When the El Nino fades....

[IanC]

back to the OP.

climate scientists are claiming that this latest super El Nino is only about 10% responsible for the spike in 2015 temps, which are continuing into 2016.

there are three possibilities. temps stay at this record height, temps drop slightly, or temps drop dramatically.

the first is unlikely because the warm water fuelling the El Nino is not inexhaustible. the flush of extra water vapour from evaporation is what warms the atmosphere, as everyone should know.

the second case is more interesting. could this latest super El Nino cause a step jump like the 1998 El Nino? a drop afterwards but not all the way down to the previous average. perhaps.

or the third case, where the following La Nina drops the temps back down to the previous average, or even lower.


the one thing I am sure of is that the climate scientists, at least in the media, will blame most or all of the temperature drop on La Nina. unlike the 10% 'assist' given to the ongoing El Nino.

 

[Crick]

Number 2, that the El Nino-specific warming will end but that the world will continue to warm (as it did after 1998) is the likeliest.

 

[Crick]

California seems finally to be awash with rain

West Coast Awash in Water for First Time in a Long While

 

[Crick]

crick demanded that I produce pristine global data.

I "demanded" nothing. I suggested that you post and discuss global data rather than data produced from 2% of the globe's surface.

 

[Old Rocks]

back to the OP.

climate scientists are claiming that this latest super El Nino is only about 10% responsible for the spike in 2015 temps, which are continuing into 2016.

there are three possibilities. temps stay at this record height, temps drop slightly, or temps drop dramatically.

the first is unlikely because the warm water fuelling the El Nino is not inexhaustible. the flush of extra water vapour from evaporation is what warms the atmosphere, as everyone should know.

the second case is more interesting. could this latest super El Nino cause a step jump like the 1998 El Nino? a drop afterwards but not all the way down to the previous average. perhaps.

or the third case, where the following La Nina drops the temps back down to the previous average, or even lower.


the one thing I am sure of is that the climate scientists, at least in the media, will blame most or all of the temperature drop on La Nina. unlike the 10% 'assist' given to the ongoing El Nino.

One thing I am sure of, Ian. Is that no matter how accurate the scientists forecasts are, and no matter what happens next, you will try to find some way of denying it is actually happening.

We will get another stepwise increase. Down a bit, but average higher than ever before. And at every minor decrease, the deniers will be screaming 'cooling, see I told you, cooling', even when the down is higher than the majority of highs prior to 1998.

 

[IanC]

One thing I am sure of, Ian. Is that no matter how accurate the scientists forecasts are, and no matter what happens next, you will try to find some way of denying it is actually happening.

We will get another stepwise increase. Down a bit, but average higher than ever before. And at every minor decrease, the deniers will be screaming 'cooling, see I told you, cooling', even when the down is higher than the majority of highs prior to 1998.

what, exactly is this 'it' that you say I am always denying?

I have pointed out that climate models have not correctly anticipated the actual warming that has happened. Because predictions are predicated on these model projections I deny most of the predictions of doom given out by the warmers. is this the 'it'?

when have I ever screamed 'cooling'? I have often pointed out that most of the warming in the satellite era was a step jump at the 1998 El Nino, with two plateaus on either side. I must admit that I am very curious to see whether another step jump takes place. it is almost inevitable that a La Nina will follow the El Nino. as usual I will not be making any predictions as to the size or duration of the La Nina but I will predict that climate science will blame all (at least the majority) of the cooling on ENSO, in direct contrast to their claim that recent warming is due to CO2 with only a 'slight assist' from the El Nino.

 

[jc456]

Number 2, that the El Nino-specific warming will end but that the world will continue to warm (as it did after 1998) is the likeliest.

Crick, I had asked previously, do you believe the suns output is in a cooling cycle. If so, how does less LWR create more warming?

 

[jc456]

crick demanded that I produce pristine global data.

I "demanded" nothing. I suggested that you post and discuss global data rather than data produced from 2% of the globe's surface.

Crick, what is the % coverage of the earth surface with temperature stations that are used for the global dataset?

 

[jc456]

back to the OP.

climate scientists are claiming that this latest super El Nino is only about 10% responsible for the spike in 2015 temps, which are continuing into 2016.

there are three possibilities. temps stay at this record height, temps drop slightly, or temps drop dramatically.

the first is unlikely because the warm water fuelling the El Nino is not inexhaustible. the flush of extra water vapour from evaporation is what warms the atmosphere, as everyone should know.

the second case is more interesting. could this latest super El Nino cause a step jump like the 1998 El Nino? a drop afterwards but not all the way down to the previous average. perhaps.

or the third case, where the following La Nina drops the temps back down to the previous average, or even lower.


the one thing I am sure of is that the climate scientists, at least in the media, will blame most or all of the temperature drop on La Nina. unlike the 10% 'assist' given to the ongoing El Nino.

One thing I am sure of, Ian. Is that no matter how accurate the scientists forecasts are, and no matter what happens next, you will try to find some way of denying it is actually happening.

We will get another stepwise increase. Down a bit, but average higher than ever before. And at every minor decrease, the deniers will be screaming 'cooling, see I told you, cooling', even when the down is higher than the majority of highs prior to 1998.

well we did get that 58 > 62 so we now understand the math.

 

[Crick]

Crick, what is the % coverage of the earth surface with temperature stations that are used for the global dataset?

How much area do you believe is "covered" by a temperature station?

 

[jc456]

Crick, what is the % coverage of the earth surface with temperature stations that are used for the global dataset?

How much area do you believe is "covered" by a temperature station?

What does that have to do with my question?

 

[Crick]

Okay, then. 100%. Spacing varies.

 

[jc456]

Okay, then. 100%. Spacing varies.

Prove it, let's see the stations in the ocean. You know where 85% of the surface is.