By P Gosselin
German online agriculture information site agrarheute.com here asks whether the climate models wrong since the East “East Pacific has been cooling down more and more over the past 30 years” and this “contrary to all predictions”.
Modern agriculture knows that oceanic cycles have significant consequences for global agriculture.
No explanation for cooling
“Why does this part of the eastern Pacific contradict climate models, scientists ask, and they can’t find a simple explanation,” reports agriheute.com. The cooling of the East Pacific has defied the forecasts made by climate models, which predicted a warming due to “greenhouse gas” emissions.
The region of cooling is the ocean area that “stretches west of Ecuador” and “could reduce greenhouse gas warming by 30 percent”. The false prediction by climate models risk misleading the agriculture industry, as it is known that ocean temperatures impact growing conditions around the world.
Major impacts around the world
“The steady cooling also has global implications. The future of the cold region could determine, among other things, whether California is hit by a permanent drought or Australia faces increasingly severe wildfires,” agrarheute.com adds. “It affects the intensity of the monsoon season in India and the likelihood of droughts and famines in the Horn of Africa. It could even change the scale of climate change worldwide by altering the sensitivity of Earth’s atmosphere to rising greenhouse gas emissions.”
Relying on faulty climate models could put farmers totally on the wrong track.
Lots of unknowns
“The problem is that if we don’t know why this cooling is happening, we don’t know when it will stop or if it will suddenly turn into warming,” said Pedro DiNezio of the University of Colorado at Boulder.
If natural phenomena are causing large oceanic regions to cool, then it is not a stretch of the imagination to think that natural factors are likely causing other regions to warm. It’s the cycles, stupid!
“No explanation for cooling”
…lower solar activity since the 1990s.
“The problem is that if we don’t know why this cooling is happening, we don’t know when it will stop or if it will suddenly turn into warming,”
And we’ve been taught to be soooo afraid of warming
Isn’t science settled ? 😀
No, just the deceit
To the climate catastrophists, the “science” can be settled while more research is still required.
The process of doublethink cannot be understood without doublethink.
“The problem is that if we don’t know why this cooling is happening, we don’t know when it will stop or if it will suddenly turn into warming,” said Pedro DiNezio of the University of Colorado at Boulder.
… but we do know, with absolute certainty, that the warming is happening elsewhere, and we know exactly why it is happening, and we know that it will keep happening at an accelerating rate, and we know that the only way to stop it and stay alive is to take away other peoples stuff.
Solar activity has more impact on our climate than the climerati shills understand or accept
Maybe but how? No one really knows because it is a very complex phenomena with many poorly understood variables and unknown variables.
Human civilization is the one big variable that the Green Regime blames all weather anomalies.. No better way to kill science by limiting scientific inquiry to one variable. Occam’s razor solves the Green Regime problem easily. Enforcing a one variable theory about a complex phenomena is not science it’s politics. It requires many potent lies to restrict a scientific theory about a complex phenomena to one variable. The motivation behind such blatant lies can only indicate there is much at stake. And that only thing that can matter that much in a pollical movement is power. Therefore the Green Regime and/or those who are leveraging it, want a a very big chunk of power. To lie with massive impunity presupposes they already have the power to be successful. They feel they won the battle to win the war for their share of global power. And they are probably right. Those who are on the bandwagon with the Green Regime Global Juggernaut don’t care about the truth behind a regional cooling spell. It’s irrelevant because science is not the issue. Just one dismissing story blaming the cooling on climate change aka human civilization solves the problem of scientific evidence for them. The problem is us. Just think about what the future solution for us will be…maybe jack boots, (canvas boots painted black with non-0il based paint) and all.
BTW for those it matters to…. like us
“cosmic radiation may heat up radioactive-isotopes in the mantle and crust …
Lots of magma down there for cosmic radiation to fire up but we don’t have a clue about any of this.”
I think we can safely say that that suggestion is wrong. Firstly “cosmic radiation” is not a well defined term and I am guessing that JC means cosmic rays. Now the majority of cosmic rays hit something in the atmosphere and so do not reach the surface. Then of the ones that do they do not have enough energy to produce significant heating. And I am baffled as to why they would only heat up radioactive isotopes and not all elements — there is some new physics going on here that JC needs to explain. Plus there is the fact that temperate does not change the decay rates of elements so even if the radioactive isotopes where heated nothing would change.
I was thinking the same thing – while more clouds caused by increased cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere when there is less solar activity or solar wind, that doesn’t mean cosmic bombardment like from some Starkiller base causing the guts of the Earth to heat up – we’d all be dead before long before it reached that level – and apparently the radioactive elements in the Earth’s crust are doing a great job of their own, heating the core and interior without any help from cosmic rays.
I wonder if the Earth’s magnetic field is affected by the solar wind, and so does it have any effect on the core and it’s churning molten metal outer layers. A few degrees, more or less, even on top of thousands might make a difference at the surface or the ocean depths to the weather.
We know that Earth’s magnetic field is weakening so a less strong field should have a bigger effect.
I could be very wrong. The point was to throw out a bunch of possible variables related to solar impact on climate/weather variance to support my point that the Green Regime only cares about one, climate change which means human civilization. There are many more variables to study. I was hoping the experts would chime in. I am a clinical analyst/theologian/Psychotherapist not a scientist. Everything I have learned about climate science I learned reading WUWT since 2008.
“ENSO….. is there a correlation with the ENSO with solar output variation”
Yes. But the bad stuff shouldn’t happen if everyone would just understand these facts:
1) Your question was first answered in 2020 in my Sun-Climate Symposium poster,
“A Niño Intrayear Ratio (NIR) timeseries is introduced as annual ratios since 1870, calculated from each year’s area-weighted Niño1-4 monthly averages first to second half. NIR 30-year average (30ya) lags the Solar Influences Data Center (SIDC) v2 sunspot number (SN) 30ya by 13 years and positive above SIDC 87 v2 SN, peaking in the 1990s. The departure from average detrended integrated annual change in Mauna Loa (ML) atmospheric CO2 change was maximized during strong solar cycles 21-23, following a long-term increase in NIR, lagging the 30ya NIR by 1 year, both now declining from lower solar activity, positive above 106.7 SN.”
2) Then further in my 2022 Sun-Climate Symposium and AGU posters,
“Solar Cycle Induced Tropical Warming/Cooling Pattern Found
Asymmetrical Tropical 1°C step-up/down was found by differencing:
•Step-up: subtract previous solar min years SST from solar maxs SST
•Step-down: subtract previous solar max years SST from solar mins
The solar maximum and solar minimum years of Fig.1, second panel, are shown with red and blue dots for the 9 solar cycles studied in Fig. 2.
Typically the ENSO region warms (cools) first, leading to general global ocean warming (cooling), following solar activity increases (decreases) above (below) the solar threshold
[95 SN], demonstrated below with ERSSTv5.
The odds are 1.9×10^11:1 against this pattern recurring 9 times in a row [w/o solar]”
3) My 2023 Sun-Climate Symposium poster will show among other things that right now the tenth solar step-up in a row is happening, increasing those odds calculated in 2022.
“Solar cycle 25 has already provided several confirmations of solar super-sensitivity from the end of La Niña declared three days after the 365-day sunspot average equaled 95, after the first three consecutive months of sunspots greater than 95 SN, as was expected in May 2022; then segueing into El Niño-like ocean warming conditions. Strong sunspot activity from September 2022 onwards has driven total solar irradiance to the highest levels since 2002. Evidence has mounted indicating high TSI has enhanced upper ocean absorbed solar radiation causing a subsurface Kelvin wave, marine heat waves,… ”
Mine is the only explanation for the 30y tropical cooling and the current warming too.
Thank you for this very helpful reply. Everything I know about climate science I h reading WUWT since 2008. I am clinical analyst not a scientist.
The point of my post is The Green Regime limits all the possible variables on anomalous weather events to one variable that is human civilization. They don’t do science they do narrative management. I added a bunch of speculative variables I don’t know much about regarding the Sun’s role in weather/climate variation with hopes scientists like yourself would reply.
Or just another symptom of a rotating planet 70% covered in water with an orbiting moon as awell as direct solar effects as well as solar and other planetary gravitational effects moving said fluid and in turn initiating Coriolis effect both in an E-W-N-S direction but radially also coupling with fluid density effects associated with temperature and even fresh water inflows.
Wow, simplistic models and selective data sets might just miss certain realities.
Saw one the other day asserting increased temperatures in the STate of Victoria, AUstralia. Funny thing though, the data started on a strong ‘trough’ , i.e. an historiacally low value and finished on a peak, an historically high value. If you did that with data conforming to a pure sine wave you would still get an uptrend. I saw similar in a paper regarding ‘sea level rise’ based on data from Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour. Lo and behold! folks. An uptrend! yet the sinusoidal nature of the data was clear as day. There was some actual uptrend but the data vasectomy multiplied it by several times.
Don’t be silly, the Sun has no effect on Earth’s climate, the models say so.
Most people don’t realize how huge the Pacific ocean is. Whatever the Planck feedback, evaporation rate, and cloud cover is there, affects the climate in the rest of the world a couple of months later. If currents decide to change locations, it probably changes a nearby continent’s climate by part of a degree for the next 500 years….
Australia lower left, NA upper right…
And here is a similar perspective from the GOES West geostationary satellite. The link activates a 2-hour animation of images from what NOAA calls the “CO2 Longwave IR” band. No climate model comes even close to the real thing, as these near-real-time, high resolution images help us grasp. This is the same band of wavelengths, centered at 13.3 microns, from which much of the static warming effect of incremental CO2 is computed. No surprise at the headline on this post, “Climate Models Wrong on the East Pacific…” Those models never had ANY diagnostic or predictive power to determine the ocean response or the overall climate response to rising CO2 in the atmosphere.
https://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/GOES/fulldisk_band.php?sat=G18&band=16&length=12
It’s 7500 miles (6500 nm) from San Diego to Sydney. That’s a long way.
No stats, nothing about how much cooler, nor the extent, not even a graph.
I’ve included a graph of the SST anomalies of the waters off the coast of Peru in a comment below.
Regards,
Bob
That is because humans are EVIL!!!!!!! Except for them. All other humans have to be exterminated. Get with the program, boomer. (does it really need a sarc tag?)
The PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) is cooling. Looks like CO2 is under-performing.
PDO seems to have more cold than warm phases.
John, regarding your two graphs, it’s meaningless to compare the AMO and PDO. Unlike the AMO, the PDO does not represent the surface temperature of the North Pacific. It represents the spatial patterns of the sea surface temperature anomalies of the extratropical North Pacific.
Regards,
Bob
Understand – but I find the AMO and PDO very useful in explaining climate patterns during my climate talks.
Maybe you could help explain this temp chart for PDO to help clear up confusion. It’s on the WUWT reference pages.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/PDO%20MonthlyIndexSince1979%20With37monthRunningAverage.gif
ResourceGuy, the labeling of the y-axis on the climate4you PDO graph is incorrect. The PDO data are NOT presented in Deg C. The y-axis should be labeled PDO.
Regards,
Bob
there is simply not enough of it to affect anything – as Richard Lindzen said – to think that a tiny amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has more of an effect on the climate than the sun, the earth’s rotation, the oceans and their interactions with the continents is simply – “magical thinking”
CO2 was NEVER GOING TO “PERFORM” as they tell us it will, because it is not possible. Infrared radiation cannot penetrate water beyond a few MICRONS (THOUSANDTHS of a millimeter) and does NOT warm it whatsoever.
All ocean heat content comes from the Sun or from the Earh’s crust beneath the water (undersea volcanic activity, geothermal).
CO2 does nothing to the ocean heat content, just like it does nothing to atmospheric heat content.
You are right but for the wrong reason. For IR, the oceans act like land. The downwelling radiation energy does not penetrate but counters the T^4 radiation from the surface. This is the way radiation heat transfer works and, with the incorporation of view factor and emissivity, which here are 1 and about 0.98 , is analyzed by engineers.
“ counters the T^4 radiation from the surface.”
No evidence of that.
Net radiation flux depends on temperature differences.
Atmospheric ACO2 does not and can not alter the temperature gradient.
Exactly. For some reason folks have the idea that “back radiation” from a cold body can alter the radiation from a hot body. Even Planck recognized that a body radiates based on its temperature and will continue to do so regardless of the amount of energy absorbed from a cold body. The net energy still goes from hot to cold.
Yea! Where is my global warming!!!!!!! I paid for it and I WANT IT!!!!!!! Actually I really wish PA would get a really nasty winter. We keep getting ripped off, other people getting our snow, the bastiches!
The AMO shows the real global temperature profile: Warm 1880’s cooling down to the 1910’s, then warming up through the 1930’s, then cooling down through the 1970’s, and then warming up from the 1980’s to the present, and all three temperature highpoints are equally warm, and the low points are equally cool.
Just the same as the U.S. temperature profile. And the same profile as all unmodified regional surface temperature charts from around the world.
Hansen 1999:
The only “temperature” chart that does not look like this profile is the bogus, bastardized “hotter and hotter” Hockey Stick charts, which misrepresents the global temperature profile and turns it into a propaganda tool, causing the unnecessary spending of TRILLIONS of dollars trying to fix a CO2 problem that does not need fixing. All because of a bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick chart.
Here is a comparison of the US temperature chart profile (Hansen 1999) to a bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick global “temperature” chart.
The AMO and all the unmodified regional surface temperature charts from around the world have the same temperature profile as the AMO and the US chart.
None of them look like the profile of the bogus Hockey Stick. The Hockey Stick chart is the outliar. And the only thing climate alarmist have to hang their hats on. And it is a complete misrepresentation of reality. The historic written temperature records prove it.
Thanks Tom. I totally agree. I use many of these charts in my climate talks – including the many charts I create – such as the attached chart. I am also very aware of how USHCN data is altered and fabricated – and have an entire talk just on this subject – as illustrated in my video … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs-K_tadveI
“We Don’t Know Why This Cooling Is Happening”
I’m going to take a WAG here and say the models are wrong because it has bugger all to do with CO2:
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=126238
Old joke:
Two meteorologists and a climate modeller are duck hunting. A lone duck flies over head. The first meteorologist aims but shoots high, the second meteorologist aims and shoots low.
The climate modeller exclaims “We got him”.
This humor made my day!
That is an old joke.
The modern-day climate modeler does not go hunting with meteorologists. They prefer to duck hunt from their yacht while waiting for assistants to splice data and operate AI systems to write ‘preapproved narrative’ publications.
“The modern-day climate modeler”
Vegetarian, non-hunter?
I wonder which hunter got TV interviews and professional awards for the cause.
The climate modeller gets out his laptop, aims it at the hapless bird, and exclaims…lightning! bird falls from the sky..Duck soup tonight!
I’d go one leap further and say because the modellers are raving lefty hysterics full of deceit
I’d go one leap further and say because the modellers are raving lefty hysterics full of
deceitI think you spelled “sh*t” wrong.
Like everything else “climate!”
The models are expensive junk
In the real world….
Chris Packham issues legal challenge to PM over delay to net-zero policies
The naturalist and TV presenter said Rishi Sunak failed to consult the public, his own climate advisers and Parliament
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/chris-packham-legal-challenge-rishi-sunak-net-zero-b1111223.html
That’s rich. The public has never been consulted on net zero – only told….
When Packham rids himself of oil, hydrocarbons and nuclear power, he will have the right to pontificate, until then, he’s just another low frequency hum
Can I ask a couple of dumb questions? The oceans have a thermal mass about 1000 times the atmosphere. All CO2-driven global warming goes through the atmosphere. An increase in the ocean temperature of 0.1degC would require a decrease of the atmosphere of 100 degC. Is this right? Also, how does the atmosphere warm the oceans? Long wave radiation does not penetrate the surface layer. What is the physical mechanism for ocean warming?
mud -washed into the water from farmland.
Also dust, smoke and ash from wildfires (airborne and waterborne) plus the assorted grime that arises off cities
(And not forgetting, UK sewage)
There is a very very serious issue with that water-borne mud and it explains exactly what’s going on here.
2 issues in fact.
1/ It is, as Jim Steele is currently so very fond of, to do with Solar Ponds BUT, with Upside Down Solar Ponds
= where the hot part of the pond at at the surface and not at the bottom.
Clear clean water of considerable depth (>100metres) absorbs solar energy to a depth of about 100metres
Muddy water absorbs the entirety of Sol’s energy within the top (WAG) 20 metres. The top 20 metres can and do get very warm – right up to their (Stefan) limit of 31°C
But: The water below that top 20m layer is now getting next to zero energy and can thus be doing nothing else but cooling.
If anything stirs up the top layer or sucks away the heat (e.g. Cyclone, Hurricane, TropicalStorm, BoringOldThunderstorm, that cold water will appear at the surface and so, We see what is reported here
Oceanic cooling
2/ The 2nd issue is that that extra hot water created by the mud is absolutely magnetic to Hurricanes.
btw: I asked but did anyone check, about Superstorm Sandy.
My prediction was that it arrived at a time of High Tide and bingo – yes it did= almost exactly the time of a full moon.
i.e. The Moon used the tide to try return the soil/mud/silt to the land it came from and Sandy followed it in
to wrap it up and be absolutely clear, esp why I keep asserting that Deserts are Cold Places
Bingo: Deserts are = Cold Places and therein lies the mechanism
I have no clue other than- anyone not familiar with swimming in Maine’s coastal waters- you’re in for a surprise. It’s dam near freezing in the middle of a summer heat wave.
Surface water currents in northern and southern regions radiate heat to outer space. They cool to around freezing and sink to the sea floor at about 4 C temperature. The spinning of the Earth moves that cold water back to equatorial regions over decades, where eventually it is forced by hydrostatics to mix, resurface and be warmed by the tropical Sun. Thus the mechanism of ocean warming you have asked for is that if large portions of the northern and southern extremes of the planet become slightly less cold for any reason, the warmer portions of sea surface in between must be a little bit warmer. The deep ocean temperature is unlikely to change from 4 C, but the area and volume less than 4 C will be slightly reduced.
Hmmm, I didn’t explain that very well. The Sea surface is a small portion of the total ocean, only a few meters of the 3.8 Km ocean depth. So that surface temp is fairly sensitive to the rates at which cooling at the poles and warming by mixing at the tropics occurs. Hope that helps….
Confusing question but if I get your drift the answer is No. The ocean has a large thermal mass which means it takes many times more energy to produce the same temperature change in the ocean than it does the atmosphere. This has nothing to do with relative temperatures, but with the relative time to make such a change. If the ocean and atmosphere were in temperature equilibrium, then a
temperature increase of the atmosphere in contact with the ocean would eventually raise the ocean by 
all other things remaining the same, (Ceteris paribus is the Latin phrase).
Heat transfer depends on differences in temperature, not differences in energy content.
Anywhere on Earth where atmosphere in contact with the ocean is warmer (higher temperature) than the ocean surface, heat will flow from atmosphere to ocean. Also if precipitation landing on the ocean surface is warmer than the ocean surface that too will warm the ocean. Finally, solar radiation can penetrate to significant depth and warm the ocean, but if the surface is mixed by waves, then infrared radiation from the sky though it be absorbed by a very thin surface layer might be mixed to some depth quickly and contribute to warming the ocean.
Heat transfer at the interface between atmosphere and either ocean or dry land is a complicated matter involving conduction, evaporation, precipitation, convection, and radiation. Heat transfer can go either direction.
The atmosphere DOESN’T warm the oceans. Any claims that it does are garden variety bullshit.
Story Tip: check out the report and video, on Breitbart, of Laurence Fox house being raided in London, allegedly for promoting the idea of destroying the Climate Cameras. Great comments by Fox and others.
Looks like he’s been blade running…
arrest on suspicion of damaging ULEZ cameras
https://news.sky.com/story/laurence-fox-arrested-after-video-showing-police-in-his-home-shared-on-social-media-12976589
They won’t have any hard evidence of criminal activity – saying they need removing by angle grinder is not the same as doing it
He was great in the tv show “Lewis”!
And yet the grubby JSO idiots can destroy property at will, no consequences, even admired by the climerati for taking action
Curious timing on that police raid. Quite some time after his comments about the ULEZ cameras but almost immediately after some unwise comments made about a female journalist. I draw no conclusions from this, just saying.
And no action taken against the twat Chris Packham who put out a video encouraging law-breaking.
Lawfare is the greatest weapon of the marxist leftists. They must be defanged.
Below is a graph of the SST anomalies of the East Pacific off the coast of Peru, which was one of the locations mentioned in the post. I’ll let you comment.
Regards,
Bob
We are back to butterflies again. The idea that any of our computer models can accurately predict any thing in this realm is absolutely absurd. Even our best CFD programs do not even come close to resolving all the interaction involved with all the forces involved in planet wide physics – not even freaking close. Even if we were sure we understood all the mechanisms- not possible at this point in time.
Which of course doesn’t mean they shouldn’t try to develop climate models- only they shouldn’t worship them as revealed truth.
A bad model can be worse than no model – il, as you say, the model is “believed”.
They take an assumption or tens of them and assume the worst
It’s the scare potential that counts
We know some of the mechanisms, even if we don’t understand them. The PDO has been known for a few decades now and may well be why this region is showing cooling. It’s stupid and irresponsible for climate enthusiasts to claim ignorance of a known mechanism whilst trying desperately to explain it in terms of global warming.
This is just speculation. Is it possible the warming and/or cooling of the Pacific is mostly caused by underseas volcanic activity? And that it is volcanic activity that under the ocean that causes El Ninos? No one really know how extensive volcanic activity is on the floor of the ocean. If an enormous volcano goes off, all that volcanic heat has to go somewhere. And warmer water would rise to the surface. I know that the deep ocean is cold, and that water has a large thermal inertia. But perhaps a large enough eruption along a line of thermal vents or from an erupting ocean floor volcano over a long enough period could produce enough hot water to cause the ocean surface to heat up? After all, look how much heat a large volcano on land can produce. Be kind. I’m just wondering.
Every so often, a large raft of floating pumice cobbles, pebbles, and smaller, will be discovered in the South Pacific. Generally, there is nothing else to provide evidence that an undersea eruption has taken place.
Recently. the number of known undersea volcanoes (seamounts) has nearly doubled after a mapping effort based on gravity measurements from space.
I suspect that the estimates on geothermal heat from individual volcanoes and spreading centers is underestimated.
“If natural phenomena are causing large oceanic regions to cool, then it is not a stretch of the imagination to think that natural factors are likely causing other regions to warm. It’s the cycles, stupid!”
If man made phenomena are causing large oceanic regions to warm, then it is not a stretch of the imagination to think that natural factors are likely causing other regions to cool. It’s the cycles, stupid!
its always the cycles, they “explain” everything and nothing
“…they “explain” everything and nothing.”
(be careful … you’ll give away the secrete to your ‘business’ model)
“If man made phenomena are causing large oceanic regions to warm”
Evidence that they are?
Or just another moosh fantasy !
Your comments are empty of any rational content.
Please tell us why the climate models got it wrong?
Do you have your very own battery car yet, mosh?
Story tip – YT video – Tesla truck with Jay Leno – Jay Leno Hauls Tesla Semi with Tesla Semi – YouTube
So, how much does it weigh?
I don’t know the exact numbers. What I read earlier, is the Tesla is only two thousand pounds heavier than diesel tractors. I don’t know if its state or federal, but they have allowed electric trucks to gross 82,000 lbs. So its a wash. However, Tesla is taking a pretty big advantage of the geography with their truck runs. Their battery factory is in Sparks, Nevada. They’re delivering batteries to Fremont, CA. After a short leg of about 30 miles, and a climb of about 2,000′, there’s a 60 mile descent down the Sierra Nevada range, from a summit of 8,800′ above sea level down the Sacramento, 3′ above sea level. They should reach Sacramento with almost a full charge. Then its only another 80 miles to Fremont, CA.
My son just took a 152,000 lb oversized load from the east coast through Barstow on 15 to just outside San Diego last week crossing a pass at 8000 ft. Lets see the Tesla truck do that. Because of the oversize he had to make a large 250 + mile detour around Los Vegas through Tonopah because of the bridges. I think he only had to refuel once on that trip out.
What a shame it is that the electric Tesla semi trucks have to go back to Sparks and climb a 60 mile grade to 8800′ in order to reload.
“Why does this part of the eastern Pacific contradict climate models, scientists ask, and they can’t find a simple explanation,” reports agriheute.com.
Why does reality contradict the models? Because the models are wrong.
It doesn’t look like the UN’s IPCC bothered to do a cost-benefit study of stopping warming by 2050.
Bloomberg’s green-energy research team estimated it would cost $US 200 Trillion to stop Global Warming by 2050. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-07-05/-200-trillion-is-needed-to-stop-global-warming-that-s-a-bargain#xj4y7vzkg
There are about 2 billion households in the world, that is $US 100,000 per household.
Ninety percent of the world’s households can’t afford anything additional. That means about $US 1 million per household in developed countries or about $US 33,000 per year for 30 years. The working people can’t afford anything near that.
Most, if not almost all, families would rather have a degree or two of warming and an extra $US 1 million in their bank accounts.
Bloomburg link every day.
My guess would be the Humbolt Current which impacts the entire west coast of
South America. I’d guess the Solar Sun Spot cycle has a role as does volcanic
activity along with space weather particles.
If they are really concerned about the cooler temperatures there is an easy fix. Simply lower the historical temperatures and … problem solved.
Am I doing this right?
It has worked for them so far.🤷♂️🙄
… and these are just the know unknowns. It says nothing about the unknown unknowns.
I believe that infrared radiation from CO2 cannot penetrate into water more than the depth of a few microns, well within the range of skin temperature reduction due to evaporation. All that the CO2 IR does then is to slightly increase the rate of evaporation although by an amount so small that it would be difficult to measure. Bulk seawater is heated by visible sunlight and distributed up, down or sideways by ocean currents. Cooling of the Eastern Pacific ocean is caused by either less sunshine in that area of the world or by altered ocean currents.
The answer is simple.
THEY’RE WRONG ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND ITS DRIVERS.
THE MODELS ARE GARBAGE.
Time to face the ugly truth.
The models will tell you what to think with the right thumbs on the scale.
story tip
New study removes human bias from debate over dinosaurs’ demise | ScienceDaily
Human bias was not removed, it was just shifted from the scientists to the programmers.
I had to check the date to be sure it wasn’t April fools day. I swear CAGW is like a religion to these fools.
Like? It IS their religion.
Well, has anyone done the obvious and asked Al Gore?
The last I heard, Al Gore thought the center of the Earth was “millions of degrees” and he also said the oceans are boiling.
Same ole crazy Al. Asking him a question would probably get a crazy answer.
Cooling, warming, more storms, fewer storms, droughts, floods, oceans rising or falling. Actual conditions and causes don’t matter, as it’s ALL “climate change”. All government funded “scientists” agree, no debate is needed the issue/science is settled. And BTW, it’s all President Donald Trumps’ fault, so get ready for more indictments.
Simple really. The models are WRONG!
Therein lies the alarmist paradigm
No one fully understands climate yet, to say it’s settled, is a blatant lie
Curiously, there were 67 comments when I wrote this, and no one has used the phrase coastal upwelling, a well-known phenomenon which draws cool subsurface waters to the surface and is known to occur along the coasts of Peru and California.
Regards,
Bob
I would seem that the surprised climate models didn’t account for it either. 😎
Bob, you might be able to answer this.
Hunga Tonga was a submarine eruption that had actually been “happening” since December before the big eruption..
It must have added a large amount of energy to the ocean around it at whatever depth it was erupting.
Where would the main ocean currents take this energy, and how long would it take to be detectable?
What effects might it have?
My understanding from looking at circulation charts is that the South Pacific gyre would take the energy south towards the Antarctic, (how long would it take?) then link into the Antarctic Circumpolar current.
I mentioned that in another thread, but several people ignored it.
Bob, I initially had the same thought about upwelling. But what would have caused an increase in upwelling necessary to cool the East Pacific over time?
The only reason we need to know the “why” of any weather anomaly is so it can be ultimately blamed on human civilization. Or to find evidence to fight off the bogus blaming with actual truth. Authority and truth don’t matter anymore. No one trusts a word anyone says out side of the tribe. It’s the nut-job echo chamber political world we live in. It’s very toxic psychologically.
People would be far better off to shut it down and go do something else.
Really? The UN has already released a video explaining there is no ice or snow in Antarctica or the Arctic, so clearly all the coolth went to the East Pacific because humans are evil. Once all humans are dead everything will be FINE! Oh, but not them, they are GOOD humans because they want all humans to be dead because humans are evil, except for them. Got it?!?!? You evil human assholes?!?!?!? Just die and the climate will be FINE!!!!!!
So eventually half the world will be boiling and the other half an ice age. Jeez oh Pete we gotta get this climate change figgerd out. We need more $ to study this.
“Why does this part of the eastern Pacific contradict climate models”
Do the models agree for some other part of the world? I’m not saying climate models can’t work, but results from the earliest ones look poor with the passage of time.
O further thought prognosis might be worse if the model accuracy were good everywhere. .
“Why does this part of the eastern Pacific contradict climate models, scientists ask, and they can’t find a simple explanation,” reports agriheute.com.”
It’s the unconscious humour that is so endearing about the climate narrative.
Paraphrasing. Climate wrong, models right. The climate is guilty of misinformation and must be cancelled. How dare it contradict The Settled Science!
From what I’ve read on this site about the El Nino Southern Oscillation, cooling of the East Pacific (La Nina) causes droughts in California but heavy monsoons in east Asia, while warming of the East Pacific (El Nino) results in heavier rain in the American west but weaker monsoons in east Asia.
From the ENSO meter on this site, we’re in a strong El Nino now, but there were La Nina conditions in 2020 through 2022. Whether this is good or bad depends on which side of the Pacific one lives.