Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - sark

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Consequences / Re: Arctic Amplification and Extreme Weather
« on: September 05, 2020, 03:00:12 AM »
When those articles were published, it was true.  Now?

OK, let's just compare a 5 year average from 2000-2020 of DJF surface temperature anomalies +/- 1.5... like an autosquint function... exaggerated.  Compared to the 1979-2000 average.  We're talking about articles published back a few years ago.  in the last few years the cooler trend anywhere is pretty much annihilated.

click to run

2
Consequences / Re: Arctic Amplification and Extreme Weather
« on: September 05, 2020, 01:08:17 AM »
literally any charts you run right now show a trend.  what is it you would like to see?

3
August is in the monthly NCEP/NCAR R1

temps at 925mb for the entire Arctic over the past 4 months have been the most extreme ever observed.  Hard to reckon with this signal over the past two years.

Second is gif of 1999-2020 925mb air temperature anomaly vs the 1981-2010 average (click to run)

4
With these wild atmospheric gyrations, could we be watching the atmosphere actually trying to obliterate the Hadley cell with intrusions into the Arctic?

I know. It belongs in the Stupid Questions thread.

This is the thread for that question.

5
By setting the interval to a large value and centering the scale on 273.15K (0°C) the blue area shows the average air temperature that is freezing for the 4 month period of May through August.

1999 through 2020

925mb is 2,500ft or 760m

(click to run)

6
Mountain torques what is you doin

You know, a lot of things are like normal oscillations or whatever, but in 2019-2020 they're so exaggerated

7
In 2019, we scored the highest ever 500mb geopotential height anomaly at 80-90N, but 925mb air temperatures did not respond to it.  850mb did not respond.  In fact, I think it had been pretty muted in the Arctic after about November of 2016...

we saw excursions of temperature especially in SON and DJF, into March and April but by May it usually calmed down, kinda the new normal, but overall the Arctic had a few recent years with only mild positive temperature anomalies, compared to what we were used to seeing.  flick back through the archive at DMI80N http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php and it would seem like the really big anomalies are in 2016 and earlier, at least in terms of duration and power. 

You can also look through the various levels of the atmosphere https://psl.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/data/composites/printpage.pl

Or just chart a time series of the variable in question https://psl.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries1.pl

So in 2020 it could have appeared that 2019, it's Modoki El Nino, the +IOD, etc had simply forced anticyclones to the pole with various downstream effects.  May of 2020 rolls around and we have yet another dynamic final warming of the stratospheric polar vortex.  Yet again, a barotropic anticyclonic atmosphere briefly attained positioning over the North Pole, but it was less extreme than 2019.
 Geopotential heights 80-90N were elevated but not as much so as the year before.

Sadly, we started seeing in June that 925mb temperatures in the Arctic were sticking out like a sore thumb in the history of the atmosphere.  It blew up.  temps went from like -2C to +3C.  925 millibar height is around 2,500 ft up, or 760m.  there were a lot of soundings.  This is very new activity.

There is nothing published on this yet.

Now, if you look at June-July or May-July of 2020 the picture becomes disappointment.  It is not a trend, this is a ka-booooooom

8
May - June air temperatures at 80-90N averaged #1 by a long shot.  In the reanalysis products, we do not see this.  There is no analog.

https://psl.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries1.pl

9
Folks, I need a favor.  Can someone please find out if we have atmospheric soundings inside this +4C area and see a height profile of this?

This type of anomaly does not exist in the atmospheric record.  This is the all time greatest anomaly, is dead center at the pole, and has grown over the past 2 years.  This is becoming very suggestive of an unexpected feedback in the dynamics of our atmosphere.

I wonder if we're losing the inversion at the pole.  The various fluxes of planetary atmosphere will be notably impacted by poleward transport taking place at such a low level.  Really, it is looking not only likely, but increasingly so, this isn't just variability on top of climate change.  This is a different gear.


10
Glad to be back.

This has never before been observed.  925mb (approx 2,500ft / 760m altitude) air temps are +4 and +5C over almost four months, at both poles simultaneously.

The mechanism for this sudden leak of warm air to the poles is at and below the atmospheric boundary layer, and I believe is a dynamic change inside the turbulent atmosphere.  Warm soup sounds different when stirred than cold soup.  That sound in the atmosphere can be seen in the power spectra of turbulence.  At scales of about 500km and below, I believe you'll find a steepening slope downscale.  The emergence of smaller scale as a mixture advances toward fully mixed would appear as a steepening enstrophic cascade downscale.

Another major factor is the redistribution of mass throughout the atmosphere which seems to be amplifying in oscillation.  The atmosphere is absolutely sloshing, and the atmospheric polar caps are responding simultaneously to these great planetary waves.

Not good.

Click to run gif



11
The atmosphere is rapidly changing now.

The first image is a gif of the 925mb air temperature anomaly for May 1 - August 20 in every year from 1958-2020.  click to run

12
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 16, 2020, 06:22:20 PM »
Thank you Sark, the secret mass cremations story was clear rumor-mongering, but it's good to have actual information about the issue.

As is the crap that the new coronavirus escaped from a lab in Wuhan where China was attempting to weaponize it.

humans are far too clumsy to create something so magnificent

13
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 16, 2020, 08:02:49 AM »
Quote
First I've heard of this Sark, and Mr. Google returns nothing to the search string "Wuhan Coal yard fire".
Can you expand on this for us?

http://viirsfire.geog.umd.edu/pages/mapsData.php

Looking at Suomi NPP 375m https://viirsland.gsfc.nasa.gov/PDF/VIIRS_activefire_User_Guide.pdf

And NOAA-20 NPP VIIRS http://rammb.cira.colostate.edu/projects/npp/

some background info http://www.un-spider.org/news-and-events/news/detecting-forest-fires-satellites-modis-and-viirs

Basically there's a rumor that started 7 days ago around fire detections in China.  Windy.com showed a spike in SO2 and NOx with fire detections in this area, I believe delivered from the CAMS 40km model for fire detections and GEOS-5 22km for SO2.  I'm finding Windy is extremely difficult to use although it is pretty, so the sources for Windy are not exactly clear to me at the moment.

Wouldn't expect there to be a news article since we hear almost nothing from inside China.

Fire detections are ongoing and detected by multiple NPP enviro-sats.  Confidence is high and radiative power is in the 750-1500MW* range.  Location is on the order of within 100 meters of what appears to be coal staging yards outside of Wuhan Iron and Steel Co and linked with a couple of coal power plants nearby.  Didn't check the date of imagery.

"Update: Rise in sulfur dioxide could be sign of mass cremations in Wuhan" Taiwan News

So Taiwan News is reporting rumors of open cremations based on Windy and Twitter comments and the "debunking" has been trotted out and all of it has been utter trash journalism, from all sides.

After 7 days I kept seeing confusion surrounding this event saying it's all from models (you know how it is) so I sat down to pinpoint the location and find some sources in case anyone is interested.

It's pretty likely there are lots of industrial accident fires and open garbage burning especially of medical waste all over China.  These coal piles can go up spontaneously and both the power and scale of the observations are consistent with an open coal burn.  I'm just putting it within 100 meters of that coal staging yard.

*edit: that has to be a mistake.  not that hot I don't think.  but fire detections ongoing nonetheless

14
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 04, 2020, 08:15:14 PM »
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-cases

this is expected.  halting the import of cases can delay a global pandemic, but it will become endemic as it mutates to survive internationally

15
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 04, 2020, 09:10:12 AM »
Health authorities have asked Seoul for information about a Korean woman found infected with the novel coronavirus after visiting Thailand and with no record of travel to China.

https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1850319/korean-woman-caught-virus-in-thailand

16
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 03, 2020, 08:58:31 PM »
Coronavirus is not the cure for party politics.  We are.

17
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 01, 2020, 07:08:48 PM »
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-cases

Proper International cases for Feb 1st from the EU CDC.  I'm not sure if this graph is updating intraday.

There are today 167 cases outside of Mainland China.

What has everyone currently spooked is the asymptomatic superspreader that visited Germany, but during this CDC presser we heard that there is

asymptomatic transmission
fluxuating viral count / false negatives
there are certain to be more cases in the US

https://youtu.be/oMI-9Kvoj7Q?t=255

18
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 01, 2020, 06:39:38 PM »
https://twitter.com/SKonermann/status/1223344537772290048

"Just checked their results. The similarity is spurious. Out of 4 inserts they identify between NCov and SARS, 2 are found in bat coronavirus. Of the remaining two, only one is most similar to HIV, and is so short (6 AA) that the similarity is not higher than chance given database"

"The other novel insert between the bat coronavirus glycoprotein and NCoV is more similar to 13 viruses besides HIV and none of those similarities is higher than chance (given insert size/viral protein database size)"

https://twitter.com/Dereklowe/status/1223343979292434433

"Exactly. If these inserts are as described, it should be easy for a number of labs around the world to replicate these results, and rather quickly. We shall see."

https://twitter.com/Dereklowe/status/1223369665533050880

"TBH, I would expect an actual bioweapon to display far more obvious signs of engineering. But I would also expect such a weapon to be far nastier than this virus, bad news though it is."

The narrative of a bioweapon was always inevitable.  What I see looks more like an evolutionary cousin of SARS, better adapted to its host.




19
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 01, 2020, 05:09:14 AM »
Thank you for this, vox_mundi

Nowcasting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30260-9/fulltext

"This new modelling study estimates 75,800 individuals in the Chinese city of Wuhan may have been infected with 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) as of January 25, 2020 - but authors caution that the true size of the epidemic remains unclear "

As of January 25th 75,800 in Wuhan alone?  The only bright spot might be that the true # of cases may already be very large, giving the disease a lower fatality rate overall.  International cases remains a clear barometer

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-cases

20
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: January 31, 2020, 06:55:14 PM »

21
Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: January 30, 2020, 01:14:40 AM »
The only true barometer of this outbreak is the character and # of international cases, which is being tabulated by a Reddit user Maysign https://www.reddit.com/user/Maysign


22
Unbelievable result at 500mb for a January, to say nothing of the preceding 8 months of disruption to the core of the polar vortex.  This is not an anomaly map, this is the straight geopotential heights.

This emerged gradually in the last couple of years and is now becoming a preferred pattern of circulation.

What are the consequences?

23
The year to date average geopotential heights over the Arctic demonstrate the split that has been visually very striking within the circulation for the past year to three years.  December 2019's "6000 thickness" shows the same.

This 6000 thickness plot shows geopotential meter thickness between 1000-500mb.  This is where the 540 line comes from.  "“The 540 Line” refers to the difference in height between the 500mb pressure level and the 1000mb pressure level (which is roughly the surface).  If the difference between these two pressure levels is 5400 meters…then the 540 Line gets placed there on a weather map" https://cbs3weather.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/the-540-line/

Centering the scale on the 540 line and plotting geopotential heights over time, the emerging split jumps right out.

These are the raw geopotential heights, not an anomaly map.  When this is increasingly split, there has to be an increasing separation of the two rotations, which is visually quite striking over the past 3 years.  It's not the fact of it happening, it's that it has become preferred.

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2424498

Analysis of corotating vortex interactions is typically found in aerodynamics studies of wake turbulence from aircraft, and not geophysical fluid dynamics.  I would bet this is an unassessed bad feedback in the dynamics.

24
Global atmospheric angular momentum has gone net U positive for the first time in the record.

https://atlas.niu.edu/gwo/

https://twitter.com/gensiniwx/status/1219077898897850368

This should say relative AAM not total global AAM

Global AAM regularly cycles between positive and negative, but excluding the QBO, all global winds became Westerly yesterday, even in the Tropics, for the first time in the record.

25
Atmospheric superrotation is the endgame for the Earth we recognize.  As such, it's also probably decades off.  We're not at an instantaneous climate change moment, just abrupt.

What's interesting is that after all that time of low winds, it has corked positive with the greatest acceleration we have ever seen.

The atmospheres of Venus and Titan superrotate those planets.  https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0030.1

It's expected that Earth, too, will abruptly transition to a superrotating atmosphere.  Angular momentum at zero essentially means that the planet's atmosphere is static relative to the surface with no prograde or retrograde net rotation.  It has no angular momentum to deposit or absorb.  You could say that any time vertical and zonal integral of relative AAM anomaly is positive, the atmosphere is rotating faster than the Earth, but this is not the same as the definition of superrotation applied to other planets.

In order to truly superrotate, you'd have to have the QBO westerly and endless convective plumes from the Tropics lined up just right.  At some point, when that happens, this planet should exhibit a bimodal stability and flip into the true hothouse mode where equatorial temperature differences East to West are eliminated because the Rossby waves flooding poleward introduce enough Westerly momentum equatorward that the Equatorial Easterly winds are reversed.  I was reading that this flip to superrotation occurs with Equatorial ocean temperatures around +33C.  That is... if the stratocumulus deck doesn't evaporate first.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2008PA001652

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JAS-D-19-0089.1

Either way, the completely Westerly tropical surface winds lately yielded an atmospheric acceleration faster than has ever before been observed.  This would be fascinating if it were happening on Mars.

26
Global atmospheric angular momentum has gone net U positive for the first time in the record.

https://atlas.niu.edu/gwo/

https://twitter.com/gensiniwx/status/1219077898897850368

27
Global atmospheric angular momentum anomaly 2018-2019.

28
Arctic sea ice / Re: polar vortex - where?
« on: November 13, 2019, 09:55:11 AM »
This type of chart is a cross section of the entire polar cell, basically.  Geopotential height = what altitude in feet is a certain pressure reading.  This type of chart has a scale of pressure from top to bottom, and the colors represent height anomalies.  Warm air expands and a big area of warm air is high pressure and takes up more space in the atmosphere, so the geopotential height rises

charts can be found here: 

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao.shtml

watch some Gav's weather vids and Nutrien Ag Solutions forecasts on YouTube and you'll find someone who explains these bits clearly for you

Basically when you look at the Arctic on something like https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/daily_maps/ and you see heat anomalies at the surface, pretty sure fire bet there's a high geopotential height anomaly just about directly overhead

We've had a huge geopotential height anomaly over the Arctic for the past 7 months, more than any other year

it comes down to polar vortex destruction pretty much in both hemispheres

29
I'm so lost, Sark.  Sorry for my ignorance, but what is the GIF showing?

That gif is a 500 mb anomaly from Tropical Tidbits for a mid-August GFS run with an overlaid gif of mechanical precession.

I put it together because it is always possible to see, sometimes quite obvious to see, a retrograde wave of high pressure against the Rossby waves.  The timing seems to be somewhere around 8 days.

Bear in mind this is in forecast and an analysis of operational hour 0's would be more fruitful.  I'm probably working on stringing those together next, to create a chart gif consisting of only historical data as modeled in these weather models with no forecast data, spanning over a month's time, for example.

I'm tending toward this concept that the heat incursions, atmospheric height anomalies, and flow characteristics over the Arctic are less Rossby waves and more "mechanical".  Thought experiment: If the troposopheric polar vortex starts fragmenting, that's bigger than Rossby wave breaks.  In fact, the cycle of fragmentation and slamming back together in the tropospheric polar vortex would guide Rossby wave patterns, as opposed to Rossby wave peaks breaking in the Arctic causing the same thing.

Because dual-and-simultaneous ridges from both sides of the planet meeting at the North Pole doesn't look like Rossby waves to me.  It looks like the polar cell ripping into fragments, mainly two, causing two ridges to be pulled into the Arctic in the void left behind

These aren't wave breaks, it's just empty space where there used to be a polar cell.

The interaction between the packets of "polar cell" is becoming more like the Fujiwhara effect

30
GFS runs have all slammed into alignment suddenly.  GFS accuracy at 7 days is trending pessimistic

The polar cell is wobbling, gyrating, as well as splitting up?  As a vortex this thing is "roping out" and forming stringers.  that's my view

31
there's been a real nice oscillation going on this thing all year long ... but ... if this wave is normal howcome there's no word for it when I ask?

folks, I'm sorry about these gifs :>

32
"you all know what happens next right"

I do not

What happens next?

it splashes back together again in the middle

33
Since the forecast for this November was so similar to reanalysis Nov '18

I tacked Nov '18 onto the end of the past 6 months

Nothing like it since at least 1948.  November is not needed for that trick.  There is a huge structural anomaly over the North Pole this year.  It is not like the other years.  Not even as bad as summers of 1959 or 1960.  The polar cell is getting shredded apart right now, not like usual.

I bicycled out of the San Juan mountains of Colorado in November of 2016, traveling South.  I remember 2016 on these same charts.  November of 2016 was astonishingly bad, but I remember thinking it's not runaway, got bored and turned away.  It was expected to be bad

May - October, not a time known for Arctic Amplification, with a 6 month polar height anomaly of A HUNDRED METERS

that's unexpected.

we are having a tremendous world-record colossal polar geopotential height centered right over the North Geomagnetic Pole, slashing right through our traditionally stable seasons

nobody can freak out because they'd lose their health insurance.  I get it.  what if next year gets better and it won't do us in until the next solar minimum?  then you'd look like a real jerk

the tropics are flooding freely into the central Arctic like never before, and basically the whole system of polar vorticity just octopuses out in response.  What was that ancient hypothesis of Open Polar Sea, the polar cell is made of islands and the North Pole is Tropical?  maybe a genetic memory of the the late Eocene?

well, that's gonna speed up the day.

whatever is stacked up to cause this is a threat and needs to be confronted IMHO

Lord Jesus, Be a Sunspot

34
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: November 04, 2019, 06:32:42 AM »
Keep doing your thang.

well here's the deal.  I'm not going to put forward any effort.  I won't necessarily lock, delete, keep going, or stop.

anyone can come and deface it with denier style reasoning and that's fine.  I'm basically finished with the work and the thread is probably not going to be useful, going forward.  this is not the appropriate place, frankly.

that being said, there's really no reason to stop posting updates either.  I just don't know if that will happen or not.

let's hope the idea is batshit and this can come out as a climate thriller novel in a year.  that would be fun.

for now I'll just point you to my twitter @systemrename which gets updated more frequently, because it's been more convenient.  https://twitter.com/systemrename

35
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: November 03, 2019, 11:50:44 PM »
locked or unlocked makes no difference to me.  it's unlocked.

36
This line of thinking should be assessed by someone else.  It's not going to be debated emotionally here on this hobby forum.  I'm not here to play scientist with you lot or participate in a nerd fight.

How many times can I repeat the thesis in question?  It must be a round peg for square holes.

Polar vortex destruction is leading to decreasing atmospheric angular momentum, which is a feedback upon itself.

Major factors include:

1) ocean heat / thin sea ice
2) solar minimum
3) annual geopotential heights

If this is true, it is an unassessed feedback in dynamics that could meet the definition of abrupt runaway, a self-reinforcing feedback loop that leads to a relatively rapid change of system mode.

If not true, we'll see AAM roar positive, continuing to oscillate along a reasonable trend line, even if long term in decline.  In that case, it's just abrupt normal apocalyptic mainstream climate change,  which is well covered already.

I've not seen it addressed yet, that's what I'm here for.  I appreciate defending this line of thinking against solid reasoning, but this isn't going to become another forum nerd fight.  This is just a place to put it all down for future reference.

It might be evident in precipitation quantities that exceed the increase expected by mean global temperature.  It might be evident in winds or relative AAM.  I don't even have access to the GSDM as the CPC product was taken down and passwords on GSDMsolutions changed *both* within the past year.

What do I do at this point?

37
Of course we have positive geopotential height anomalies over the arctic. That happens almost by definition! Arctic Amplification creates warmer air above the Arctic hence the anomalies.
And yes, as we move forward, the anomalies will be bigger and bigger.
Yet, it does not mean that the world is ending (yet)

Strawman

1.
an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.

and it's a real habit

38
these are the years that stuck out in JJA anomalies and a couple of them beat '19 in severity & focus on the North Pole

but now we're kind of pushing 7 months straight :/

I'll have to re-do this on all the years in the archive using May-Oct to know if it beats all.  meanwhile the 06Z GFS is coming in

39
It usually doesn't happen all Spring & Summer & Autumn with a period of under 16 days, and then spread to the Southern Hemisphere.

Best I can suggest is check the rainfall quantities.  This should have increased more than the temperature increase would suggest, due to the falling AAM.

if this was 1968 or 1977 there would be less of a problem because the geopotential height over the Arctic was deep.  thick sea ice.  Now we seem to have the issue outlined above.  whatever influences are piled on here are resulting in a system that is showing signs of breaking.

How many stratospheric splits and SSW has the NHEM experienced since 2013?  Seems it ain't 0.6 per year.

40
This is the 10hpa forecast as long as they make it (GFS). NO SPLIT AT ALL.

I hope your other data and musings are more exact

that's a different attribute at a different level.  no bite on the attitude.

https://www.wetterzentrale.de/en/topkarten.php?map=2&model=gfs&var=39&run=18&time=252&lid=OP&h=1&mv=0&tr=3#mapref

42
notice the tropopause?

43
Meanwhile, Looks increasingly like the nascent Northern polar vortex is being split in November. 

There is absolutely no polar vortex spilt on any models, any timeframes at all

This is for 12 Nov at 50hPa

44
The Southern Hemisphere's winter polar vortex has been destroyed by the Sudden Stratospheric Warming that began at the end of austral winter.

I will take questions now.

45
This is an 18 October Global Synoptic-Dynamic Model plot showing 4 weeks of information that is able to be conveyed on a single chart.  It's called a phase space diagram and you'd have to watch Ed Berry explain it on YouTube. 

I had the good fortune to run into this recently. (first image)  It shows conditions leading to barely neutral to negative global wind

The AAM is computed by interolating forecast of the operational numerical weather model:  http://aam.earthrotation.net/rt/

GIFS 1 & 2 Northern Hemisphere & Southern Hemisphere show complete polar vortex breakdown at all  levels.  Something is wrong.

Below that is the ECMWF at hour 240 around November 11 which is still on an 8 day cycle of the polar cell gyrating in & out as it turns atop the Earth.  Once the rest of this area fills in and the winter tropospheric polar cell gets going, there are models indicating very low sea level pressure over the Arctic in DJF.  Well, maybe the built up atmospheric angular momentum that is conserved in models by parameter wants to now push it forward and create a very strong zonal jet stream over the U.S.  why not

I hope it works that way but about half of these waves are breaking through the jet stream in late Summer - Autumn

Anyway, a lot of the other indicators like La Nina temps off the South American West coast suggest continued negative global wind speed (Mr) as measured atmospheric angular momentum.

In that lecture linked above on this page of Ed Berry in 2018, he speaks about a risk.  Atmospheric super-rotation, a condition in which tropical convection firing in the ITCZ tends to accelerate the atmosphere faster than the Earth's rotation

Ed also attests to a recent (since the 90's) trend of lower AAM, while he also asks *why* does thin sea ice lead to a negative Arctic Oscillation.

I think they lost faith in the GSDM after 2018.  Just like the Madden-Julian Oscillation long-range weather indicator is increasingly stuck in Phase 8, 1,  and 2

Academics aren't allowed to say this stuff, and in Ed's lecture he doesn't finish the sentence, but an atmospheric super-rotation is what most planets do.  Like Venus.  He may have been about to describe the differences in where waves originate on such bodies

We are at points on both of those renowned teleconnections GWO and MJO indicating low atmospheric angular momentum and seem to be stuck there

In forecast these products rely on models but they have to be watched real time, but they should outperform numerical models

well they do.  the remaining polar low is in such a shape that it causes a split vortex.  We see it when polar arms get spun out by tropical highs busting right through the jet stream and sticking to the North Pole until they dissipate. 

Maybe a big driver of that is solar minimum.  I kinda pray it.  It's also super obvious that another big factor is thin Arctic sea ice.

What I don't think *anybody* expected was according disruption of the Southern polar cell.

We're right now seeing a sudden stratospheric warming following through from the stratosphere to the ground and it is predicted to final warm the winter polar vortex over Antarctica in the next few days.  Meanwhile, Looks increasingly like the nascent Northern polar vortex is being split in November.  This could be the earliest polar vortex sudden warming in NH winter ever.  I tend to think it will slightly defy description.

what we are seeing since 2013 and especially 2016, 2018, and 2019 is atmospheric restructuring.  all the processes of a stable global interglacial distribution of ground temperatures are broken.  the polar vortex, jet stream, zonal mass, and geopotential height over the poles.

this is the hothouse Eocene climate waking up.  how long is that supposed to take, 3-15 years?

WHY?  Well, one explanation is a self-reinforcing bad feedback loop worldwide with all these fatal factors piling on at once.

Jesus, be a sun spot.

46
DUN DUN DUNNNN


47
IMHO

Yes, if it is weather in the continental midlatitudes of the Northern Hemisphere.  what we experience of weather is largely derived from the expression of the polar cell in this fluid system

Outside of the central tropics, the Earth's atmosphere progresses East, headed toward the rising sun.  Westerly Atmosphere flow.  Prevailing winds from the West

Overall the sky is flinging forward of the Earth's rotation, spinning faster than the planet.  this atmosphere direction is called zonal flow.  U+

it's a spiral from equator to pole.  like a twist top ice cream cone

where it twists, there's a jet stream

the polar cell is like a candy cherry garnish.  but your treat is melting in the sun & a little pool underneath the cherry has sent it adrift and it's wobbling around on top.

why not

Zonal flow causes winds from the West, or Westerlies, and these winds progress zonally like from Seattle to New York.

this could be described with flight of aircraft and angular momentum in the atmosphere & earth but thrust and friction and landing weight, a bit of a stretch for me, let's be honest

the opposite of zonal is meridional and that's wind blowing North South.  V+  Well,  since about the mid-1990's and definitely increasing the entire time since then is WHAT!?  not just of the jet stream, but everything.  literally weather extremes of ridges and lows and pretty much all storms.  Your situation is exactly that, something that always existed, but now it's severe weather.  The jet stream is crashing into the Earth.

well the major torque exerted between the rotating earth, the rotating fluid core, and the rotating atmosphere, and hell Retrograde planets & the Sun too, it is conserved.  AAM -is- slowing over time in our measurements.  Meridional measurements are pretty good and um, wow

https://www.timeanddate.com/time/earth-rotation.html#calc-daylength

because all the North South long contorted dissolving breaking jet stream action has begun scrubbing into the Earth with meridional friction.  letting the clutch out.

the Earth is speeding up.  the Earth's relative motion with regard to the atmosphere is catching up.  Days are shorter and gravity waves are sound

Climate models need to have atmospheric angular momentum reinforced with a parameter so it is not lost, because they're still practicing on the QBO

if GW isn't conserved in an atmospheric model, the energy basically gets "rained out" and the south pole gets very cold, because they don't have waves that can jack into the strength of the Antarctic winter polar vortex, which would become deeper in a warming model

the suspected reason for the too cold pole is the lack of wave interaction with the winter PV over Antarctica... so this SSW we are still having over Antarctica nearing its final warming.  Brutal

Because the slowing at the north pole has translated to the Southern hemisphere with some torque of its own and the whole entire atmosphere got VERY slow recently, about the slowest on record from when I had a chance to see a good record of AAM.  Right around Oct 1

So yeah pretty much any annoying weather is your own personal observation of it since the 90's but obviously since 2014

48
I read somewhere, when looking up the cold pole problem, that not conserving atmospheric angular momentum would also increase precipitation. 

But we don't have a cold South Pole right now.  In fact,

Both polar cells are failing now.

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/intraseasonal/z200anim.shtml

49
Nothing anyone says sounds right to me any more.  It was a mistake to bring up markets around humans.

My mistake

Fight me

50
Permafrost / Re: Permafrost general science thread
« on: October 22, 2019, 06:18:47 AM »
Large loss of CO2 in winter observed across the northern permafrost region

"Here we synthesize regional in situ observations of CO2 flux from Arctic and boreal soils to assess current and future winter carbon losses from the northern permafrost domain. We estimate a contemporary loss of 1,662 TgC per year from the permafrost region during the winter season (October–April). This loss is greater than the average growing season carbon uptake for this region estimated from process models (−1,032 TgC per year). Extending model predictions to warmer conditions up to 2100 indicates that winter CO2 emissions will increase 17% under a moderate mitigation scenario—Representative Concentration Pathway 4.5—and 41% under business-as-usual emissions scenario"

Susan M. Natali, Jennifer D. Watts, […]Donatella Zona
Nature Climate Change (2019)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0592-8

Pages: [1] 2 3 4