2014 Global Temperatures

[AvantHiatus]

I agree with you that El Ninos will continue to stay weak until the PDO and trade winds switch to their positive phase, but that wasn't my point.

 

Let's assume for a second that time started in 2008, in the start of the true negative PDO phase.  Ignore everything before that.  Given that all the natural indicators have more than likely bottomed out (solar, ENSO) in 2008-2012, don't you think that any upward trend at all for the natural indicators from that point on would enhance the AGW trend of approximately 0.2C/decade?

 

I understand that we will likely be below climate model projections (run in AR5) until the PDO goes positive.  When that happens, I believe we will go above current climate model projections until the PDO turns negative again.  It's natural sloshing.  Totally normal and something climate models can't see in future projections, but CAN in hindcasts.

 

Let's say the PDO flips positive in 2030 in the same manner it flipped negative.  The warming between 2008-2030 should be not much different than in a negative PDO phase than if the same period was a PDO+ phase.  I think this is where we differ.  I don't see any evidence to suggest that La Ninas or PDO- time periods have warmed any slower than the opposite fact.  

 

I'm guessing you believe that the PDO- phase will cause muted warming within itself, while I believe it's just a climate shift and warming will resume in the normal rate in context of the that climate shift.  I think the 1945-1975 trend was dampened because aerosals was offsets the smaller CO2 forcing at time, leading to a pretty stable OHC.

In hindsight, basing future temperatures off previous PDO cycles was a tragic mistake considering the immense differences in radiative forcing.

 

The core of AGW is yet to come, the red meat radiative forcing for impacts is the infamous 3.2w/m2.

[JBG]

I'd suspect the 1910-1945 warming may have been largely natural, simply a recovery from the little ice age. There's just not enough manmade forcing to produce a warming like that in the midst of the increasing anthropogenic aerosol production that was observed during that time period.

Certainly, the paleoclimate record suggests that natural fluctuations of 0.3 - 0.6C are relatively common on short timescales.

If anything I suspect that the 1910-45 warming may be more man-related than the recent warming. The period 1910-45 incorporated much of the world's industrialization and the widespread popularity of the automobile. Coal was still in widespread use. 1977-1998 coincided with two giant El Niño events, 1982-3 and 1997-8, as well as the lengthier but more moderate 1986-8 and 1990-5 (with a few minor interruptions) events.

[bluewave]

I agree with you that El Ninos will continue to stay weak until the PDO and trade winds switch to their positive phase, but that wasn't my point.

 

Let's assume for a second that time started in 2008, in the start of the true negative PDO phase.  Ignore everything before that.  Given that all the natural indicators have more than likely bottomed out (solar, ENSO) in 2008-2012, don't you think that any upward trend at all for the natural indicators from that point on would enhance the AGW trend of approximately 0.2C/decade?

 

I understand that we will likely be below climate model projections (run in AR5) until the PDO goes positive.  When that happens, I believe we will go above current climate model projections until the PDO turns negative again.  It's natural sloshing.  Totally normal and something climate models can't see in future projections, but CAN in hindcasts.

 

Let's say the PDO flips positive in 2030 in the same manner it flipped negative.  The warming between 2008-2030 should be not much different than in a negative PDO phase than if the same period was a PDO+ phase.  I think this is where we differ.  I don't see any evidence to suggest that La Ninas or PDO- time periods have warmed any slower than the opposite fact.  

 

I'm guessing you believe that the PDO- phase will cause muted warming within itself, while I believe it's just a climate shift and warming will resume in the normal rate in context of the that climate shift.  I think the 1945-1975 trend was dampened because aerosals was offsets the smaller CO2 forcing at time, leading to a pretty stable OHC.

 

I don't think that we get back the the middle to higher range of the previous model projections anytime soon. I will

gladly take the under on Mann's bet of reaching 2C of warming by 2036. 

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-will-cross-the-climate-danger-threshold-by-2036/

[JBG]

I don't think that we get back the the middle to higher range of the previous model projections anytime soon. I will

gladly take the under on Mann's bet of reaching 2C of warming by 2036. 

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-will-cross-the-climate-danger-threshold-by-2036/

Betting on Mann is sort of like the equivalent on betting on Madoff in the financial markets. </sarcasm>

[stadiumwave]

Mann represents everything that is wrong with climate science.  There's a lot of names out there that I respect tremendously...Mann is certainly not one of them.

[The_Global_Warmer]

I agree with you that El Ninos will continue to stay weak until the PDO and trade winds switch to their positive phase, but that wasn't my point.

 

Let's assume for a second that time started in 2008, in the start of the true negative PDO phase.  Ignore everything before that.  Given that all the natural indicators have more than likely bottomed out (solar, ENSO) in 2008-2012, don't you think that any upward trend at all for the natural indicators from that point on would enhance the AGW trend of approximately 0.2C/decade?

 

I understand that we will likely be below climate model projections (run in AR5) until the PDO goes positive.  When that happens, I believe we will go above current climate model projections until the PDO turns negative again.  It's natural sloshing.  Totally normal and something climate models can't see in future projections, but CAN in hindcasts.

 

Let's say the PDO flips positive in 2030 in the same manner it flipped negative.  The warming between 2008-2030 should be not much different than in a negative PDO phase than if the same period was a PDO+ phase.  I think this is where we differ.  I don't see any evidence to suggest that La Ninas or PDO- time periods have warmed any slower than the opposite fact.  

 

I'm guessing you believe that the PDO- phase will cause muted warming within itself, while I believe it's just a climate shift and warming will resume in the normal rate in context of the that climate shift.  I think the 1945-1975 trend was dampened because aerosals was offsets the smaller CO2 forcing at time, leading to a pretty stable OHC.

 

 

Where the Southern Ocean sub-surface current between the depths of 300-1500M goes is very important.

 

 

 

[sokolow]

Mann represents everything that is wrong with climate science.  There's a lot of names out there that I respect tremendously...Mann is certainly not one of them.

I don't think that's quite right.

[chubbs]

That's going to be tough when you can't even get en El Nino as strong as during the last -PDO era.

These west based and weaker El Nino's since 1997-1998 haven't been able to move the global

temperature needle much. The stronger trades don't allow the El Ninos to get very strong

compared to the past.

 

oni.jpg

Mod/Strong El Nino is not needed to increase temperatures. Look at the big temperature increase so far this year. The longer the hiatus lasts the bigger the earth's radiation imbalance becomes. Its like pushing a spring. Ever stronger trades would be needed to pump more heat into the ocean. Its more likely that the trades stabilize or relax allowing temperatures to snap back.

[tacoman25]

The above issue was not addressed. If the trade winds are at record levels, why is the PDO still positive and floating around record high levels this spring? This cannot be solely due to the ENSO.

 

Monthly PDO values

2014** 0.30/0.38/0.97/1.13/1.80/0.82/0.70/0.67 

 

The only way to see a -PDO in the coming years is to shift the baseline

 

TGW is correct, the worldwide thermal baseline has dramatically changed.

 

Is it not obvious that warm PDO = rising global temperatures? I will await the Atlantic Heatsink theories.

 

I would recommend looking at how the PDO is calculated and what is behind the PDO shift. I recently posted the NPI (North Pacific Index) chart that shows have years since the 2007-08 PDO shift have seen much higher pressure over the North Pacific.

 

It is a bit unusual to see the string of +PDO we have seen this year without an official Nino, but at the same time it's not shocking because the atmosphere has been in a semi-Nino state much of 2014. At the same time, persistent high pressure has been present in the North Pacific, and that's a hallmark of -PDO regimes.

[GaWx]

I agree with you that El Ninos will continue to stay weak until the PDO and trade winds switch to their positive phase, but that wasn't my point.

 

Let's assume for a second that time started in 2008, in the start of the true negative PDO phase.  Ignore everything before that.  Given that all the natural indicators have more than likely bottomed out (solar, ENSO) in 2008-2012, don't you think that any upward trend at all for the natural indicators from that point on would enhance the AGW trend of approximately 0.2C/decade?.

 

nflwxman,

 I highly doubt solar bottomed out in 2008-12. Based on past patterns near a longterm minimum, I'm expecting an even weaker minimum ~2018-22 and quite possibly a weaker max in the subsequent cycle. I believe we are still only in the early stages of the current grand minimum, which could very well match the multidecadal early 1800's Dalton Minimum or possibly even go weaker for a longer period. I've been saying this for several years. So, it isn't like I'm suddenly saying this for the first time in case you're wondering. The nice thing is that we'll know much more within a decade or so.

[nflwxman]

nflwxman,

 I highly doubt solar bottomed out in 2008-12. Based on past patterns near a longterm minimum, I'm expecting an even weaker minimum ~2018-22 and quite possibly a weaker max in the subsequent cycle. I believe we are still only in the early stages of the current grand minimum, which could very well match the multidecadal early 1800's Dalton Minimum or possibly even go weaker for a longer period. I've been saying this for several years. So, it isn't like I'm suddenly saying this for the first time in case you're wondering. The nice thing is that we'll know much more within a decade or so.

That may be true.  And if we enter a mauder minimum, we will fall even more below climate models run in 2013.  However, there really is no way to bake that prediction successfully into they model.

[bluewave]

Mod/Strong El Nino is not needed to increase temperatures. Look at the big temperature increase so far this year. The longer the hiatus lasts the bigger the earth's radiation imbalance becomes. Its like pushing a spring. Ever stronger trades would be needed to pump more heat into the ocean. Its more likely that the trades stabilize or relax allowing temperatures to snap back.

 

But a rather strong series of El Ninos will be needed to reach around +.85 on giss by 2024 which would represent

closer to a .02c rise over the next decade. Assuming the PDO remains negative the next 10 years, we'll surpass the

2010 record but dip back down below that record with neutral or La Nina years that follow. So it would be a slower

than .02c rate. Remember that I didn't say no temperature rise, but a slower rate than 1977-1997 until the 

PDO shifts positive again. If the PDO should find a way to shift sooner than that, than I would be in for the

faster rate of rise. 

[GaWx]

I copied this from a post I just made in the Mid-Atlantic regional forum's Winter 2014-15 thread:

"I'd like to reiterate what Bob Tisdale is saying about the NEGATIVE correlation of N Hem. surface temperatures to the PDO as per my post from last night in this thread. Go back up there to see the very telling accompanying correlation maps. This goes against everything I've heard for years about the PDO supposedly having a POSITIVE correlation with global temp.'s.

Any opinions from anyone about this?"

This seemingly goes against what numerous posts in this Climate Change forum have said/assumed about the PDO's effects on global temperatures. It also would conflict with what JB, who first educated me about the PDO's supposed effects on global temperatures years ago, has been saying. If this is true, the -PDO likely actually has a WARMING effect on global temperatures rather than cooling! Check out the Mid-Atlantic "Winter 2014-15" thread to see the correlation maps:

http://www.americanwx.com/bb/index.php/topic/42356-winter-2014-2015-thread/?p=3056343

[chubbs]

I copied this from a post I just made in the Mid-Atlantic regional forum's Winter 2014-15 thread:

"I'd like to reiterate what Bob Tisdale is saying about the NEGATIVE correlation of N Hem. surface temperatures to the PDO as per my post from last night in this thread. Go back up there to see the very telling accompanying correlation maps. This goes against everything I've heard for years about the PDO supposedly having a POSITIVE correlation with global temp.'s.

Any opinions from anyone about this?"

This seemingly goes against what numerous posts in this Climate Change forum have said/assumed about the PDO's effects on global temperatures. It also would conflict with what JB, who first educated me about the PDO's supposed effects on global temperatures years ago, has been saying. If this is true, the -PDO likely actually has a WARMING effect on global temperatures rather than cooling! Check out the Mid-Atlantic "Winter 2014-15" thread to see the correlation maps:

http://www.americanwx.com/bb/index.php/topic/42356-winter-2014-2015-thread/?p=3056343

As is usually the case Tisdale has a few useful nuggets mixed in with the climate mis-information. ENSO does drive PDO. Researchers have shown that PDO is a redshifted version of ENSO i.e shifted to lower frequency. This means that PDO generally tracks with multi-year running average ENSO values. When the ENSO tendency over a multi-year period is La Nina, PDO is negative. When multi-year ENSO tends to be El Nino, PDO is positive This is what makes PDO a good short-term indicator of global temperature trends. It smooths the short-term noise out of the ENSO signal. However it doesn't add much information on global temperatures beyond that provided by a multi-year running average of ENSO conditions. 

 

It is also useful because PDO can be fairly stable over 20-30 years. However the PDO record is too short to know how predictable PDO is from one cycle to the next.

[nflwxman]

As is usually the case Tisdale has a few useful nuggets mixed in with the climate mis-information. ENSO does drive PDO. Researchers have shown that PDO is a redshifted version of ENSO i.e shifted to lower frequency. This means that PDO generally tracks with multi-year running average ENSO values. When the ENSO tendency over a multi-year period is La Nina, PDO is negative. When multi-year ENSO tends to be El Nino, PDO is positive This is what makes PDO a good short-term indicator of global temperature trends. It smooths the short-term noise out of the ENSO signal. However it doesn't add much information on global temperatures beyond that provided by a multi-year running average of ENSO conditions.

It is also useful because PDO can be fairly stable over 20-30 years. However the PDO record is too short to know how predictable PDO is from one cycle to the next.

Well said. I haven't seen much evidence to suggest the PDO impacts global temps outside of ENSO and trade wind frequency and magnitude (which is a big impact).

[nflwxman]

But a rather strong series of El Ninos will be needed to reach around +.85 on giss by 2024 which would represent

closer to a .02c rise over the next decade. Assuming the PDO remains negative the next 10 years, we'll surpass the

2010 record but dip back down below that record with neutral or La Nina years that follow. So it would be a slower

than .02c rate. Remember that I didn't say no temperature rise, but a slower rate than 1977-1997 until the 

PDO shifts positive again. If the PDO should find a way to shift sooner than that, than I would be in for the

faster rate of rise. 

I'm going to steal a line from my friend TGW, but I think it's nearly a lock that we have a year or two over 0.85C on GISS before 2024.

 

In fact ORH and I both made our decadal projections earlier this week.

 

I believe he went with 0.73 average between 2015-2024

I went with a 0.85 average between 2015-2024.  

 

I'm basing my prediction mostly on the sun staying on it's regular 11 year cycle and not absolutely flat-lining for a decade.

[bluewave]

I'm going to steal a line from my friend TGW, but I think it's nearly a lock that we have a year or two over 0.85C on GISS before 2024.

 

In fact ORH and I both made our decadal projections earlier this week.

 

I believe he went with 0.73 average between 2015-2024

I went with a 0.85 average between 2015-2024.  

 

I'm basing my prediction mostly on the sun staying on it's regular 11 year cycle and not absolutely flat-lining for a decade.

 

I will have to go closer to ORH between 2015-2024 provided the greater PDO/IPO remains negative.

As long as the greater PDO/IPO remains negative, I will take under +0.2 c this next decade.

[nflwxman]

I will have to go closer to ORH on this one between 2015-2024 provided the greater PDO/IPO remains negative.

Fair enough.  I hope we are all here in 2024 for the bragging rights title.

[GaWx]

I will have to go with ORH on this one between 2015-2024 provided the greater PDO/IPO remains negative.

Bluewave,

Are you going with the common idea here (and what I had thought was true til I started questioning it last night strictly due to reading an article addressing the subject) that the -PDO regime is correlated to cooler global temperatures than the +PDO regime? It appears you are based on your statement just above this. If so, what about the negative correlation to N hem temp.'s and the accompanying maps shown by Bob Tisdale? I'm not picking on you. You just happen to be the first today to post something that assumes the commonly held belief of the correlation of the -PDO to cooler global temp.'s.

[bluewave]

Bluewave,

Are you going with the common idea here (and what I had thought was true til I started questioning it last night strictly due to reading an article addressing the subject) that the -PDO regime is correlated to cooler global temperatures than the +PDO regime? It appears you are based on your statement just above this. If so, what about the negative correlation to N hem temp.'s and the accompanying maps shown by Bob Tisdale? I'm not picking on you. You just happen to be the first today to post something that assumes the correlation of the -PDO to cooler global temp.'s.

 

I am not sure how Tisdale can say that. Notice how much faster the Northern Hemisphere temperatures rose

during 77-97 compared to 98-13 when the Pacific climate shift occurred. I see the PDO shift in 98

as favoring more frequent and stronger La Ninas with stronger trades which slowed the rate of surface temperature

warming relative to 77-97. You can read all the studies on the IPO/PDO and Hiatus in the other thread.

 

[bluewave]

Fair enough.  I hope we are all here in 2024 for the bragging rights title.

 

Yeah, it will be interesting to see how things play out.

[GaWx]

I am not sure how Tisdale can say that. Notice how much faster the Northern Hemisphere temperatures rose

during 77-97 compared to 98-13 when the Pacific climate shift occurred. I see the PDO shift in 98

as favoring more frequent and stronger La Ninas with stronger trades which slowed the rate of surface temperature

warming relative to 77-97.]

Well, per Tisdale's map, he has a negative correlation in the west-central north Pacific (centered on dateline) as well as in eastern North America and a positive correlation to the eastern North Pacific, Gulf of AK, southern AK, and the Niño regions. All if that is intuitive and most here should agree with those things. The nonobvious areas are other areas he has negatively correlated: Europe, the middle latitudes of the north Atlantic, the Middle East, northern Africa, southern Asia, far eastern Asia, and the Arctic. Do all of these areas like Europe and the Arctic really tend to be cool when there is a +PDO?

No matter what, I give Tisdale credit for laying it all out there for others to examine, analyze, and debate, especially the actual correlation maps.

[bluewave]

Well, per Tisdale's map, he has a negative correlation in the west-central north Pacific (centered on dateline) as well as in eastern North America and a positive correlation to the eastern North Pacific, Gulf of AK, southern AK, and the Niño regions. All if that is intuitive and most here should agree with those things. The nonobvious areas are other areas he has negatively correlated: Europe, the middle latitudes of the north Atlantic, the Middle East, northern Africa, southern Asia, far eastern Asia, and the Arctic. Do all of these areas like Europe and the Arctic really tend to be cool when there is a +PDO?

No matter what, I give Tisdale credit for laying it all out there for others to examine, analyze, and debate, especially the actual correlation maps.

 

I think you may be talking about regional correlations. But a -PDO/ La Nina era favors global hiatus periods

like we had from 46-76 and from 98 until the present.

[GaWx]

I think you may be talking about regional correlations. But a -PDO/ La Nina era favors global hiatus periods

like we had from 46-76 and from 98 until the present.

Indeed, I am noting regional correlations as shown on Tisdale's map. However, the point is that the area covered by the negative correlations is a good bit larger than the area covered by positive correlations. So, if these regional correlations are accurate, then the idea that the northern hem.'s temp.'s are negatively correlated with the PDO is at least supported by this regional data.

[bluewave]

Indeed, I am noting regional correlations as shown on Tisdale's map. However, the point is that the area covered by the negative correlations is a good bit larger than the area covered by positive correlations. So, if these regional correlations are accurate, then the idea that the northern hem.'s temp.'s are negatively correlated with the PDO is at least supported by this regional data.

 

Globally there is no doubt that -PDO eras feature more frequent and stronger La Ninas and cooler temperatures

relative to +PDO eras and El Ninos. There are numerous papers in the other thread. So If Tisdale

is making that claim he is all on his own.

[GaWx]

 I've attached the Bob Tisdale PDO correlation graphs to which I've been referring. Focus on the top one...note how much more green/blue there is vs. yellow/orange. Granted, the Arctic regions on this kind of map look exaggerated in size vs. other regions and the tropics are minimized in relation. Regardless, there still appears to me to be a larger area of green/blue than yellow/orange:

 

[bluewave]

NCEP is a better source to use with less confusing maps shows the warmer +PDO pattern across the globe.

 

 

 

 

[GaWx]

Bluewave,

 Interesting contrast between NOAA and Tisdale. I'm not taking Tisdale's side. I'm just trying to generate discussion. I appreciate your responses as I feel you're both objective and quite knowledgeable about this stuff.

 

 Quotes from Tisdale:

 

"CAN THE PDO DATA BE USED TO DETERMINE THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE NORTH PACIFIC SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES TO GLOBAL WARMING?

It’s often noted that when the PDO is positive for multidecadal periods, global surface temperatures warm, and when the PDO is negative, global surface temperatures stop warming or cool a little. It’s is then assumed that the PDO has something to do with the warming or cooling of global surface temperatures. The problem: there is no mechanism through which the PDO can raise or lower global surface temperatures, because the PDO does not represent the surface temperatures of the extratropical North Pacific (where the PDO is derived).

(Note: Referring back to Figure 4, multidecadal variations in the strengths, frequencies and durations of El Niño and La Niña events are capable of raising and lowering global surface temperatures. Those processes exist. During multidecadal periods when El Niño events dominate, the tropical Pacific is releasing more heat than normal from the tropical Pacific to the atmosphere and redistributing more warm water than normal from the tropical Pacific to the adjoining ocean basins. The opposite holds true during multidecadal periods when La Niña events dominate. On the other hand, multidecadal variations in the spatial patterns in the North Pacific sea surface temperature anomalies, aka the PDO, are not capable of raising or lowering global sea surface temperatures.)"

[bluewave]

Bluewave,

 Interesting contrast between NOAA and Tisdale. I'm not taking Tisdale's side. I'm just trying to generate discussion. I appreciate your responses as I feel you're both objective and quite knowledgeable about this stuff.

 

 Quotes from Tisdale:

 

"CAN THE PDO DATA BE USED TO DETERMINE THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE NORTH PACIFIC SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES TO GLOBAL WARMING?

It’s often noted that when the PDO is positive for multidecadal periods, global surface temperatures warm, and when the PDO is negative, global surface temperatures stop warming or cool a little. It’s is then assumed that the PDO has something to do with the warming or cooling of global surface temperatures. The problem: there is no mechanism through which the PDO can raise or lower global surface temperatures, because the PDO does not represent the surface temperatures of the extratropical North Pacific (where the PDO is derived).

(Note: Referring back to Figure 4, multidecadal variations in the strengths, frequencies and durations of El Niño and La Niña events are capable of raising and lowering global surface temperatures. Those processes exist. During multidecadal periods when El Niño events dominate, the tropical Pacific is releasing more heat than normal from the tropical Pacific to the atmosphere and redistributing more warm water than normal from the tropical Pacific to the adjoining ocean basins. The opposite holds true during multidecadal periods when La Niña events dominate. On the other hand, multidecadal variations in the spatial patterns in the North Pacific sea surface temperature anomalies, aka the PDO, are not capable of raising or lowering global sea surface temperatures.)"

 

No problem. I would say that the key is the PDO linkage with the tropical ENSO regions.

[tacoman25]

As is usually the case Tisdale has a few useful nuggets mixed in with the climate mis-information. ENSO does drive PDO. Researchers have shown that PDO is a redshifted version of ENSO i.e shifted to lower frequency. This means that PDO generally tracks with multi-year running average ENSO values. When the ENSO tendency over a multi-year period is La Nina, PDO is negative. When multi-year ENSO tends to be El Nino, PDO is positive This is what makes PDO a good short-term indicator of global temperature trends. It smooths the short-term noise out of the ENSO signal. However it doesn't add much information on global temperatures beyond that provided by a multi-year running average of ENSO conditions. 

 

It is also useful because PDO can be fairly stable over 20-30 years. However the PDO record is too short to know how predictable PDO is from one cycle to the next.

 

Yes, PDO is directly correlated to ENSO. There's more to the PDO phase relationship than that, however.

 

During +PDO phases the correlation to ENSO tends more towards positive PDO values (so a +ENSO event produces greater +PDO values), and during -PDO phase the the tendency is more towards negative values (so a -ENSO event produces greater -PDO values, and +ENSO events don't produce as strong of +PDO values as they would during the +PDO phase).

 

Again, you have to look at pressure tendencies in the North Pacific. Higher pressure/blocking during -PDO phases, lower during +PDO phases, overall.