tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post6256059596640572226..comments2023-07-29T05:11:23.558-04:00Comments on Climate Observations: A Discontinuity In 1945 Or A Missing ENSO Event?Bob Tisdalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-84754160916592838532009-09-28T16:23:42.003-04:002009-09-28T16:23:42.003-04:00John: You wrote, “I couldn't help but notice t...John: You wrote, “I couldn't help but notice the more cyclical nature of the UAH temperature anomalies prior to 1998. After 1998 it seems to be much flatter (prior to the 2008 La Nina).”<br /><br />That's mostly due to volcanos, plus two significant El Nino events.<br /><br />Prior to the 1997/98 El Nino there were two significant volcanic eruptions. Mount Pinatubo is responsible for the dip from 1991 to 1995. It overwhelmed the two little El Nino events then. El Chichon counteracted (suppressed) the 1982/83 El Nino and amplified the 1983/84/85 La Nina. Between the two volcanic eruptions was a significant 2-year El Nino in 1986/87/88.<br /><br />After the 1997/98 El Nino, there were no explosive volcanic eruptions to add the additional dips. The only major dip was from the 1998/99/00 La Nina.<br /><br />You wrote, “I also noticed in a response you posted on WUWT about a paper that predicted more frequent, but less powerful, El Ninos.”<br /><br />Was that the news report that predicted more frequent El Nino Modoki events? If so, I believe I replied that that should be a good thing since the significant traditional El Nino events are what cause the upward step changes in SST and TLT.<br /><br />If the La Nina events outweigh El Nino events (frequency and amplitude), TLT and SST should decline.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-35736694426529704112009-09-28T13:22:38.816-04:002009-09-28T13:22:38.816-04:00Hi Bob -
Off topic, but I was looking at the UAH...Hi Bob - <br /><br />Off topic, but I was looking at the UAH anomaly graph (http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_Aug_091.jpg) , and I couldn't help but notice the more cyclical nature of the UAH temperature anomalies prior to 1998. After 1998 it seems to be much flatter (prior to the 2008 La Nina). <br /><br />Is this a reflection of the small bump ups via the 2000s El Ninos that prevented the lowering portion of the "cycle?" Have you posted about this in the past?<br /><br />I also noticed in a response you posted on WUWT about a paper that predicted more frequent, but less powerful, El Ninos. If true, would we expect to see this flattening at this level to be more the norm? More frequent small bumps keeping the SSTs elevated and preventing a return to lower anomalies?<br /><br />Thanks as always, and I hope that was coherent!Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-62524430261685962462009-09-28T04:44:45.960-04:002009-09-28T04:44:45.960-04:00John: I don't know that the Hadley Centre is ...John: I don't know that the Hadley Centre is blaming anyone. They're just trying to sort through the reasons for the wiggles in the data. The Hadley Centre and NOAA both use the data that's collected and archived in COADS.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-53465044577787542202009-09-27T22:58:13.610-04:002009-09-27T22:58:13.610-04:00Hi Bob -
Do you know if they are blaming the raw ...Hi Bob -<br /><br />Do you know if they are blaming the raw COADS and NOAA on dataset transition as well? Or is it just not addressed? I couldn't quite tell from your response - sorry for my confusion.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-9477464191669066342009-09-27T21:16:22.024-04:002009-09-27T21:16:22.024-04:00Andrew: You asked, "By the way Bob, what abou...Andrew: You asked, "By the way Bob, what about the three year, 2 sigma ENSO event beginning circa 1940? Could it not have caused a step change which then rapidly dissipated?"<br /><br />In other words, could it have generated a "secondary wave" in global SST anomalies? Good question. I don't have an answer for it. When I think of that three-year El Nino, I think of the response of the Indian Ocean. That's an extreme reaction. I'll have to break down the SST anomalies in the 1940s into individual ocean subsets and see if anything shows up. <br /><br />Almost forgot. Here's a link to my look at the Indian Ocean SST anomalies. Check out the response in the early 1940s to that three year El Nino.<br />http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/09/indian-ocean-more-detailed-look.htmlBob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-5302925108325352032009-09-27T21:04:34.461-04:002009-09-27T21:04:34.461-04:00Jenette: You asked about the NOAA press realease ...Jenette: You asked about the NOAA press realease on the recent record SSTs.<br /><br />The record is only for the NOAA ERSST.v3b data. It does not occur in the NOAA satellite-based OI.v2 SST data or in the Hadley Centre SST data. Refer to:<br />http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/09/record-sea-surface-temperatures-are.htmlBob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-43066287738972695632009-09-27T20:58:42.561-04:002009-09-27T20:58:42.561-04:00John: You asked, "Is this correction by Hadl...John: You asked, "Is this correction by Hadley meant to eliminate this bump one way or another?" <br /><br />They've discussed eliminating the drop but have said nothing about the rise that preceeds it.<br /><br />You asked, "Are they ignoring that it happened, whatever the source?"<br /><br />In the Thompson et al papers, they present that it is caused by changes in SST measurements. If there's another motive, I can't speculate on what it is.<br /><br />You asked, "If the other measurements confirm there was some sort of event, why is there a need to a adjustment?"<br /><br />They're either ignoring the other datasets or they will address their marine air temperature dataset later. The Hadley Centre can't do anything about the raw COADS data, so the data will still exist. The discontinuity will also remain in the NOAA datasets, so they won't disappear.<br /><br />You asked, "Or are the adjustments more far-reaching?"<br /><br />Are they trying to make it easier for GCMs to hindcast SST and surface temperature anomalies? Dunno.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-65889964143761363182009-09-27T20:48:26.876-04:002009-09-27T20:48:26.876-04:00Andrew: You wrote, "Bob, that still leaves th...Andrew: You wrote, "Bob, that still leaves the puzzling issue of why a discontinuity would also occur in the marine air temps, doesn't it?" <br /><br />It also appears in a number of other datasets: cloud cover, surface winds. If I read Thompson et al (2009) correctly, they are attributing the spikes in the other datasets to the transition between U.S. and British measurements and back again during the war. They don't come right out and call attention to the other datasets. Then again, I may be reading between the lines too much, knowing that the discontinuity (or ENSO response)also appears in the other datasets. I think I'll ammend the end of the post and link those posts that show the discontinuity in the other datasets.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-18852618602259337322009-09-27T19:02:19.031-04:002009-09-27T19:02:19.031-04:00By the way Bob, what about the three year, 2 sigma...By the way Bob, what about the three year, 2 sigma ENSO event beginning circa 1940? Could it not have caused a step change which then rapidly dissipated?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13649907093305834921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-18405118580485726092009-09-27T18:49:55.283-04:002009-09-27T18:49:55.283-04:00What do you make of this?
http://www.noaanews.noa...What do you make of this?<br /><br />http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090916_globalstats.htmlAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15016208904557673272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-82359878200577909112009-09-27T15:48:27.873-04:002009-09-27T15:48:27.873-04:00Hi Bob -
I believe you made an older post noting...Hi Bob - <br /><br />I believe you made an older post noting that the 1945 discontinuity was reflected in other measures - marine air temp, cloud cover, etc. Is this correction by Hadley meant to eliminate this bump one way or another? Are they ignoring that it happened, whatever the source? If the other measurements confirm there was some sort of event, why is there a need to a adjustment? Or are the adjustments more far-reaching?Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-85414234853650002632009-09-27T13:22:35.146-04:002009-09-27T13:22:35.146-04:00Bob, that still leaves the puzzling issue of why a...Bob, that still leaves the puzzling issue of why a discontinuity would also occur in the marine air temps, doesn't it?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13649907093305834921noreply@blogger.com