ENSO is not a ‘strength’ Joe, it is a fallacy!
I don’t know Don. I’m thinking that I can see an ENSO signal in this graph.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Bill on Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Gamecock on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Gamecock on “pushing nature past its limits”
- William on Mission Accomplished
- Gordon Vigurs on Mission Accomplished
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
I read Don Gaddes comment and I am always sceptical of people who claim to be 100% sure of their position when so little is actually well understood in this research field. It reminds me of the James Hansens of this world who are also 100 (OK, 99) percent sure, but then turn out to be serially wrong.
What exactly is the ENSO signal you see Steven – and where was it ‘predicted’?
97% of Climate Scientists (ENSO and AGW,) are 100% ‘sure’ Will. I have put my forecast and method on the line. It is up to you, Joe and others to read it,(or not) and return with any critique.
Dont say I didnt try.
When the earths temps respond almost directly ( with a 6 month lag ) to the ups and downs of the enso, then it seems to me that there is nothing I can do, or for that matter anyone, for you.
There is a direct physical response to the warming and cooling of the pacific tropical areas that can be seen in relation to the entire planetary circulation. How someone can deny the physical aspects of the rise and fall of such warm, energy laden water, and then the inherent response globally, is beyond me.
But I tried and now I must let you continue on your quixotic quest. Godspeed
Try comparing this with this.
I don’t know which is the chicken and which the egg but as far as I know the IPCC ignores the connection completely.
Where’s YOUR forecast Joe? What is the ‘direct physical response’ you speak of? Why is it firstly only ‘almost directly’? Why is it restricted to the ‘warming and cooling of the Pacific tropical areas’? Why the 6 month ‘lag’?
Every body of water on the Planet (including the puddle at the end of the driveway,) circulates with different temperature values, it’s called ‘Convection’. In case you hadn’t noticed Joe, the oceans are all joined together. We wont mention ‘axial spin’ and ‘gravitational pull’.
No Joe, you didn’t try, You haven’t tried – and you have nothing to try with!
I have offered you my forecast Joe, (and much more besides) obviously you are too engrossed in your own limited ‘imposed’ ENSO group-think, to even contemplate a different point of view.
My ‘Quixotic Quest’ continues to include the ENSO/University of East Anglia windmill Joe – and all the charlatans holed up inside.
Don, seriously you have no idea what you are talking about, and to claim our ideas as “group-think” just shows you can not prove how ENSO doesn’t effect climate, without resorting to personal attacks. Where’s Joe’s forecast? Where’s YOUR FORECAST? I haven’t seen you predicting 30 years in advance, and if you do have predictions out that far, don’t be afraid to share. You might want to try weatherbell.com, I’m sure you’ll see Joe’s forecast. How can you possibly think your ‘wet/dry cycles” are valid? The change in energy output from the sun is .1% over a solar cycle, and over a period of months, it;s WAY SMALLER. Over the short term, minute changes in the sun’s energy will have change on the climate in the short term as oceanic cycles should dominate. It makes perfect sense. The sun’s energy output stays relatively consistent. and the oceans cover more surface and have 1000x the energy of the atmosphere, meaning most of the sun’s energy that reaches the surface is absorbed by the oceans. The tropics have the highest amount of heat energy of any climate zone, so if we put that all together we are looking for the tropical oceans, and when you put that with the largest ocean being the pacific, you get the ENSO index, the warm tropical oceans of the pacific near the equator.
Also throw in there the Walker circulation and the Southern Oscillation Index