"The reason is that WUWT does not censor comments like alarmist blogs do.
It allows true freedom of speech, thus the grain of truth is winnowed
from the chaff of propaganda; readers can make up their own minds, and
arrive at reasonable conclusions based on the facts presented."
(Smokey aka David B. Stealey, moderator of the blog wattsupwiththat.com, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/28/comment-of-the-week-2/#comment-754850)
I continue my series that documents comments that are apparently not liked, and therefore vanished at the opinion blog wattsupwiththat.com, which is presented by blog host Anthony Watts as "The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change" and which promotes denial of anthropogenically caused global warming. The comment was in reply to the claim by regular guest author Bob Tisdale, made in his posting "Tisdale asks: Hey, Where'd The El Niño Go?". Mr. Tisdale asserts global warming was caused by the natural phenomenon El Niño. The El Niño/La Niña pattern (or ENSO - El Niño/Southern Oscillation) is a major mode of ocean variability in the tropical Pacific. It influences the weather in many parts of the world through so called teleconnections. Here is my comment to this claim. The comment also included a couple of questions for Mr. Tisdale:
----- snip -----
How is El Nino supposed to cause global warming? El Nino/La Nina is a major mode of natural variability with warm and cold phases, but global warming is a long-term trend. And the temperature of the upper ocean layers is not an independent climate driver. It's a dependent variable, so it can be the first cause that explains global warming. Claiming a warming of the upper ocean layers was the cause of global warming is just circular reasoning, since warming of the upper ocean layers is part of global warming.
Here are the annually and globally averaged anomalies of the surface temperature according to the GISS analysis relative to the average of the reference period 1951-1980:
For the decade of 1991 to 2000:
0.36, 0.14, 0.15, 0.25, 0.4, 0.3, 0.42, 0.59, 0.34, 0.36; mean+/-std = 0.331+/-0.133
For the decade of 2001 to 2010:
0.49, 0.58, 0.57, 0.49, 0.62, 0.56, 0.59, 0.44, 0.57, 0.63; mean+/-std = 0.554+/-0.061
(http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.txt)
What El Nino events are supposed to have caused and how are they supposed to have caused it that the 10 year average of the global temperature anomaly of the period 2001 to 2010 was 0.22 K higher than the 10-year average of the period 1991 to 2000? How does El Nino cause the long-term increase in the ocean heat content?
----- snip -----
Update 09/25/2012, at 9:27 AM: The statement above, "It's a dependent variable, so it can be the first cause that explains global warming", was supposed to say "It's a dependent variable, so it can't be the first cause that explains global warming" (h/t Al. Thank you for spotting this and notifying me). Comments still don't work.
Update 09/25/2012, at 9:32 AM: Posting new comments actually works. Old comments have not been imported yet.
(Smokey aka David B. Stealey, moderator of the blog wattsupwiththat.com, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/28/comment-of-the-week-2/#comment-754850)
I continue my series that documents comments that are apparently not liked, and therefore vanished at the opinion blog wattsupwiththat.com, which is presented by blog host Anthony Watts as "The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change" and which promotes denial of anthropogenically caused global warming. The comment was in reply to the claim by regular guest author Bob Tisdale, made in his posting "Tisdale asks: Hey, Where'd The El Niño Go?". Mr. Tisdale asserts global warming was caused by the natural phenomenon El Niño. The El Niño/La Niña pattern (or ENSO - El Niño/Southern Oscillation) is a major mode of ocean variability in the tropical Pacific. It influences the weather in many parts of the world through so called teleconnections. Here is my comment to this claim. The comment also included a couple of questions for Mr. Tisdale:
----- snip -----
How is El Nino supposed to cause global warming? El Nino/La Nina is a major mode of natural variability with warm and cold phases, but global warming is a long-term trend. And the temperature of the upper ocean layers is not an independent climate driver. It's a dependent variable, so it can be the first cause that explains global warming. Claiming a warming of the upper ocean layers was the cause of global warming is just circular reasoning, since warming of the upper ocean layers is part of global warming.
Here are the annually and globally averaged anomalies of the surface temperature according to the GISS analysis relative to the average of the reference period 1951-1980:
For the decade of 1991 to 2000:
0.36, 0.14, 0.15, 0.25, 0.4, 0.3, 0.42, 0.59, 0.34, 0.36; mean+/-std = 0.331+/-0.133
For the decade of 2001 to 2010:
0.49, 0.58, 0.57, 0.49, 0.62, 0.56, 0.59, 0.44, 0.57, 0.63; mean+/-std = 0.554+/-0.061
(http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.txt)
What El Nino events are supposed to have caused and how are they supposed to have caused it that the 10 year average of the global temperature anomaly of the period 2001 to 2010 was 0.22 K higher than the 10-year average of the period 1991 to 2000? How does El Nino cause the long-term increase in the ocean heat content?
----- snip -----
Update 09/25/2012, at 9:27 AM: The statement above, "It's a dependent variable, so it can be the first cause that explains global warming", was supposed to say "It's a dependent variable, so it can't be the first cause that explains global warming" (h/t Al. Thank you for spotting this and notifying me). Comments still don't work.
Update 09/25/2012, at 9:32 AM: Posting new comments actually works. Old comments have not been imported yet.
Not sure why your comment was snipped, Jan, it doesn't concern me, but I’ll be happy to reply to the questions you posed. They are old arguments and are based on your misunderstandings of ENSO and indicate you haven’t investigated the instrument temperature record very thoroughly.
ReplyDeleteJan P Perlwitz asks: “How is El Nino supposed to cause global warming? El Nino/La Nina is a major mode of natural variability with warm and cold phases, but global warming is a long-term trend.”
ENSO is a process, not an oscillation with warm and cool phases. Refer to page 10 of the Introduction of my book (see free preview here):
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/preview-of-who-turned-on-the-heat-v2.pdf
There I noted: The strength of ENSO phases, along with how often they happen and how long they persist, determine how much heat is released by the tropical Pacific into the atmosphere and how much warm water is transported by ocean currents from the tropics toward the poles. During a multidecadal period when El Niño events dominate (a period when El Niño events are stronger, when they occur more often and when they last longer than La Niña events), more heat than normal is released from the tropical Pacific and more warm water than normal is transported by ocean currents toward the poles—with that warm water releasing heat to the atmosphere along the way. As a result, global sea surface and land surface temperatures warm during multidecadal periods when El Niño events dominate. They have to. There’s no way they cannot warm. Conversely, global temperatures cool during multidecadal periods when La Niña events are stronger, last longer and occur more often than El Niño events. That makes sense too because the tropical Pacific is releasing less heat and redistributing less warm water than normal then.
Jan P Perlwitz asks: “And the temperature of the upper ocean layers is not an independent climate driver. It's a dependent variable, so it can be the first cause that explains global warming.”
You’re correct. Ocean heat content is a dependent variable. In the tropical Pacific and in the tropics as a whole, Ocean Heat Content is dependent on ENSO. El Niño events release heat from the tropical Pacific and La Niña events recharge it. The recharge is accomplished through the increased downward shortwave radiation that accompanies the La Nina, which is caused by the stronger trade winds, which reduce cloud cover. Basic ENSO.
The NODC ocean heat content data for the tropical Pacific shows that OHC there only rises during the 3-year La Niña events, as one would expect, and during the 1995/96 La Niña. See Figure 5-51 from my book:
http://i49.tinypic.com/keclqx.jpg
The unusual warming during the relatively weak 1995/96 La Niña (weak only in NINO3.4 region) was caused by stronger than normal trade winds in the western tropical Pacific associated with a weather event. Refer to McPhaden (1999):
http://lightning.sbs.ohio-state.edu/geo622/paper_enso_McPhaden1999.pdf
McPhaden writes: “For at least a year before the onset of the 1997–98 El Niño, there was a buildup of heat content in the western equatorial Pacific due to stronger than normal trade winds associated with a weak La Niña in 1995–96.”
Poleward of the tropics, Ocean Heat Content is dictated by sea level pressure and its associated winds, which inhibit or enhance the transport of warm water from the tropics toward the poles, where it can be released to space easier. OHC data indicates that changes in sea level pressure have impeded the poleward transport, which caused it to accumulate at depth at mid latitudes. This is easiest to see in the OHC data for the North Pacific, north of 20N. OHC there happily declined until a shift in sea level pressure in the late 1980s, which caused a sudden warming over 2 years. Without The remainder of your questions should be answered by the above.that shift, North Pacific OHC would have declined since 1955.
http://oi48.tinypic.com/2elccc4.jpg
Regards
Bob Tisdale