2014 Global Temperatures

[Mallow]

Yeah...no. Just joking around, and yes, poking a bit of fun at the alarmists calling for impending doom. That's not a straw man, it's a very real segment. Calling it in "poor taste" seems absurdly over-sensitive.

 

I agree with your last sentence, however.

 

We definitely disagree.

[tacoman25]

I'm not sure what you are referring to, but I'm pretty sure no climate scientist said AGW can overwhelm ENSO over a sub decade period, which is essentially what we are talking about at this point.

 

Also 2014 SSTs colder than 2013, on what planet?

 

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/

 

Looks like you may have misunderstood what I meant, let me try to clarify. What I said was that not long ago some climate scientists believed ENSO was being overwhelmed by AGW...or in other words, that AGW was causing more/stronger El Ninos: http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2006/04/10/comments-on-the-jim-hansen-spuper-el-nino-prediction/. 

 

This came in the mid/late 1990s, after a prolonged 1990-95 +ENSO period, and then the Super Nino of 1997-98. 

 

“Both the recent trend for more ENSO events since 1976 and the prolonged 1990-1995 ENSO event are unexpected given the previous record, with a probability of occurrence about once in 2,000 years. This opens up the possibility that the ENSO changes may be partly caused by the observed increases in greenhouse gases. “

In the conclusion of the paper, they stated with respect to the trend in more ENSO events.

“Is this pattern of change a manifestation of the global warming and related climate change associated with increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Or is this pattern a natural decadal-timescale variation? We have shown that the later is highly unlikely.”

 

They clearly believed that all the Ninos at that time were being caused by AGW.

[tacoman25]

We definitely disagree.

 

Was it necessary to post this? 

 

You've really been nitpicking my posts lately, and taking me a lot more seriously than I do. Let's just chill. Gather around the virtual campfire, make some s'mores, and if you want I can break out the guitar.

[tacoman25]

Also 2014 SSTs colder than 2013, on what planet?

 

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/

 

My bad, I was thinking of 2012. Tropical SSTA have been a little warmer this summer than last summer, though not by much.

 

But then we have to consider that: in 2012 summer ENSO SSTA were warmer than 2013, yet 2013 fall was warmer. So it's not always a direct correlation.

[nflwxman]

My bad, I was thinking of 2012. Tropical SSTA have been a little warmer this summer than last summer, though not by much.

 

But then we have to consider that: in 2012 summer ENSO SSTA were warmer than 2013, yet 2013 fall was warmer. So it's not always a direct correlation.

 

My bad, I was thinking of 2012. Tropical SSTA have been a little warmer this summer than last summer, though not by much.

 

But then we have to consider that: in 2012 summer ENSO SSTA were warmer than 2013, yet 2013 fall was warmer. So it's not always a direct correlation.

Right, but 2012 was sandwiched by two pretty strong negative ENSO events.  That was part of the "momentum" point I mentioned before.  We were not full at the gas at this point in 2012.  We've been ENSO neutral for 1.5 years at this point.  The ball is rolling. 

[tacoman25]

Right, but 2012 was sandwiched by two pretty strong negative ENSO events.  That was part of the "momentum" point I mentioned before.  We were not full at the gas at this point in 2012.  We've been ENSO neutral for 1.5 years at this point.  The ball is rolling. 

 

 

2011-12 was a weak/moderate Nina, and 2012-13 was weak -ENSO, not even an offical Nina.

 

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml

 

Regardless, I don't think ENSO "momentum" explains a whole lot. I'm not sure there's much if any carryover from what happened 1.5-2 years ago. 2004 should have had a lot of +ENSO momentum, but it was relatively cool, for example.

[StudentOfClimatology]

What sort of "momentum" are we talking about here? Recall that ENSO cooled pretty good last winter...here's February 2014..remember this occurred just before the spike in NH temps/SSTs:

[nflwxman]

 

2011-12 was a weak/moderate Nina, and 2012-13 was weak -ENSO, not even an offical Nina.

 

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml

 

Regardless, I don't think ENSO "momentum" explains a whole lot. I'm not sure there's much if any carryover from what happened 1.5-2 years ago. 2004 should have had a lot of +ENSO momentum, but it was relatively cool, for example.

2004 was 0.51 as a ENSO neutral year.  It was warmer than 7/10 of the years prior to it, so I wouldn't call it cool per say.  I'm not saying every year is subject to this, but it's a statistically sound way of looking at it, even if there are exceptions.

 

2013 was ENSO neutral, albeit negative...but no nina.

[nflwxman]

What sort of "momentum" are we talking about here? Recall that ENSO cooled pretty good last winter...here's February 2014..remember this occurred just before the spike in NH temps/SSTs:

Latent heat release is not just an instantaneous event.  It requires time to build heat in the atmosphere.  The longer the pacific allows the heat to stay on the surface with weaker trades, the warmer it becomes at the surface.  Conversely, the longer it buries the energy deeper in the ocean, the cooler it gets.  Absent of human made forcing, this is one way how the climate system modulates.  Human made forcing has complicated the issue by applying additional energy to the system constantly, making la ninas and El Ninos warmer with time.

 

Regardless- I hope y'all skewer me if 2014 doesn't break the record (for the record, I say it beats it only slightly).

[StudentOfClimatology]

Latent heat release is not just an instantaneous event. It requires time to build heat in the atmosphere. The longer the pacific allows the heat to stay on the surface with weaker trades, the warmer it becomes at the surface. Conversely, the longer it buries the energy deeper in the ocean, the cooler it gets. Absent of human made forcing, this is one way how the climate system modulates. Human made forcing has complicated the issue.

I assume you're referring to specific/sensible heating? Latent heat release in the tropics occurs primarily in the atmosphere as tri-atomic H^2O molecules form & break bonds to condensation nuclei. A strong MJO event, for instance, will often spike the global temperature as the strong convection leads to latent heat release in the mid/upper troposphere.

I agree that anthropogenic forcing has thrown a wrench in things, but am still not sure how "inertia" from previous ENSOs can persist for more than 2-4 months.

[tacoman25]

2004 was 0.51 as a ENSO neutral year.  It was warmer than 7/10 of the years prior to it, so I wouldn't call it cool per say.  I'm not saying every year is subject to this, but it's a statistically sound way of looking at it, even if there are exceptions.

 

2013 was ENSO neutral, albeit negative...but no nina.

 

You're not understanding what I'm saying...2004 had +ENSO momentum, looking at the years leading up to it and its overall ENSO that year. But temperature-wise, it was relatively cool.

[tacoman25]

Looks like you may have misunderstood what I meant, let me try to clarify. What I said was that not long ago some climate scientists believed ENSO was being overwhelmed by AGW...or in other words, that AGW was causing more/stronger El Ninos: http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2006/04/10/comments-on-the-jim-hansen-spuper-el-nino-prediction/. 

 

This came in the mid/late 1990s, after a prolonged 1990-95 +ENSO period, and then the Super Nino of 1997-98. 

 

“Both the recent trend for more ENSO events since 1976 and the prolonged 1990-1995 ENSO event are unexpected given the previous record, with a probability of occurrence about once in 2,000 years. This opens up the possibility that the ENSO changes may be partly caused by the observed increases in greenhouse gases. “

In the conclusion of the paper, they stated with respect to the trend in more ENSO events.

“Is this pattern of change a manifestation of the global warming and related climate change associated with increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Or is this pattern a natural decadal-timescale variation? We have shown that the later is highly unlikely.”

 

They clearly believed that all the Ninos at that time were being caused by AGW.

 

No response to this nflwxman?

[nflwxman]

I assume you're referring to specific/sensible heating? Latent heat release in the tropics occurs primarily in the atmosphere as H^2O molecules (tri-atomic) form/break bonds to condensation nuclei. A strong MJO event, for instance, will often spike the global temperature as the strong convection leads to latent heat release in the mid/upper troposphere.

Well both, yes.

[nflwxman]

You're not understanding what I'm saying...2004 had +ENSO momentum, looking at the years leading up to it and its overall ENSO that year. But temperature-wise, it was relatively cool.

I disagree that it was cool though.  I understand what you are saying.  Not every year will be warmer than the previous one.  Especially if the previous year was 2003 (a moderate Nino).

[StudentOfClimatology]

Well both, yes.

Okay

Just to add, I totally agree that anthropogenic forcing has thrown a huge wrench in processes like this, but am still not sure how "inertia" from previous ENSOs can persist for more than 2-4 months.

[nflwxman]

No response to this nflwxman?

Not really, no.  I'm not sure how increasing frequency of Ninos is related to your statement about AGW forcing overwhelming ENSO.

[StudentOfClimatology]

No response to this nflwxman?

I don't get what you're suggesting. No scientist I've met believes ENSO is controlled solely via anthropogenic forcing. But there is evidence that AGW may be increasing the frequency of strong ENSO events, and that El Niño may very well be how the system responds to increasing CO^2 forcing.

[tacoman25]

Not really, no.  I'm not sure how increasing frequency of Ninos is related to your statement about AGW forcing overwhelming ENSO.

 

 

I explained what I meant. Several prominent climate scientists believed AGW was influencing ENSO to the point where it was driving more/stronger Ninos. Thus, AGW overwhelming the ENSO system.

 

This viewpoint has now been proven to be almost certainly mistaken.

[nflwxman]

 

I explained what I meant. Several prominent climate scientists believed AGW was influencing ENSO to the point where it was driving more/stronger Ninos. Thus, AGW overwhelming the ENSO system.

 

This viewpoint has now been proven to be almost certainly mistaken.

Well, it doesn't change ENSO impact on relative global temperature.  I thought you were talking specifically AGW forcing meaning all years will be cooler than the previous one, which we know is not true.

 

I'm not sure that viewpoint has been debunked just by a series of Ninas.  It will take decades for that type of hypothesis to be fully tested.

[tacoman25]

I don't get what you're suggesting. No scientist I've met believes ENSO is controlled solely via anthropogenic forcing. But there is evidence that AGW may be increasing the frequency of strong ENSO events, and that El Niño may very well be how the system responds to increasing CO^2 forcing.

 

That's not what I said.

 

Did you read the link? Trenberth and associates suggested several times in the mid/late 1990s that AGW was causing higher frequency/strength of Ninos (based largely on what had occurred since 1976, which we now realize is when the +PDO phase kicked in).

 

Hansen and others indicated at points they subscribed to this viewpoint, and this seems to be part of the reason Hansen has repeatedly suggested super Ninos that never materialized.

[tacoman25]

Well, it doesn't change ENSO impact on relative global temperature.  I thought you were talking specifically AGW forcing meaning all years will be cooler than the previous one, which we know is not true.

 

I'm not sure that viewpoint has been debunked just by a series of Ninas.  It will take decades for that type of hypothesis to be fully tested.

 

It's not just that there's been more -ENSO since 2005. We also have a much better understanding of oceanic phases (though still woefully incomplete) now. Trenberth, etc had no idea about the PDO back then.

[tacoman25]

I disagree that it was cool though.  I understand what you are saying.  Not every year will be warmer than the previous one.  Especially if the previous year was 2003 (a moderate Nino).

 

But you are arguing that the final third of 2014 will be warmer than 2012 or 2013 because of ENSO "momentum". I just don't see much evidence that what happened 1.5-2 years go has much or any influence on today's temps. 

 

I doubt 2014's temperatures would have been much different if 2012-13 winter had been a major Nina (as I pointed out, it wasn't). 

[nflwxman]

But you are arguing that the final third of 2014 will be warmer than 2012 or 2013 because of ENSO "momentum". I just don't see much evidence that what happened 1.5-2 years go has much or any influence on today's temps. 

 

I doubt 2014's temperatures would have been much different if 2012-13 winter had been a major Nina (as I pointed out, it wasn't). 

Let's agree to disagree.  I don't think you can put an exact time period on the "momentum" concept, but I will come up with some stats tomorrow that show what I mean.

 

Take the trailing 2 year ONI and correlate it to a detrended rolling global temperature dataset.

[Mallow]

Looks like you may have misunderstood what I meant, let me try to clarify. What I said was that not long ago some climate scientists believed ENSO was being overwhelmed by AGW...or in other words, that AGW was causing more/stronger El Ninos: http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2006/04/10/comments-on-the-jim-hansen-spuper-el-nino-prediction/. 

 

This came in the mid/late 1990s, after a prolonged 1990-95 +ENSO period, and then the Super Nino of 1997-98. 

 

“Both the recent trend for more ENSO events since 1976 and the prolonged 1990-1995 ENSO event are unexpected given the previous record, with a probability of occurrence about once in 2,000 years. This opens up the possibility that the ENSO changes may be partly caused by the observed increases in greenhouse gases. “

In the conclusion of the paper, they stated with respect to the trend in more ENSO events.

“Is this pattern of change a manifestation of the global warming and related climate change associated with increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Or is this pattern a natural decadal-timescale variation? We have shown that the later is highly unlikely.”

 

They clearly believed that all the Ninos at that time were being caused by AGW.

 

I wouldn't have worded it that way, but I see what you are trying to say. "ENSO is being overwhelmed by AGW" to me means what nfl and I were talking about earlier, that the signal of ENSO is washed out by the AGW signal. That's what's usually meant when talking about AGW "overwhelming" some natural forcing. What you were saying was simply that there were studies that suggested that ENSO frequency was being affected by AGW.

 

Also, the last sentence quoted above is not right at all. They believed that the frequency and strength of El Ninos could not be explained by natural variability, and therefore that AGW was having an impact on ENSO. But that doesn't mean they were claiming that "all Ninos at the time were being caused by AGW"... that doesn't make any sense.

[The_Global_Warmer]

The rest of 2014 will be warmer because the ocean surface is anomalously record warm right AND IT AIN'T EVEN CLOSE.

[The_Global_Warmer]

The small area of "cool" ssts in the NPAC is nothing but a tiny spec now.  Amazing.  On top of that the NATL and NPAC have continued to get warmer. 

 

The latest weather-bell update has 0.38C+ dailies and .147C+ monthly.  It looks like the monthly will finish around .165C+.  Around a .71 to .72C giss equivalent.

 

 

 

 

 

To add fuel to the fire.  Major enso changes underway.

 

September might pull off a .80C+ on GISS and NCDC. 

 

[tacoman25]

Also, the last sentence quoted above is not right at all. They believed that the frequency and strength of El Ninos could not be explained by natural variability, and therefore that AGW was having an impact on ENSO. But that doesn't mean they were claiming that "all Ninos at the time were being caused by AGW"... that doesn't make any sense.

 

Again, guess I should have worded it differently. I wasn't claiming they literally believed ALL ninos were being caused by AGW, but rather that the increase in frequency/strength of Ninos during the 1980s/1990s was due to AGW. Kind of like when you say: "Look at all these people", you don't mean literally ALL people.

 

The point was that they failed to understand the reason there was such a marked increase in +ENSO starting in the mid 1970s was due mainly to a flip in the PDO phase, a natural phenomenon. This is one of many examples of over-attribution of climate trends to global warming. They saw this trend of increasing +ENSO since the 1970s and assumed AGW was to blame.

[Isotherm]

The CFSR is not an accurate indicator of global temperature. It contains spurious drops in model output. I'm not sure of the exact reason but could have something to do with model upgrades or simply the fact that it doesn't use observational data. 

 

Also, the idea that OHC has been rising at only .2W/m2 since 1992 is bogus. Numerous studies put it at around .6W/m2. In addition, it is impossible to explain the rise of the oceans without significantly rising OHC. 

 

You could link us the study Isotherm but I am very doubtful of its integrity. 

 

 

 

#closedminded.

[StudentOfClimatology]

#closedminded.

#scientificminded

[The_Global_Warmer]

The weather-bell dailies have shot up to .43C+ now.  That is roughly a .98C+ giss equivalent.

 

 

The monthly is up to .151C+.  Might reach .175C+ at the rate and could start September just blazing.