Paul

Due to the proximity of the IPS predicted rise of solar cycle 24 to observed solar cycle 23 solar minimum values, and the apparent lack of new Cycle 24 sunspots, IPS has again moved the predicted solar cycle away by 6 months.

Ionospheric Prediction Service (IPS): CYCLE 24 PREDICTION MOVED AWAY BY 6 MONTHS

Hat tip to Anthony Watts

A new paper published in GRL gives a 1000-year perspective on Hurricane activity in Boston, USA. The paper is entitled: ‘A 1,000-year, annually-resolved record of hurricane activity from Boston, Massachusetts,’ by Besonen et al.

The Abstract states:

The annually-laminated (i.e., varved) sediment record from the Lower Mystic Lake (near Boston, MA), contains a series of anomalous graded beds deposited by strong flooding events that have affected the basin over the last millennium. From the historic portion of the record, 10 out of 11 of the most prominent graded beds correspond with years in which category 2–3 hurricanes are known to have struck the Boston area. Thus, we conclude that the graded beds represent deposition related to intense hurricane precipitation combined with wind-driven vegetation disturbance that exposes fresh, loose sediment. The hurricane signal shows strong, centennial-scale variations in frequency with a period of increased activity between the 12th–16th centuries, and decreased activity during the 11th and 17th–19th centuries. These frequency changes are consistent with other paleoclimate indicators from the tropical North Atlantic, in particular, sea surface temperature variations.

The paper concludes:

The LML sedimentary record provides a well-controlled and annually-resolved record of category 2–3 hurricane activity in the Boston area over the last millennium. The hurricane signal shows centennial-scale variations in frequency with a period of increased activity between the 12th–16th centuries, and decreased activity during the 11th and 17th–19th centuries. We recognize that the LML record is a single point source record representative for the greater Boston area, and hurricanes that passed a few hundred km to the east or west may not have produced the very heavy rainfall amounts and vegetation disturbance in the lake watershed necessary to produce a strong signal within the LML sediments. Nevertheless, we also note that clear evidence of a secular change in hurricane frequency identified in the LML record is consistent with other lines of evidence that conditions for the development of hurricanes have changed on centennial timescales. Hence, it appears that hurricane activity was more frequent in the first half of the last millennium when tropical Atlantic SSTs were warmer and eastern equatorial Pacific SSTs were cooler than in subsequent centuries.

Also, a NOAA climate realist speaks out:

Excerpt: “I did not say if there is global warming, it would be man-made,” Mr. Goldenberg emphasized. “Not all scientists agree that the warming we’ve seen is necessarily anthropogenic. It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” According to Stanley Goldenberg, meteorologist with the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, based in Miami, “Numerous hurricane meteorologists agree that the historical data has not produced any evidence of changes [due to climate change] in the number or intensity of hurricanes, particularly in the Atlantic Basin, and even globally. “There are some who have done studies that do claim a link, [but] virtually all those studies have been heavily rebutted by others in the hurricane community,” he noted. “In my opinion, the flaw in those studies is an improper utilization of historical databases. I have been a specialist in hurricane climate data for close to three decades, and others who know the databases well agree with what I am saying.” Mr. Goldenberg pointed to a number of confounding problems in such studies, including the time frame chosen, the techniques available now and in the past to measure hurricane activity, the ways in which such activity was recorded, and the availability of satellite data—or lack thereof. “The biggest fallacy is that people think that a hurricane feeds off a warm ocean, and if the ocean gets warmer, we will have more intense hurricanes,” he explained. “But there are other factors involved, such as vertical wind shear, which is the difference between the upper and lower layers of the atmosphere. You could also have drier air. These are far more critical factors than the ocean being warmer. “Everything else being equal, if you warm the ocean under a storm, you might get a stronger storm—but everything else is not equal,” said Mr. Goldenberg. “Warming may increase vertical shear and therefore inhibit storms. The ocean itself warming is such a little effect.” […] Mr. Goldenberg of NOAA added, “There are those who want to attribute any perceived increase in natural disasters to anthropomorphic global warming. I predict that if we have an active hurricane season, someone will attribute it to AGW. They’re not really looking at the science; they’re looking at the disaster.

Global Warming Not Linked To Increased Hurricane Activity

The current cycle of the sun is taking a long time to start, triggering different explanations, writes Mark Lawson in an article entitled: ‘Scientists disagree over lack of sunspots,’ published in the Australian Financial Review (subscription required).

Excerpt: Despite being dismissed by a number of scientists as of little consequence to the present discussion of climate change, the issue of the sun’s activity – or apparent lack of it – has been the subject of considerable debate in recent months. Scientists who concern themselves with the fledgling subject of space weather (changes in the sun’s emissions) have been wondering where all the sunspots have gone, when they might come back and what effect this will have on climate…..

Another scientist who says he has identified a link between the sun’s activity and climate – in particular between rainfall in Australia and sunspots – is Robert Baker, an associate professor at the University of New England’s School of Human and Environmental Studies. Baker tells the AFR he has identified a strong correlation between sunspots, the sun’s magnetic activity and the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI). He says variations in the earth’s magnetic field account for about half of the variation in the SOI, and that changes in sunspot activity as an indicator of magnetic activity can be correlated with rainfall patterns in south-east Australia . The Bureau of Meteorology has rejected Baker’s reasoning and a paper by him was not accepted by the Australian Meterological Magazine. But Baker says his analysis has been accepted by the peer-reviewed journal Solar Terrestrial Physics for publication in December.

The extended title of the post is “Sea Surface Temperatures of the Oceans Surrounding Australia and the Magnitude of ENSO Events, ” because the following illustrations of Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) of Australian waters present an interesting effect, the impact of the magnitude of El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events on SST. While I’ve seen it before in other data sets, I haven’t yet singled it out for discussion.

(Note: To economize words, throughout the rest of the post, I’ll use “Australian waters” in place of “oceans surrounding Australia” or the “combined Southwest South Pacific and Southeast South Indian Ocean data set.”)

First, to determine the area to evaluate, I downloaded data for two geographical areas from the NOAA NOMADS system. They’re identified by the red and blue boxes in Figure 1. The coordinates used are 10-45S, 105-165E for the red area and 0-55S, 95-175E for the blue.

Figure 1

Figure 2 illustrates the SST anomalies from January 1854 to June 2008 for the two ocean areas surrounding Australia. Both data sets have been smoothed with a 37-month filter. Picking the start date in the trough at 1905 and the end date at a peak in 2000 (There must be an alarmist side to me.), both data sets show rises in SST that are on the order of 1.0 to 1.2 deg C. The two signals are similar, with the smaller area having the greater variations. For the remainder of this post, I’ll use the data from the smaller area, the red curve.

Figure 2

Figure 3 shows the raw long-term data for the SST anomalies of Australian waters. Also illustrated is data that’s been smoothed with a 12-month running-average filter. Typical of many other oceanic data sets, there is an overall decline in SSTs from the late 1800s to 1910 and a rebound in SSTs until 1940. Then, though there are underlying oscillations, SSTs rise almost continuously from 1940 to present. El Nino events appear to stand out.

Note: The step change (temperature drop) at 1945 has been identified as an error in a recent Thompson et al letter to “Nature” with the title “A Large Discontinuity in the Mid-Twentieth Century in Observed Global-Mean Surface Temperature”.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7195/abs/nature06982.html

Figure 3

But there’s something that seems to be missing from the data in later years. Refer to Figure 4, which illustrates short-term (January 1978 to June 2008) SST anomalies for Australian waters. The delayed responses to the 82/83, the 86/87/88, and the 97/98 El Nino events are again easy to find with the sudden rises in SST, but…

Where are the effects of the La Ninas?

The 97/98 El Nino is so much larger than the subsequent multiyear La Nina that it gives the impression that it supplied enough heat to create a step change in the SSTs of Australian waters and that the heat then dissipated over a ten year period. But that impression is only partly correct. The effects of the La Ninas are there, but they are overwhelmed by the magnitudes of those major El Ninos.

Figure 4

In Figure 5, I’ve added NINO3.4 SST anomaly data to the graph of short-term SST anomalies for Australian waters. A scaling factor of 0.3 has been applied to the NINO3.4 data. I’ve also noted the timing of the two major volcanic eruptions in case someone feels they’re relevant.

The time lags between an ENSO event and the response of SST for Australian waters appear to be on the order of a few months to a year. And with the scaling factor used (0.3), the magnitude of the NINO3.4 SSTs during the 82/83, the 86/87/88, and the 97/98 events appear to generate similarly sized reactions in the SSTs of Australian waters.

Then, starting at 1998, it would appear that the entire drop in NINO3.4 SST should result in a similarly sized response in SST, but the response of the Australian waters falls far short. The logic behind the “Would-Should” statement is wrong.

In simple terms, ENSO events supply heat to sea surfaces when the NINO3.4 SST anomalies are greater than zero and remove heat when they’re less than zero. So the reference point for the NINO3.4 data is zero when comparing it to other anomaly data. Looking at the data again and using zero as the reference for the multiyear La Nina episode after the 97/98 El Nino, the reaction by the SSTs of Australian waters is in the proper scale. There are minor differences in the cause and effect and in the time lags in prior ENSO events, but all in all, there are no surprises.

Figure 5

The effects of ENSO events on SST trends are obvious once we’re reminded of them. Keep in mind that it is not only the frequency of El Nino and La Nina events but also the magnitude of those events that must be considered during discussions of their impacts on global or local climate.

In “The Evolution of ENSO and Global Atmospheric Temperatures”, Trenberth et al identify the linear trend in global temperatures that result from ENSO events: “For 1950-98, ENSO linearly accounts for 0.06 deg C of global warming.” http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/papers/jgr2001b/jgr2.html

The effects of ENSO events appear much greater on regional levels.

Closing Note: The additional problems with measuring and calculating global mean sea surface temperature are discussed at length in numerous posts at ClimateAudit and in the papers that are the subjects of or the references used for those posts. For further information, refer to the following ClimateAudit posts:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3114
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1272

SOURCE

Sea Surface Temperature Data is Smith and Reynolds Extended Reconstructed SST (ERSST.v2) available through the NOAA National Operational Model Archive & Distribution System (NOMADS).
http://nomads.ncdc.noaa.gov/#climatencdc

Bob Tisdale