chubbs Posted Friday at 11:43 AM Share Posted Friday at 11:43 AM CERES net radiation continues to increase off the El Nino bottom set in late summer 2024. The last net radiation peak occurred in January 2023, as the 3-year nina came to an end. With growing signs of a shift from nina to nino conditions another peak is probably developing this winter. If so the next net radiation peak will be well below Jan 2023 levels and more in-line with winter of 21/22 and other recent nina peaks since 2008. Indicates that a portion of the unusually high peak in winter2022/2023 was enso-related. In-any-case the current radiation imbalance would support a rise in global temperatures to record levels if moderate/strong nino conditions develop as forecast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted yesterday at 08:30 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 08:30 PM https://phys.org/news/2026-02-january-hottest-cold-snap-eu.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfStock1 Posted 2 hours ago Share Posted 2 hours ago On 2/10/2026 at 3:30 PM, Typhoon Tip said: https://phys.org/news/2026-02-january-hottest-cold-snap-eu.html So here's a question. Given that "the planet" is generally a self-contained system with very little (essentially no) variance in externalities with regards to energy inputs (mainly solar irradiance - generally near-constant) and output (terrestrial radiation - generally near-constant) - shouldn't the warming of the planet just be essentially a straight (or curved) line with an always-upwards slope, such that a new record should be set *every* year? Or is it the case that it's really just these records are just really just referring to "the places we are measuring" and not "the planet" as a whole? Yes - question is somewhat rhetorical, but is intended to trigger some thought. If one presumes that the planet as a whole is warming continually, then what are the "holes" in the data? Are there significant areas of the ocean for instance that we're just not measuring, and the reason we don't see a new record every year is because of the non-existent data that would offset the data we do have? Or perhaps is it the case that we are in fact measuring the whole "surface" (including the oceans), but the surface temperature as a whole actually does go up and down based on something - e.g. subterranean effects e.g. "bubbles" in mantle convection, or perhaps solar cycles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now