Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Recommended Posts

We're going to sail miles away from the topic if we continue in this vein, so please can you take that side of the discussion to pm if you want to continue it, thanks :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 662
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So, have you ever wondered how exactly would N Atlantic look like if you would pump out all the water? Well, its one big mountain range (MAR - Mid Atlantic Ridge). It gives you a feeling and a differe

Yeah, I think that's quite a disingenuous chart (no reflection on yourself , of course!).   If we look at the months used in that chart, and the 9 months leading up to them, we get the following:  

The 13 hours later this arrived..   Many thanks for your enquiry regarding North Atlantic sea surface temperatures. I have spoken to the relevant scientists within the Met Office Hadley Centre who h

Posted Images

I agree the DMI has a very interesting and what appears to be a fairly unbiased scientific site.

 
Whilst perusing I noticed this chart...

 

 

post-12512-0-23169200-1445425125_thumb.p

 

which appears to be telling us that the gains in Arctic sea ice are much greater then for at least 10 years.

 

Could this be as a side effect of the waning of the currents in the North Atlantic beginning to show its hand in the Arctic?

 

And all this happening whilst the ENSO is pumping heat into the atmosphere and without as BFTV as shown us, an excessively cold Arctic this year.

 

Is it a pure coincidence or are we looking at a very interesting period we are moving into?

Edited by Midlands Ice Age
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was initially just trying to make the point Paul that it's worthwhile checking your source (assuming you don't already know it) when posting to the thread.

Agreed Paul sorry about that, Knocker the source was always DMI? and you kindly put the official link up.  Other bits...we move on.  MIA, yes I agree an interesting set up

 

BFTP

Edited by BLAST FROM THE PAST
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Paul sorry about that, Knocker the source was always DMI? and you kindly put the official link up.  Other bits...we move on.  MIA, yes I agree an interesting set up

 

BFTP

 

Yes the original source was DMI but you chose a web site that had deliberately extracted that graph whilst failing to mention that the Greenland ice sheet, taking into account everything, is currently losing 300 billion tonnes of ice a year. After doing so you posted this:

 

 

Aiding or not.......doesn't seem to be down to excessive ice melt from Greenland

 

By doing so you appear, I stress appear, to be deliberately posting false information very relevant to this thread. I think that quite important.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this graph, from the previously mentioned paper by Rahmsford et al., is relevant.

 

nclimate2554-f6.jpg

 

We can see that despite increases in surface accumulation of snow and ice, the losses through melting and glacier calving are far more dominant.

 

The image http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n5/fig_tab/nclimate2554_F6.html

The paper it's from http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n5/full/nclimate2554.html

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

AMOC strength: research from 3 surveys at 16°N, 26°N and 41°N (page 78) showed:

  •  
  • at 26°N the now decade-long (2004–March 2014) findings from the trans-basin instrument array shows there was a decrease in transport of −4.2 ± 2.5 Sv over the decade. The median value of the AMOC over this period was 17 Sv. The report notes “a statistically significant downward trend in MOC transport from 2004 to 2012, particularly starting in 2008.â€
  •  
  • at 16°N and 41°N there was no significant trend.
  •  

Next looking at the Meridional Heat Transport (MHT - linked to the AMOC) the report (page 81) finds a significant decreasing trend in northern latitudes:

  •  
  • −0.19 ± 0.09 PW decade at 41°N.
  •  
  • −0.27 ± 0.19 PW decade at 26°N.
  •  

Note: The median MHT value over the decade is 1.2 ± 0.4 PW. 1PW = (1015 W).

 

 

 

 

 

Could this be as a side effect of the waning of the currents in the North Atlantic beginning to show its hand in the Arctic?

 

And all this happening whilst the ENSO is pumping heat into the atmosphere and without as BFTV as shown us, an excessively cold Arctic this year.

 

Is it a pure coincidence or are we looking at a very interesting period we are moving into?

 

The gyre strengths have a large complicating effect on the concept of a straight forward conveyor of water transfer. This chart from Yashayaev and Kieke - http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Igor_Yashayaev/publication/270345227_Studies_of_Labrador_Sea_Water_formation_and_variability_in_the_subpolar_North_Atlantic_in_the_light_of_international_partnership_and_collaboration/links/54c699220cf289f0cecbae22.pdf shows that as well as the OSNAP and EEL sections already mentioned there are many more regions being studied (as well as the hundreds of ARGO floats) relevant to, if not specifically for AMOC.

 

post-2779-0-76421300-1445440705_thumb.gi

 

Many lie in the subpolar gyre directly, but here is a study published this year outside the gyre from the Faroese section - Transport of volume, heat, and salt towards the Arctic in the Faroe Current 1993–2013http://www.ocean-sci.net/11/743/2015/os-11-743-2015.pdf which shows that consistent with other research the flow in the northeast Atlantic (and onwards to the Arctic) has actually strengthened.

 

 

Abstract. The flow of warm and saline water from the Atlantic Ocean, across the Greenland–Scotland Ridge, into the Nordic Seas – the Atlantic inflow – is split into three separate branches. The most intense of these branches is the inflow between Iceland and the Faroe Islands (Faroes), which is focused into the Faroe Current, north of the Faroes. The Atlantic inflow is an integral part of the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation (THC), which is projected to weaken during the 21st century and might conceivably reduce the oceanic heat and salt transports towards the Arctic. Since the mid-1990s, hydrographic properties and current velocities of the Faroe Current have been monitored along a section extending north from the Faroe shelf. From these in situ observations, time series of volume, heat, and salt transport have previously been reported, but the high variability of the transport has made it difficult to establish whether there are trends. Here, we present results from a new analysis of the Faroe Current where the in situ observations have been combined with satellite altimetry. For the period 1993 to 2013, we find the average volume transport of Atlantic water in the Faroe Current to be 3.8 ± 0.5 Sv (1 Sv = 106 m3 s−1) with a heat transport relative to 0 °C of 124 ± 15 TW (1 TW = 1012 W). Consistent with other results for the Northeast Atlantic component of the THC, we find no indication of weakening. The transports of the Faroe Current, on the contrary, increased. The overall increase over the 2 decades of observation was 9 ± 8 % for volume transport and 18 ± 9 % for heat transport (95 % confidence intervals). During the same period, the salt transport relative to the salinity of the deep Faroe Bank Channel overflow (34.93) more than doubled, potentially strengthening the feedback on thermohaline intensity. The increased heat and salt transports are partly caused by the increased volume transport and partly by increased temperatures and salinities of the Atlantic inflow, which have been claimed mainly to be caused by the weakened subpolar gyre.

 

Their results show an 18% increase in heat transport over the last two decades, primarily between the mid-1990s and 2003 due to a weakened gyre allowing more warm salty water to penetrate further north, and after this time more a result of local air-sea interaction. Citing Rahmstorf et al. and others, weakening of the thermohaline circulation (THC) that may have been identified in the western north Atlantic has not been seen in the northeast deep water overflows.

The northwest has recently seen extensive convection in the Labrador and Irminger seas as has been mentioned, though has been through a period of reduced overturning. Yashayaev and Loder (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AGUFMOS42B..05Y) consider the possibility that increased freshening from ice melt may have played a role but note that a weakened THC was also accompanied by record warm SSTs, not cooling. The cooling is from atmospheric interaction which is then strong enough to break down the stratification and stability of the ocean

 

 

Episodes of strong basin-wide near-surface freshening occurred in 2008-2009 and 2011-2012, starting off the Greenland coast, and then progressing into the western and central Labrador Sea. Possible causes of these salinity decreases include accelerated reductions in the Greenland and Arctic ice covers which increased the amount of melt water transported by the boundary current and diffused into the Sea's interior by lateral exchanges. The surface freshening observed in the Labrador Sea in 2012 is in agreement with the extreme Greenland ice sheet melt in the same year. Despite the Labrador Sea's recent warming and freshening, it continues to show signs of notable winter convection that reaches 1500 m and possibly even deeper. The two winters of the past decade and a half in which the Labrador Sea overturned to 1600 m were 2008 and 2014. Comparison of the heat losses to the atmosphere with internal ocean heat content changes for individual cooling seasons demonstrates a good agreement, suggesting that fall and winter atmospheric forcing was the primary factor in the variability of the depth and strength of convection in recent years.

Edited by Interitus
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this graph, from the previously mentioned paper by Rahmsford et al., is relevant.

 

nclimate2554-f6.jpg

 

We can see that despite increases in surface accumulation of snow and ice, the losses through melting and glacier calving are far more dominant.

 

The image http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n5/fig_tab/nclimate2554_F6.html

The paper it's from http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n5/full/nclimate2554.html

 

 

BFTV..

 

Is it your contention that it was the greenland ice sheet meltwater which caused the  AMO to enter its down phase?

I was not using the sea ice to suggest that  it had anything to do with the change in the AMOC? Just enquiring whether the gain in ice could have anything to do with 'weakening' AMO?

 

But you state that the rapid greenland ice sheet melting over the last 100 years when  it has been very negative and so must be also considered. The problem is which is the chicken and which is the egg. I have also seen responses elsewhere that hint that the Greenland ice sheet retreat appears to have stopped this year.

 

http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/greenland-blowing-away-ice-growth-records/

 

 

Blessed Weather has already shown a  paper in  which it suggests that the AMO appears to be responding to climatic responses in the atmosphere

 

http://noc.ac.uk/new...-winter-cooling

 

and below is another in which they have examined  and modelled it fairly extensively and have come to the conclusion that atmospheric conditions are dominating the AMO response.

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151015144804.htm

 

I thought that the idea that the AMO change was a response to the warming in the Arctic was being accepted as incorrect.

 

I must agree though that some interaction is probable and in the same way as the Nino is likely to be stronger with warmer SST's, so any saline response in the Arctic is more likely to make the changes in the AMO appear stronger.

 

MIA

 

Edit ..

 

Just seen Interitus's response above quoting much more extensively from a variety of papers. But all seem to me to be saying that

it is being caused by the atmospheric and ocean coupling interations which are then  causing the AMO effects further down the line.    Interitus also shows that  the response in the North Atlantic to the cooler temperatures further souh is extremely complicated. I guess we will have to await the latest data expected  in January for answers.

Edited by Midlands Ice Age
Link to post
Share on other sites

BFTV..

 

Is it your contention that it was the greenland ice sheet meltwater which caused the  AMO to enter its down phase?

I was not using the sea ice to suggest that  it had anything to do with the change in the AMOC? Just enquiring whether the gain in ice could have anything to do with 'weakening' AMO?

 

But you state that the rapid greenland ice sheet melting over the last 100 years when  it has been very negative and so must be also considered. The problem is which is the chicken and which is the egg. I have also seen responses elsewhere that hint that the Greenland ice sheet retreat appears to have stopped this year.

 

http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/greenland-blowing-away-ice-growth-records/

 

 

Blessed Weather has already shown a  paper in  which it suggests that the AMO appears to be responding to climatic responses in the atmosphere

 

http://noc.ac.uk/new...-winter-cooling

 

and below is another in which they have examined  and modelled it fairly extensively and have come to the conclusion that atmospheric conditions are dominating the AMO response.

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151015144804.htm

 

I thought that the idea that the AMO change was a response to the warming in the Arctic was being accepted as incorrect.

 

I must agree though that some interaction is probable and in the same way as the Nino is likely to be stronger with warmer SST's, so any saline response in the Arctic is more likely to make the changes in the AMO appear stronger.

 

MIA

 

Edit ..

 

Just seen Interitus's response above quoting much more extensively from a variety of papers. But all seem to me to be saying that

it is being caused by the atmospheric and ocean coupling interations which are then  causing the AMO effects further down the line.    Interitus also shows that  the response in the North Atlantic to the cooler temperatures further souh is extremely complicated. I guess we will have to await the latest data expected  in January for answers.

 

MIA,

 

I think you need to read back a little. The iceagenow link is highly misleading and the graph I posted shows that. A few weeks of data cannot show the end of a long term trend for ice loss anyway.

 

I don't know what is causing the cold pool, or if it's related to the AMO or if the AMO will switch to -ve soon, but I think it's possible that additional meltwater from Greenland is influencing things. There are lots of influencing factors at play here, no need to dismiss any yet as far as I can tell.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

The gyre strengths have a large complicating effect on the concept of a straight forward conveyor of water transfer........

 

............(Snipped)

 

 

 

BFTV..

 

Is it your contention that it was the greenland ice sheet meltwater which caused the  AMO to enter its down phase?

 

.............(Snipped)

 

Just seen Interitus's response above quoting much more extensively from a variety of papers. But all seem to me to be saying that

it is being caused by the atmospheric and ocean coupling interations which are then  causing the AMO effects further down the line.    Interitus also shows that  the response in the North Atlantic to the cooler temperatures further souh is extremely complicated. I guess we will have to await the latest data expected  in January for answers.

 

Thanks Interitus. Good points made.

 

MIA - don't know whether you spotted this paper. It was first published online in August 2015, so recent research.

 

Response of Atlantic overturning to future warming in a coupled atmosphere-ocean-ice sheet model.

 

Key points (copied from the paper):

 

• Ice sheet/climate feedbacks can occur on a decadal scale in the future

• Greenland melting causes the deep ocean circulation to decrease significantly

• The discrepancy caused by including an ice sheet causes cooling of up to 30%

 

Full paper: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL065276/pdf

 

So many research papers and so much forcing, coupling and feedback going on!! And a few of these papers are not without some contradictions between each other either!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

MIA,

 

I think you need to read back a little. The iceagenow link is highly misleading and the graph I posted shows that. A few weeks of data cannot show the end of a long term trend for ice loss anyway.

 

I don't know what is causing the cold pool, or if it's related to the AMO or if the AMO will switch to -ve soon, but I think it's possible that additional meltwater from Greenland is influencing things. There are lots of influencing factors at play here, no need to dismiss any yet as far as I can tell.

 

I think we are violently agreeing. Is it significant that Arctic sea ice appears to have turned the corner, at the same time as the Greenland ice sheet melting appears to be at least slowing at the same time as the massive cold water anomaly in the Atlantic driver happens?         No-one knows yet what is causing the cold anomalies.

 

So many reports with different views.

 

So many research papers and so much forcing, coupling and feedback going on!! And a few of these papers are not without some contradictions between each other either!

 

It is conflicting, as my response to BFTV shows. I find it interesting that many of the global warming climate scientists are proposing the gwarming route, whereas many of the papers from 'independent' uni's  are looking at actual natual patterns.

 

As I said above the numbers produced in the Northern Atlantic as well as the Rapid array  data in January will hopefully give us the answer. I still have this feeling that it is even more complcated  than currently is being examined and goes back to a north/southern hemisphere interaction of equalising the heat between  both hemispheres, which can only be performed by the Atlantic..

 

MIA

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The AMO cycle has been known about for years and was due based on past cycle lengths to be be moving into its cold phase around now. Personally, I'd expect a brief warming over the next 12 months in response to the large El Niño, before we see the real switch in 2017; that's just gut feel though. Anyway, given it's a long term, acknowledged cycle, which is behaving as would be expected, whatever the cause of the move into the cold phase, it's very unlikely to be global warming - in case anyone is thinking that.

Edited by beng
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The AMO cycle has been known about for years and was due based on past cycle lengths to be be moving into its cold phase around now. Personally, I'd expect a brief warming over the next 12 months in response to the large El Niño, before we see the real switch in 2017; that's just gut feel though. Anyway, given it's a long term, acknowledged cycle, which is behaving as would be expected, whatever the cause of the move into the cold phase, it's very unlikely to be global warming - in case anyone is thinking that.

Indeed beng and I'm thinking along the same lines as you regarding the cold pool temporarily easing off for a wee while.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are violently agreeing. Is it significant that Arctic sea ice appears to have turned the corner, at the same time as the Greenland ice sheet melting appears to be at least slowing at the same time as the massive cold water anomaly in the Atlantic driver happens?        

 

Could you expand a little on what you mean by the first statement and a link(s) to confirm the second.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The AMO cycle has been known about for years and was due based on past cycle lengths to be be moving into its cold phase around now. Personally, I'd expect a brief warming over the next 12 months in response to the large El Niño, before we see the real switch in 2017; that's just gut feel though. Anyway, given it's a long term, acknowledged cycle, which is behaving as would be expected, whatever the cause of the move into the cold phase, it's very unlikely to be global warming - in case anyone is thinking that.

 

can we be sure it's behaving as expected?

 

Oceanographers will hate this: The AMO and AMOC are only an atmospherically driven phenomenon

 

 

 

The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation without a role for ocean circulation

 

The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) is a major mode of climate variability with important societal impacts. Most previous explanations identify the driver of the AMO as the ocean circulation, specifically the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Here we show that the main features of the observed AMO are reproduced in models where the ocean heat transport is prescribed and thus cannot be the driver. Allowing the ocean circulation to interact with the atmosphere does not significantly alter the characteristics of the AMO in the current generation of climate models. These results suggest that the AMO is the response to stochastic forcing from the mid-latitude atmospheric circulation, with thermal coupling playing a role in the tropics. In this view, the AMOC and other ocean circulation changes would be largely a response to, not a cause of, the AMO.

 

http://www.sciencema...0/6258/320.full

Edited by knocker
Link to post
Share on other sites

can we be sure it's behaving as expected?

 

Oceanographers will hate this: The AMO and AMOC are only an atmospherically driven phenomenon

 

 

 

http://www.sciencema...0/6258/320.full

X

Can we be sure that global temps will continue to rise, the answer no but the probabilities say yes. Likewise the AMO is doing what the AMO does and until we see something unusual happening then we have to go with the probability that it's behaving quite normally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you expand a little on what you mean by the first statement and a link(s) to confirm the second.

 

 

knocker..

 

Please refer to my posts 378 and 383 above.

 

I have tied the events together in my response you responded to...

 

All I am say is that it is more likely to be the natural AMO cycle and also would the effects as described be expected at the same time if there was/is no connection?.

 

MIA. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

knocker..

 

Please refer to my posts 378 and 383 above.

 

I have tied the events together in my response you responded to...

 

All I am say is that it is more likely to be the natural AMO cycle and also would the effects as described be expected at the same time if there was/is no connection?.

 

MIA. 

 

I would just appreciate the link to the fact that the Greenland melt is slowing down, not your reasons for saying it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - agree with Knocker. I like to be as open minded as possible with regards to aspects of AGW... but I would also like to see your evidence that the Greenland ice melt is slowing down MIA. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

BW...

Do these reports indicate that the melting of the ice in the Arctic area has contributed little to the setup of this event?

I still think it possible that it may have contributed to the continuation of the cooling, but I guess we will find that out when we hear the results in January.

 

MIA

 

The melting isn't large enough to cause direct cooling. The reduced salinity is much more significant in its ability to reduce convection and overturning in the deep water formation areas, here described in Swingedouw et al. - http://www.cgam.nerc.ac.uk/~ericg/publications/Swingedouw_al_CD06.pdf

 

 

On a time scale of a century, the North Atlantic branch of the THC seems mostly sensitive to preconditioning by ice and atmosphere fluxes over the Labrador, Irminger and GIN Seas convection sites (Stouffer and Manabe 2003). The winter cooling by the atmosphere is necessary to produce local instabilities and deep water formation in the North Atlantic, but salinity also plays a crucial role. Density is strongly sensitive to salinity at high latitudes. For example, for a temperature below 10C, a cooling of 1.1C is necessary to increase density by 0.1 kg/m3, against an increase of only 0.012 PSU for salinity.

 

Then with regards to the next January RAPID data, bear in mind it takes about a decade for deep water formed in the Labrador Sea to reach the Abaco line in the Bahamas at 26°N, as described in Propagation pathways of classical Labrador Sea water from its source region to 26°Nhttp://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/docs/vanSebille_etal_2012.pdf - recent changes will take a time to appear.

 

MIA - don't know whether you spotted this paper. It was first published online in August 2015, so recent research.

 

Response of Atlantic overturning to future warming in a coupled atmosphere-ocean-ice sheet model.

 

Key points (copied from the paper):

 

• Ice sheet/climate feedbacks can occur on a decadal scale in the future

• Greenland melting causes the deep ocean circulation to decrease significantly

• The discrepancy caused by including an ice sheet causes cooling of up to 30%

 

Full paper: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL065276/pdf

 

So many research papers and so much forcing, coupling and feedback going on!! And a few of these papers are not without some contradictions between each other either!

 

One more key point missed from this paper, in common with just about all freshwater hosing model experiments is the size of the freshwater flux required to generate the significant changes in AMOC and the timescales involved. In their RCP projections by the end of this century the freshwater flux is about 0.03 Sv or 945 gigatonnes equivalent to around 2.6mm sea level rise per year, reducing AMOC from about 18 to 14 Sv.

This puts into perspective the likely effect of current rates of Greenland sea level rise of 0.61 mm/yr (Box & Colgan 2013) and even the extreme 474 GT mass balance loss calculated for 2012 is half the forecast annual average.

Other studies have suggested that this degree of AMOC sensitivity requires more in the order 0.1 Sv, 3150 GT or 8.7mm/yr to produce a similar effect.

This paper http://www.climate.unibe.ch/~stocker/papers/renold09qsr.pdf manages to produce the 6 degree Celsius cooling over the north Atlantic many would associate with AMOC shutdown - but they specified 200 years of freshwater hosing linearly increasing to 1 Sv after 100 years then back to zero. This is an average of nearly 4.5 cm sea level rise per year or nearly 9 metres in two centuries, a cataclysmic increase which would cause many more problems than just AMOC weakening - but even then the AMOC doesn't shutdown completely, reducing to between 4-5 Sv from their initial control value of 16 Sv after 150 years - it is just much shallower and contracted towards the tropics.

Edited by Interitus
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the original source was DMI but you chose a web site that had deliberately extracted that graph whilst failing to mention that the Greenland ice sheet, taking into account everything, is currently losing 300 billion tonnes of ice a year. After doing so you posted this:

 

 

By doing so you appear, I stress appear, to be deliberately posting false information very relevant to this thread. I think that quite important.

The graph is False?  I don't think so knocker,  a point of view may be right or wrong for sure, but the information of the graph isn't and could be relevant . If I'm guilty of anything it's not finding/posting the link you provided [which you do well on regular basis] of the same graph but the aim was the graph and its information.  I do however, believe that big variability displays a natural side more at play....my opinion again until concrete proof gets achieved either way.

The cold pool is very recent but the billions and billions of tons of Greenland ice loss [incredible amount on face of it] it would seem, as posted by BFTV and yourself, seems to have been going on for some considerable time.  So the question is excessive ice loss from Greenland assisting or not...seems not to me for two reasons, the cold pool should have been there well before now? and maybe more of a permanent feature if it was assisted by/down to Greenland ice loss?

Joe B has for several years now been touting the anticipated switch in AMO in latter half of this decade.  So as posted above the natural cycle has been known about like the PDO.    Personally I think we are seeing a natural cycle overturn occur, but that is my opinion only and not to be misconstrued as deliberate false information not relevant to this thread. 

 

Just to add, I have to say I think BFTV post above this is top notch

 

 

BFTP

Edited by BLAST FROM THE PAST
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, this cold pool issue is a complex one, and it's relationship with the AMO is just yet another dimension to it. We've seen evidence that it's related to atmospheric conditions, the AMO, to extra freshwater input, a long term decline (regionally or not) in the AMOC and more. It's made all the more complex by lags, feedbacks and a myriad of interactions within the climate system.

 

This has been a fascinating and informative thread so far. While it's highly unlikely that a bunch of amateurs on a weather site will solve this puzzle, I think we should be open to, and could benefit from, discussing all possibilities, ideally with evidence and sound reasoning.  :drinks:

 

Excellent summary there, BFTV. :good:

 

It appears that both the PDO and AMO might not have the regular cyclicity, previously attributed - whatever the drivers, they will be many and complicated. 

 

The one apparent thing in this rash of recent research: the scientists see a possibility of something quite different (regionally) to what had previously been assumed to be a uniform picture.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent summary there, BFTV. :good:

 

It appears that both the PDO and AMO might not have the regular cyclicity, previously attributed - whatever the drivers, they will be many and complicated. 

 

The one apparent thing in this rash of recent research: the scientists see a possibility of something quite different (regionally) to what had previously been assumed to be a uniform picture.

With the PDO its probably best to take a decadal average rather than assume every year will be the same.

The real tell will be once Nino goes. Will we see a dive or neutral bobbing up and down values.

Of course that raises the question of whether the PDO or Nino drive each other and in that case which one is dominant.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree that there is no cycle involved with the AMO as the graph below demonstrates, as for misleading with false information then attributing melt water from Greenland with nothing more than scant theories and no factual data is very misleading. Now if we were to agree on that being a possibility then I would agree otherwise its straw clutching at best.

 

2000px-Atlantic_Multidecadal_Oscillation

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...