What's behind the weirdly warm and dry weather in the West, and the weirdly wet and cold weather in the East? Two studies point to a huge "warm blob" of water that's been lurking off the U.S. West Coast. The long-lived patch, which measures about 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) wide, is about 2 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit (1 to 4 degrees Celsius) above normal . . . .
That much of a temperature anomaly over that many square miles of ocean surface has to represent a very large quantity of heat. A lot of "therms". Or BTUs. I cannot imagine that it is due to any kind of underwater volcanic activity. If it actually were, I think that the site(s) of this volcanic activity would already have been pinpointed and would be currently under exploration. And there would be a lot of news coverage.
I can only explain it as seawater, warmed from the sun's energy, and moved into that "blob" area by ocean currents and wind patterns.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 04-14-2015).]
The weather pattern, known as the North Pacific Mode, is what's causing the Pacific's warm blob as well.
Is global climate change playing a role in the rise of the North Pacific Mode? Neither Bond nor Hartmann is willing to say. "I don't think we know the answer," Hartmann said. "Maybe it will go away quickly and we won't talk about it anymore, but if it persists for a third year, then we'll know something really unusual is going on."
The weather pattern, known as the North Pacific Mode, is what's causing the Pacific's warm blob as well.
Is global climate change playing a role in the rise of the North Pacific Mode?
so is it a weather pattern or is it climate? I find it funny you use both. A blob is not climate. this is a weather event. if it lasts for 1000 years then yea I can say its climate then. weather events are NOT climate.
There is a chart or plot that accompanies the NBC News report with this caption:
This chart shows the pattern of anomalously warm temperatures off the coast of Washington and Oregon in April 2014, as compared with sea surface temperatures from 1981 to 2010.
My personal opinion is that this "blob" event could be a signature of global warming, which I interpret as a rising trend in temperatures all around the world, as identified by data analyses that filter out short term (weather) changes and cyclical patterns such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. This North Pacific Mode (referenced in the NBC News report), which they say is what is causing this particular "blob", could fall into the short term or cyclical category. But if this "blob" of anomalously warm surface water just offshore of Washington and Oregon is seen to persist, or reoccur in 2016 and subsequent years, it begins to look more like a signature of global warming.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 04-15-2015).]
Inter-decadal Pacific Oscillation Explains Global Warming "Hiatus" Since 2000 Study reinforces finding that decades-long climate cycle is behind seeming flatlining of global surface air temperatures April 14, 2015 Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Atmospheric greenhouse gases have continued to rise during recent years, yet global mean surface temperature has shown no clear warming since about 2000. This slowdown in surface warming, often referred to as the global warming “hiatus,” is in sharp contrast to model simulations, which on average show strong warming since 2000.
A National Science Foundation-supported study co-authored by Shang-Ping Xie, a climate scientist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, attributes nearly the entire difference between observations and simulations to a climate cycle known as the Inter-decadal Pacific Oscillation (IPO). The cycle is similar to the more commonly known El Niño Southern Oscillation but significantly longer in duration, reversing phases over the course of decades. The study found that the behavior of the IPO explains essentially all the difference between observed and model-simulated global warming rates on decadal time scales since 1920, and in particular the warming hiatus since year 2000. . . .
If they have known about these so called Inter-decadal Pacific Oscillations, and claim they are decade long and therefore have known about them for quite some time, why arent these included in their simulations?
Argo is a network of sensors that provides temperature data from the oceans, down to as far as 6000 feet below the surface.
Argo data has prompted various researchers to suspect that heat is being stored or sequestered below the surface of large expanses of ocean.
They believe that this is being caused by a strengthening of the trade winds over the last 20 years.
Their expectations are that this trend of increasing trade winds will decline and reverse, and that the heat energy that is currently trapped within this subsurface ocean reservoir will reappear in the form of higher surface air temperatures across the land masses, where people will be able to more directly "feel the heat" and experience the extra "BTUs" that they have been missing out on, because of these persistent trade wind patterns.
Here's an abstract of a report that was published in Nature Climate Change just over a year ago; there are more recent reports along the same lines:
"Despite ongoing increases in atmospheric greenhouse gases, the Earth’s global average surface air temperature has remained more or less steady since 2001. A variety of mechanisms have been proposed to account for this slowdown in surface warming. A key component of the global hiatus that has been identified is cool eastern Pacific sea surface temperature, but it is unclear how the ocean has remained relatively cool there in spite of ongoing increases in radiative forcing.
Here we show that a pronounced strengthening in Pacific trade winds over the past two decades—unprecedented in observations [and] reanalysis data and not captured by climate models—is sufficient to account for the cooling of the tropical Pacific and a substantial slowdown in surface warming through increased subsurface ocean heat uptake. The extra uptake has come about through increased subduction in the Pacific shallow overturning cells, enhancing heat convergence in the equatorial thermocline. At the same time, the accelerated trade winds have increased equatorial upwelling in the central and eastern Pacific, lowering sea surface temperature there, which drives further cooling in other regions. The net effect of these anomalous winds is a cooling in the 2012 global average surface air temperature of 0.1–0.2◦C, which can account for much of the hiatus in surface warming observed since 2001.
This hiatus [slowdown of surface air temperature warming] could persist for much of the present decade if the trade wind trends continue, however rapid warming is expected to resume once the anomalous wind trends abate."
I'm slow so please help me out here. The temperature on earth has not risen since 2000 but we're still experiencing global warming or climate change?
?
even though the evidence is proof the planet has not gotten warmer, these radicals keep trying to convince you it is getting warmer. Now rinselberg is trying to convince you that a small "blob" off the coast of two states is climate change. Yet when the northeast gets cold and people claim global warming is false, rinaelberg is on here stating that climate is bigger than a couple states in the northeast. Yet its ok for him to use a mere two states of slightly warmer water to claim its climate change that effects the whole planet. The radical moves the goalposts constantly to support his radical ideology
[This message has been edited by bigformula (edited 04-16-2015).]
article: The net effect of these anomalous winds is a cooling in the 2012 global average surface air temperature of 0.1–0.2◦C, which can account for much of the hiatus in surface warming observed since 2001.
Originally posted by bigformula: Even though the evidence is proof the planet has not gotten warmer, these radicals keep trying to convince you it is getting warmer. Now rinselberg is trying to convince you that a small "blob" off the coast of two states is climate change. Yet when the northeast gets cold and people claim global warming is false, rinaelberg is on here stating that climate is bigger than a couple states in the northeast. Yet its ok for him to use a mere two states of slightly warmer water to claim its climate change that effects the whole planet. The radical moves the goalposts constantly to support his radical ideology.
Reading comprehension?
Please, educate yourself. Browse this one report (link, below) from just 8 days ago, written for a general audience, and published online by the Australian Broadcasting Company.
If you said something along the lines of "You know, I'm skeptical about these global warming reports and predictions. There are just too many different factors and scenarios that come up in all of these reports. I don't think that there is a solid scientific consensus about the state of the earth's climate, or about any practical ways to change the course that it is on", that would come across as a more reasonable reaction on your part. But every time you try to fire a scientific "bullet", you only end up shooting your own self.
You don't have the scientific grasp to shoot down any of what is in this report (link below), any more than I have the extraordinary competence that would be required for me to be able to independently confirm any or all of it in a seriously convincing manner.
I suggest this particular writeup, because it touches on so many of the topics that are currently being discussed in this field.
quote
You may have heard that global warming has 'paused' but it's only one part of a bigger picture and the search for understanding has equipped climate scientists with better tools than ever.
Is global climate change playing a role in the rise of the North Pacific Mode? Neither Bond nor Hartmann is willing to say. "I don't think we know the answer," Hartmann said.
This is progress. Because not knowing the answer, for the past 15-20 years or so, hasn't stopped "scientists" from saying it was due to global climate change. Interesting that they are now unwilling to say they don't know the answer.
And they also wouldn't have called it global climate change. They would have called it global warming. The actual information posted is interesting in and of itself. Thanks for posting.
Originally posted by 2.5: Under water volcano action, or would there be smoke?
An underwater volcano off the coast of Oregon has risen from its slumber and may be spewing out lava about a mile beneath the sea.
Researchers were alerted to the possible submarine eruption of the Axial Seamount, located about 300 miles (480 kilometers) off the West Coast, by large changes in the seafloor elevation and an increase in the number of tiny earthquakes on April 24. . . .
I am not advancing this as related in any way to the gi-normous "blob" of warm ocean waters offshore (Original Post) that two research studies have linked to the U.S. weather extremes of 2014 and 2015, as manifested in warm, dry weather patterns persisting up and down the West Coast, alongside remarkable extremes of cold, rain, hail and snow that have battered many of the other states from the Midwest to the East Coast.
This volcanic activity was only detected about a week ago (April 24), and they were observing the "blob" as far back as 3Q 2013.
I can't imagine that this is volcanic activity on a scale that it could be elevating surface temps by 2 to 7 degrees (F) over such a large expanse of ocean.
I haven't "done the math", but if this were a game show, I would say that there has not been volcanic activity on that scale since the last of the dinosaurs, about 65 million years ago.
But when I saw this report, I remembered that post from 2.5
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-01-2015).]
Oceanographers, marine biologists and climate researchers are out in droves, studying the very warm Pacific Ocean waters that are close onshore from Puget Sound, south all the way to the west coast of Mexico.
"It's not climate change, but it's something we expect to see more frequently during the coming decades."
Back by popular demand, after a hiatus of 574 days (since the previous post)
"Blob" in Pacific Ocean linked to spike in ozone
A warm blob of water lurking in the Pacific Ocean in 2014 and 2015 led to a spike in ozone levels across the western U.S., new research suggests.
The blob of warm water, which sat about 310 miles off the Oregon coast, was linked to a high-pressure system in the atmosphere that resulted in warm, calm air and sunny skies across nearly a quarter of the country, said study co-author Dan Jaffe, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington Bothell.
Those atmospheric conditions sped up the formation of ozone in the atmosphere . . .
<SNIP>
The "blob" ― as meteorologists affectionately called the mass of warm water ― occurred from the winter of 2014 through the summer of 2015, when high sea-surface temperatures prevailed in the Northeast Pacific Ocean. The warmer waters — about 2 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than average for the region — spanned from the coast of Sitka, Alaska, to Santa Barbara, California, and came with a high-pressure system in the atmosphere that led to low wind speeds, fewer storms and sunnier skies.
The warm blob scrambled the food chain and brought a host of strange ecological effects: The toastier waters fueled some of the worst-ever toxic red tide algal blooms , and marine mammals died in droves as they struggled to find enough food in normally cold, food-rich waters, Jaffe said.
But the blob also had stark effects inland. In June 2015, for instance, the average monthly air temperatures were elevated between 1.8 and 10.8 F relative to normal in the western U.S., researchers reported Wednesday, Feb. 15, in the journal Geophysical Research Letters . These regions also experienced more cloud-free, windless days.
Jaffe and his colleagues had been tracking levels of ozone , a compound with three atoms of oxygen that can irritate the lungs, at the Mount Bachelor Observatory in central Oregon.
They found record-high levels of ozone above the Oregon peak. That spurred them to examine levels throughout the Mountain West. Sure enough, they found highly elevated levels of ozone throughout the region.
<SNIP>
The new findings suggest the blob directly led to dangerous levels of ozone across the western U.S.
What's not known, however, is whether climate change [global warming] will lead to more of these "blobby" weather patterns.
WHere does one get full height boots. as the crap is getting to deep
No kidding. I'm sure it's due to my lack of scientific prowess but this reads like a lot of theory and few facts. What are these guys smoking! A meteorologist can't tell me if it's gonna rain next week for certain but these climate scientists have it all figured out. Comparing the "models" from 2000 to actual data shows how terribly wrong this crowd has been. Considering their track record I can extrapolate that this is likely BS as well.
Originally posted by rinselberg: ..... Two studies point to a huge "warm blob" of water that's been lurking off the U.S. West Coast. The long-lived patch, which measures about 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) wide, is about 2 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit (1 to 4 degrees Celsius) above normal . . . .
Originally posted by jmclemore: Generated by human activities or just a natural occurrence?
Great question! Thank you!
Towards the end of the same brief news report (from my Original Post of April 11, 2015)
quote
The other study was conducted by Dennis Hartmann, an atmospheric scientist at UW. He links the "polar vortex" chill that gripped the central and eastern U.S. in 2013-2014 to a decadal-scale weather pattern that sent warm, dry air to the West Coast and cold, wet air to the East. Hartmann says the same scenario apparently played out during the winter of 2014-2015.
The weather pattern, known as the North Pacific Mode, is what's causing the Pacific's warm blob as well.
Is global climate change [global warming] playing a role in the rise of the North Pacific Mode?
Neither Bond nor Hartmann is willing to say. "I don't think we know the answer," Hartmann said. "Maybe it will go away quickly and we won't talk about it anymore, but if it persists for a third year, then we'll know something really unusual is going on."
My take on whether this "blob" of warm Pacific ocean water offshore, near the states of Washington and Oregon, was caused by global warming, driven by human greenhouse gas emissions
There isn't enough data yet to make that call. The "blob" was there in 2014 and 2015. After an almost two year "hiatus"--no activity on this thread since my last post from August of 2015--I revived this discussion with a new report that was based on data that was collected across the continental United States during the same time period when the "blob" was being observed. So, a new report that just came out recently, in 2017, but it was looking back at what was being observed during 2014 and 2015.
I don't think that the "blob" persisted through 2016, or has been observed again since the first day of 2017, because if that were the case, I would expect that would have been highlighted as part of this new report--and it wasn't.
The researchers are keeping their eyes on ocean temperature data that is always coming in from their monitoring devices. Will the "blob" reappear any time soon? Will it become a regular feature or characteristic for that same part of the Pacific Ocean, offshore to Washington and Oregon? It's the 64-billion dollar question.
Maybe in 2022 or 2027 they will have a clearer idea about it.
I think if the "blob" settles in and becomes a predictable characteristic of that same area of the Pacific Ocean, and if they review all the historical data that they have and there is nothing in the historical data to suggest that the "blob" was characteristic of this area during any of the decades before 2014, then I think it would be reasonable to think that this "blob" of especially warm ocean water is a result of the overall warming of the planet that many researchers attribute to human greenhouse gas emissions.
If the "blob" persists, then I would expect that there would be journal articles being published (in the future) with more detailed explanations of the mechanisms to explain more precisely the how and the why about how the overall warming of the planet would be having this especially elevated impact (in terms of ocean temperatures) on this particular region of the Pacific Ocean, causing this region to be distinct from the somewhat cooler ocean waters (of the future) that would be on the periphery of the "blob".
This, of course, assumes that the entire Pacific Ocean in this latitude range, from Japan, across to Hawaii, and on to the shores of Washington and Oregon, does not evolve into a much larger "blob", or--to use the more commonly accepted scientific term for this--a "super blob".
So, my answer to the question here from "jmclemore" is... TBD.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-25-2017).]
AGAIN ALL THIS SCIENCE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A hypothesis
but it is treated like rock solid fact..
How can you be typing on the Internet? It's only a hypothesis. How can you have a car? It's only a hypothesis. How can you eat food? It's only a hypothesis.
If you hate science so much, then burn all your belongings, and go hide in a cave in the Ozarks and try to live without it for a while.
How can you be typing on the Internet? It's only a hypothesis. How can you have a car? It's only a hypothesis. How can you eat food? It's only a hypothesis.
If you hate science so much, then burn all your belongings, and go hide in a cave in the Ozarks and try to live without it for a while.
Stay stupid.. you listed items you can put your hands on..
We can't put our hands on records that never were. or space we can't get to. or, weather /climate cycles that we have no records of.. yet you'll use all of those and call it fact..
Her is a fact for you.. Something hit earth and caused an ice age,, by blocking the sund rays.. What you dopes are calling man made climate change is just the ending of that ice age.. but there is no money to be made from that fact..
EVEN IF WE WERE STILL IN THE STONE AGE AS FAR AS POPULATION AND INDUSTRY the ice would still be melting just as fast..
only way to stop earth warming is to block the sun rays.. that require partcals in the air.. Want to stop it, go blow up a super volcano..
We could go dark from a solar storm sending us back to the stone age, and the earth warming would not change..
Cleaner air= less clouds as clouds are made up of dirt and dust, less of both = less clouds and that = more rays from the sun heating the earth..
Ice lands volcano puffs the last year years has put more green house gases into the air than we humans have in the last 100 years..
Hawaii's volcano puts more in the air in 6 months than industry in the usa has in a decade.. The ocean and it's organic matter/live puts more greenhouse gases in the air every year than the whole human race and industry.. does in 50 years..
Our effect on the weather and climate is 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% every decade.. earth itself is in control of it and it's cycle.. outside a comet or large meteor hit..
Stay stupid you are good at it.
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 02-25-2017).]
It's baaack... the "BLOB", and it portends the likelihood of a warm and dry winter in the West, and a cold and stormy winter in the Eastern Continental United States.
quote
A mass of warm water in the northern Pacific Ocean known as "the BLOB" has returned . . .
The BLOB is not retroactive. It doesn't explain the weather you've already had. It explains the weather that's still ahead.
I think it only just formed again. Otherwise, why wouldn't I have already seen a report like this and put it up here, say, at the beginning of October?
