- Joined
- 21 June 2009
- Posts
- 5,880
- Reactions
- 14
rederob, I don't think you have any brain at all.
oopsEl Nina
Is that opposite to La Nino ?
...Richard Branson, the British entrepreneur, credits Lovelock with inspiring him to pledge billions of dollars to fight global warming. "Jim is a brilliant scientist who has been right about many things in the past," Branson says. "If he's feeling gloomy about the future, it's important for mankind to pay attention."
Mind you, you have to smile to yourself when you hear Branson and Lovelock mentioned in the same sentence
So yeah. Name calling can have a devastating effect. Ner ner ne' ner ner.
La Niña translates from Spanish as "the girl-child". The term "La Niña" has recently become the conventional meteorological label for the opposite of the better known El Niño. .............
A La Niña event is sometimes called an anti-ENSO (anti-El Niño-Southern Oscillation) event.
The name ‘El Niño’ originally was given to a change in the coastal current (usually flowing from south to north) near the Peruvian coast during anos de abundancia. Paita sailors who used to sail north-south direction along the coast called the counter-current ‘El Niño’, after the Child Jesus because it had a tendency to appear soon after Christmas (the reason for this seasonality is not yet fully understood, ...
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/05/el-nino-global-warming/As an aside, it's amusing to note that in some early papers, the opposite of El Niño was described as the 'anti-El Niño' but given the religious connotations described above, this usage did not get a lot of support
Frequency and severity [of El Niño] are as a result of increased CO2?
Do you have a cite if I've assumed correctly.
El Niño events tend to recur every 3-8 years. The last El Niño as of today was in 1997-98, and was the strongest or second strongest (after 1982-83, depending on what you look at) event observed in modern times. The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) in Australia provides an Internet page on ENSO with a nice ENSO wrap-up for up-dated information.
How will the El Niño phenomenon be affected by a global warming?
This is what the Dutch Meteorological Institute (KNMI) and the Max-Planck Institute (Germany), Matt Collins of Univ. Reading (U.K.) think. There is even a short entry about global warming and ENSO in Wikipedia. The brevity of this entry may reflect the fact that the question about how ENSO will respond to a global warming is still not settled. However, it seems that one common trait among some climate models is the indication that a global warming may result in a more a general El Niño-type average state (eg. Collins et al. 2005, Climate Dynamics, 24, 89-104. 19 and here).
Analysis by Collins of climate model simulations indicated that increased CO2 may result in ENSO events becoming larger in amplitude and more frequent than under present conditions. This conclusion was based on version 2 of the Hadley Centre Coupled Model (HadCM2). However, in a subsequent analysis based on version 3 of the Hadley Model (HadCM3), Collins found that he could not detect a change in magnitude or frequency of ENSO as greenhouse gases increased, thus contradicting the results of his earlier study. These differences highlight the level of uncertainty associated with ENSO and global warming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENSO
But El Niño's effects on weather vary with each event, and ENSO's intensity or frequency may change as a result of global warming. Research suggests that treating ocean warming which occurs in the eastern tropical Pacific separately from that of the central tropical Pacific may help explain some of these variations
ENSO Wrap-Up
A regular commentary on the El Niño-Southern Oscillation
About El Niño & La Niña
CURRENT STATUS as at 8th July 2009
Summary: Strong indicators of El Niño persist
Indicators suggest an El Niño event is developing across the Pacific Basin. Conditions have reached a point that, should they persist at such levels through the remainder of the southern winter and into spring, 2009 will be considered an El Niño year.
Leading climate models indicate that warming of the Pacific will continue for the next few seasons, with very little chance of the current development stalling or reversing.
Continuing El Niño signals include central Pacific Ocean surface temperatures around 1 °C above average, and supporting sub-surface temperatures up to 4 °C warmer than normal. Trade winds remain weaker than average, and there is an emerging signal of enhanced cloudiness near the date-line
Conversely, the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) rose over the past week to near zero. However, this would appear to be a response to local weather conditions near Darwin and Tahiti, rather than a long-term climate signal, and hence the SOI is likely to fall again in the weeks ahead.
El Niño events are usually (but not always) associated with below normal rainfall in the second half of the year across large parts of southern and inland eastern Australia.
After many weeks of positive values, the most recent value of the Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD), as measured by the Dipole Mode Index (DMI), was slightly negative [ = wetter]. In the past, positive IOD values have been associated with drier conditions through south east Australia in winter and spring.
:topic
sheesh looking back at that poll end of last year - 28% don't even believe it's getting warmer!! - wow. Hoostn we have a problem
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13752&highlight=enso
a) it was a single year of high value which coincided with El Nina - and of course el Nina's are part and parcel of the problem of GW/CC in any case i.e. their frequency and severity are all due to GW - but moving on
It's like saying "it's really hot in this room, but that's nothing to do with the weather - it's because the airconditioner burnt out due to yesterday's high temperature" sorta thing - if you get my drift.
However, in a subsequent analysis based on version 3 of the Hadley Model (HadCM3), Collins found that he could not detect a change in magnitude or frequency of ENSO as greenhouse gases increased, thus contradicting the results of his earlier study. These differences highlight the level of uncertainty associated with ENSO and global warming.
Something tells me i'd have to do a lot more than that for you to be able to make sense out of anything
It's like saying "it's really hot in this room, but that's nothing to do with the weather - it's because the airconditioner burnt out due to yesterday's high temperature" sorta thing - if you get my drift.
You should try and eliminate these absolute throw-away comments
ok - you didn't get my drift.
I'll try rephrasing it.
GW includes sea temperature effects
ENSO is all about sea temp effects
wowo - maybe they're related?
I get the feeling you've had a night on the turps.
just relax calliope, and let it all go over your head... less stressful for you.
Saying "maybe they're related" and "their frequency and severity are all due to GW" are two very different statements. That's my drift.ok - you didn't get my drift.
I'll try rephrasing it.
GW includes sea temperature effects
ENSO is all about sea temp effects
wowo - maybe they're related?
That applies to a large portion of what is said by both sides of this argument.The lack of scientific reasoning on that site is a worry - that's the problem i have with all the sceptics, never enough reasoning and study involved in their arguments - half of it's put together by people with very little scientific background and the other half comes from people with vested interests.
They leave out too much very important information.
OK Even if I accept that one - (although there were two models, one shows relation, one is inconclusive - never mind , we move on) .. but does it change the conclusion?Saying "maybe they're related" and "their frequency and severity are all due to GW" are two very different statements. That's my drift.
One last comment about the assertion (by Bolt and others) that the world has been cooling since 1998.
a) it was a single year of high value which coincided with El Nina - and of course el Nina's are part and parcel of the problem of GW/CC in any case i.e. their frequency and severity are all due to GW - but moving on
b) were the results averaged it would show the continued upward trend, especially when the lesser solar activity was deducted to show the continuning increasing contribution of CO2
c) 1998 was an "outlier" - i.e. a statistical blip - a bit like the diving judges when they ignore the top and mottom arks and average the rest.
d) as they also say, there are liars, outliers, and out-an-out liers.
PS try telling your Uni maths professor that that you'd like to do a PhD on the subject, and your first comment was that you'd looked at the data, and it's clear that
a) the world has generally been cooling since 1998 (based on one spike), and
b) that proves that the ghg contribution in particular is a furphy
I'm guessing you'd be laughed out of the faculty.
Hell, half the time the same people who say a) is true ...
also agree that b) is currently influenced by a slow start to the next possibly milder 11-12 yearly solar cycle
out·li·er ... A value far from most others in a set of data.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?