bluewave Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Please delete...sorry for inconvenience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 It still appears to me that their forecast is missing the Pacific. You can see how awful the 2008 forecast whiffed on the PAC (both on land in NW North America and the ENSO regions). The 1981-2010 baseline is heavily skewed toward that part of the world being warm...so I'm going to guess they whiff on this forecast too. Unless the PDO goes back into a positive phase, I think the warming in those regions will be hard to come by. It will be interesting to see if Siberia reverses its recent cooling trend too. They also predicted cooling in the N ATL that never materialized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nflwxman Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think that the important point may be that it is seeing the temperatures near the lower range of the projections even if it can't resolve the Pacific to the degree that we may like. The jury still out on the North Atlantic since last year was the first time the new model showed a more significant drop there which worked out in 2013 relative to the earlier years. But it will be interesting to see if the North Atlantic cooling continues beyond 2013 or it was a one year fluke. However, the forecast initially remains towards the lower end of the range simulated by CMIP5models that have not been initialisedwith observations (green shading), consistent with the recent pause in surface temperature warming 13.png Their forecast is based off the Hadcrut4 dataset, which is sadly missing most of the arctic, so I'm not sure how they confidently make a forecast with such sparse data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 It still did very well there. The forecast correctly predicted enhanced warming over high northern latitudes, and in most regions the observations lie within the predicted range. However, the predicted temperatures are too warm in the tropical Pacific Ocean and over parts of China, and too cold over the southern Atlantic and Indian oceans. Yeah I'm not sure how hadcrut4 missing some arctic data really hurt their forecast...the irony being one of the spots they verified best was up in the arctic. The area where they have good coverage is where they failed the most...the Pacific ocean and a vast chunk of Asia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think that the important point may be that it is seeing the temperatures near the lower range of the projections even if it can't resolve the Pacific to the degree that we may like. The jury still out on the North Atlantic since last year was the first time the new model showed a more significant drop there which worked out in 2013 relative to the earlier years. But it will be interesting to see if the North Atlantic cooling continues beyond 2013 or it was a one year fluke. I don't see what you are talking about. The forecast seems to end with a confidence interval roughly the same as the CMIP5 models. If you follow the mean of their forecast it shows warming at a rate of .5C/decade (very rapid). The reason it didn't verify the Pacific so well is that 4 of the last 5 years has leaned or been strongly La Nina. No model that I know of can predict ENSO so precisely as to say 4 of the next 5 years will be La Nina. 4 of 5 years being La Nina is even more frequent than was experienced in past -PDOs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 You've misunderstood the statement. The forecast shows a -PDO. There is 'no strong signal' of that reversing because the PDO lacks predictability. The statement reads 'were the -PDO to continue as forecast...' The forecast by the model is for a -PDO. Nevertheless it shows very rapid warming over the short term. Were the PDO to become positive, warming would likely be even more rapid. The -PDO is 'moderating' the warming from extremely rapid, to somewhat less rapid in the forecast. The reason the warming is forecast to be rapid is clearly the model does not expect 4 of the next 5 years to be La Nina, as 4 of the last 5 years were. If only 2 or 3 of the next 5 years are La Nina, 1 or 2 neutral, and 1 positive, temperatures will be much warmer. That seems to be what the model is suggesting. As I stated before, even for a -PDO the last 5 years have been very Nina-ish. Also pointing out that the model forecast starts out on the low side of CMIP5 is pretty redundant given the model is initialized with current conditions. That's not a forecast at all.. it's just repeating the fact that it's cool right now. The actual forecast (you know.. into the future) is for very rapid warming (probably not predicting as many Ninas as we have experienced recently). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Why have all bluewaves posts disapeared? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Why have all bluewaves posts disapeared? Not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Because he deleted them. I guess this thread is useless now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share Posted February 2, 2014 Because he deleted them. I guess this thread is useless now. Sorry for the disruption. Further research on the thread topic indicated that it was incorrect for 13 out of 14 years so I didn't want leave incorrect information up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Sorry for the disruption. Further research on the thread topic indicated that it was incorrect for 13 out of 14 years so I didn't want leave incorrect information up. Isn't the new model supposed to be better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvantHiatus Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 People still debate basic ideas like ECS and "how much warming is in the pipeline" and use datasets such as RSS to claim the Earth is cooling. No reason to delete this. I thought everything was given equal consideration in the climate debate. No one jumped on the bandwagon to validate the situation when Michael Mann received death threats or when we discovered that climate-gate was a slanderous lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.