Increasing weather/climate extremes

[Accountability Now]

I will not bow to your reading and comprehension difficulties.

So in other words you can't.

[waldo]

So in other words you can't.

it is your prerogative to not accept, to not agree with positions/assessments from the IPCC, USGCRP, WMO, etc.

[Accountability Now]

it is your prerogative to not accept, to not agree with positions/assessments from the IPCC, USGCRP, WMO, etc.

That is not true at all. I gladly agree with them when they use the data properly and not pick and choose statements to serve their purpose. I absolutely deplore any one organization that misleads people by using fear mongering statement that simply aren't true. I feel the exact same way about organizations on the 'other side'.

Use the facts....and that is it. Don't make things sound better or worse than they are just because you want to prove your agenda.

Seriously...I will gladly entertain studies that show any increases in global events but I will criticize any area that uses serious data. If they don't then I will applaud it.

[waldo]

That is not true at all.

you've announced your denial position... your labeling global warming as 'BS' was profound! In that context, this is your opportunity to bring forward specific areas/items you disagree with. You keep nattering away with the same question/request... if you aren't able to bring forward exactly what your concerns are, presuming you have concerns, I certainly can't help you sort yourself out.

.

[Accountability Now]

you've announced your denial position... your labeling global warming as 'BS' was profound! In that context, this is your opportunity to bring forward specific areas/items you disagree with. You keep nattering away with the same question/request... if you aren't able to bring forward exactly what your concerns are, presuming you have concerns, I certainly can't help you sort yourself out.

.

I don't need to bring anything forward to back a claim that you continue to state. That is your job.

Your constant denial to do so only proves that you have nothing.

[waldo]

I don't need to bring anything forward to back a claim that you continue to state. That is your job.

Your constant denial to do so only proves that you have nothing.

in the context of your expressed denial of GW (labeling it 'BS'), this thread provides you an opportunity... it awaits, at your convenience. You don't have to step-up, you don't have to put yourself out there, you don't have to bring anything forward. Only offered as example references, a few of those OP linked reference docs, the full comprehensive reports, are hundreds of pages in volume; apparently, you're a very quick study as you said you went through them all, in short order. If those extended reports... or even the summary reports, cause you no concern, then you can certainly bring forward your own separate raised issues/concerns, if you have any.

[waldo]

relative to possible causal ties to certain extreme weather events, for reference purposes within this thread, I've taken the liberty of bringing forward prior content offered in other threads:

see anthropogenic sources... see global warming... see accelerated Arctic ice melting... see Arctic Amplification... see a changing/shifting jet-stream... see an expectation of "more extreme weather events, such as heavy snowfall, heat waves, and flooding in North America and Europe, varying in location, intensity and timescales".

scientific research is showing that the decreasing autumn Arctic sea ice has been linked to winter changes in Northern Hemispheric atmospheric circulation... causing a shift in the jet-stream position to allow cold air from the Arctic to plunge much further south. Additionally, the loss of Arctic sea ice also raises atmospheric water vapour content providing enhanced moisture sources, supporting increased heavy snowfall in Europe during early winter.

Scientists link frozen spring to dramatic Arctic sea ice loss

Met Office: Arctic sea-ice loss linked to colder, drier UK winters

NOAA led study:

...examined the wind patterns in the subarctic in the early summer between 2007 and 2012 as compared to the average for 1981 to 2010. They discovered that the previously normal west-to-east flowing upper-level winds have been replaced by a more north-south undulating, or wave-like pattern. This new wind pattern transports warmer air into the Arctic and pushes Arctic air farther south, and may influence the likelihood of persistent weather conditions in the mid-latitudes.

Our research reveals a change in the summer Arctic wind pattern over the past six years. This shift demonstrates a physical connection between reduced Arctic sea ice in the summer, loss of Greenland ice, and potentially, weather in North American and Europe, said Overland, a NOAA research oceanographer.

These shifts in winds not only affect weather patterns throughout the Arctic but are also thought to influence weather in Greenland, the United States, and western Europe. Understanding such links is an ongoing area of research, the scientists said. The effects of Arctic amplification will increase as more summer ice retreats over coming decades. Enhanced warming of the Arctic affects the jet stream by slowing its west-to-east winds and by promoting larger north-south meanders in the flow. Predicting those meanders and where the weather associated with them will be located in any given year, however, remains a challenge.

The researchers say that with more solar energy going into the Arctic Ocean because of lost ice, there is reason to expect more extreme weather events, such as heavy snowfall, heat waves, and flooding in North America and Europe but these will vary in location, intensity, and timescales.

What we're seeing is stark evidence that the gradual temperature increase is not the important story related to climate change; it's the rapid regional changes and increased frequency of extreme weather that global warming is causing. As the Arctic warms at twice the global rate, we expect an increased probability of extreme weather events across the temperate latitudes of the northern hemisphere, where billions of people live, said Jennifer Francis, Ph.D, of Rutgers.

[waldo]

.....Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes

providing theoretical support to the above mentioned 2012 study (by Dr. Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University), the study from the Pottsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany: Weather extremes: atmospheric waves and climate change

The northern hemisphere has experienced a spate of extreme weather in recent times. In 2012 there were destructive heat waves in the US and southern Europe, accompanied by floods in China. This followed a heat wave in the US in 2011 and one in Russia in 2010, coinciding with the unprecedented Pakistan flood and the list doesnt stop there.

Now we believe we have detected a common physical cause hidden behind all these individual events: each time one of these extremes struck, a strong wave train had developed in the atmosphere, circling the globe in mid-latitudes. These so-called planetary waves are well-known and a normal part of atmospheric flow. What is not normal is that the usually moving waves ground to a halt and were greatly amplified during the extreme events.

Climate change caused by greenhouse-gas emissions from fossil-fuel burning does not bring a uniform global warming. In the Arctic, the warming is amplified by the loss of snow and ice. This in turn reduces the temperature difference between the Arctic and, for example, Europe. Yet temperature differences are a main driver of air flow, thereby influencing the planetary waves. Additionally, continents generally warm and cool more readily than the oceans.

These two factors are crucial for the mechanism now detected. They result in a changing pattern of the mid-latitude air flow, so that for extended periods the slow waves get trapped. The irregular surface temperature patterns disturb the global air flow. This analysis is based on equations that our team of scientists developed, mathematically describing the wave motions in the extra-tropical atmosphere. The conclusions drawn from the equations were tested using standard daily weather data from the US National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP).

During recent periods in which several major weather extremes occurred, the trapping and strong amplification of particular waves like wave seven (which has seven troughs and crests spanning the globe) was observed. The data show an increase in the occurrence of these specific atmospheric patterns.

This analysis helps to explain the increasing number of unprecedented weather extremes. It complements previous research that already showed that climate change strongly increases the number of heat records around the world, but which could not explain why previous records were broken by such stunning margins. The findings should significantly advance the understanding of weather extremes and their relation to man-made climate change.

[waldo]

from Weather Underground - July 3rd: Third extreme jet stream pattern of the past five weeks

The jet steam is exhibiting unusual behavior over the U.S., a pattern we've seen become increasingly common in summertime over the past decade. There's a sharp trough of low pressure over the Central U.S., and equally sharp ridges of high pressure over the Western U.S. and East Coast. Since the jet acts as the boundary between cool, Canadian air to the north and warm, subtropical air to the south, this means that hot extremes are penetrating unusually far to the north under the ridges of high pressure, and cold extremes are extending unusually far to the south under the trough of low pressure. The ridge over the Western U.S., though slowly weakening, is still exceptionally intense.

This week's extreme jet stream pattern is the third time in the past five weeks that we've seen a highly amplified ridge-trough pattern that has led to extreme weather:

Pattern 1 - This ridge, which on Sunday brought Earth its highest temperatures in a century (129°F or 54°C in Death Valley, California), was responsible for more record-breaking heat on Tuesday. July 2. Most notably, Redding, California hit 116°, just 2° short of their all-time record. Death Valley had a low of 104°, the second hottest night on record since 1920 (the hottest was just last summer!) Numerous daily high temperature records were set in Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. It was the opposite story in the Central U.S., where the southwards-plunging jet stream allowed record cold air to invade Texas. Waco, Texas, hit 58°F this morning (July 3), the coldest temperature ever measured in July in the city. Numerous airports in Texas, Nebraska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kansas, and Missouri set new daily record low temperatures this morning. And over the Eastern U.S., the northward-pointing branch of the jet stream is creating a potentially dangerous flooding situation, by pulling a moisture-laden flow of tropical air from the Gulf of Mexico over the Florida Panhandle north-northeastward into the Appalachians. Up to five inches of rain is expected over this region over the next few days, and wunderground's severe weather map is showing flash flood warnings for locations in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.

Pattern 2 - The end of May and beginning of June, when the $22 billion Central European floods occurred. A high pressure ridge became stuck over northern Scandanavia, causing all-time May heat records--as high as 87°F--at stations north of the Arctic Circle in Finland. The high pressure ridge blocked low pressure systems from moving north, and a series of two low pressure systems dumped record rains over Austria and Germany, creating the highest floods ever seen on portions of the Danube River. The $22 billion price tag made it the 5th most expensive non-U.S. weather-related disaster in world history.

Pattern 3 - June 18 - 22, when a ridge of high pressure over Alaska broke all-time heat records in the state, with unofficial readings as high as 98°F. A low pressure system became trapped over Alberta, Canada, bringing the city of Calgary a $3 billion flood disaster. This was the most expensive flood in Canadian history, and third most expensive natural disaster of any kind for the country. The only more expensive disasters were a 1989 wildfire ($4.2 billion) and a 1977 drought ($3 billion.)

[Shady]

Waldo's having a conversation with himself, because nobody else gives a crap.

[Michael Hardner]

Waldo - I'm interested. You're usually more interested in climate than weather, though. Why the change ?

[BubberMiley]

Waldo's having a conversation with himself, because nobody else gives a crap.

I always read Waldo's posts. It's fun to watch him make the deniers scurry away because they have no compelling arguments whatsoever.

Keep scurrying...

[Accountability Now]

from Weather Underground - July 3rd: Third extreme jet stream pattern of the past five weeks

So a bunch of local/regional examples most of which aren't even extremes. Temperatures in California....not extreme even by waldo's own statements. Redding was just 2 degrees off from its extreme. I'll remember to say the world's temperature as increased but 'just' 2 degrees. The Central European flood....5th most exepsnive non European flood? How is that an extreme?

Now I do like the topic of jet stream because I do believe there are larger forces at play like the jet stream, El Ninos, etc. Perhaps there is a shift in the jet stream. Perhaps this shift is causing these weather anomolies. But is there any chance that this same jet stream factor happened in the past? Any chance at all? Of course waldo has shown that the jet steam has shifted but no actual proof that is man caused. Lets look back to another decade of weather extremes....the 1930s. Here are some local/regional examples of my own:

1936 North American Heat wave - worst heat wave in US history

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_North_American_heat_wave)

1930s US Drought - most extreme in history

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/archive.html?year=2009&month=03

1930s Dust Bowl - caused by the drought

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl

1931 Central China Flood - worst flood in world history....ever.

(http://floodlist.com/asia/central-china-floods-1931)

1932 Calgary Flood (Bow River) - worst until 2013 flood for recorded history however reports speculate that two floods in 1879 and 1897 that were signifcantly worse than the 2013 flood but they didn't have the instrumentation to mark it. (I'll touch on this later)

http://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/calgary-floods-it-could-happen-again/8295/

July 7, 1931 - Highest Temperature ever recorded in Africa (Tunisa) (previously a higher temperature was thought to be reached in Libya but again faulty instrumentation was to blame (to be touched on later)

http://wmo.asu.edu/africa-highest-temperature

February 11, 1935 - Lowest Temperature ever recorded in Africa (Morroco)

(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalextremes.html)

February 6, 1933 - Lowest Temperature ever recorded in Asia (Russia)

(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalextremes.html)

Out of the 18 records set on the above Global Extremes link, the 1930s claim three of them and 2001-2010 has none. 13 of 18 extremes happend prior to the 1950s. The closest one to 2001 was in 1994.

So what the heck was happening in the 1930s to cause such extremes? It certainly wasn't caused by man. Was it a force like a shifting jet stream? Possibly.

An odd coincidence of course is when we look at US landfall hurricanes which of course is the most reliable data we have according to waldo's scientist who offered his above quote from the WMO. In the 1930s there were 19 total hurricanes with 8 of them being major. Between 2001-2010 there were 19 total hurricanes with 7 of them being major. Just sayin....

I was easily able to show waldo that various authorities on tropical cyclone studies have stated and shown that the most reliable data that exists is after 1966. (http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E11.html). This is just one more example to add to the 1897/1879 Calgary floods and extreme temperature in Libya being reconsidered examples. The instrumention in the earlier days was not prevlent or as advanced as ours is today. This change in instrumentation has caused spurious data to be used such as the claim that waldo has issued from the WMO stating that 2001-2010 had the highest cyclone activity in the northern Atlantic basin since 1855. You can't compare today's values past 1966 but the WMO did. Why?

To further this point I would like to present this link from the NOAA NESDIS (National Environmental Satelltie, Data and Information Service) http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/ghcn-daily/index.php?name=coverage

This link show the GLOBAL Historical Climatology Network and its coverage of stations worldwide (land and oceans). This link shows maps over the course of time with the various temperature and precipitation stations plotted on the maps. It is clear as day that the number of recording stations has vastly increased over time. As stated in this link:

The total number, spatial distribution, and temporal completeness generally increase through time for all variables, although both the temperature and precipitation networks attain their maximum density in the 1960s.

Again....we see the most reliable data that we have start in the 1960s yet a large number of extremes that we have seen occurred in the 1930s.

We will never be able to truly compare 'apples to apples' because of this lack of data but any data pushing extremes needs to be considered rather than just accepting it on face value.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Accountability Now

[Accountability Now]

Waldo - I'm interested. You're usually more interested in climate than weather, though. Why the change ?

Because its convenient.

[Accountability Now]

I always read Waldo's posts. It's fun to watch him make the deniers scurry away because they have no compelling arguments whatsoever.
Keep scurrying...

Who is scurrying? Most people just get tired of the constant deflection and give up knowing it won't be a logical debate. I apparently have more time on my hands to show the facts that waldo believes in are based on spurious data.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Accountability Now

[waldo]

Waldo - I'm interested. You're usually more interested in climate than weather, though. Why the change ?

Michael, as I said in my first sentence within the OP... 'when does a weather extreme become a climate extreme'? Of course, we're now seeing an increasing frequency of weather extreme events - it's important, where possible to attempt to look for causal ties to the extremes... to their increasing event frequency. If you're interested/inclined, this video is a most interesting presentation from Stanford climate scientist, Chris Field... Climate Change: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters (start in around the 4:00 minute mark to avoid a somewhat too lengthy introduction of Field... although it does speak to the many accomplishments and titles/positions Field held/holds)... he addresses 6 so-called myths, some perpetuated by both sides (although, of course, from different slants). In any case, for anyone at all interested in weather extremes, linkages to climate change, managing related risk, etc., this video should be worthwhile to watch:

.

[waldo]

1930s US Drought - most extreme in history

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/archive.html?year=2009&month=03

1930s Dust Bowl - caused by the drought

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl

I have no cycles to play today... here's a throw-away. (nice to see you taking to my earlier reference to Jeff Masters - Weather Underground) - you should have looked a bit more. Did you hear... apparently, there have been new farming practices introduced over all these decades since the 30s - go figure!

The Dust Bowl drought and heat of the 1930s: partially human-caused

Using computer models of the climate, the scientists found that the Dust Bowl drought was primarily caused by below-average ocean temperatures in the tropical Pacific and warmer than average ocean temperatures in the Atlantic, which acted together to alter the path of the jet stream and bring fewer precipitation-bearing storms to the Central U.S. However, the full intensity of the drought and its spatial extent could not be explained by ocean temperature patterns alone. Only when their model included the impact of losing huge amounts of vegetation in the Plains due to poor farming practices could the full warmth of the 1930s be simulated. In addition, only by including the impact of the dust kicked up by the great dust storms of the Dust Bowl, which blocked sunlight and created high pressure zones of sinking air that discouraged precipitation, could the very low levels of precipitation be explained. The Dust Bowl drought had natural roots, but human-caused effects made the drought worse and longer-lasting.

The fact that we are experiencing a drought in 2012 comparable to the great Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s--without poor farming practices being partially to blame--bodes ill for the future of drought in the U.S.

With human-caused global warming expected to greatly increase the intensity and frequency of great droughts like the 2012 drought in coming decades, we can expect drought to cause an increasing amount of damage and economic hardship for the U.S. Since the U.S. is the world's largest food exporter, this will also create an increasing amount of hardship and unrest in developing countries that rely on food imports.

Jeff Masters

[Michael Hardner]

Because its convenient.

That's not helpful. If you don't have a basic buy-in of the intellectual honesty of your discussion partners then there's not much use in engaging with them, is there ?

[Shady]

I always read Waldo's posts. It's fun to watch him make the deniers scurry away because they have no compelling arguments whatsoever.Keep scurrying...

This type of trolling/personal attack shouldn't be permitted in the forum. This is what leads to threads having to be locked.

[GostHacked]

So can the C02 be attributed to the Dust Bowl of the 1930s, or are we seeing what is in our future if we don't handle farming properly? And can we learn anything from that with the current scale of urbanization where we are drastically reducing the local area's ability to handle extreme weather events?

Clearing bush area, filling in swamplands, all in the name of urban growth. Obviously extreme weather events are the 'new normal' (hate buzz words and catch phrases) ... so either we start planning for them, or we run the risk of more damage due to weather events.

[BubberMiley]

This type of trolling/personal attack shouldn't be permitted in the forum. This is what leads to threads having to be locked.

Actually, I believe it is trolling attempts to distract from the lack of a competent rebuttal that leads to the downgrade of discussion, not the exposure of that.

[Accountability Now]

I have no cycles to play today... here's a throw-away. (nice to see you taking to my earlier reference to Jeff Masters - Weather Underground) - you should have looked a bit more. Did you hear... apparently, there have been new farming practices introduced over all these decades since the 30s - go figure!

I'm glad you think that the drought of 1930s which of course was the worst ever seen in the US is 'a throw away". Nothing severe there....hey?

I'm also glad to see that your answer to the dust bowl is "using computer models"....are those the same models that same to be plauging global warming activists today? How are those models faring with actual numbers?

Any other insights on why 1930s were so bad?

[Accountability Now]

That's not helpful. If you don't have a basic buy-in of the intellectual honesty of your discussion partners then there's not much use in engaging with them, is there ?

Michael....don't you think your post should be intened for waldo? Essentially if you don't agree with him he replies with sarcastic responses that usually include "clearly you know nothing of this topic". Where is the buy in there? You don't have to believe me.....a number of other MLW members have said the exact same thing about him.

As far as it being "not helpful"....that is your interpreation. However, the fact is that global warming activists have switched positions a number of times when things just aren't going their way. For example, now that temperatures are going down....well now its the oceans causing the problem. Or of course if we see more hurricanes then its global warming but if we see fewer hurricanes then its global warming. They have convenient explanations for anything that happens....just like switching from climate to weather...of course now climate apparently means 30 year stints when it used to mean much longer terms....another convenience for them.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Accountability Now

[Michael Hardner]

For example, now that temperatures are going down....well now its the oceans causing the problem.

Temperatures aren't "going down" - that's just wrong. The MET has indicated that warming has stalled.

Added: I tend to not be able to read must past fundamental errors in a post.

[Accountability Now]

Temperatures aren't "going down" - that's just wrong. The MET has indicated that warming has stalled.

Added: I tend to not be able to read must past fundamental errors in a post.

Sure....but you know what I meant. Now that it hasn't 'increased" like they said it would then they come up with excuses. Its their convenient way of doing things.