Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

El Niño Is Back, Bringing Droughts, Floods, Crop Failures And Social Unrest


Recommended Posts

What like your RC buddy Rahmsdorf did?

Hmmm. Evidence?

No, didn't think so. I know the CA 'way' is to offer as little as possible as snarkily as possible.. but if you want to say something, say it properly. If you are making an accusation of incompetence or fraud, then make it properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunspots and temperature.

From the Reference Frame.

I would note that that is in fact a graph of cosmic rays against a very odd graph of temperature, with no references.

Not sunspots.

And the time scale, you may note, is approxamately six orders of magnitude bigger than the one you are suggesting for sunspot effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would note that that is in fact a graph of cosmic rays against a very odd graph of temperature, with no references.

Not sunspots.

And the time scale, you may note, is approxamately six orders of magnitude bigger than the one you are suggesting for sunspot effects.

You ought to know if you are having this debate that cosmic rays increase at times of low sunspot numbers. The correlation has been displayed as you had previously asked - it would have been gracious to acknowledge that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You ought to know if you are having this debate that cosmic rays increase at times of low sunspot numbers. The correlation has been displayed as you had previously asked - it would have been gracious to acknowledge that.

No. First, a single unreferenced graph that contains a temperature record that looks very strange indeed, and then gives a putitive graph of 'cosmic rays' (how did they measure that?) against it does NOT chow a correlation.

Second, we are looking for correlations on human timescales to support your case. Not 10+ millions of years timescales.

Oh, and it's a bit rich to ask people to be gracious after your scattergun accusitions of fraud..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. First, a single unreferenced graph that contains a temperature record that looks very strange indeed, and then gives a putitive graph of 'cosmic rays' (how did they measure that?) against it does NOT chow a correlation.

Second, we are looking for correlations on human timescales to support your case. Not 10+ millions of years timescales.

I told you where the graph was if you wanted to go and learn more.

You didn't specify timeframe in the initial request, so I think you are just being picky now that I have provided some evidence that you don't like. Strange really that we can't have a science discussion without offence being taken over facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. Evidence?

No, didn't think so. I know the CA 'way' is to offer as little as possible as snarkily as possible.. but if you want to say something, say it properly. If you are making an accusation of incompetence or fraud, then make it properly.

Don't I get a chance to respond before being condemned?

:lol:

You are right it wasn't changing of start points (sorry) although it is centred around a single year (1990), but adjusting the average from 11 years to 15 years that Rahmstorf has done. There may be valid reasons, but sticking to 11 years doesn't look as bad as 15 years, so naturally, I am as suspicious as when Haliwide changed their text to "but still prices are 10% higher than 2005, sorry 4, err make that 1991."

For anyone interested, the original post is here - Opportunism And The Modelsand references to RealClimate discussions (you never see it the other way round, but that may be because snarkiness is an obstacle to enlightened debate). Obviously being a scientist yourself, I would be interested in your comments on the underlying statistical strengths or lack thereof in the McIntyre claims (genuinely). There are follow up threads, which often have a teasing element to them, but all in good humour I am sure. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History shows us that at times at times of economic instability it is good to find a scapegoat - the weather and disease are usually top of the list.

So for example if you were expecting a period of bad economic news. you could find a generally insignificant virus and blow its effects out of all proportions, then worry people some more with tales of bad weather and ruined harvests. At least that's what they used to do in centuries past!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History shows us that at times at times of economic instability it is good to find a scapegoat - the weather and disease are usually top of the list.

So for example if you were expecting a period of bad economic news. you could find a generally insignificant virus and blow its effects out of all proportions, then worry people some more with tales of bad weather and ruined harvests. At least that's what they used to do in centuries past!

A fair point but this despicable climate con has been going on for several years now ;)

The link in bobthe~'s post previously to Climate Audit is well worth a read to see the scams and tricks they have been pulling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't I get a chance to respond before being condemned?

:lol:

You are right it wasn't changing of start points (sorry) although it is centred around a single year (1990), but adjusting the average from 11 years to 15 years that Rahmstorf has done. There may be valid reasons, but sticking to 11 years doesn't look as bad as 15 years, so naturally, I am as suspicious as when Haliwide changed their text to "but still prices are 10% higher than 2005, sorry 4, err make that 1991."

11 years is in many ways too short; the 'official' definition of climate as opposed to weather effects is about 30 years. <2 years is certainly weather; 2->10+ or so years will be influenced by ENSO (El Nino etc); you need to be well over 10 years to be certain you are seeing a trend and not a fluctuation. So going from 11 to 15 years should improve the result. Especially as the 11-year smoothing was obviously heavily influenced by the strong La Nina event at the end of the series.

Could have been documented better, but I don't quite see what the huge issue is.

For anyone interested, the original post is here - Opportunism And The Modelsand references to RealClimate discussions (you never see it the other way round, but that may be because snarkiness is an obstacle to enlightened debate). Obviously being a scientist yourself, I would be interested in your comments on the underlying statistical strengths or lack thereof in the McIntyre claims (genuinely). There are follow up threads, which often have a teasing element to them, but all in good humour I am sure. :unsure:

I've visited CA occasionally, but wading through the general conspiracy mongering and vagueness isn't fun - McIntyre is not a good communicator. Generally, if anything he'll find something minor (or irrelevant) and make it into the end of the world; the classic being a minor correction to US-48 temperature data, which you'll frequently find misquoted as World temperature data (see this thread). He isn't keen on straight forward publishing.

In HPC terms, it's a bit like a bear saying:

'House prices fell 2% this month - that's 24% a year'

and then a bull saying '2% a month is only 21.5% a year, so there is no HPC at all'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/c...oe-1766555.html

A new El Niño has begun. The sporadic Pacific Ocean warming, which can disrupt weather patterns across the world, is intensifying, say meteorologists.

So, over the next few months, there may be increased drought in Africa, India and Australia, heavier rainfall in South America and increased extremes in Britain, of warm and cold. It may make 2010 one of the hottest years on record.

The cyclical phenomenon, which happens every two to seven years, is a major determinant of global weather systems. The 1997-98 El Niño combined with global warming to push 1998 into being the world's hottest year, and caused major droughts and catastrophic forest fires in South-east Asia which sent a pall of smoke right across the region.

At present, forecasters do not expect this El Niño to equal that of 1998, but it may be the second-strongest, and concerned groups, from international insurance companies to commodity traders, to aid agencies such as Oxfam, have begun to follow its progress anxiously. Its potential for economic and social impact is considerable.

Professor Chris Folland, of the Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, said: "We are likely to see more global warming than we have seen in the past few years, which have been rather cool. In fact, we are already seeing it."

El Niño is a periodic warming of the normally cold waters of the eastern tropical Pacific, the ocean region westwards out from South America along the line of the equator. Since the Pacific is a heat reservoir which drives wind patterns around the world, the change in its temperature alters global weather. An El Niño is defined by ocean surface temperatures rising by more than 0.5C above the average.

This El Niño is well beyond that, says the Climate Prediction Center of the US National Weather Service. "Sea surface temperatures remain +0.5 to +1.5 above average across much of the equatorial Pacific Ocean," the centre reported last week. "Observations and dynamical model forecasts indicate El Niño conditions will continue to intensify and are expected to last through the northern hemisphere winter of 2009-10."

The last El Niño was in 2006-07 and, at its peak, sea surface temperatures averaged about 0.9 degrees above normal. But this is a stage which has already been reached by this one.

The last El Niño, comparatively weak though it was, is thought to have been partly responsible for the extraordinarily warm weather in Britain between the summer of 2006 and the spring of 2007: July 2006 was Britain's hottest month, autumn 2006 (September, October and November) was the warmest autumn, winter 2006-07 (December, January and February) was the second warmest in Britain, and April 2007 was our warmest April.

Can the global economy cope if El Nino is a bad one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.