Here is a serious question for you Astro. In your opinion, how much of the cooling that we are seeing in the eastern Nino regions (specifically 1+2) is due to a net inflow of cold water from the southeast Pacific? If you look at the west-east horizontal cross-section time-series of the upper 400+ meters of the tropical Pacific, it seems apparent that the latest gravity waves are just absolutely dissipating (rather than surfacing) in the East Pacific. It would appear they are just being overwhelmed by a mass of cold water.
The cause is solar and planetary, as I've explained in great detail for years (also on this current and lasting La Nina.) As you know, as I have taught, when climate scientists try to predict ENSO they are removing a climate mechanism where the thermal/kinetic exchange to equilibrium is achieved.
ENSO is externally forced through the polar annular modes/AAM.
What confuses the climate computer modelers at NOAA and other climate centers about ENSO and its cycle is that the thermodynamic response to perturbation is not linear.
That's because El Niño and La Niña respond to fluctuations caused by the external forcing - primarily by the activity of the Sun.
ENSO is forced by the Sun externally because of the strength of the trade winds, that is a technical term for what is known as 'Walker Cell' dynamics and the AAM integrals which predate ENSO's sea surface temperature variations.
Know that the Earth's atmosphere with these perturbations is the less energetic body, so by definition there has to be an 'external' perturbation present that forces the atmosphere to respond.
Scientific evidence of the Sun's forcing of the atmosphere exists and the relationship is very significant:
For instance, the co-rotating coronal holes of the Sun induce fluctuations of the solar wind speed in the vicinity of the Earth.
These fluxes of solar wind speed are closely correlated with geomagnetic activity and the resultant geophysical climate and weather effects on Earth which is basic to Astrometeorology.
Solar wind speeds have been observed and monitored by orbiting Earth satellites since the mid-1960s.
The long-term series of solar wind speed clearly reveals enhanced amplitudes at the solar rotation period of 27.3 days and at its harmonics 13.6 and 9.1 days.
The amplitude series are modulated by a quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) that has a period of 1.75a (that's 21 months) as bi-spectral analysis reveals.
A 1.75a QBO component is also present in the equatorial, zonal wind of the stratosphere at 30 hPa, in addition to the well-known QBO component at the period 2.4a (at 29 months.)
The solar wind QBO influences the stratospheric QBO, the global electric circuit, and cloud cover by modulation of ionospheric electric fields, cosmic ray flux and particle precipitation.
And the series of solar wind speed fluctuations are bandpass-filtered at the period 1.75a.
The filtered series provide the amplitude of the solar wind QBO as function of time.
The maxima of the solar wind QBO series correlate with those of the ENSO Index. Analysis confirms that the solar wind QBO helps to trigger ENSO activity.
The solar forcing of ENSO is performed by changes in the meridional flux by means of the NAM/SAM. This is what also connects directly back to planetary wave action.
In volume 36, issue 17, of the September 2009 Geophysical Research Letters, Rodrigo Caballero and Bruce T. Anderson stated that and I quote:
"Stationary planetary waves are excited in the mid-latitudes, propagate equator-ward and are absorbed in the subtropics.
The impact these waves have on the tropical climate has yet to be fully unraveled.
"Previous work has shown that interannual variability of zonal-mean stationary eddy stress is well correlated with interannual variability in Hadley cell strength.
A separate line of research has shown that changes in midlatitude planetary waves local to the Pacific strongly affect ENSO variability.
"Here, we show that the two phenomena are in fact closely connected. Interannual variability of wave activity flux impinging on the subtropical central Pacific affects the local Hadley cell.
The associated changes in subtropical subsidence affect the surface pressure field and wind stresses, which in turn affect ENSO.
"As a result, a winter with an anomalously weak Hadley cell tends to be followed a year later by an El Niño event."
Moreover, there is a link from the Pacific Meridional Mode to ENSO.
Consider what scientists Ping Chang and Link Ji from Texas A&M University at College Station, Texas wrote back in late 2008:
"The occurrence of a boreal spring phenomenon referred to as the Pacific Meridional Model (MM) is shown to be intimately linked to the development of El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) in a long simulation of a coupled model.
The MM, characterized by an anomalous north–south SST gradient and anomalous surface circulation in the northeasterly trade regime with maximum variance in boreal spring, is shown to be inherent to thermodynamic ocean–atmosphere coupling in the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) latitude, and the MM existence is independent of ENSO.
"The thermodynamic coupling enhances the persistence of the anomalous winds in the deep tropics, forcing energetic equatorially trapped oceanic waves to occur in the central western Pacific, which in turn initiate an ENSO event.
The majority of ENSO events in both nature and the coupled model are preceded by MM events."
Now, the reasons why NOAA/NWS and every other conventional climate center on Earth, along with some forecasts and their reliance on models cannot forecast ENSO.
The reason is that their computer models are completely out of touch with the realities of how the Earth's climate is truly forced - from space.
ENSO is *astronomically-caused.*
Clearly the algorithms in their overblown computer models are not programmed to understand ENSO. These models are based on 'effects,' - but not causes.
That is why they cannot forecast anything that falls outside of several weeks to about two months (if that.)
Yet every single year they come out with forecasts on ENSO which do not materialize.
Rather, what conventional modelers do is that they take an initial condition and apply their own perturbation theories in attempts to luck into a accurate prediction - but those projections are always wrong.
In truth, in the real world of climate, ENSO is NOT an internally driven or a chaotic phenomenon.
El Niño and La Niña are solar and planetary magnetically-driven events that forces upper stratospheric U-flow/QBO and this can be easily observed with the results and impact on the N/S annular modes.
Reports from a project on the 2011 La Nina I forecasted fell to -4 degrees Celsius because those expensive computer models are founded on absolutely useless methods on the given boundary conditions they use to project from.
It means they are essentially using models that *drives* the climate/weather system state - rather than the other way around.
It's called having it ass backwards.
For instance,
If you subtract ENSO, then you also have to subtract the poleward migration of Hadley cells/expansion of the Ferrel cells observed since solar year 1976. Now, once you do that, you lose 3-4 percent decrease that's observed in tropical cloud cover.
Therefore, you also lose essentially all of the warming that has occurred since the 1970s which comes to about 3.5W/m^2 of loss since solar year 1982.
NOAA/NWS and every other climate forecast center does not successfully produce accurate seasonal forecasts. Again, that's because their models are programmed only to the limited and general governing equations entered into them.
Climate and weather events which span from two to three standard deviation ranges are going to have to be reported to the general public against the weight of evidence which claims the cause is man-made global warming.
Standard deviations that range at 3 and higher will increase due to the fact that we have entered a new mini ice age, and so that means that the reporting on what this means is going to contrast the typical blame of everything on human-caused climate change.
The fact with man-made global warming is that it was never true. It has burdened the general public with the climate insight of an infant at the expense of preparing the public for the realities of climate change caused by a quiescent Sun.
And, as forecast by your friendly astromet - over a decade ago - for this time now in 2022...
www.severe-weather.eu/long-range-2/enso-weather-la-nina-update-cold-season-influence-usa-europe-fa/
