El Nino, El Nonsense

By hrynyshyn on January 10, 2007.

Just a pointer to yet another thoughtful rejoinder from the Real Climate group in the wake of media hysteria. This time it's all about whether El Nino or climate change is to blame for the ridiculously warm weather that recently dominated much of North America. As usual, the answer is: it's too complicated for simple answers. Among the many poignant observations:

...while El Nino typically does perturb the winter Northern Hemisphere jet stream in a way that favors anomalous warmth over much of the northern half of the U.S., the typical amplitude of the warming (see Figure below right) is about 1C (i.e., about 2F). The current anomaly is roughly five times as large as this. One therefore cannot sensibly argue that the current U.S. winter temperature anomalies are attributed entirely to the current moderate El Nino event.

And yet, that's what a lot of alleged experts are saying on the nightly news, if they're not trying to link the warm spell to anthropogenic global warming, that is.

Think (and read) before you speak, people.

Tags
Climate

More like this

From the link:

A canard that has already been trotted out by climate change contrarians (and unfortunately parroted uncritically in some media reports) holds that weather in certain parts of the U.S. (e.g. blizzards and avalanches in Colorado) negates the observation of anomalous winter warmth. This argument is disingenuous at best. As clearly evident from the figure shown above, temperatures for the first month of this winter have been above normal across the United States (with the only exceptions being a couple small cold patches along the U.S./Mexico border). The large snowfall events in Boulder were not associated with cold temperatures, but instead with especially moisture-laden air masses passing through the region. If temperatures are at or below freezing (which is true even during this warmer-than-average winter in Colorado), that moisture will precipitate as snow, not rain. Indeed, snowfall is often predicted to increase in many regions in response to anthropogenic climate change, since warmer air, all other things being equal, holds more moisture, and therefore, the potential for greater amounts of precipitation whatever form that precipitation takes.

Emphasis added.

Speaking of canards, isn't the bolded statement itself a canard? The 'holding' capacity of air has nothing to do with it. It's the balance between condensation and evapouration, which depends on temperature, phase, presence of impurities, etc.. The air is itself irrelevant.

It's just a way of speaking, and easier to say than "the water vapor reaches thermal equalibrium with the warm air and thus attains a higher saturation pressure." I wouldn't get to worked up about it.