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: 843 - 793

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

NO MATTER WHAT WE SAY ,THERE IS BOUND TO BE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING EL NINO, LA NINA MODOKI. AND NEUTRAL THIS HURRICANE SEASON
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
842. jpsb
Quoting 832. CuriousAboutClimate:



Occam's razor, jpsb. Why suggest additional, as-yet-unidentified factors to try to explain something that is already explained perfectly well by the current observational data? Plurality should not be posited without necessity. By the way, the cosmic ray hypothesis is essentially dead

"A set of Monte Carlo simulations nevertheless indicated that the weak amplitude of the global mean temperature response associated with GCR could easily be due to chance (p-value = 0.6), and there has been no trend in the GCR. Hence, there is little empirical evidence that links GCR to the recent global warming."
Link

"Evidence is presented from which the contributions of either cosmic rays or solar activity to this warming is deduced. The contribution is shown to be less than 10% of the warming seen in the twentieth century."
Link

"Our analysis shows that, although important in cloud physics the results do not lead to the conclusion that cosmic rays affect atmospheric clouds significantly, at least if H2SO4 is the dominant source of aerosols in the atmosphere. An analysis of the very recent studies of stratospheric aerosol changes following a giant solar energetic particles event shows a similar negligible effect. Recent measurements of the cosmic ray intensity show that a former decrease with time has been reversed. Thus, even if cosmic rays enhanced cloud production, there would be a small global cooling, not warming."
Link


A wrote a long piece on why I believe what I do for this blog, around #410 or #510. I appreciate your taking the time to reply. but it is lunch time so I will see yall tomorrow.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 834. sar2401:

At least you have been appointed our solar expert. I will keep that in mind whenever any sun type questions come up here. :-)


Bout time I was an expert on something. My mom would be proud.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 839. GTstormChaserCaleb:

Watch us get a La Niña . :P
maybe la neutral
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 825. Gearsts:

No one can't say at this time if the El nino will be modoki or not or if we will have and El nino at all. Some have made it their day job to constantly post about the el nino and the 100% chance they give of development but the best thing to do is wait and see how the enso slowly evolve.
Watch us get a La Niña . :P
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Here are the current tornado watch areas issued by SPC for 2015; not sure if this is updated for the watches issued in parts of North Florida yesterday but it looks that way:

Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 820. georgevandenberghe:



Only for some of us. :-(
its coming not summer like but spring like in about 10 days its time for winters eviction and springs arrival
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
836. jpsb
Quoting 819. ricderr:

thanx jp....but when we observe when was that added...and the reasoning behind it....i think it confirms my point..it sure didn't come from our founding fathers

from the dept of the treasury

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:


Actually according to wiki the phase has been in use on coins since 1864, but I would like to leave this topic, so my last words will be a quote from Alexis de Tocqueville and then one from Voltaire.

"Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith."

"Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer."
Translation: If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Anyone have any thoughts on how the Spring tornado season will pan out over the next few months? We know that the biggest "boom" for the Mid-West comes with strong warm Gulf flow colliding with the cooler air from late-Winter fronts entering the Plains from the Rockies. Given the current storm trajectories, and current jet pattern, I am thinking that we might have a strong tornado season this year and that if the atmosphere is responding to a potential El Nino pattern, that we might get a few "low rider" fronts that will cause some boom for parts of the Gulf Coast as well. Too early to know what the transition pattern will fall into from Spring to Summer (it could change from the current one) but I remember our Blogger "Levi" making some good correlations (which I believe he presented to SPC a few years ago) on one of the Pacific indicators with some correlations to tornado season.

Would love to hear from Levi on his thoughts on this issue for the coming few months.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting Naga5000:


I didn't say that at all. Stop putting words in my mouth. I have tried to explain to you numerous times that the sun is one of the many forcings. You seem to think we haven't been able to measure the forcings...I really can't make this any clearer, please refrain from attributing statements to me that I didn't make.



Why is this so hard for you to understand?
At least you have been appointed our solar expert. I will keep that in mind whenever any sun type questions come up here. :-)
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 832. CuriousAboutClimate:



Occam's razor, jpsb. Why suggest additional, as-yet-unidentified factors to try to explain something that is already explained perfectly well by the current observational data? Plurality should not be posited without necessity. By the way, the cosmic ray hypothesis is essentially dead

"A set of Monte Carlo simulations nevertheless indicated that the weak amplitude of the global mean temperature response associated with GCR could easily be due to chance (p-value = 0.6), and there has been no trend in the GCR. Hence, there is little empirical evidence that links GCR to the recent global warming."
Link

"Evidence is presented from which the contributions of either cosmic rays or solar activity to this warming is deduced. The contribution is shown to be less than 10% of the warming seen in the twentieth century."
Link

"Our analysis shows that, although important in cloud physics the results do not lead to the conclusion that cosmic rays affect atmospheric clouds significantly, at least if H2SO4 is the dominant source of aerosols in the atmosphere. An analysis of the very recent studies of stratospheric aerosol changes following a giant solar energetic particles event shows a similar negligible effect. Recent measurements of the cosmic ray intensity show that a former decrease with time has been reversed. Thus, even if cosmic rays enhanced cloud production, there would be a small global cooling, not warming."
Link


Even if they did, cosmic rays aren't a forcing, the cloud/aerosol is the radiative forcing which is covered in the chart I posted from the IPCC. It's like we are speaking a different language entirely.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 823. jpsb:



Your argument, at least as I understand it, is that the only influence the Sun has on Earth's climate can be measured in watt per meter squared at the top on the atmosphere. I disagree, I think the interact between the Earth and the Sun is far more complex and that we have much more to learn. Dr Soon work on comic rays and cloud formation being one area of interest. The 60 year cycle and 200 year cycle are also of interest. There might even be a 100,000 year cycle which might help explain the 100,000 year problem.

Re putting words into your mouth. You described as "pseudo scientific garbage" NativeSun's conjecture that the Sun effects Earth climate. I am merely offering my support to his conjecture which I do not think is "pseudo scientific garbage ".


Occam's razor, jpsb. Why suggest additional, as-yet-unidentified factors to try to explain something that is already explained perfectly well by the current observational data? Plurality should not be posited without necessity. By the way, the cosmic ray hypothesis is essentially dead

"A set of Monte Carlo simulations nevertheless indicated that the weak amplitude of the global mean temperature response associated with GCR could easily be due to chance (p-value = 0.6), and there has been no trend in the GCR. Hence, there is little empirical evidence that links GCR to the recent global warming."
Link

"Evidence is presented from which the contributions of either cosmic rays or solar activity to this warming is deduced. The contribution is shown to be less than 10% of the warming seen in the twentieth century."
Link

"Our analysis shows that, although important in cloud physics the results do not lead to the conclusion that cosmic rays affect atmospheric clouds significantly, at least if H2SO4 is the dominant source of aerosols in the atmosphere. An analysis of the very recent studies of stratospheric aerosol changes following a giant solar energetic particles event shows a similar negligible effect. Recent measurements of the cosmic ray intensity show that a former decrease with time has been reversed. Thus, even if cosmic rays enhanced cloud production, there would be a small global cooling, not warming."
Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 783. CarolinaHurricanes87:

Good morning everyone. HUGE busted forecast here in Charlotte. Even after the storm had begun, local mets predicted 7-10, NWS 5-9, and TWC 5-8. Official storm total ended up at 1.8". Sad day for snow lovers
Forecast saw spot on for Chapel Hill NC. I got 8" snow with some sleet and freezing rain on top. Heavy wet snow has brought down a lot of trees and limbs. It's a real winter wonderland mess!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 826. weblackey:


And, they don't specify which god when you look at it. Take your pick, I suppose!


I choose Thor, he promised to rid the world of Ice Giants...I don't see any Ice Giants around. Checkmate.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 823. jpsb:



Your argument, at least as I understand it, is that the only influence the Sun has on Earth's climate can be measured in watt per meter squared at the top on the atmosphere. I disagree, I think the interact between the Earth and the Sun is far more complex and that we have much more to learn. Dr Soon work on comic rays and cloud formation being one area of interest. The 60 year cycle and 200 year cycle are also of interest. There might even be a 100,000 year cycle which might help explain the 100,000 year problem.

Re putting words into your mouth. You described as "pseudo scientific garbage" NativeSun's conjecture that the Sun effects Earth climate. I am merely offering my support to his conjecture which I do not think is "pseudo scientific garbage ".


Dr. Soon's work was garbage to begin with, before he published unethically, and my statement about pseudo scientific garbage was regarding the sun as being the main driver of climate, which it clearly isn't. Cosmic rays and clouds don't fit

"Benestad (2013) compared cosmic ray flux to global surface temperature changes and found "there is little empirical evidence that links GCR to the recent global warming." In fact, since 1990, galactic cosmic ray flux on Earth has increased - "the opposite direction to that required to explain the observed rise in global mean temperatures" (Lockwood 2007). In fact, cosmic ray on flux recently reached record levels. According to Richard Mewaldt of Caltech, "In 2009, cosmic ray intensities have increased 19% beyond anything we've seen in the past 50 years." Erlykin et al. (2013)"

and

"Numerous studies have also investigated the effectiveness of GCRs in cloud formation (the third step). Kazil et al. (2006) found:

"the variation of ionization by galactic cosmic rays over the decadal solar cycle does not entail a response...that would explain observed variations in global cloud cover."

Sloan and Wolfendale (2008) found:

"we estimate that less than 23%, at the 95% confidence level, of the 11-year cycle changes in the globally averaged cloud cover observed in solar cycle 22 is due to the change in the rate of ionization from the solar modulation of cosmic rays."

Kristjansson et al. (2008) found:

"no statistically significant correlations were found between any of the four cloud parameters and GCR"

Calogovic et al. (2010) found:

"no response of global cloud cover to Forbush decreases at any altitude and latitude."

Kulmala et al. (2010) found

"galactic cosmic rays appear to play a minor role for atmospheric aerosol formation events, and so for the connected aerosol-climate effects as well."

Laken et al. (2013) found

"there is no robust evidence of a widespread link between the cosmic ray flux and clouds."

Krissansen-Totton & Davies (2013) found

"no statistically significant correlations between cosmic rays and global albedo or globally averaged cloud height, and no evidence for any regional or lagged correlations"

In the CERN CLOUD experiments, Almeida et al. (2013) found

"ionising radiation such as the cosmic radiation that bombards the atmosphere from space has negligible influence on the formation rates of these particular aerosols [that form clouds]"
"

So, yeah, pseudo science garbage. I stand by my words.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
warming trend init

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting beell:
From the "Let's run with an attention-grabbing headline and worry about the science later" department.

Deadliest Tornado Outbreak in Decades Was Fueled by Smoke From Land Clearing
April 2011 saw the worst day of U.S. tornadoes since 1974, and a new analysis points to fires in Central America as part of the cause.-National Geographic/February 9th, 2015


"We're not saying that the outbreak happened because of the smoke," "We're saying that, given the conditions already in place, the smoke intensified the tornadoes."
Pablo Saide, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Iowa, in Iowa City...

"This case is such an outlier in so many ways, it makes it difficult for me to believe the findings,"
Greg Carbin, a meteorologist at the the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Storm Prediction Center in Norman, Oklahoma...

In the hopes of convincing Carbin and the forecasting community of the power of aerosols, Saide plans to test his simulations on other tornado outbreaks.
That is such good news. Since the number and severity of tornadoes has plunged since the 2011 outbreak in Alabama, that means they've stopped clearing land and burning the debris in Central America.

Greg Carbin did a good job restraining himself.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:

Quoting 819. ricderr:

thanx jp....but when we observe when was that added...and the reasoning behind it....i think it confirms my point..it sure didn't come from our founding fathers

from the dept of the treasury

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:
And, they don't specify which god when you look at it. Take your pick, I suppose!
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 802. Tazmanian:





it wont be a Modoki
No one can't say at this time if the El nino will be modoki or not or if we will have and El nino at all. Some have made it their day job to constantly post about the el nino and the 100% chance they give of development but the best thing to do is wait and see how the enso slowly evolve.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting 789. jpsb:



Unrestrained capitalism would be a cruel form of economics to live under. Capitalism moderated by humane (Christian) law and implemented by honest men is the best economic system yet devised. Once long ago in the USA we had such a system, today not so much.
Sorry, but the US has never been governed by a theocracy, as you imply by your last sentence. There are some folks pushing revisionist history, but they are incorrect. Capitalism moderated by honest folk and laws is indeed the best of all scenarios, but no thanks to laws promulgated by any religion, no matter which one.

A government and people can be moral without a religious basis.


As for weather, back to your regular programming: Central Raleigh got around 4" of heavy wet snow, a lot of tree branches and whole small trees down, one is currently hanging on the cable/phone lines serving our part of the street, eek! Hopefully it will be removed safely without losing service. I'd hate to not be able to read here ;-)
Streets are slushy but drivable, not like the ice we had last week. But tomorrow morning will be bad as all that slush is going to freeze overnight.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
823. jpsb
Quoting 811. Naga5000:



I didn't say that at all. Stop putting words in my mouth. I have tried to explain to you numerous times that the sun is one of the many forcings. You seem to think we haven't been able to measure the forcings...I really can't make this any clearer, please refrain from attributing statements to me that I didn't make.



Why is this so hard for you to understand?


Your argument, at least as I understand it, is that the only influence the Sun has on Earth's climate can be measured in watt per meter squared at the top on the atmosphere. I disagree, I think the interact between the Earth and the Sun is far more complex and that we have much more to learn. Dr Soon work on comic rays and cloud formation being one area of interest. The 60 year cycle and 200 year cycle are also of interest. There might even be a 100,000 year cycle which might help explain the 100,000 year problem.

Re putting words into your mouth. You described as "pseudo scientific garbage" NativeSun's conjecture that the Sun effects Earth climate. I am merely offering my support to his conjecture which I do not think is "pseudo scientific garbage ".
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 796. jpsb:






use image info the get the source.


the image shows the decline in global sea ice
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
extreme cold warning
for southern Ontario
issued by Environment Canada
at 10:33 a.M. EST Thursday 26 February 2015.
------------------------------------------------- --------------------
Extreme cold warning for:
=new= City of Toronto
=new= Windsor - Essex - Chatham-Kent
=new= Sarnia - Lambton
=new= Elgin
=new= London - Middlesex
=new= Simcoe - Delhi - Norfolk
=new= Dunnville - Caledonia - Haldimand
=new= Oxford - Brant
=new= City of Hamilton
=new= Halton - Peel
=new= York - Durham
=new= Huron - Perth
=new= Waterloo - Wellington
=new= Dufferin - Innisfil
=new= Grey - Bruce
=new= Barrie - Orillia - Midland
=new= Belleville - Quinte - Northumberland
=new= Kingston - Prince Edward
=new= Peterborough - Kawartha Lakes
=new= Stirling - Tweed - South Frontenac.

------------------------------------------------- --------------------
==Discussion==


A period of very cold wind chills is expected.

A frigid Arctic airmass will combine with light to moderate winds to
produce wind chill values between minus 30 and minus 35 overnight
and early Friday morning.

While anyone who isn't dressed warmly is at risk in cold weather
conditions, some are at greater risk than others for frost bite and
hypothermia:
- homeless people
- outdoor workers
- people living in homes that are poorly insulated (with no heat or
no power)
- people with certain medical conditions such as diabetes,
peripheral neuropathy and diseases affecting the blood vessels,
people taking certain medications including Beta-blockers
- winter sport enthusiasts
- people who consume excess alcohol
- infants and
- seniors.

Wear appropriate clothing.
- Always wear clothing appropriate for the weather. Synthetic and
wool fabrics provide better insulation. Some synthetic fabrics are
designed to keep perspiration away from your body which keep you dry
and further reduce your risk.
- Dress in layers with a wind resistant outer layer. You can remove
layers if you get too warm (before you start sweating) or add a
layer if you get cold.
- Wear warm socks, gloves, a hat and scarf in cold weather. Be sure
to cover your nose to protect it.
- If you get wet, change into dry clothing as soon as possible. You
lose heat faster when you're wet.

Extreme cold warnings are issued when very cold temperatures or wind
chill creates an elevated risk to health such as frost bite and
hypothermia.

Environment Canada meteorologists will update alerts as required, so
stay tuned to your local media or weatheradio. Email reports of
severe weather to storm.Ontario(at)ec.Gc.CA or tweet with the hashtag
(hash)onstorm.

Http://weather.Gc.CA/warnings/index(underscore)e. Html?Prov=son

End/MSC

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 764. StormTrackerScott:

Here comes Summerlike temps.




Only for some of us. :-(
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
thanx jp....but when we observe when was that added...and the reasoning behind it....i think it confirms my point..it sure didn't come from our founding fathers

from the dept of the treasury

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 812. jpsb:


I did not bring this topic up, but since it is under discussion



So, is this a government mandate?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 811. Naga5000:



I didn't say that at all. Stop putting words in my mouth. I have tried to explain to you numerous times that the sun is one of the many forcings. You seem to think we haven't been able to measure the forcings...I really can't make this any clearer, please refrain from attributing statements to me that I didn't make.



Why is this so hard for you to understand?


I'd say because he doesn't want to.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I am going to stick to the weather as much as I can but have to respond to the post below; "In God We Trust" went went out the window for a period of time in the US when we used slave labor for a few hundreds of years and didn't start equalizing the tables for women and minorities in the Country up through the the 1960s (Civil Rights) and current social issues we are still grappling with.................I will keep quiet now..................... :)
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 812. jpsb:


I did not bring this topic up, but since it is under discussion




Context helps...

"In 1956, the nation was at a particularly tense time in the Cold War, and the United States wanted to distinguish itself from the Soviet Union, which promoted state atheism.As a result, the 84th Congress passed a joint resolution "declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States." The law was signed by President Eisenhower on July 30, 1956, and the motto was progressively added to paper money over a period from 1957 to 1966. (Public Law 84-851) The United States Code at 36 U.S.C. § 302, now states: "'In God we trust' is the national motto.""
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
light snow at my house!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
<
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
812. jpsb
Quoting 799. ricderr:

Unrestrained capitalism would be a cruel form of economics to live under. Capitalism moderated by humane (Christian) law and implemented by honest men is the best economic system yet devised. Once long ago in the USA we had such a system, today not so much.


in a republic...if you govern under "christian" law....a type of religious based law...then you leave open the basis of your law...to the "christian" view of the elected officials...if the demographics of that populace changes...so does the application of the "christian "laws.......a very slippery slope

I did not bring this topic up, but since it is under discussion

Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 806. jpsb:



I see our solar expert has asserted as fact that the Sun does not have any effect on Earth's climate. He should send NOAA a memo straight away.

From NOAA
One interesting aspect of solar cycles is that the sun went through a period of near zero sunspot activity from about 1645 to 1715. This period of sunspot minima is called the Maunder Minimum. The "Little Ice Age" occurred over parts of Earth during the Maunder Minimum. So how much does the solar output affect Earth's climate? There is debate within the scientific community how much solar activity can, or does affect Earth's climate. There is research which shows evidence that Earth's climate is sensitive to very weak changes in the Sun's energy output over time frames of 10s and 100s of years. Times of maximum sunspot activity are associated with a very slight increase in the energy output from the sun. Ultraviolet radiation increases dramatically during high sunspot activity, which can have a large effect on the Earth's atmosphere. The converse is true during minimum sunspot activity. But trying to filter the influence of the Sun's energy output and its effect on our climate with the "noise" created by a complex interaction between our atmosphere, land and oceans can be difficult.

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/?n=sunspots

One should not assert as fact what ones does not know with certainty.


I didn't say that at all. Stop putting words in my mouth. I have tried to explain to you numerous times that the sun is one of the many forcings. You seem to think we haven't been able to measure the forcings...I really can't make this any clearer, please refrain from attributing statements to me that I didn't make.



Why is this so hard for you to understand?
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 722. sar2401:


(snip)


For anyone following the WPC challenge, the WPC QPF forecast from last Sunday through 6:00 CST today showed a total of 2" to 2.5" in SE AL. From Sunday until Wednesday midnight, I had 1.15" of rain. From 000 Wednesday until 1800 today, I got another 2.65" (!). My day total rainfall though midnight on 2/25 was 2.95" (!). So, instead of around 2.5" for the period, I got 3.80". It's kind of hard to fault the WPC on this one, since I don't believe any forecasts anticipated what actually happened here today. If we ignore the predicted totals, the WPC correctly forecast we'd get substantial rain in the four day period, and they were right about that. Still, if you're going to forecast amounts, ~2.50" compared to the actual of 3.80" is a pretty big miss. What concerns me is that the WPC has pretty consistently missed in my area on upside variance, and this is yet another example.



For my area, BTR airport received 1.56"; the WPC had us in the 1-1.25 range, but close proximity to the 1.25-1.5 range, so close enough to 'ballpark' for me :)
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting LongIslandBeaches:


IF that verifies, then that is some welcome news for the four corners region. Crossin' fingers.

Also, in response to 722. sar2401, if i remember correctly (and I probably didn't) the WPC had your area higher on previous runs.. then lowered it as they shifted totals north and east. Soooo... hey look, it's cold out!
No, you don't remember correctly. The challenge was if the WPC forecast for SE AL, issued last Sunday and covering the period though yesterday, would prove correct. Nothing changes in that scenario. You are certainly welcome to check the WPC archive for each 24 hour forecast issued during the 24 hour period leading up to yesterday and see if the forecast improved. You'll find that it didn't.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 802. Tazmanian:





it wont be a Modoki


Yup it looks as if we might be looking at a Central to Eastern Based El-Nino. Nino 3.4 is back above 0.8C and will likely go much higher come May as this sub surface warm pool surfaces and expands east toward South America. This warm pool is the reason for the drastic up tick in its nino values come June and with the PDO staying at or near record levels is a good sign that this years El-Nino will not bust infact we have met the 5 consecutive month readings of .5 or higher for Nino 3.4 so this El-Nino could be declared in April.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 805. LAbonbon:


Can someone explain this a bit more? I thinkI understand what he's saying, but I'm not absolutely sure :/


The trend is more important than fluctuations about the trend.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 765. maxcrc:

We can't mix the long term trend with short term trends which are indeed influenced by short term factors like ENSO cycles, solar 11-year cycle, PDO, AMO indexes and others...
Global sticks and hiatuses are normal to follow one after the other.
We don't have to give them more importance to what they effectively have.


Can someone explain this a bit more? I thinkI understand what he's saying, but I'm not absolutely sure :/
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 796. jpsb:






use image info the get the source.


Yes, clearly it has been trending downward. Notice how often the red curve is below the black line after say 2000 compared to before 2000, especially compared to near the beginning of the period shown.

You could probably find a graph that shows it better, in which that red curve is expanded vertically, and in which a trend line is shown.

The decline in arctic sea ice volume is even more dramatic than the decline in arctic sea ice area.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 794. Sfloridacat5:



Checking the overnight observations it appears it was just a little too warm. Precipitation was light rain at one point during the early morning hours and snow mixed with mist during most observations.



Began as rain, changed quickly to snow (VERY heavy for short periods), but what was supposed to be snow all night unexpectedly changed back to a heavy, soaking rain with just a few wet flakes mixed in. Usually our problem is a warm nose creeping up and giving us an ice storm, but this time there just wasn't enough cold air at the surface. Temps hovered between 32 and 34 degrees most of the night.

There was a very tight gradient that made this forecast so difficult- the storm had a built in "high bust potential". Southern parts of Mecklenburg County (Charlotte) got practically nothing, after the rain melted away the initial burst of snow. Northern parts of the county received between 4 and 7 inches. Wake County (Raleigh) had a very similar scenario play out, but unlike Charlotte, the heart of Raleigh was north of the rain/snow line.

Very disappointed I didn't get to see a real snow storm out of this, but can't blame the forecasters when 10 or 20 miles makes such a huge difference
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NativeSun:
Modoki, can you say Modoki all summer long.




it wont be a Modoki
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:

Quoting 757. hurricanes2018:

El Nino will be here soon by spring time
Modoki, can you say Modoki all summer long.


i believe the phrase that fits would be....those that do not learn from the past.....are bound to repeat it.....we're seeing a repeat of last year...not only in the models...but in the posting of bloggers.....let me expound....

we're in the springtime barrier period.....a time when the models show grievous errors

we're seeing the enso regions of 1/2 and 3 fall......we're seeing a rise in the 3.4 and 4 regions by a weak westerly wind anomaly which was explained by the aussie mets as typical of a decaying el nino....

when we look at the westerly wind push..and also looking at the equatorial water anomalies.....we see a warm anomaly similar to last year pushing west...however it is later than last year...and we saw last year...that due to the timing...and due to ocean temperatures that had risen due to spring and summertime heating...that kelvin wave had little to no affect on ocean temperatures.....by calcualting the temp of the kelvin wave...and referencing the may/june temps of the area of ocean at the 1/2 enso regions...we can expect the same this year......

one note when looking at the water temp anomalies...is there is a very cold wave starting to traverse across the enso 4 area...when this reaches the surface in the next 30/60 days...we should see anomalies quickly drop in the 3.4 and 4 enso regions





Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 716. KoritheMan:

Gustav and Ike were, for all intents and purposes, major hurricanes if we're defining solely wind impact. 90 and 95 kt really isn't meaningfully different from 100 kt, where major hurricane starts.
Good morning Kori. I commented a long time ago that Ike was worse than some of the majors we have seen..Ike was a monster.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Unrestrained capitalism would be a cruel form of economics to live under. Capitalism moderated by humane (Christian) law and implemented by honest men is the best economic system yet devised. Once long ago in the USA we had such a system, today not so much.


in a republic...if you govern under "christian" law....a type of religious based law...then you leave open the basis of your law...to the "christian" view of the elected officials...if the demographics of that populace changes...so does the application of the "christian "laws.......a very slippery slope
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 757. hurricanes2018:

El Nino will be here soon by spring time
Modoki, can you say Modoki all summer long.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 768. jrweatherman:



But scientists can also be wrong.
As can amateur bloggers!
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
796. jpsb
Quoting 643. DCSwithunderscores:



Here's a recent article from Climate Central that shows that the rate of decline of arctic sea ice is greater than the rate of increase of antarctic sea ice, and thus that the global sea ice trend is downward:

Link

Here's a short video that explains why we shouldn't be fooled by claims that arctic sea ice is increasing:

Link





use image info the get the source.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Quoting 785. tampabaymatt:



I feel your pain. That show is awful, but the wife is a big fan.


Funny..its the highest rated new TV show so most of America disagrees with you..I enjoy it myself..could use some Cookie here on this blog...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CarolinaHurricanes87:
Good morning everyone. HUGE busted forecast here in Charlotte. Even after the storm had begun, local mets predicted 7-10, NWS 5-9, and TWC 5-8. Official storm total ended up at 1.8". Sad day for snow lovers


Checking the overnight observations it appears it was just a little too warm. Precipitation was light rain at one point during the early morning hours and snow mixed with mist during most observations.
Member Since: December 31, 1969 Posts: Comments:
Good Morning..

Brad Panovich Meteorologist
45 mins ·

No excuses for last night it was a big miss South of I-85 and to a much lesser amount north. Still worth reading about what we do and here's, Breaking News we aren't right all the time!

Perspective on the accuracy of Meterologists
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 843 - 793

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