Wx Infinity Forums

Wednesday Morning update from Jeff Lindner:

Upper air pattern of western US ridge and eastern US trough which has resulted in unseasonably warm and dry conditions for the last 6-8 weeks will continue for the next few days before changes finally occur late this weekend.

Upper ridge overhead this morning stretching from MX into the southern plains will lead to another day of warm afternoon temperatures. Weak cool front overnight with offshore winds will help to keep temperatures from getting out of control today (highs in the mid 70’s) compared to the lower 80’s yesterday. Surface high will move eastward tonight and early Thursday with strong southerly flow returning to the area. With upper ridge building and warming mid level temperatures combined with strong warm air advection on S to SW winds expect both Thursday and Friday to be warm to very warm. Will go with low 80’s both days, but would not be surprised to see some mid 80’s especially west of I-45.

Upper air pattern finally breaks down just enough to allow a storm system to approach the area late this weekend and on Monday with what appears to be the best chance of rainfall for the region since the start of 2016. Multiple days of southerly flow will help to moisten the air mass both at the surface and aloft. This combined with decent lift along a frontal boundary should result in a good chance for showers and even a few thunderstorms on Monday. Will cap rain chances at 50% for now due to the general dry pattern we have been stuck in since the start of the year, but hopefully this system can upset the current upper air pattern enough to allow drying areas to get some much needed rainfall.

Climate:
January 2016 was the warmest January on record across the planet…following eh hottest year on record (2015). Average January temperatures were just above 2.0 F degrees above normal with tremendous warmth located across the polar regions of the northern hemisphere. Some locations across the Arctic averaged 20-23F above normal for the month of January. The significant lack of cold air across the Arctic is one reason why temperatures have been so mild across the US and TX this winter. The biggest driver of this overall warmth appears to be the strong El Nino in the central and eastern Pacific, but there is likely also some degree of contribution from climate change involved as well. Typical El Nino patterns show a lag time between the maximum water temperatures (which peaked in early December) and the maximum global warmth…usually 2-4 months after the SST max. One would expect continued very warm to record warm global temperatures to continue into February and March.

I'm sorry, but did Jeff just used the term "Climate Change"? Can you elaborate a bit more on this please?

redneckweather wrote:I'm sorry, but did Jeff just used the term "Climate Change"? Can you elaborate a bit more on this please?

The climate is always changing - has been for billions of years.

I can't speak for Jeff. He would need to clarify. It's unclear if he meant strictly 'climate change' or more specifically AGW.

We have seen a pattern where there is spike in global temperatures during El Nino events. Then, once El Nino subsides, the temps cool back down but not as much. There is a new, higher plateau of 'normal' temperatures that are warmer than previous to the event. A 'new normal' if you will.

It makes sense. It's just basic physics and thermodynamics. Water takes more energy (and longer) to warm than the air. Then once we have El Nino, a lot of that pent-up energy and heat from the oceans gets released into the atmosphere, resulting in atmospheric warming. With each cycle it steps up a bit more. What we are seeing now and expect in the next few years closely mirrors what we saw with the '97 Nino event.

As we all know, it's a controversial subject and there are threads upon threads in other forums on this. We have/had many lively threads on the topic on S2k. I have long been a staunch skeptic of the influences of AGW. This is just my personal opinion, but I've come to realize that some of my views were unfortunately skewed by politics. As I focus just on the science itself, which is what we should be doing, it's becoming more apparent to me that AGW is a real factor in our climate change....but by how much and what we should do about it is the $64,000 question.

Still perplexes me why AGW is controversial. Nobody has proven that CO2 is NOT a heat-trapping gas.

For about 150 years, the Greenhouse Effect has been studied. 100 years ago Alexander Graham Bell made this observation,
"[The unchecked burning of fossil fuels] would have a sort of greenhouse effect", and "The net result is the greenhouse becomes a sort of hot-house." Bell went on to also advocate the use of alternate energy sources, such as solar energy.

There are no scientific organizations that refute AGW. There are a few neutral ones, which are directly associated with the fossil fuel industry, but all the major ones support the science of AGW.

Then we have the recent revelations that in 1977 Exxon's own scientists confirmed the threat of increasing CO2 and a warmer climate.

The science is NOT controversial. It's established. CO2 is a heat-trapping gas.

wxman57 wrote:

redneckweather wrote:I'm sorry, but did Jeff just used the term "Climate Change"? Can you elaborate a bit more on this please?

The climate is always changing - has been for billions of years.

and now humans instead of cyanobacteria are contributing to change.

We've been very careful over the years to keep politics out of our weather discussions. Let's be mindful of that. There is a reason why we have chosen to keep this Weather Forum strictly weather discussion related. That said one of the best examples I ever heard was presented by Dr. Neil Frank. There are 100,000 seats in the new Texas Stadium. If we put in each seat every molecule present in our atmosphere, CO2 would fill exactly 4 seats.

jasons wrote:I can't speak for Jeff. He would need to clarify. It's unclear if he meant strictly 'climate change' or more specifically AGW.

We have seen a pattern where there is spike in global temperatures during El Nino events. Then, once El Nino subsides, the temps cool back down but not as much. There is a new, higher plateau of 'normal' temperatures that are warmer than previous to the event. A 'new normal' if you will.

It makes sense. It's just basic physics and thermodynamics. Water takes more energy (and longer) to warm than the air. Then once we have El Nino, a lot of that pent-up energy and heat from the oceans gets released into the atmosphere, resulting in atmospheric warming. With each cycle it steps up a bit more. What we are seeing now and expect in the next few years closely mirrors what we saw with the '97 Nino event.

As we all know, it's a controversial subject and there are threads upon threads in other forums on this. We have/had many lively threads on the topic on S2k. I have long been a staunch skeptic of the influences of AGW. This is just my personal opinion, but I've come to realize that some of my views were unfortunately skewed by politics. As I focus just on the science itself, which is what we should be doing, it's becoming more apparent to me that AGW is a real factor in our climate change....but by how much and what we should do about it is the $64,000 question.

Yeah, the last straw for me was when data from Roy Spencer at UAH describing an increased vertical temperature trend in troposphere (contrary to a greenhouse model) collapsed when it was revealed that orbital decay of the satellite was not taken into effect. When corrected, the data are now consistent with AGW contributing to ≥ 50% of the increase in Earth's trop temp over the last 100 years.

CO2 retains infrared radiation, is homogenously distributed in the atmosphere and has a long half-life (decades for turnover). Amplification of AGW via water vapor is complex and not clear - trends suggest that there's less of an effect, and it is local (Greenland). Water vapor is very heterogeneously distributed of course, fluctuates wildly, and has a very short half-life (days).


Because we don't have a "control Earth" it is difficult to demonstrably "prove" by inferential means using a double blind, control, intervention study...but compared with most "controversies" in theory in the biosciences, this is a done deal...the question is how much worse will it get and how fast? and where? Temperature wise, Texas has not been affected much on average, whereas cold winter nights are warmer in South Dakota. Will AGW make our droughts deeper and longer? Fair question.


A good thought experiment question to ask is "Would the Earth be cooler if the CO2 [ ] in the atmosphere decreased suddenly from 400 ppm back to 280 ppm. Then Obvious CC is Obvious.

srainhoutx wrote:We've been very careful over the years to keep politics out of our weather discussions. Let's be mindful of that. There is a reason why we have chosen to keep this Weather Forum strictly weather discussion related. That said one of the best examples I ever heard was presented by Dr. Neil Frank. There are 100,000 seats in the new Texas Stadium. If we put in each seat every molecule present in our atmosphere, CO2 would fill exactly 4 seats.

It would be 40 seats, srain if I've calculated this correctly. 0.04% x 100,000 = 40

100 years ago, CO2 occupied 28 seats.

Agreed. Science =/= Politics though.

One more item of note. The anomaly of 2015, especially December, and January 2016's recording breaking global warmth should be a concern to the average citizen, especially if you're under 50 years of age. Still waiting on NOAA's numbers for January, but NASA has January at 1.13 Celcius while Dec was 1.11 Celcius above average. Prior to 2015, the hottest month on record was 0.88 Celcius in Jan 2007. Prior to that was Feb 1998 with 0.86 Celcius. (see list below)

Jan 2016 represents roughly a 14% increase from the previous record set in October 2015. This represents a 25% increase from the last El Nino that happened 17 years ago. That is a freakishly large increase in less than 2 decades. Finally, the IPCC recently lowered the target number for increase in global temps to 1.5 degrees Celcius by end of century. If we repeat the current warming increase on the next El Nino we'll reach that target before 2040.

Top 10 hottest months globally, chart as of Nov. 2015.
1) 0.99°C, Oct 2015
2) 0.97°C, Nov 2015
3) 0.91°C, Sep 2015
4) 0.89°C, Mar 2015
5) 0.88°C, Feb 2015
5) 0.88°C, Jan 2007
7) 0.87°C, Aug 2015
7) 0.87°C, Jun 2015
9) 0.86°C, Feb 1998
10) 0.85°C, May 2015

srainhoutx wrote:We've been very careful over the years to keep politics out of our weather discussions. Let's be mindful of that. There is a reason why we have chosen to keep this Weather Forum strictly weather discussion related. That said one of the best examples I ever heard was presented by Dr. Neil Frank. There are 100,000 seats in the new Texas Stadium. If we put in each seat every molecule present in our atmosphere, CO2 would fill exactly 4 seats.

We just confirmed detection of a gravity wave from over 1 billion light years away. The universe, and our climate, is a little more reactive than you're giving it credit for.

wxman57 wrote:

redneckweather wrote:I'm sorry, but did Jeff just used the term "Climate Change"? Can you elaborate a bit more on this please?

The climate is always changing - has been for billions of years.

Yes but I would not call that "Climate Change", at least in the sense in being related to AGW which I don't agree with. What I would rather say is, "The weather pattern is always changing - has been for billions of years."

Return flow off the Gulf has established bringing an increase in moisture and this pattern looks to continue throughout the weekend into early next week. Overnight temperatures will increase to the Spring like 60's with daytime highs near 80F. The models continue to advertise a deepening Central/Eastern trough particularly Monday into Tuesday as a shortwave crosses the Plains with a slow moving cold front approaching Monday. Most areas look to receive some rain, but there is still timing issues as well as a stout cap throughout the weekend. The guidance suggests the cap will erode Sunday night, but as is typical this time of year the computer models may be a bit aggressive eroding the cap. Showers and possibly a few thunderstorms seems a safe forecast for Monday into at least early Tuesday as the cold front moves off the Coast. Much cooler weather should follow the front ending the much above normal temperatures until later next week.

The overnight longer range guidance continues to advertise a robust Kelvin Wave progressing Eastbound across the Pacific with the MJO suggesting a wet phase developing across the Central and Eastern Pacific. The CFSv2 Monthly Precipitation Outlook for March has been very insistent of a return of rainfall across our Region as we end February and begin March.

Without trying to simply dwell on the fact that February is supposed to be winter, including some pipe bursting freezing temperatures, I have REALLY been enjoying these extremely wonderful days that we have had the last several days/weeks. If we have no control over the weather, then I guess I will just continue to enjoy each day that I am here on this earth.

Here's one reason for a mild winter. Note the January anomaly for the north pole.

I just don't get people that are happy about 80 degree weather in December, January, and February down on the Gulf coast. We are about to have 6 months of 90-100 degree weather and way more humidity.

THANK YOU! Couldn't have said it better myself

The "winter" we're having this year makes me even more happy for visiting Montana the week prior to Christmas.

Fingers are still crossed for a late season, requisite rodeo Blue Norther but I think they're crossed for nothing.

Cromagnum wrote:I just don't get people that are happy about 80 degree weather in December, January, and February down on the Gulf coast. We are about to have 6 months of 90-100 degree weather and way more humidity.

Yeah! Can't wait for it to warm up!

Some people just do not like cold, unless the cold brings snow to the area. That group would include me.