Re: Florida must wait/more comments on ENSO
- From the Autralian Meteorolgy site:
They are saying ..."if we only consider the SOI and search the data
base for years with similar trends to the current year, 7 of the best
10 matches were El Niño years and 3 weren't.".....
I wonder which 3 years they are talking about? It would be
interesting to compare them to the current situation.
--- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
> No TS right away for the E. GOM because this CME at best just
> an E Pac storm and as a result increased shear near Jamaca even as
> the SOI is no longer negitive:
> Go here to see the second storm, Boris.
> Note its monsoonal features and course north of the first E. Pac
> storm. I think of this like back EMF, for you EEs out there.
> Take a look please at 3/4/97 anomaly chart compared and contrasted
> with the new one out for 6/7. It is worth the time. This is only a
> few months before a 500 year El Nino. Ocean temperatures in general
> were colder then. Why? Because the flaring cycle had just bottomed
> out and Mt. Pinatubo had released huge SOx emissions into the air,
> dropping phase change temperatures of cirrus clouds. Then the
> was increasing with the solar cycle and the SOx was washing out of
> the air, and actually became part of the sulfur reducing ocean
> The flaring distributed cirrus clouds without respect to ocean
> currents, and some of this resulted in storms near equatorial
> Americas, and Gaia feedback electrical insulation, and fingers of
> warm anomalies, within those few months, were extending from the
> equatorial American coasts.
> So how did the Southern Oceans respond by SSTs (Sea Surface Temps)
> then? Around the Southern Ocean, with a colder ocean the induction
> against cirrus, as the circumpolar moves west to east, was not as
> good--so cirrus heated up the Southern Ocean and SSTs became,
> counterintuitively, warm anomaly. Furthermore, it was cold in the
> oceans in general so that no state sized glaciers were braking off--
> also resulting in warm anomalies. And the sun was starting to kick
> with the flaring and biological material from SOx added to the
> was responding as well.
> Compare to the anomalies today--they are cold anomaly and state
> bergs have been breaking off. What gives? Warmer oceans. That
> electrically, induction will be strong and because this particular
> current, the circumpolar, is west to east, it means cold anomalies.
> It has been cold anomaly there for MONTHS. There, some of the
> strongest sustained winds on earth occur, making it an almost
> certainty that with these warm oceans the Southern Ocean will
> continue to have cold surface ocean temps. These cold SSTs move
> around the gyre in the Southern Pacific and bring a much greater
> probability of La Nina. Indeed, historically FOUR MONTHS before El
> Nino the Southern Ocean is warm anomaly.
> The additional electrical feature that I am going to compare and
> contrast between now and 3/4/97 is also not intuitive. That is,
> during the spring of 1997 when rains did visit the equatorial
> American Pacific shoreline and Gaia feedback those fingers of warm
> anomalies you see, there was a triangle of cold SSTs mid-Pacific.
> What is interesting about that? Well, when those cold anomalies
> in the normal gyre movements (La Nada) soon those cold anomalies
> where in the W. Pac. And they have a very peculiar impact
> electrically. When they move over the gyres where the Coriolis turn
> brings a directional change from east to west (enhancement) to west
> to east (cirrus decreases), cold oceans bring WARM SSTS downflow!
> Hence, as the gyre moved these cold anomalies, probably traced back
> to low flaring and Mt Pinatubo (and/or other cyclic aspects), to
> W. Pacific they became makers of downflow warm anomalies--right
> the path of a budding potential El Nino. When you combined this
> what was occurring in the Southern Oceans, as well as the biosphere
> along the equatrial coast--along, I might add, with the November
> diversion of the Yangtze, which would have further cooled the W.
> ya got the bomb!
> In marked contrast, today we have a very warm ocean in general. We
> have a Southern Ocean, in contrast, with predictibly cold anomaly
> SSTs and melting glacial ice there. This is constantly churning
> anomalies into the gyres to be moved to the Eastern tropical
> The Yangtze is starting to recover and SSTs in the W. Pac are VERY
> warm. That brings stronger induction patterns gyred around in the
> Pacific, west to east, against cirrus, and further brings cold
> anomalies. Further, while there are these short periods of warm
> anomalies and rain associated with the flaring we have had, 2003 is
> well to the down slope of flaring and Gaia has a tendency to rain
> itself out.
> In short, there is NO chance of El Nino this winter. None.
- Yes but the SST anomalies from the sats only starts mid 96. There is
only one ENSO in that.
--- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> From the Autralian Meteorolgy site:
> They are saying ..."if we only consider the SOI and search the data
> base for years with similar trends to the current year, 7 of the
> 10 matches were El Niño years and 3 weren't.".....
> I wonder which 3 years they are talking about? It would be
> interesting to compare them to the current situation.