Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change

[TheClimateChanger]

Funnily enough, the USCRN data largely supports my contention decades ago that the US climate record likely understates the change. If you accept USCRN as the gold standard, then, you must conclude nClimDiv [and the older USHCN] clearly understates warming in recent decades.

[bdgwx]

1 hour ago, TheClimateChanger said:

Funnily enough, the USCRN data largely supports my contention decades ago that the US climate record likely understates the change. If you accept USCRN as the gold standard, then, you must conclude nClimDiv [and the older USHCN] clearly understates warming in recent decades.

Exactly. The corrections applied to nClimDiv (USHCN) still aren't fully offsetting the biases and errors. 

[GaWx]

 Despite some including Grok AI insisting there’d need to be WAY more ocean floor vents than have been discovered for underwater seismic activity to significantly affect SSTs, the AGW denying JB today seems to ignore that per the the attached. He says he’s not aware of any possible explanation for the sharp cooling over the last year in much of the Atlantic other than a sharp reduction in mid ocean seismic activity:
 

You Can't Explain this kind of Drop with Man Made forcing

Wow. Look at the MDR drop off in Feb. 

Co2 does not explain that

This might tho

[rcostell]

This dataset stands on its own.  You can spin it, cherry pick "micro-areas", argue about its veracity or deny it exits. But in the real physical world- this dataset is corraborated by actual events and changes that one can visit, see and touch...that only this trend can explain.   Lets continue to keep a macro view, shall we? 

 

[GaWx]

2 hours ago, rcostell said:

This dataset stands on its own.  You can spin it, cherry pick "micro-areas", argue about its veracity or deny it exits. But in the real physical world- this dataset is corraborated by actual events and changes that one can visit, see and touch...that only this trend can explain.   Lets continue to keep a macro view, shall we? 

 

Per this in C:

-Biggest warmings in 1 yr (per eyeballing) (all >0.2)

1. 2022 to 23  0.30
2. 1976 to 77  0.27
3. 1887 to 88 and 1956 to 57 0.24
5. 1929 to 30  0.21

 

-Biggest warmings in 2 yr

1. 2022 to 24 0.39
2. 1887 to 89 0.29
3. 2014 to 16 0.28
4. 1971 to 73, 1996 to 98, and 1956 to 58 0.27
7. 1904 to 06 and 1929 to 31 0.26
 

[GaWx]

BOULDER’S WINDS AREN’T WHAT THEY USED TO BE

Extreme gusts in Boulder and Front Range appear to be diminishing

JUN 24, 2025 - BY DAVID HOSANSKY

Throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, wind gusts routinely topped 120 miles per hour (mph), as measured at NSF NCAR’s Mesa Lab in the foothills above southwest Boulder. But the city’s extreme downslope winds have seemingly slackened in the last 30 years, with observed peak gusts rarely approaching 100 mph after 1995.

More research is needed to flesh out the reason for the decrease in peak gusts. But the paper suggests it may have to do with changes in atmospheric conditions. As global temperatures have become warmer, tropical storms are pumping more heat high in the atmosphere, affecting upper-level winds in the midlatitudes that could be changing the combination of atmospheric ingredients that produce  strong wind gusts during powerful downslope wind events.

“The difference in instrument location is part of the story, but the bigger picture probably has to do with changing conditions in the atmosphere,”

https://news.ucar.edu/133028/boulders-winds-arent-what-they-used-be

—————-

 Note that the year 1995 was stated as the cutoff point after which extreme gusts started to diminish. The +AMO/current active era/higher ACE for Atlantic tropical activity also started in 1995. Concurrently, the EPAC’s quieter ACE era started in 1995. Coincidence?

[chubbs]

On 7/4/2025 at 6:11 PM, GaWx said:

 Despite some including Grok AI insisting there’d need to be WAY more ocean floor vents than have been discovered for underwater seismic activity to significantly affect SSTs, the AGW denying JB today seems to ignore that per the the attached. He says he’s not aware of any possible explanation for the sharp cooling over the last year in much of the Atlantic other than a sharp reduction in mid ocean seismic activity:
 

You Can't Explain this kind of Drop with Man Made forcing

Wow. Look at the MDR drop off in Feb. 

Co2 does not explain that

This might tho

JB is just showing his lack of understanding of how the earth's climate works. Making a very simplistic argument that ignores the structure of the ocean. He needs to show that changes heat released at the bottom of the ocean made it all the way to the surface. The data is available from argo floats which get subsurface temperatures down to 2000m around the oceans. If seismic was driving our climate or having any significant impact at all we would know about it. 

I posted info previously which showed that the sun warms the ocean from the top down. Surface waters are less dense because they are warmer. In contrast the the waters at the bottom of the ocean where the vents are located are very cold and dense. That makes the ocean very stable. Ocean flow at the bottom of the ocean is horizontal in most locations. There is no way for changes in seismic activity to impact surface temperatures directly above the Atlantic vents. The only mixing between bottom and surface waters occurs in the arctic and antarctic where surface waters are cold enough to sink to the very bottom of the ocean. That's where the effect of any change in seismic heating would be felt at the surface. 

There is a much simpler explanation for the changes in the past year:  changes in surface wind speed. Since warming is top down, The waters just below the surface are always cooler. Higher winds cool the surface waters by promoting mixing. Light winds allow surface waters to warm. Wind driven mixing usually extends to roughly 100m. I showed a chart upthread which showed that surface winds in the area that cooled  are higher this year vs last.

[GaWx]

3 hours ago, chubbs said:

JB is just showing his lack of understanding of how the earth's climate works. Making a very simplistic argument that ignores the structure of the ocean. He needs to show that changes heat released at the bottom of the ocean made it all the way to the surface. The data is available from argo floats which get subsurface temperatures down to 2000m around the oceans. If seismic was driving our climate or having any significant impact at all we would know about it. 

I posted info previously which showed that the sun warms the ocean from the top down. Surface waters are less dense because they are warmer. In contrast the the waters at the bottom of the ocean where the vents are located are very cold and dense. That makes the ocean very stable. Ocean flow at the bottom of the ocean is horizontal in most locations. There is no way for changes in seismic activity to impact surface temperatures directly above the Atlantic vents. The only mixing between bottom and surface waters occurs in the arctic and antarctic where surface waters are cold enough to sink to the very bottom of the ocean. That's where the effect of any change in seismic heating would be felt at the surface. 

There is a much simpler explanation for the changes in the past year:  changes in surface wind speed. Since warming is top down, The waters just below the surface are always cooler. Higher winds cool the surface waters by promoting mixing. Light winds allow surface waters to warm. Wind driven mixing usually extends to roughly 100m. I showed a chart upthread which showed that surface winds in the area that cooled  are higher this year vs last.

 Thanks, Charlie!
 
 Yes, I recall you mentioning the surface winds being higher this year vs last thus resulting in cooling from upwelling. Regardless, I think it’s important to always expose JB when he spreads misinfo about underwater seismic being the main factor in ocean warming and now cooling.

 I don’t expose it and other stuff like this because I necessarily agree with it. However, sometimes I like being reminded of the true explanation. Also, I expose it to show how often it’s being spouted as well as to generate responses like yours to keep others informed who are just reading this stuff from JB for the first time of how far off JB is. Thus, I expect to repost more of this JB nonsense as he continually posts it in the near future.

[ChescoWx]

We are not alone in altered man made climate change

[chubbs]

23 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

We are not alone in altered man made climate change

You complain about being called a denier; but, your posts are the same old denier talking points or charts. Long debunked. Science has moved on from this issue decades ago. 

[csnavywx]

On 7/3/2025 at 2:50 PM, donsutherland1 said:

Setting aside extreme maximum temperatures in the area most affected by the Dust Bowl, on a nationwide basis, such summers have already been matched or exceeded. Only 136 retains the top spot (in a tie).

Yep. We're basically there now and the probability of it striking in any given summer has risen sharply. Going through SSP5 8.5 runs can give a feel for how bad it could get in 10-30y. For instance, it has summers occasionally far exceeding anything in the 1930s and 2012 by the *middle of next decade*.

A few notes on that statement: While CO2 emissions are below 8.5 runs, radiative forcing and net energy imbalance is actually currently considerably *above* the 8.5 ensemble, mainly due to non-CO2 forcing being considerably above expectations -- and ECS/TCR might end up being on the hot side due to cloud feedback trends (detected by CERES). The most obvious brakes to this would be near term non-CO2 forcing slowdown, smoke aerosols (from extensive boreal burning -- seeing some of this already) and a weakening AMOC via differential hemispheric heating and a SMOC reversal (this too, may be in the early stages of happening). Regional trends are always a bear because transient climate responses can destructively or constructively interfere with the background trend and each other. A good example of this recently has been northern CONUS cooling in Feb-May due to a downstream response from rapid NPac cooling and cooling over the Corn Belt and adjacent areas from extensive evapotranspiration in Jun-Aug that has exchanged increased humidity for lower summer temps. These are transient responses -- and could and probably will unravel as the NHem temp response increases.

Perhaps more importantly, one striking feature in future runs is the ever-present ability of intra-seasonal and intra-annual forcing to temporarily overwhelm and unravel those transient responses and result in an explosive, high volatility move that seems to come from nowhere and create conditions that seem to detach completely from the existing probability curve. The damping is removed and, like a coiled spring, the "true PDF" is revealed. These will tend to cause the most damage because of their inherent year-to-year unpredictability.

A CMIP-6 run shows an example what that might look like (July 1936 and July 2012 are thrown in for good measure here):

 

 

Far more extreme events in general start to occur as the NHem circulation is disrupted by the permanent collapse of summer sea ice in the late '30s-40s and by the time we hit 2050 we open up "lights out" events where temps and precipitation could destroy the existing plant stock and most of those year's crops. Events so intense and long that we could see our first "year without a winter".

[rcostell]

34 minutes ago, chubbs said:

You complain about being called a denier; but, your posts are the same old denier talking points or charts. Long debunked. Science has moved on from this issue decades ago. 

Unfortunately, some people are too naive, stubborn, ignorant or deluded by others to recognize the preponderance of actual evidence and real world events that point to an oncoming conclusion.  Just how it is- they then hear their own echo chamber or are goaded by others. For the greater good- I think these people should be politely ignored by those not so afflicted.  See Isaac Cline - 1900 Galveston Hurricane.