Home/Blog
One of the many tragic consequences of human-caused climate change is the nearly unprecedented lack of tornadoes during the first half of March.
According to Greg Forbes, severe weather weenie at The Weather Channel, the only other year when this happened was 1969.
Clearly, this is just one more example of how we are destroying the climate system.
1969. Woodstock. Stoners. Maybe there were tornadoes but nobody noticed.
Maybe the tornadoes got tired of all the whining and left earth ?
This can’t be caused by human-caused climate change (HC3). After all, nothing good comes of HC3. Only really, really bad stuff.
They say the arctic is warming and that is what is to be expected when the earth warms. I have always wondered why they say that?
But the real question I have by what mechanism do claim that an increase in temperature in the upper latitudes without a corresponding increase in temperature at the equator will cause more tornadoes and severe thunderstorms?
I mean I’m just a truck driver that did happen to have some 100 level education in earth sciences and meteorology. Read a few books on it like ‘The Resilient Earth’ by Doug Hoffman and Allen Simmons. And in what seems like another life time now, spent a great deal of time living outdoors in various places on this globe which required paying particular attention to the weather and possible changes. It seems to me that in increase in temperature at the poles means there will be less of a contrast or difference between the temperatures at the poles and the equator.
Thus when a cold air mass from the north or northwest meets the warmer equatorial air mass over the temperate regions of the US and the difference in temperature between the two would generally be less than it once was and so would not the probability of violent weather be reduced?
yes, the decreased temperature contrast between high and low latitudes would, if anything, cause less severe weather. The main ingredient we have been missing is low pressure troughs over the western U.S causing cyclogenesis to the lee of the Rockies.
Here’s my post from 4 years ago discussing these troughs and their connection to the Pacific Decadal Oscillation:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/05/the-tornado-pacific-decadal-oscillation-connection/
rah, here’s something I made last week that should give you an idea how sea surface temperatures varied from 1996 to March 12, 2015, that shows the periodic, seasonal Arctic increases and the equatorial temps you asked about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nmf8m_SK4Yg&feature=player_detailpage
Bob, that was excellent. One can really see an El Nino in August of 1999 near the beginning. Then later the Humbolt current bending to the west and streaming out across the Pacific.
Gonna spend some more time with with your presentation. The only way to go is full screen and just concentrate on a certain region through the whole presentation. Then play it again concentrating on a different region. Etc.
“..periodic, seasonal Arctic increases…”
Periodic with a complete fluctuation lasting several years, fine, but surely there shouldn’t be anything seasonal left in an “anomalies series?”
What about those predicted severe weather events? Seems just last year that lots of tornadoes of unusual intensity were being blamed on global warming. Humph, I think I should go re-read Lewis Carrol in order catch up on AGW theory.
again, read my blog post. There has been no increase in strong to severe tornadoes.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/05/the-tornado-pacific-decadal-oscillation-connection/
Roy,
My post was supposed to be a joke about AGW predictions and then linking what ever happens to AGW and that uncontrolled co2. One of the more memorable environmentalist news reports recently announced the arrival of isotopes from the Japanese nuclear spill to the west coast in miniscule amounts and then linking that hypothetically with a 10 year trend in failures of orca reproduction. A clear case of effect leading the cause.
well as the IPPC say-
“There is low confidence in any observed long-term (i.e., 40 years or more) increases in tropical cyclone activity”
“There is low confidence in observed trends in small spatial-scale phenomena such as tornadoes and hail because of data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems”
Hi Roy,
Now that tornadoes are down and average atmospheric wind-speed is apparently down as well (if I remember correctly from an earlier post) won’t this affect movie Wizard of Ozz movie rentals and those engaged in recreational sailing? What about the video careers of STORM CHASERS?!!! What will those misguided climate nerds with recycled Pintos stuffed with camera equipment, weather sensors, beer kegs and old laundry driving through Kansas in search of a disaster going to do?!!!! The economic and human costs could prove staggering! Thanks for a great post and …
Have a great day!
There is a near consensus of IPCC models that predict that increasing GHG’s will increase positive NAO/AO:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-5-6.html
AGW theory is laughable because their basic assumptions as to how the atmosphere would behave due to global warming in the first place have not turned out.
Read the article above.
They then cover themselves by trying to say their theory (which it did not!) predicted a more meridional jet stream pattern would evolve in response to global warming and this in turn would lead to more severe weather.
This is in direct opposition to what their theory said originally which was a more zonal atmospheric circulation and less extremes in weather.
They then try to justify this meridional pattern to global warming, by the absurd connection of a lack of global Arctic Sea Ice due to global warming causing the jet stream to be more meridional and thus create more severe weather.
There is a near consensus of IPCC models that predict that increasing GHG’s will increase positive NAO/AO:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-5-6.html
More data that shows the opposite of what their theory calls for.
In addition the global temperature data (WHICH AGAIN THEIR THEROY DOES NOT CONFORM TO) since the Holocene Optimum – Present, has been in a very slow gradual down trend punctuated with some warm periods which can be explained by Milankovitch Cycles, with Solar Variability superimposed upon that cycle and ENSO,PDO,AMO PHASES along with VOLCANIC ACTIVITY further superimposed upon the temperature trend in response to Milankovitch Cycles and Solar Variability.
http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/12/agw-falsified-noaa-long-wave-radiation-data-incompatible-with-the-theory-of-anthropogenic-global-warming-2/
This is the link I meant to send with my second post.
Anything can appear to be possible when you have no idea what you are talking about.
Now, that’s just wrong.
But mind you, it’s funny as all get-out. The problem is the coffee running out my nose.
Shame on you!
I started following this topic on a daily basis from 2007. I followed both camps, pro-scepticism and pro-warming. I assumed both sides had reasoned arguments to make.
Then one day it was like a switch had been flicked. Every five minutes the pro-warming side started talking about ‘extreme weather.’ The situation was bizarre. Why was this almost never mentioned the year before but all they wanted to chat about now? At that point I realised it wasn’t actually a debate between two balanced sides.
Joe Bastardi, who is right fairly often, thinks we will see a significant pick up in tornadoes this year.
Gee, I wonder if the energy expended by a super cyclone such as Pam might have something to do with it? Of course it couldn’t, since the weather in a fraction of North America is the only thing that matters when it comes to determining the current energy state of the global climate. (And yes, that was sarcasm.)
That would be entirely too logical.
These guys seem to forget that the deep freeze in the NE USA during the winter of 2013/2014 was also caused by a strong typhoon. You would think that a former NASA Scientist would be able to understand that a powerful weather system such as a super typhoon has the ability to affect weather thousands upon thousands of miles away.
Help! We are in the middle of an “extreme sun event” in England! Can someone please tell me the politically correct way to blame this event on global warming?
Sorry, but, they seem be going away:
U.S. Annual Totals of Tornadoes in the Local NWS Reports: 2011: 1,897. 2012: 1,116. 2013: 943. 2014: 1,055.
This paragraph provides clear idea in favor of the new people of blogging,
that genuinely how to do blogging.
You wish has been answered. Ask the folks in Moore, OK. 5 times in 5 years.
italics and italics
italics and italics and