|
|
Post by duwayne on Apr 20, 2022 21:36:55 GMT
I, like some others here, believe the AMO trend over the next several years is pretty significant as far as global warming is concerned.
I found this in Wikipedia….
“In a 2021 study by Michael Mann, it was shown that the periodicity of the AMO in the last millennium was driven by volcanic eruptions and other external forcings, and therefore that there is no compelling evidence for the AMO being an oscillation or cycle.[28] There was also a lack of oscillatory behaviour in models on time scales longer than El Niño Southern Oscillation; the AMV is indistinguishable from red noise, a typical null hypothesis to test whether there are oscillations in a model.[29]”
Mann doesn’t believe the AMO oscillates. The models apparently don’t include an AMO oscillation.
My MaxCon 1.0 model is based on an ocean oscillation with the AMO playing a significant role.
Will the current belief in the IPCC models take a significant hit if the AMO falls below zero and stays there for much of the next 30 years? That will surely mean the current IPCC models will run too hot.
|
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 20, 2022 23:17:04 GMT
I, like some others here, believe the AMO trend over the next several years is pretty significant as far as global warming is concerned.
I found this in Wikipedia….
“In a 2021 study by Michael Mann, it was shown that the periodicity of the AMO in the last millennium was driven by volcanic eruptions and other external forcings, and therefore that there is no compelling evidence for the AMO being an oscillation or cycle.[28] There was also a lack of oscillatory behaviour in models on time scales longer than El Niño Southern Oscillation; the AMV is indistinguishable from red noise, a typical null hypothesis to test whether there are oscillations in a model.[29]”
Mann doesn’t believe the AMO oscillates. The models apparently don’t include an AMO oscillation.
My MaxCon 1.0 model is based on an ocean oscillation with the AMO playing a significant role.
Will the current belief in the IPCC models take a significant hit if the AMO falls below zero and stays there for much of the next 30 years? That will surely mean the current IPCC models will run too hot.
Every single IPCC model (except one if I remember correctly) runs way too hot ... when compared to the UAH lower troposphere measurements. Another -0.3 C will bring that anomaly back to the base range where the UAH series started (1979) ... just after the Pacific climate shift. And that is with the AMO still high. If that doesn't shake their belief a bit, then they cannot be moved. The S. Pacific gyre via the Humboldt current seems to be moving waters of a temperature not seen since the 1970s (we will soon see) ... and with low solar UV, the overall SSTAs in the ENSO regions should continue to decline. The PDO has been pulling back to the west for some time now. The AMO will follow in its own time, when the Atlantic SSTAs south of 45N drop. We see a hint. Mann has his own oscillation to worry about. |
|
|
|
Post by ratty on Apr 20, 2022 23:19:37 GMT
I, like some others here, believe the AMO trend over the next several years is pretty significant as far as global warming is concerned. I found this in Wikipedia…. “In a 2021 study by Michael Mann, it was shown that the periodicity of the AMO in the last millennium was driven by volcanic eruptions and other external forcings, and therefore that there is no compelling evidence for the AMO being an oscillation or cycle.[28] There was also a lack of oscillatory behaviour in models on time scales longer than El Niño Southern Oscillation; the AMV is indistinguishable from red noise, a typical null hypothesis to test whether there are oscillations in a model.[29]” Mann doesn’t believe the AMO oscillates. The models apparently don’t include an AMO oscillation.
My MaxCon 1.0 model is based on an ocean oscillation with the AMO playing a significant role. Will the current belief in the IPCC models take a significant hit if the AMO falls below zero and stays there for much of the next 30 years? That will surely mean the current IPCC models will run too hot. Can Mann's theory be tested against a volcanic eruptions database (if one exists)? I wonder what his other external forcings were? Sun, planets, Bary .... ? |
|
|
|
Post by Sigurdur on Apr 21, 2022 1:20:41 GMT
I, like some others here, believe the AMO trend over the next several years is pretty significant as far as global warming is concerned. I found this in Wikipedia…. “In a 2021 study by Michael Mann, it was shown that the periodicity of the AMO in the last millennium was driven by volcanic eruptions and other external forcings, and therefore that there is no compelling evidence for the AMO being an oscillation or cycle.[28] There was also a lack of oscillatory behaviour in models on time scales longer than El Niño Southern Oscillation; the AMV is indistinguishable from red noise, a typical null hypothesis to test whether there are oscillations in a model.[29]” Mann doesn’t believe the AMO oscillates. The models apparently don’t include an AMO oscillation.
My MaxCon 1.0 model is based on an ocean oscillation with the AMO playing a significant role. Will the current belief in the IPCC models take a significant hit if the AMO falls below zero and stays there for much of the next 30 years? That will surely mean the current IPCC models will run too hot. Can Mann's theory be tested against a volcanic eruptions database (if one exists)? I wonder what his other external forcings were? Sun, planets, Bary .... ? Mann is like Biden. Easter Bunnies required. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 21, 2022 14:37:47 GMT
I, like some others here, believe the AMO trend over the next several years is pretty significant as far as global warming is concerned. I found this in Wikipedia…. “In a 2021 study by Michael Mann, it was shown that the periodicity of the AMO in the last millennium was driven by volcanic eruptions and other external forcings, and therefore that there is no compelling evidence for the AMO being an oscillation or cycle.[28] There was also a lack of oscillatory behaviour in models on time scales longer than El Niño Southern Oscillation; the AMV is indistinguishable from red noise, a typical null hypothesis to test whether there are oscillations in a model.[29]” Mann doesn’t believe the AMO oscillates. The models apparently don’t include an AMO oscillation.
My MaxCon 1.0 model is based on an ocean oscillation with the AMO playing a significant role. Will the current belief in the IPCC models take a significant hit if the AMO falls below zero and stays there for much of the next 30 years? That will surely mean the current IPCC models will run too hot. Can Mann's theory be tested against a volcanic eruptions database (if one exists)? I wonder what his other external forcings were? Sun, planets, Bary .... ? I suspect that cloud cover is a better and more extensive test. Unfortunately, the publicly available cloud cover experiment went silent after 2009. But we see in chart 1 below that the 26-year trends were downward, which seem to match the trend in Solar AP. Read more solar reaching the surface. We see in chart 2 that cloud cover is inversely correlated to tropical SSTAs from 2004 to 2009. The very UV and visible solar energy waves that heat the tropical equatorial waters on their way west. Again. SSTs increase under low-cloud conditions. No physical scientist would be surprised. Beyond 2009 we have been cut off ... although I'm sure the data are there. They are just not being pursued. Wonder why. In chart 3 we see that Mid-Western cloud cover increased from 2012 through 2019 ... after which, local sky-cover data stopped being available on the NWS data site. I would hate to suggest nefarious reasons.  Wonder what was happening over the oceans during this period. Ya think it was going up? Conclusions would suggest that lowering cloud cover during the "grand" solar maximum enhanced heating. Since 2009, increasing cloud cover, in combination with a less energetic sun may have been lowering temperatures. The data are there, but we can suspect that their analysis will not be funded. "Mr" Mann leaves no database legacy (or really anything else). Nothing that would expand our knowledge. Certainly no comparison to Dr Roy and the UAH lower troposphere measurements. I think that history will be deservedly unkind to "Mr" Mann and his legacy to Man. Another Golden Parachute that will fade into oblivion.
  The are encouraging signs from climate4you ... at least atmospheric water vapor ... although they compared Hadst and not UAH.  |
|
|
|
Post by ratty on Apr 21, 2022 19:42:08 GMT
If I can't get you that pay rise I've been promising, I'm going to put you up for a promotion. Promise .....  |
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Apr 21, 2022 21:09:32 GMT
I think the cloud impact is very difficult to determine.
The variables within it are massive and likely to mask any conclusions that could be drawn.
With solar intensity all radiation from it the sun are positive and measured there is conjecture about missing frequency content (super short wave Gamma as an example) but all radiation is positive with satellites to measure out there multiple of. same with emitted radiation from earth and temperature measurements by satellites. Always some conjecture but the data or conclusions are founded on data and valid.
Last night we had a low cloud settle in, daytime temperature yesterday was 24C as a result of the cloudy night it dropped only to 20C so the Auckland temperature average was say 22C three days ago daytime 26C, high clear low humidity air at night 10C, average likely 5C cooler at 17C.
cloud does not warm the planet if it intercepts the suns rays.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sigurdur on Apr 22, 2022 3:08:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 22, 2022 4:10:44 GMT
Thanks Sig. I'll see if I can extend cloud cover beyond 2009. |
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Apr 22, 2022 12:24:31 GMT
The global impact of a net increase in cloud’s albedo will trump it’s insulation effect. Data gathering in sprawling UHI regions mixed with the huge gaps in data points/“corrections” may mask perception for a while but reality wins in the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 22, 2022 17:58:49 GMT
Nino Region 1+2 is our measurement region for cold inputs from the SE Pacific. March is generally the coldest SST month and September is the warmest. The chart below shows that the Dec-Feb time period seems to be returning to input conditions of the 1960s and 1970s. (Note that the title should show Dec-Feb). What shows up in Region 1+2 doesn't stay in Region 1+2.
  |
|
|
|
Post by ratty on Apr 22, 2022 18:29:07 GMT
Nino Region 1+2 is our measurement region for cold inputs from the SE Pacific. March is generally the coldest SST month and September is the warmest. The chart below shows that the Dec-Mar time period seems to be returning to input conditions of the 1960s and 1970s. Anecdote: We had a fireplace installed in the early 1970s. It became a decorator item in the late 1970s. Matches the blue line. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 22, 2022 18:47:19 GMT
Nino Region 1+2 is our measurement region for cold inputs from the SE Pacific. March is generally the coldest SST month and September is the warmest. The chart below shows that the Dec-Mar time period seems to be returning to input conditions of the 1960s and 1970s. Anecdote: We had a fireplace installed in the early 1970s. It became a decorator item in the late 1970s. Matches the blue line. Can you quantify that Ratty? I need a new metric.  |
|
|
|
Post by ratty on Apr 22, 2022 21:25:51 GMT
Anecdote: We had a fireplace installed in the early 1970s. It became a decorator item in the late 1970s. Matches the blue line. Can you quantify that Ratty? I need a new metric. Sorry, Australia was still Imperial in those years. PS: It was nice to look at. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 23, 2022 18:39:11 GMT
Can you quantify that Ratty? I need a new metric.  Sorry, Australia was still Imperial in those years. PS: It was nice to look at. My house was built in 1950, and it too has a fireplace. Probably would want to get a heavy-duty insert if I wanted to do any serious wood heating. Those babies are pricey these days. Y'all burn crocs these days don't ya? There are lots of crocs in climate science. |
|
Wonder what was happening over the oceans during this period. Ya think it was going up? Conclusions would suggest that lowering cloud cover during the "grand" solar maximum enhanced heating. Since 2009, increasing cloud cover, in combination with a less energetic sun may have been lowering temperatures. The data are there, but we can suspect that their analysis will not be funded. 
