tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post1221251940001876455..comments2023-07-29T05:11:23.558-04:00Comments on Climate Observations: Multidecadal Changes In Sea Surface TemperatureBob Tisdalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-62969973294693636332010-11-24T19:09:02.779-05:002010-11-24T19:09:02.779-05:00lgl-Your math looks good to me :)lgl-Your math looks good to me :)Andrewhttp://devoidofnulls.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-51750605590043331212010-11-23T19:06:41.662-05:002010-11-23T19:06:41.662-05:00This is brilliant!!! And this matches exactly what...This is brilliant!!! And this matches exactly what I've been looking at using the NOI data (SST for EL nino region 3.4) from NOAA (available since 1950). Namely, what struck me is that since the el nino from 1958, each peaking el nino thereafter has been stronger than the previous one, until the 1997/1998 el nino: <br />1958 1.7<br />1973 2.1<br />1983 2.3<br />1998 2.5<br />(2010 1.8: trend reversal! see below)<br /><br />Doing simple linear regression; the la nina peaks from 1958 to 1998 produce a slope (increase) of 0.0017/month with an R2 of 0.97. <br /><br />That said, looking at la ninas since the 1950s; these increased in strength until the one in 1974:<br />1950 -1.7<br />1956 -2.0<br />1974 -2.1<br />and have since then decreased (the peak la ninas that is) until the most recent one in 2008:<br />1974 -2.1<br />1989 -1.9<br />2000 -1.6<br />2008 -1.4<br />Interestingly, the decrease in la nina peaks from 1974 to 2008 is also 0.0017/month with an R2 of 0.97. <br /><br />I only picked the strongest consecutive enso events since the others can be regarded as "noise".<br /><br />The fact that both the el nino and la nina peaks increased and decreased, respectively, with the exact same slope make me believe there is an underlying mechanism that causes this: the pacific decadal oscillation (PDO).<br /><br />Adding PDO events (warm to cold reversals, vice versa, phase shifts, etc) to the NOI data we instantly see the following events coincide:<br /><br />The 2008 la nina coincides exactly with the PDO GPTC.<br />The 1998 el nino coincides exactly with the PDO phase shift from warm to cold.<br />The 1988 la nina coincides exactly with the highest PDO (LPTC) since 1934.<br />The 1977/78 el nino coincides exactly with the PDO phase shift from cold to warm.<br />The 68/69 la nina coincides exactly with PDO's phase reversal. The 55/56 la nina coincides exactly with the lowest PDO value since 1900.<br /><br />Note: the PDO cycle is exactly related to the sun's orbital motion (torque) cycle.<br /><br />Apparently not all enso events coincide with all significant PDO changes, but the key (peak) events do, and thus it can be deducted that the enso cycle, therefore, also coincides with the sun's orbital motion (torque) cycle.<br /><br />In addition, between 1950 and 1977 there were 126 la nina seasons (months) and 75 el nino seasons: PDO was cold. <br />Between 1977 and 1998 there were 53 el nino seasons and 27 la nina seasons: PDO was warm.<br /><br />Hence, it is obvious that the enso cycle is highly correlated with the PDO, which in turn is highly correlated to the sun's torque cycle. This has been confirmed by Dr Theodor Landscheidt! In addition, it appears to me that we've entered a trend reversal in enso strength; going from a el nino dominated 40 yr period that ended in 1998 to a la nina period of several decades that started in 2008.<br /><br />All this also coincides exactly with the climate change we've experienced since 1977 (when the PDO shifted from cold to warm, ending in 1998 when the PDO shifted from warm to cold: in 1998 the highest global temperatures have been recorded and have since not been broken... 2010 may become the highest on record but only, in my opinion due to the 2009/2010 el nino we've experienced). Subtract the effect of the el nino and it won't be the highest or 2nd highest temperature, but even lower....<br /><br />Now if global temperatures continue to rise, while we continue to be in the PDO cold phase that peaked in 2007 and will last till 2016, that's when anthropogenic climate change is real, to me!<br /><br />references:<br />PDO: http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/<br /><br />PDO and Solar torque cycle: Trends in Pacific Decadal Oscillation<br />Subjected To Solar Forcing: http://www.john-daly.com/theodor/pdotrend.htm<br /><br />Solar Activity Controls El Niño and La Niña: http://www.john-daly.com/sun-enso/sun-enso.htm<br /><br />global atmospheric temp trends: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/11/oct-2010-uah-global-temperature-update-0-42-deg-c/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-12838471897112959982010-11-23T16:31:47.922-05:002010-11-23T16:31:47.922-05:00And of course there is the offset of around 0.0002...And of course there is the offset of around 0.00025 on the SST' so,<br />1. d/dt SST = 0.011*ENSO+0.00025<br />3. SST = 0.011*(integral of ENSO) + 0.00025t, where t is months since 1880.<br /><br />How much off this time Andrew?lglnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-82227432283370058342010-11-22T18:58:02.784-05:002010-11-22T18:58:02.784-05:00Andrew,
But just a little. "It is very likely...Andrew,<br />But just a little. "It is very likely that most of the temperature increase the last century was caused by ENSO"lglnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-23011979015464554922010-11-22T16:28:42.207-05:002010-11-22T16:28:42.207-05:00lgl-Actually, you calculus is a little off my frie...lgl-Actually, you calculus is a little off my friend. it's more like:<br /><br />1. d/dt SST ∝ ENSO<br />2. the integral of d/dt is equal to the SST by the fundamental theorem of calculus<br />3. There fore, the integral of ENSO is proportional to SSTAndrewhttp://devoidofnulls.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-13392718834422531442010-11-22T11:17:53.453-05:002010-11-22T11:17:53.453-05:00"If you differentiate the global temperature ..."If you differentiate the global temperature record then it's almost certain to look like the ENSO time series because this is the strongest mode of year to year variability."<br /><br />It does, and this is an interesting statement.<br />1. SST'=ENSO<br />2. Obviously the integral of SST'=SST<br />3. then from 1 and 2 SST=integral of ENSOlglnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-77850404196340993052010-11-22T10:51:25.680-05:002010-11-22T10:51:25.680-05:00Bob-I tend to think that it never hurts to include...Bob-I tend to think that it never hurts to include all the information one can get, but It's your blog, it's up to you. :)<br /><br />Anyway, thanks for the graph of the SST derivative. As I thought, the ENSO and it are clearly very similar in their behavior.<br /><br />It's clear that the ENSO events definitely have long term impacts. You seem to be the only one even trying to develop models of that effect, so kudos there. Just offering some advice on there construction, makes me feel like an important participant. :)Andrewhttp://devoidofnulls.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-47824227627964187922010-11-22T06:40:10.217-05:002010-11-22T06:40:10.217-05:00Andrew and Nebuchadnezzar: In addition to a graph ...Andrew and Nebuchadnezzar: In addition to a graph of NINO3.4 SST anomalies and the first derivative of global SST's, what other specifics do you want from the comparison--correlation?Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-66234772254704175872010-11-22T04:33:55.886-05:002010-11-22T04:33:55.886-05:00Nebuchadnezzar says: “Bob's justification seem...Nebuchadnezzar says: “Bob's justification seems to be that it's the right period to use because it gives the right answer, which just leads us round in circles.”<br /><br />The base years of 1950-1979 are only required to make the running total work. The curve of the 31-year average NINO3.4 SST anomalies used for the comparisons to multidecadal changes in SST anomalies in Figures 3, 7, and 12 is not dependent on base years. And the years portrayed by each map (not the base years) are the only selection made for the maps of the multidecadal changes in SST anomalies used in the video.<br /><br />Regardless, adjusting or selecting data to provide the right answer is commonplace in the present state of climate science. GISS admitted that the Lean (2000) TSI reconstruction was obsolete but used it anyway to help recreate the rise in the early 20th century global temperatures. The Hoyt and Schatten TSI reconstruction was prepared specifically for the same reason, so that it explained the rise in the global temperature in the early 20th century. I recall discussions about how the aerosol datasets being used by climate modelers were prepared only to explain the mid-century dip in global temperatures. There are a multitude of adjustments made to climate models so that the output meets the modeler’s expectations.<br /><br />The concepts and bases for them are not dependent the running total. What I’ve shown in a number of past posts is that the East Indian and West Pacific Oceans are warmed by El Niño and La Niña events and that the warmings are cumulative. In an earlier and this post I’ve shown that the ENSO signal persists in the North Atlantic for a number of reasons and that this may explain the additional variability of the AMO. And in this post I’ve shown, because of these ENSO-induced processes, that ENSO COULD explain all (or part) of the rise in global temperatures from the early 1900s to present. <br /><br />RegardsBob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-29328366142542044792010-11-22T02:57:53.260-05:002010-11-22T02:57:53.260-05:00Andrew said "Here's a thought, instead of...Andrew said "Here's a thought, instead of integrating ENSO, differentiate the global SST's and compare that to ENSO. This is a comparison which is essentially mathematically equivalent, and avoids pesky arbitrary constant terms."<br /><br />The pesky arbitrary constant is the interesting thing that makes the integrated series look like the global temperature record.<br /><br />If you differentiate the global temperature record then it's almost certain to look like the ENSO time series because this is the strongest mode of year to year variability.<br /><br />What Bob's saying that's interesting and perhaps controversial is that global temperature change can be almost completely explained by the integrated Nino time series. That's why I'm worried about the choice of base years. Bob's justification seems to be that it's the right period to use because it gives the right answer, which just leads us round in circles.<br /><br />NebuchadnezzarAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-40059211907249393282010-11-21T18:08:04.865-05:002010-11-21T18:08:04.865-05:00My apologies to all for the delay in moderating an...My apologies to all for the delay in moderating and replying to the comments. <br /><br />Anonymous (November 21, 2010 4:57 AM): Thank you for the links. (I used google to translate them. Thank you, google.) Anthony Watts at wattsupwiththat would be interested in the link to the discussion on surface station locations. <br /><br />Anonymous (November 21, 2010 7:21 AM): You asked, “I guess I'm left wondering, what's really so special about the period 1950-79?” <br /><br />It seems only to establish the right ratio of positive to negative anomalies, and that ratio allows the running total to reproduce the global temperature anomaly curve. We can also shift NINO3.4 data of other base years until the right ratio is established. <br /><br />Frank: Thanks for the discussion about “hemispheric dipole”. Regarding your graph, the lag (or divergence) that seems to work its way into the data in the 1960s could be the result of the Southern Ocean SST data. It’s really just the climatology (basically a noisy flat line) before 1960s then it rises and plateaus and then falls again in the 1990s.<br /><br />Andrew: You concluded your questions with, “Here's a thought, instead of integrating ENSO, differentiate the global SST's and compare that to ENSO. This is a comparison which is essentially mathematically equivalent, and avoids pesky arbitrary constant terms.”<br /><br />I’ll do that in a follow-up to this post. Thanks. In the mean time, here’s a graph from a very early post that compares the annual change in HADCRUT3GL and the Trenberth NINO3.4 SST anomalies that have been scaled.<br />http://i30.tinypic.com/15rl7qo.jpg<br /><br />sykes.1: You asked, “I guess I missed it, but what drives these oscillations?”<br /><br />Assuming you’re asking about ENSO (El Niño and La Niña events), that’s one of the unanswered questions in climate science. A relaxation of the Pacific trade winds initiates an El Niño event, and a La Niña event typically follows an El Niño event as the Pacific tries to return to a “normal” state. But there are many factors that can cause the trade winds to relax, and there are many factors that can cause the strengths of individual ENSO events to be different. In fact, the general thought is that each ENSO event is subtly different as are the global responses. And that’s one of the reasons that climate modelers have very little luck trying to reproduce the ENSO record of the 20th century. Sorry I couldn’t give you a definite answer.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-55886997438974256832010-11-21T16:23:53.326-05:002010-11-21T16:23:53.326-05:00I guess I missed it, but what drives these oscilla...I guess I missed it, but what drives these oscillations?sykes.1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10954672321945289871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-74295054672999309002010-11-21T12:10:07.997-05:002010-11-21T12:10:07.997-05:00What is the justification for assuming that, when ...What is the justification for assuming that, when "integrating" the ENSO events, that the mean of all the data should be non-zero? Without the constant non zero mean, no trend would emerge in the data to mimic the long term of the global SST.<br /><br />Indeed, shouldn't one try and determine ENSO conditions long before the instrumental record, average to the present, and then integrate? Would not that make more sense? Indeed, if you did that you could still possibly get a trend in the last 150 years, but no trend over a record the length of a hypothetical ENSO record from pre-instrumental times.<br /><br />Here's a thought, instead of integrating ENSO, differentiate the global SST's and compare that to ENSO. This is a comparison which is essentially mathematically equivalent, and avoids pesky arbitrary constant terms.Andrewhttp://devoidofnulls.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-15525674134540434862010-11-21T11:52:22.293-05:002010-11-21T11:52:22.293-05:00Thank you for this exciting post. I reconstructed ...Thank you for this exciting post. I reconstructed your operations and got the same result. Anyway... I have some maybe helpful suggestions. The 31-year SST-difference makes some sense, anyway it's some kind of "constructed". I calculated the yearly difference between NH (extratropics) and SH (also extratropics) in GISS data and the resuling series is very similar to the AMO (look http://www.dh7fb.de/reko/dtnhsh ). After generating a plot with this difference (I called it "HMO" with H for hemispheric) and the global-series from GISS you can see, that almost all warming in the last 30 years comes from the NH. See http://www.dh7fb.de/reko/ensogiss . In green is marked the 30 years running Mean of ENSO 3.4 temps after transforming the record 15 years into the future. The correlation is R= 0.62 between the unsmoothed series of "HMO" and the 15y- transformed record of 30 y running Mean of the Nino 3.4 .So it could be, that the global temperatures are controlled by the ENSO-Mean with a timelag of about 15 years.<br />best wishes!<br />FrankAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-46236982510870956422010-11-21T07:21:58.263-05:002010-11-21T07:21:58.263-05:00Thanks Bob,
I can see that the grounds for choosi...Thanks Bob,<br /><br />I can see that the grounds for choosing that period sound sensible; it is in Trenberth's words "representative of the 20th century".<br /><br />However, if you did use the whole twentieth century (1901-2000 or similar) it wouldn't just be <i>representative</i> of the 20th century, it would actually <i>be</i> the 20th century. If you did this, the running total would come out as zero, wouldn't it?<br /><br />It's certainly interesting that it comes out looking like the global average if you choose the base-period just right, but I guess I'm left wondering, what's really so special about the period 1950-79?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-23561528116570235012010-11-21T04:57:27.980-05:002010-11-21T04:57:27.980-05:00Sir,
Maybe you can use these:
http://www.dmi.dk...Sir,<br /><br />Maybe you can use these:<br /><br /><br />http://www.dmi.dk/dmi/index/klima/klimaet_indtil_nu/temperaturen_i_groenland.htm<br /><br />http://met.no/?module=Articles;action=Article.publicShow;ID=882<br /><br /><br />Best regardsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-87261411632638821912010-11-20T04:25:21.155-05:002010-11-20T04:25:21.155-05:00Nebuchadnezzar: A follow up to my earlier reply r...Nebuchadnezzar: A follow up to my earlier reply regarding base years: IMO, selecting the proper base years so that the running total reproduces the underlying global temperature anomaly curve makes more sense that rearranging manufactured aerosol datasets in climate models to recreate the mid-century flattening of the curve.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-44085604172129279422010-11-20T03:25:12.725-05:002010-11-20T03:25:12.725-05:00Nebuchadnezzar: Regarding the base years, I disco...Nebuchadnezzar: Regarding the base years, I discovered the effect using the Trenberth and Stepaniak NINO3.4 data. I was trying to determine if La Nina events cancelled out El Nino events, as is widely believed. Their use of 1950-1979 base years was discussed in Trenberth (1997) "The Definition of El Nino":<br />ftp://grads.iges.org/pub/kjin/BADGER/1021/Trenberth-1997-BAMS(ElNino.Define).pdf<br /><br />Trenberth writes, "Figure 1 shows the 5-month running mean SST time series for the Niño 3 and 3.4 regions relative to a base period climatology of 1950–79 given in Table 1. The base period can make a difference. This standard 30-year base period is chosen as it is representative of the record this century, whereas the period after 1979 has been biased warm and dominated by El Niño events (Trenberth and Hoar 1996a)." <br /><br />There's no reason for me to hide that the base years are necessary for the running total to recreate the global temperature anomaly curve. In fact, I'm sure someone could write a program that could find more ideal base years.<br /><br />The Hadley Centre could use the concept of the oceans integrating ENSO to verify what periods need to be reexamined. For example, the 1945 discontinuity wouldn't appear so out of place if the peak around 1943/44 didn't exist. But the spike in 1943/44, which is most prevalent in the Indian Ocean, exists in areas that are well sampled. Is it justifiable there? Could it be an aftereffect of the three year El Nino that came before it? That would be a lot of warm water released to the surface.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-61182249249936510862010-11-19T22:04:09.006-05:002010-11-19T22:04:09.006-05:00Thanks Bob,
And the base period? I guess that mig...Thanks Bob,<br /><br />And the base period? I guess that might change things a little.<br /><br />NebuchadnezzarAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-15222793588139877952010-11-19T21:53:24.898-05:002010-11-19T21:53:24.898-05:00Nebuchadnezzar: The simple integral (running tota...Nebuchadnezzar: The simple integral (running total) of NINO3.4 SST anomalies also works with HADSST2 and, of course, with the Trenberth and Stepaniak NINO3.4 SST anomaly data since its based on HADSST2.<br /><br />And, not to worry, in the event that the Hadley Centre elects to change their methods for HADSST3, lets say by not reinserting the sampled data back into the interpolated data, the NINO3.4 SST anomalies as they exist now can be easily reproduced from ICOADS data.<br /><br />RegardsBob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-70849150559332932972010-11-19T21:34:18.649-05:002010-11-19T21:34:18.649-05:00Dennis: First: I'm not discussing epochs of ...Dennis: First: I'm not discussing epochs of millions of years, just 130 years. And I'm presenting evidence that the oceans integrate ENSO. It's never been presented or discussed in a paper, yet. <br /><br />Also, are we dealing with the same levels of CO2, etc.? You may not be comapraing apples to apples.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-83550892207007209462010-11-19T18:08:42.632-05:002010-11-19T18:08:42.632-05:00Dear Bob,
The analysis of the running total of Ni...Dear Bob,<br /><br />The analysis of the running total of Nino 3.4 SSTs is fascinating.<br /><br />One question: does it work for other SST data sets (and averaging periods), or is it something special in HadISST or your choice of anomaly period?<br /><br />I ask because 1950-79 seems a strange choice for a base year and HadISST is a unique statistical analysis of the available data.<br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />NebuchadnezzarAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-74362487656120622212010-11-19T17:45:47.993-05:002010-11-19T17:45:47.993-05:00Bob,
Here is another link on the effects on volca...Bob,<br /><br />Here is another link on the effects on volcanism and the atmospheric response:<br />http://www.global-climate-change.org.uk/2-6-3.php<br /><br />The last paragraph in that link states the following: "Volcanic activity has the ability to affect global climate on still longer time scales. Over periods of millions or even tens of millions of years, increased volcanic activity can emit enormous volumes of greenhouse gases, with the potential of substantial global warming (Pickering & Owen, 1994; Rampino & Volk, 1988). However, the global cooling effects of sulphur dioxide emissions (Officer & Drake, 1983) will act to counter the greenhouse warming, and the resultant climate changes remain uncertain. Much will depend upon the nature of volcanic activity. Basaltic outpourings release far less sulphur dioxide and ash, proportionally, than do the more explosive (silicic) eruptions."<br /><br />Over the past 100 years or so, our manmade sources of the same pollutants show a continued increase in greenhouse gases (GHG's) while the amount of the regulated criteria pollutants, like the GHG countering SO2 emissions, have been greatly reduced in the atmosphere due to the passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970. The end result since then is there has been a reduced countering effect of the GHG's of these manmade pollutants, and thus the noted increase in global temperatures. This is all independent of the natural ENSO cycles and thus may be influencing those same ENSO cycles by how much solar radiation is reaching the ocean surface through chemistry and general atmospheric circulation pattern changes.<br /><br />Dennis H.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-26126289478738062972010-11-19T17:24:26.456-05:002010-11-19T17:24:26.456-05:00Dennis: Again, I confirmed that the effects of vol...Dennis: Again, I confirmed that the effects of volcanic eruptions can outweigh the effects of El Nino events. But there is no evidence that volcanic eruptions alter the frequency and magnitude of ENSO events. There is a significant difference.Bob Tisdalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462377647970214137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2220966763638300672.post-61948722046129674352010-11-19T17:16:53.301-05:002010-11-19T17:16:53.301-05:00Bob,
In reply to your question:
"Did the 198...Bob,<br /><br />In reply to your question:<br />"Did the 1982 and 1991 eruptions of El Chichon and Mount Pinatubo suppress the strength and frequency of El Niño events in the latter part of the 20th century"<br /><br />Here is a web link from the fellow skeptic info web site, ICECAP:<br />http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Volcanism_and_Climate.pdf<br /><br />That ICECAP story on volcanism and climate response stated the following:<br />"Volcanic eruptions can override El Nino warming. The volcanic cooling associated with the major eruptions in 1982 and 1991 were able to minimize and then offset the warming with the super El Nino of 1982/83 and the El Ninos of the early 1990s on a global basis."<br /><br />So in effect, the atmospheric response was able to minimize (or enhance) the effects of the peaks (or valleys) of the ENSO cycles. <br /><br />Again the response to the volcanoes (or any similar pollution source) occurred in the atmosphere first and not the other way around. ENSO does not initiate the atmospheric response to the volcanoes or other similar (manmade) atmospheric pollution sources as you are suggesting. The ocean ENSO response occurs after the changes already occurred in the atmosphere due to the interaction of those pollution sources, whose cycles or forcings are independent of the ENSO cycles.<br /><br />Dennis H.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com