Our hurricane forecast has been out for February with the numbers game that everyone plays and I think means next to nothing. It is where they are going, not how many that is key. Our IMPACT forecast will be on here early the week of the 9th and will show this may be the classic year for showing why that is the case.
There was great reason in past years to write off the hurricane season when El Niños showed up. The Atlantic was darn cold and the Tropical Pacific warming meant a giant sucking sound of easterlies would roar through the main development regions with high shear. Since most of the devastating hurricanes came out of that area in the past predict a lower-than-normal MDR season, you assume the US is in good shape. However, even in some of those years, majors manage to hit the coast.
What I did for you here is outline the evolution of stronger or greater El Niños since 1957. The huge problem is the distorted warming of the Atlantic that is a counterweight to the El Niño as far as enhanced easterlies. We are treading in new territory.
1957:
.png)
We had Audrey early and not much beyond.
1965:
.png)
Betsy managed to hit.
1972:
.png)
No major hits.
1982:
Notice how cold the water still is globally:
.png)
No big hits.
1987:
.png)
No big hits.
Now I am going to put on my CO2 question hat.
There is little change from 1957:
.png)
To 1991.
In 1991 it was still quite cold:
.png)
Bob came a calling.
Yet the rapid rise of CO2 began in the 1950’s:
Le Chatelier’s would mean that the countering effect of the system would have begun immediately as its a principle that implies diminishing feedback, not increasing.
You can also see SST’s (sea surface temperature) rose little in that time, CO2 could not be affecting temperatures.
Underwater Volcanic activity began its increase in the 80’s with the more rapid seismic spreading taking off in the 90’s:
Given the implications of Geothermal input to such a massive source of heat, why is this not a consideration? I will not continue pushing this point but the rise in CO2 began in the 50’s, but the real warming did not start until the geothermal inputs started.
And start they did.
1997:
.png)
NO major hits.
2015:
.png)
No major US hits, but Joaquin did show up for the Bahamas.
How this is pushed off to the side is beyond me (actually its not, but I will be nice).
But now look at this.
The SST forecast at this time of the year for 2015:
.gif)
But now:
.png)
That is trouble. The CFSV2 SLP pattern has a lot of low pressure around over warm water:
This is not the normal higher-than-average pressures in the MDR and lower-than-average west of S. America:
This is a heck of a lot different than the mean of those seasons. Again, think big picture. High pressure all over the Atlantic, low-pressure eastern Pacific, stronger easterlies, increased shear, and more sinking air over the tropical Atlantic.
It still has a negative connotation for the MDR with the lowest pressures out of the MDR. But that is also an indication to me that there will simply be more activity north of the MDR, at least normal and perhaps above.
Precipitation forecast:
Precipitation is much higher from Africa to Florida than the standard El Niño means which are dry (see below):
500b:
We have a pattern that actually FAVORS development but more between 25 and 35 north rather than in the deep tropics.
In the mean years, we do not see the negatives showing up further south, so again a distortion to the north:
.png)
So we are in no man’s land. The more I study this, the more I am hoping that people try to step back and look at this as to what the source is. Because as you can see, it is having an effect on the questions we are being asked. Above all in the search for what is concealed (the future), the reason it is concealed is that it takes more than just accepting what you are told to find.
Here is what we must confront. If (as some on my side of the agw issue claim) it is NOT what I am suspecting (geothermal input), then what is it? Granted in the entire geological history, this may not be remarkable, but we could not observe it as it happened before. It most certainly is happening now in the time scale frame that due to non-science-based stimulus, is turning this into a runaway train for a policy that could help destroy the foundational values o this country. If it is not from below, then it is from above? It can’t just “happen.” And if it is from above, then the people pushing CO2 as the cause of the warming, certainly have an argument, but then comes the “So What” aspect. If it is warming and in past years this was a climate optimum, so what? Adapt and move on.
To my fellow meteorologists—think. Think about your basic courses and what the implication of warming is to your forecast due to feedback that have to be amplified in some places, but DE-AMPLIFIED in others. That’s right, there is evidence of countering that in a rational world would be considered positive (and make your job more boring). You can’t just go on TV and say it’s all climate change and it is getting worse. You have to look for the unmoved mover, for your answer is there.
For others, do you really want to spend what is estimated to be close to 300 trillion dollars by 2050 to convert to a system that currently forces us to rely on unsavory sources and methods that have a much shorter lifespan than fossil fuel supply? At the very least question authority now, before it’s too late to even have the chance.
* This article was originally published here
PUBLISH WITH US!
The Washington Gazette works at our discretion with businesses, non-profits, and other organizations. We do not work with socialists, crony capitalists, or disinformation groups. Click the green button below to view our services!
HELP STOP THE SPREAD OF FAKE NEWS!
SHARE our articles and like our Facebook page and follow us on Twitter!
0 Comments