swatch of precip moving into the South again and looks like snow in Arkansas at the moment with some mixed precip strarting to slide into northern AL and GA:

More winter weather for the South, Southeast and Mid-Atlantic Wednesday

On Wednesday, precipitation will spread eastward along the Gulf Coast, affecting portions of the Southeast and Tennessee valley. Cold air in place will allow for a mix of wintry precipitation from northern Texas eastward across the central and northern Gulf Coast states and into portions of the Carolinas.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LAbonbon:

Yes, Eufala is in the deep purple, which is 2-2.5. Even if it hit 1.8 or 1.9, would you call it 'bust', or 'in the ballpark'?

Regarding the 'other' form of the QPF. Here are the current 1-day products:




See? No 'X's :D
I'll take #2 over the deep purple haze version. At least I can read the contour numbers instead of blowing the map up and trying to figure out which color is which. Unfortunately, I haven't found the same style of map for anything other than the 24 hour forecast. I'd call 1.75" a hit and less a miss. We have to set a standard somewhere.

Lots more lighting now over New Orleans, and it looks like the cells are trying to form up in a line. I'm not sure if they end up in the Gulf or onshore but at least it's something interesting to look at.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 347. Drakoen:

4km NAM tomorrow morning


That's a big jump north.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
In Fig.4 the data trend is presented as linear increase with sin/cos wave oscillations. Now the oscillation is not in question but could the linear increase be actually larger, long term, raising sin/cos oscillation?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 350. sar2401:

Gul dang it, another pay wall. I really don't know how they arrived at their conclusion without seeing the study, but it does appear that the authors are attempting to introduce yet another climate term which didn't exist before. It's %u201Cdeep-tropics squeeze%u201D (DTS), and a Google search shows the term comes back to this study. Unfortunately, DTS also has several established meanings, none of which are climatalogical. I'll leave it to you to check the Urban Dictionary, but you have been warned. :-)

I was bummed about the paywall as well. For a moment there I thought since the article westscotweather linked earlier (from the same source, PNAS) was fully available, then this would be as well. I wonder what the difference is...anybody know?
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting LAbonbon:
From the Los Angeles Times:

Is drought the new normal for Southern California?
By GEOFFREY MOHAN
FEBRUARY 23, 2015 4:11 PM

Inreased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is altering Earth's most important atmospheric weather cell, drawing more moisture into the deep tropics and broadening areas of drought at higher latitudes, according to a new study.

The U.S. west, including Southern California, as well as swaths of subtropical Brazil that are suffering from acute drought lie in the heart of the decreased rainfall band shown in 33 climate scenarios run over a 140-year span, according to the study published online Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The study shows a clear global-warming signal in the changed water cycle brought on by a "deep tropical squeeze" in the Hadley circulation, a massive convection-driven cell extending from Earth's equator toward the planet's mid-latitudes.

%u201CWe are finding the region of drying exactly coincides with the places where we are now seeing this worldwide drought and wildfire happening," said University of Maryland atmospheric scientist William Lau, lead author of the study. "That includes the western U.S., southwestern U.S., Mexico, Brazil, southwestern Australia, southern Africa, northern Africa, the mid-Mediterranean region, southern Europe %u2014 all this is at the edge of the climatological sub-tropics that are being extended.%u201D
Read Full Article
Gul dang it, another pay wall. I really don't know how they arrived at their conclusion without seeing the study, but it does appear that the authors are attempting to introduce yet another climate term which didn't exist before. It's %u201Cdeep-tropics squeeze%u201D (DTS), and a Google search shows the term comes back to this study. Unfortunately, DTS also has several established meanings, none of which are climatalogical. I'll leave it to you to check the Urban Dictionary, but you have been warned. :-)
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
The earth gets warmer, the earth gets cooler as it goes through its natural cycles.

No news here. Move along.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 342. sar2401:

There's a little more lightning showing up as the blob moves east. Only about 5 strokes per minute so not a lot but enough to startle people not expecting it. :-)

I really never expect that the bulls eye will verify. It is about 50 miles west of me but the small scale of the map makes it hard to tell accurately. As I've said many times, take those numbers and "X'es" off the map. They are distracting and serve no purpose except to highlight that the WPC is making a forecast that they don't have enough skill to make. What was important about the map was Eufaula is in the deep purple contour, which is 2.50" - I think. I'm slightly color blind and have a hard time distinguishing those fine color gradients. I'm now at 1.05" since Sunday. Not bad, but another inch at least before 6:00 pm tonight is needed before I'd call it in the ballpark. Below two inches isn't really the ballpark. What I think the WPC got right (and we'll see this evening if it did) is that an area of fairly substantial rain would occur between Sunday and Thursday. There must be a better way to communicate this than what the WPC is now using. I remember the hatched plots as well. I thought they were much more readable than what we have now. Unfortunately, graphic power progresses, bright young college grads who know that stuff backwards and forwards show up, and the old stuff gets put in the archives. Life is like that.

Big increase in lightning strokes since I started typing this. Up to about 12 a minute now. over 100 a minute is what I'd expect to see from a good line of storms but at least it's a little different than yet another batch of stratiform rain.

Yes, Eufala is in the deep purple, which is 2-2.5. Even if it hit 1.8 or 1.9, would you call it 'bust', or 'in the ballpark'?

Regarding the 'other' form of the QPF. Here are the current 1-day products:




See? No 'X's :D
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
4km NAM tomorrow morning

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 339. jpsb:



Not at all, a luke warmest knows that CO2 is a green house gas and knows that the climate has been warming and knows that mankind is responsible for some of that warming. We just do not believe the IPCC computer models nor to we believe all the doom and gloom predictions coming from the alarmist camp. There are agents other than CO2 which drive climate.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
the IPCC does not have computer models
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WaterWitch11:


geez you guys didn't you see ratatouille? it was the flea...

plus wasn't the blankets and bedding an issue?
LOL. I did see Ratatouille, and it was a pretty good movie. That rat was cute. I think the blankets and bedding were an issue with smallpox.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
From the Los Angeles Times:

Is drought the new normal for Southern California?
By GEOFFREY MOHAN
FEBRUARY 23, 2015 4:11 PM

Inreased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is altering Earth's most important atmospheric weather cell, drawing more moisture into the deep tropics and broadening areas of drought at higher latitudes, according to a new study.

The U.S. west, including Southern California, as well as swaths of subtropical Brazil that are suffering from acute drought lie in the heart of the decreased rainfall band shown in 33 climate scenarios run over a 140-year span, according to the study published online Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The study shows a clear global-warming signal in the changed water cycle brought on by a "deep tropical squeeze" in the Hadley circulation, a massive convection-driven cell extending from Earth's equator toward the planet's mid-latitudes.

“We are finding the region of drying exactly coincides with the places where we are now seeing this worldwide drought and wildfire happening," said University of Maryland atmospheric scientist William Lau, lead author of the study. "That includes the western U.S., southwestern U.S., Mexico, Brazil, southwestern Australia, southern Africa, northern Africa, the mid-Mediterranean region, southern Europe — all this is at the edge of the climatological sub-tropics that are being extended.”
Read Full Article
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 393 - 343

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18Blog Index

Top of Page

Category 6™

About

Cat 6 lead authors: WU cofounder Dr. Jeff Masters (right), who flew w/NOAA Hurricane Hunters 1986-1990, & WU meteorologist Bob Henson, @bhensonweather