|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 6, 2012 7:28:53 GMT 1
Poor nickrr has mistaken the effect for the cause. Personally, I think its the Higgs Boson to blame for the blocking pattern. Or the Ozone Hole. Could be anything really. But not CO2!
Roy Spencer says:
------------
Fluctuations in Arctic Sea Ice may affect weather elsewhere but since these fluctuations have always happened...what's new?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 6, 2012 7:31:11 GMT 1
Let's not forget the Southern Pole jet stream, either! Jet Streams, RevisitedWednesday, September 1, 2010 1:07:19 PM One of my readers has asked a few questions about the jet stream. As I intended to reply with a few general basic principles rather than going into too much detail, and as my posts are generally about simplified general basic principles, I thought that I might as well make a post of my reply. Jet streams are waves (Rossby waves to be more exact) that form at the boundaries of adjacent air masses with significant differences in temperature, such as of the polar region and the warmer air nearer to the equator. The jet stream is characterised by large undulations or meanders, typically three to six in numbers. Heat is transported to polar regions by the atmosphere. Any mechanism that transfers heat from the surface of the Earth to the atmosphere also contributes to the poleward transport of heat. The following diagram shows a cross section of the subtropical and polar jet streams by latitude. I hope the figure (taken from Wikipedia) shows that motion in the upper troposphere is generally polewards. The Earth’s surface is uneven heated. The Hadley, Ferrel, and Polar cells plus the lows and highs are a manifestation of the need for heat to be moved polewards, to compensate for the imbalance between low and high latitudes. My reader asks: “Why does the jet stream on the northern hemisphere come "down" to 30°N, whereas the antarctic jet stream seems content to stay closer to the south pole?” The short, and maybe oversimplistic, answer is the presence of smaller landmasses in the Southern Hemisphere. Sea water has a high thermal coefficient compared with ground and increase less in temperature from solar radiation, furthermore the water will spread the radiation to a depth that is not possible on land. The ocean water temperature will therefore show less variability than land masses. As a result the southern polar jet stream exhibit less day-to-day, and month-to-month, variability due to the presence of much smaller landmasses. Indeed the southern hemisphere polar jet tends to mostly circle the Antarctic. I have tried to illustrate 4 things in the figure above. 1. The larger landmasses on the Northern Hemisphere as compared to the Southern Hemisphere. 2. The southern polar jet stream exhibit less variability. 3. The Antarctic polar jet stream does indeed constantly stay closer to the South Pole. 4. May I also point out that the Jet Streams are nearer to their poles in the summer than in the winter. (When you compare, please note that summer in Antarctica means January - as opposed to the North pole, where summer means July). It was, however, not my intention to show any exact latitudes for the possible extension of the jet stream’s operation area. The weather in Antarctica is really special because of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, which is the only ocean current that flows completely around the globe. This cold current isolates Antartica from any warm current transporting heat southwards. Antarctica with its ice sheet is therefor extremely cold, and this has of course implications for the atmospheric heat transfer. I hope I have also made clear that the meridional exchange of air is not an effect of the jet stream, but that it is the other way round - the jet stream is an effect of the atmospheric meridional heat transfer or, if you wish, exchange of air. And that the temperature at the Earth’s surface has a more or less direct influence on the jet streams (remembering that the jet streams flow at interfaces between cold and warm air, albeit miles above our head). I also ought to mention that when the polar-front jet penetrates to subtropical latitudes (as was the case to the north of Pakistan during the extraordinary rains in Pakistan this year), it may merge with the subtropical jet to form a single band (until they split again). Of course all these atmospheric phenomena are interactive (the jet stream may indeed have a large influence on the local weather), but I hope it helps to see them all as parts of a global heat transfer system (complementary to ocean circulation). my.opera.com/nielsol/blog/jet-streams-revisited
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Jul 6, 2012 20:31:15 GMT 1
Please explain this comment. The paper quoted says that higher temperatures in the Arctic have led to increased occurrence of extreme weather. Are you saying that the extreme weather has caused the rising temperatures in the Arctic?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jul 6, 2012 21:23:16 GMT 1
That'll be the high temperature that caused vicious icing in Arctic waters this previous winter? The high temperature that brought the ice pack further south than living memory? The high temperature that led to brutally low sea temperature in Northern Scotland? The high temperature that killed hundereds of thousands of old and infirm in their beds? Or is it the high temperatures shown in the "gridded", "homogenised" and "smoothed" data from utterly discredited, politicised "scientists"? Twat.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 6, 2012 22:44:09 GMT 1
"Enhanced arctic warming", if it exists, is caused by enhanced northwards transport of equatorial warming via ocean and atmospheric currents, isn't it? Nothing to do with CO2.
If the varying state of the Arctic has an effect on weather patterns elsewhere, so what? But as stu has pointed out the red Arctic blobs on temperature anomaly maps do not represent reality. Take them with a pinch of salt!
"Extreme" is an odd word, anyway, to use to describe weather. Extremes are pretty "normal", actually. The annual monsoon is "extreme". Tornadoes, which affect the US midwest EVERY year are "extreme". El Nino is "extreme" Cyclones and tropical storms are "extreme" but nevertheless happen with almost monotonous regularity in certain regions. The melting and refreezing of the Arctic EVERY year is somewhat "extreme", don't you agree? Sandstorms which regularly sweep across deserts are "extreme". The entire continent of Antarctica is "extreme" all of the time, too, as is the SOuthern Ocean.
There is no evidence whatsoever that CO2 is the cause of the blocking pattern of the jet stream currently causing stasis in several parts of the Northern hemisphere - hot in one place, cold in another, wet another. To ascribe the reason to the atmosphere containing "extra energy" courtesy of the CO2 molecule is on a par with other "new age" quackery to which the gullible are irresistibly drawn.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Jul 6, 2012 22:48:12 GMT 1
"Are you saying that the extreme weather has caused the rising temperatures in the Arctic?" Not me, but 'they' are. Or the extreme temps have caused them to look warmer in comparison. Depends how it's looked at. Also Sun flares can cause weather pattern changes, as here ... www.youtube.com/watch?v=BASj70_oReU&feature=player_detailpage#t=23s
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 6, 2012 23:33:19 GMT 1
From Dr Roy SPencer, satellite temperature measurement expert June 2012 U.S. Temperatures: Not That RemarkableJuly 6th, 2012 I know that many journalists who lived through the recent heat wave in the East think the event somehow validates global warming theory, but I’m sorry: It’s summer. Heat waves happen. Sure, many high temperature records were broken, but records are always being broken. And the strong thunderstorms that caused widespread power outages? Ditto. Regarding the “thousands” of broken records, there are not that many high-quality weather observing stations that (1) operated since the record warm years in the 1930s, and (2) have not been influenced by urban heat island effects, so it’s not at all obvious that the heat wave was unprecedented. Even if it was the worst in the last century for the Eastern U.S. (before which we can’t really say anything), there is no way to know if it was mostly human-caused or natural, anyway. “But, Roy, the heat wave is consistent with climate model predictions!”. Yeah, well, it’s also consistent with natural weather variability. So, take your pick. For the whole U.S. in June, average temperatures were not that remarkable. Here are the last 40 years from my population-adjusted surface temperature dataset, and NOAA’s USHCN (v2) dataset (both based upon 5 deg lat/lon grid averages; click for large version): Certainly the U.S drought conditions cannot compare to the 1930s. I really tire of the media frenzy which occurs when disaster strikes…I’ve stopped answering media inquiries. Mother Nature is dangerous, folks. And with the internet and cell phones, now every time there is a severe weather event, everyone in the world knows about it within the hour. In the 1800s, it might be months before one part of the country found out about disaster in another part of the country. Sheesh.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 7, 2012 12:45:43 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Jul 8, 2012 17:03:00 GMT 1
I note that you haven't explained this comment yet.
This is pathetic (although not surprising coming from Roy Spencer). Even if you don't agree with the theory of AGW surely you realize that it doesn't necessarily mean that everywhere will get warmer? This is really basic stuff. If you want to criticize AGW I suggest that you at least get a handle on the basics of what it says.
No, the evidence strongly suggests that it is caused by increased CO2. The feedback effects (such as increased albedo) have enhanced this which is why the Arctic has warmed more than any other part of the planet.
The jet streams are created by the movement of warm air from the tropics to the Arctic. However, as the Arctic has warmed there is a smaller temperature gradient and so the jet stream is weaker, which in turn means it starts to meander more and cause blocking patterns which result in longer periods of more extreme weather.
Then why did you use it in the title of this thread?
Actually there is - see the paper I referred to earlier in the thread. There's plenty more along those lines if you can be bothered to look.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Jul 8, 2012 17:05:33 GMT 1
rsmith7
Nice - I see you've lost none of the old wit and charm!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 9, 2012 12:57:16 GMT 1
The change in temperature gradient between the equator and the poles is also supposed by some to account for the relative dearth of Northern hemisphere hurricanes, too.
But this does not implicate CO2 either, just a change in temperature!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 9, 2012 16:33:40 GMT 1
Cold Snap Claims 14 Lives In Chile…Agricultural Emergency In Argentina…Tasmania Coldest Temperature In 30 Years…By P Gosselin on 9. Juli 2012 notrickszone.com/2012/07/09/cold-snap-claims14-lives-in-chile-agricultural-emergency-in-argentina-tasmania-coldest-temperature-in-30-years/While much of the media’s focus has been on the heat wave hitting the USA, little attention is being paid to the bitter cold gripping South America. It’s another unusually cold winter striking the continent. Last year,hundreds froze to death. The same occurred in the winter of 2010. The English-language I Love Chile news site has a report on the cold now gripping vast parts of South America. At least 14 people have died in Chile due to cold over the past few days. According to I Love Chile: Overall, eight people have died due to cold weather in Santiago, in addition to six others who perished in other the Central and Southern regions of the country. The cold front has caused temperatures throughout Chile to drop well below freezing. Some parts of Santiago reported temperatures as low as -4 degrees Celsius, causing homeless residents throughout the capital to face the cold without proper accommodations.” According to www.news.de here, the cold is also gripping Bolivia and Peru, where the mercury has dropped to -23°C. The low temperatures will continue in the days ahead as cold is expected to grip much of South America for the next week, see chart above. Last week in Argentina, serious frosts led to a declaration of an agricultural emergency and disaster, read here. globalfreeze.wordpress.com/2012/06/30/argentina-serious-frosts-have-led-to-a-declaration-of-agricultural-emergency-and-disaster/The extreme cold is not isolated to South America. In Tasmania night-time temperatures in the South and Liawenee posted the coldest June day in almost 30 years. “Temperatures in some areas fell to almost 10 degrees below average between June 20 and June 28. Fingal and Ross had their coldest June night in 15 years on June 27 with bone-chilling lows of -6.7C and -6.5C recorded respectively.” Hat-tip: globalfreeze.wordpress.com/.
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Jul 10, 2012 19:23:11 GMT 1
I think that you might have mistaken the effect for the cause? Increased CO2 has led to the higher temperatures in the Arctic.
Apart from that I note that you haven't addressed any of the other points in my previous post. Presumably that's because you can't find any counter-evidence? Maybe it's time for you to think the unthinkable - there might be something in this climate change stuff!
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jul 10, 2012 21:12:32 GMT 1
Yes, it's been exposed as a scam and doesn't warrant any more of my time.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Jul 10, 2012 23:37:09 GMT 1
"there might be something in this climate change stuff! "
The climate does change but not necessarily for reason of CO2 increase.
|
|