Comments on: Walker circulation and ENSO http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/ The Power of Numeracy Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:57:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ###1998 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX### $2300 - Mitsubishi Eclipse Parts http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-1924 ###1998 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX### $2300 - Mitsubishi Eclipse Parts Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:53:15 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-1924 [...] Niche Modeling » Walker circulation and ENSO [...] [...] Niche Modeling » Walker circulation and ENSO [...]

]]> By: cohenite http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-1925 cohenite Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:22:30 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-1925 Chicken or egg; solar or ENSO; I thought this was interesting and resolved the 'which comes first' issue;Carl Wolk (12:16:22) : Also note that the rises in temperature in 1976, 86/7, and 97/8 preceded the rises in solar activityCarl's comment is from the Scafetta thread at WUWT and seems to suggest to this bemused mind that the ENSO starts the warming; but then this;"Stephen Wilde (12:21:26) : It is necessary to attribute sufficient modulating effects to the filtering of the TSI signal through the oceans.It is necessary to recognise that all the events in the air including cloudiness and albedo changes are a consequence of changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans and not themselves a cause of climate change whether or not changes in cosmic ray quantities have some effect on overall cloudiness.The Svensmark theory might have a modulating effect on the primary effect on climate initiated by the oceans but does not in itself initiate anything. The absence of a 30/60 year periodicity in cosmic ray quantities is evidence of that. If Svensmark were right we would see an 11 year periodicity in oceanic phase changes but we do not.It needs to be appreciated that changes in the radiative balance of the oceans is a combination of long term solar changes and shorter term internal oceanic changes. Consequently very small changes in solar input can build up over several solar cycles (usually about 3) to enable a phase shift in the oceans to reveal that in the intervening period there has been a small background trend (the ’stepped’) effect. Whilst there is an upward solar background trend the steps will be slightly raised from the end of one positive phase to the beginning of the next positive phase at approximately 30 year intervals The opposite for a downward solar background trend."I guess the main point is that CO2 climate sensitivity is being squeezed down to inconsequence. Chicken or egg; solar or ENSO; I thought this was interesting and resolved the 'which comes first' issue;Carl Wolk (12:16:22) : Also note that the rises in temperature in 1976, 86/7, and 97/8 preceded the rises in solar activityCarl's comment is from the Scafetta thread at WUWT and seems to suggest to this bemused mind that the ENSO starts the warming; but then this;”Stephen Wilde (12:21:26) : It is necessary to attribute sufficient modulating effects to the filtering of the TSI signal through the oceans.It is necessary to recognise that all the events in the air including cloudiness and albedo changes are a consequence of changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans and not themselves a cause of climate change whether or not changes in cosmic ray quantities have some effect on overall cloudiness.The Svensmark theory might have a modulating effect on the primary effect on climate initiated by the oceans but does not in itself initiate anything. The absence of a 30/60 year periodicity in cosmic ray quantities is evidence of that. If Svensmark were right we would see an 11 year periodicity in oceanic phase changes but we do not.It needs to be appreciated that changes in the radiative balance of the oceans is a combination of long term solar changes and shorter term internal oceanic changes. Consequently very small changes in solar input can build up over several solar cycles (usually about 3) to enable a phase shift in the oceans to reveal that in the intervening period there has been a small background trend (the ’stepped’) effect. Whilst there is an upward solar background trend the steps will be slightly raised from the end of one positive phase to the beginning of the next positive phase at approximately 30 year intervals The opposite for a downward solar background trend.”I guess the main point is that CO2 climate sensitivity is being squeezed down to inconsequence.

]]> By: cohenite http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-1923 cohenite Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:22:30 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-1923 Chicken or egg; solar or ENSO; I thought this was interesting and resolved the 'which comes first' issue;Carl Wolk (12:16:22) : Also note that the rises in temperature in 1976, 86/7, and 97/8 preceded the rises in solar activityCarl's comment is from the Scafetta thread at WUWT and seems to suggest to this bemused mind that the ENSO starts the warming; but then this;"Stephen Wilde (12:21:26) : It is necessary to attribute sufficient modulating effects to the filtering of the TSI signal through the oceans.It is necessary to recognise that all the events in the air including cloudiness and albedo changes are a consequence of changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans and not themselves a cause of climate change whether or not changes in cosmic ray quantities have some effect on overall cloudiness.The Svensmark theory might have a modulating effect on the primary effect on climate initiated by the oceans but does not in itself initiate anything. The absence of a 30/60 year periodicity in cosmic ray quantities is evidence of that. If Svensmark were right we would see an 11 year periodicity in oceanic phase changes but we do not.It needs to be appreciated that changes in the radiative balance of the oceans is a combination of long term solar changes and shorter term internal oceanic changes. Consequently very small changes in solar input can build up over several solar cycles (usually about 3) to enable a phase shift in the oceans to reveal that in the intervening period there has been a small background trend (the ’stepped’) effect. Whilst there is an upward solar background trend the steps will be slightly raised from the end of one positive phase to the beginning of the next positive phase at approximately 30 year intervals The opposite for a downward solar background trend."I guess the main point is that CO2 climate sensitivity is being squeezed down to inconsequence. Chicken or egg; solar or ENSO; I thought this was interesting and resolved the 'which comes first' issue;Carl Wolk (12:16:22) : Also note that the rises in temperature in 1976, 86/7, and 97/8 preceded the rises in solar activityCarl's comment is from the Scafetta thread at WUWT and seems to suggest to this bemused mind that the ENSO starts the warming; but then this;”Stephen Wilde (12:21:26) : It is necessary to attribute sufficient modulating effects to the filtering of the TSI signal through the oceans.It is necessary to recognise that all the events in the air including cloudiness and albedo changes are a consequence of changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans and not themselves a cause of climate change whether or not changes in cosmic ray quantities have some effect on overall cloudiness.The Svensmark theory might have a modulating effect on the primary effect on climate initiated by the oceans but does not in itself initiate anything. The absence of a 30/60 year periodicity in cosmic ray quantities is evidence of that. If Svensmark were right we would see an 11 year periodicity in oceanic phase changes but we do not.It needs to be appreciated that changes in the radiative balance of the oceans is a combination of long term solar changes and shorter term internal oceanic changes. Consequently very small changes in solar input can build up over several solar cycles (usually about 3) to enable a phase shift in the oceans to reveal that in the intervening period there has been a small background trend (the ’stepped’) effect. Whilst there is an upward solar background trend the steps will be slightly raised from the end of one positive phase to the beginning of the next positive phase at approximately 30 year intervals The opposite for a downward solar background trend.”I guess the main point is that CO2 climate sensitivity is being squeezed down to inconsequence.

]]> By: Anonymous http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-11717 Anonymous Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:22:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-11717 Chicken or egg; solar or ENSO; I thought this was interesting and resolved the 'which comes first' issue; Carl Wolk (12:16:22) : Also note that the rises in temperature in 1976, 86/7, and 97/8 preceded the rises in solar activity Carl's comment is from the Scafetta thread at WUWT and seems to suggest to this bemused mind that the ENSO starts the warming; but then this; "Stephen Wilde (12:21:26) : It is necessary to attribute sufficient modulating effects to the filtering of the TSI signal through the oceans. It is necessary to recognise that all the events in the air including cloudiness and albedo changes are a consequence of changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans and not themselves a cause of climate change whether or not changes in cosmic ray quantities have some effect on overall cloudiness. The Svensmark theory might have a modulating effect on the primary effect on climate initiated by the oceans but does not in itself initiate anything. The absence of a 30/60 year periodicity in cosmic ray quantities is evidence of that. If Svensmark were right we would see an 11 year periodicity in oceanic phase changes but we do not. It needs to be appreciated that changes in the radiative balance of the oceans is a combination of long term solar changes and shorter term internal oceanic changes. Consequently very small changes in solar input can build up over several solar cycles (usually about 3) to enable a phase shift in the oceans to reveal that in the intervening period there has been a small background trend (the ’stepped’) effect. Whilst there is an upward solar background trend the steps will be slightly raised from the end of one positive phase to the beginning of the next positive phase at approximately 30 year intervals The opposite for a downward solar background trend." I guess the main point is that CO2 climate sensitivity is being squeezed down to inconsequence. Chicken or egg; solar or ENSO; I thought this was interesting and resolved the ‘which comes first’ issue;

Carl Wolk (12:16:22) :

Also note that the rises in temperature in 1976, 86/7, and 97/8 preceded the rises in solar activity

Carl’s comment is from the Scafetta thread at WUWT and seems to suggest to this bemused mind that the ENSO starts the warming; but then this;

“Stephen Wilde (12:21:26) :

It is necessary to attribute sufficient modulating effects to the filtering of the TSI signal through the oceans.

It is necessary to recognise that all the events in the air including cloudiness and albedo changes are a consequence of changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans and not themselves a cause of climate change whether or not changes in cosmic ray quantities have some effect on overall cloudiness.

The Svensmark theory might have a modulating effect on the primary effect on climate initiated by the oceans but does not in itself initiate anything. The absence of a 30/60 year periodicity in cosmic ray quantities is evidence of that. If Svensmark were right we would see an 11 year periodicity in oceanic phase changes but we do not.

It needs to be appreciated that changes in the radiative balance of the oceans is a combination of long term solar changes and shorter term internal oceanic changes. Consequently very small changes in solar input can build up over several solar cycles (usually about 3) to enable a phase shift in the oceans to reveal that in the intervening period there has been a small background trend (the ’stepped’) effect.

Whilst there is an upward solar background trend the steps will be slightly raised from the end of one positive phase to the beginning of the next positive phase at approximately 30 year intervals

The opposite for a downward solar background trend.”

I guess the main point is that CO2 climate sensitivity is being squeezed down to inconsequence.

]]> By: davids99us http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-1922 davids99us Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:55:35 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-1922 Carl, Yes I saw it thanks, since you are on my Google Reader list, butI am happy for you to bring it to the attention of my readers. Iparticularly like:"You’d think that after $79 billion dollars of government-fundedresearch just in the United States, someone would have bothered todetrend sea level data to discover that ENSO is radiative."Do you think the issue of ENSO radiative vs non-radiative is major.Do you have references. I know that Douglass has just published onthis.Cheers Carl, Yes I saw it thanks, since you are on my Google Reader list, butI am happy for you to bring it to the attention of my readers. Iparticularly like:”You’d think that after $79 billion dollars of government-fundedresearch just in the United States, someone would have bothered todetrend sea level data to discover that ENSO is radiative.”Do you think the issue of ENSO radiative vs non-radiative is major.Do you have references. I know that Douglass has just published onthis.Cheers

]]> By: Anonymous http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-11714 Anonymous Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:55:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-11714 Carl, Yes I saw it thanks, since you are on my Google Reader list, but I am happy for you to bring it to the attention of my readers. I particularly like: "You’d think that after $79 billion dollars of government-funded research just in the United States, someone would have bothered to detrend sea level data to discover that ENSO is radiative." Do you think the issue of ENSO radiative vs non-radiative is major. Do you have references. I know that Douglass has just published on this. Cheers Carl, Yes I saw it thanks, since you are on my Google Reader list, but
I am happy for you to bring it to the attention of my readers. I
particularly like:

“You’d think that after $79 billion dollars of government-funded
research just in the United States, someone would have bothered to
detrend sea level data to discover that ENSO is radiative.”

Do you think the issue of ENSO radiative vs non-radiative is major.
Do you have references. I know that Douglass has just published on
this.

Cheers

]]> By: Carl Wolk http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-1921 Carl Wolk Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:11:50 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-1921 Hi David, Since you've been publishing pieces about the cumulative, long-term effect of ENSO, I thought you'd be interested in my new post. This is the evidence I've been looking for to finally prove ENSO is radiative.<a href="http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/sea-level-data-exposes-el-ninos-secret/" rel="nofollow">http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/...</a> Hi David, Since you've been publishing pieces about the cumulative, long-term effect of ENSO, I thought you'd be interested in my new post. This is the evidence I've been looking for to finally prove ENSO is radiative.http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/…

]]> By: Carl Wolk http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-11709 Carl Wolk Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:11:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-11709 Hi David, Since you've been publishing pieces about the cumulative, long-term effect of ENSO, I thought you'd be interested in my new post. This is the evidence I've been looking for to finally prove ENSO is radiative. http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/sea-level-data-exposes-el-ninos-secret/ Hi David, Since you’ve been publishing pieces about the cumulative, long-term effect of ENSO, I thought you’d be interested in my new post. This is the evidence I’ve been looking for to finally prove ENSO is radiative.
http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/sea-level-data-exposes-el-ninos-secret/

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-1920 Bob Tisdale Sun, 16 Aug 2009 09:42:06 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-1920 Clarification: But I was suggesting that the multidecadal rise and fall in the Southern Ocean SST anomalies, which preceded the ‘period of unprecedented El Nino dominance’, were responsible for the extra strength of the significant El Nino events that began with the 1972/73 El Nino.A question that probably belongs on an earlier thread. Could the 1972/73 El Nino have been responsible for the Pacific Climate Shift of 1976? It was a significant El Nino with a two-year La Nina to "stabilize" things. That La Nina ended in 1976 (coincidentally) and was followed by two lesser (secondary?) El Nino events in 1976/77 and 1977/78. In 1974, Fuego (not too large with a DVI of 200) erupted, which would have added slightly to the impact of the La Ninas. The timing looks right.Regards Clarification: But I was suggesting that the multidecadal rise and fall in the Southern Ocean SST anomalies, which preceded the ‘period of unprecedented El Nino dominance’, were responsible for the extra strength of the significant El Nino events that began with the 1972/73 El Nino.A question that probably belongs on an earlier thread. Could the 1972/73 El Nino have been responsible for the Pacific Climate Shift of 1976? It was a significant El Nino with a two-year La Nina to “stabilize” things. That La Nina ended in 1976 (coincidentally) and was followed by two lesser (secondary?) El Nino events in 1976/77 and 1977/78. In 1974, Fuego (not too large with a DVI of 200) erupted, which would have added slightly to the impact of the La Ninas. The timing looks right.Regards

]]> By: Bob Tisdale http://landshape.org/enm/walker-circulation-and-enso/#comment-11693 Bob Tisdale Sun, 16 Aug 2009 09:42:00 +0000 http://landshape.org/enm/?p=2893#comment-11693 Clarification: But I was suggesting that the multidecadal rise and fall in the Southern Ocean SST anomalies, which preceded the ‘period of unprecedented El Nino dominance’, were responsible for the extra strength of the significant El Nino events that began with the 1972/73 El Nino. A question that probably belongs on an earlier thread. Could the 1972/73 El Nino have been responsible for the Pacific Climate Shift of 1976? It was a significant El Nino with a two-year La Nina to "stabilize" things. That La Nina ended in 1976 (coincidentally) and was followed by two lesser (secondary?) El Nino events in 1976/77 and 1977/78. In 1974, Fuego (not too large with a DVI of 200) erupted, which would have added slightly to the impact of the La Ninas. The timing looks right. Regards Clarification: But I was suggesting that the multidecadal rise and fall in the Southern Ocean SST anomalies, which preceded the ‘period of unprecedented El Nino dominance’, were responsible for the extra strength of the significant El Nino events that began with the 1972/73 El Nino.

A question that probably belongs on an earlier thread. Could the 1972/73 El Nino have been responsible for the Pacific Climate Shift of 1976? It was a significant El Nino with a two-year La Nina to “stabilize” things. That La Nina ended in 1976 (coincidentally) and was followed by two lesser (secondary?) El Nino events in 1976/77 and 1977/78. In 1974, Fuego (not too large with a DVI of 200) erupted, which would have added slightly to the impact of the La Ninas.

The timing looks right.

Regards

]]>