NASA announced that the rate of co2 increase over the last year was 5th highest on record.
“The global rate of increase [2020 CO2] was the fifth-highest in NOAA’s 63-year record, following 1987, 1998, 2015 and 2016.”
These are all around times of major el ninos, 2 of them super Ninos, the other, 86-87 a major event. There was an el Nino preceding 2020 (18-19) Right off the bat co2 release has to be linked in some way to that. That there was no corresponding La Nina behind the 2015-16 super event instead another, though lesser el Nino, before 2020. Its only now, after a La Nina, that a sharp drop off is occurring and a direct, in your face link, to what the oceans are about. It gives merit to my belief that the warming oceans are the largest source of increased Water Vapor and with it the warming which is greatest where its coldest and driest. Saturation mixing ratio charts, which show the correlation of water vapor to temperature must be looked at here. I have shown that so many times, most readers here understand how minute amounts of WV correlate to much larger temperature variation where its coldest and driest. The Chapter in my book, The Weaponization of Weather in the phony climate war, deals directly with this. Also released is co2 since the oceans are a large reservoir for co2 . Large scale cooling of the oceans which would be a natural event would likely result in large scale cooling. But we have the hint! The La Nina this winter and the drop of the global temperature since last year! So think about it. The global temperature is now responding in no uncertain terms, as Dr Roy Spencer’s chart shows:
These are against the new 30 year means, but you can see the step up function caused by Super Ninos in the chart in my book. On this new chart, my idea would look like this:
Suppose we went back to where the SST’s were in the 1980s. How much cooling would there be?
Lets look at SST’s now with even with the La Nina drop off:
Below is 1987 ( the El Nino was waning, but co2 was lower so the increase from the warming could be more dramatic vs the smaller amount):
But look at how cold the oceans were compared to now. If the oceans cooled temperatures would have to fall, perhaps back to that level. The residual warming, which would be tiny, would have a better link to Man but would be non-consequential. ( given how well we have adapted to warming and the fact it has been so overblown by models, one could argue mans progress has be aided by warming. Its why previous warm eras were climate optimums, while the agenda driven weaponizers today try to make this a crisis, or emergency or whatever sound bite they think is working) So the argument if you want to assign co2 as the driver, is that IT IS OVERWHELMING nature and the oceans and causing them to warm. Would that not at least deserve some skepticism given the oceans contain 99.9% of the thermal energy of the system. I do understand why, if that is all you look at and it is what defines your being, you would certainly believe that its co2. It is going up, the temperature is going up, so its time to spend 10 trillion dollars even though it saves the planet only .01C in 30 years ( Gina McCarthy said that not me). But what if nature doubles up on the La Nina or a strong response, which, unlike the 97-98 event, there has not been. In fact, in the wake of 15-16 we had one though weaker that was able to sustain the warming even more up thru 2020. Still, no one on the other side of the climate change issue dares touch the elephant in the room, which is water vapor. (should it not be an elephant, given its weight in GHG’s.
40 years ago, Dr. John Cahir(retired) of PSU was saying we were missing, even then, the biggest metric, which he believed was the quantification of saturation mixing ratios given their correlation to temperature. The temperature was a poor proxy, a second level metric. So I am in his shadow, carrying that water (and believe me, that is a long shadow to be in, the guy was a rare breed of forecaster and dynamist. So was Dr.Charles Hossler, and Dr. Joel Myers). Glory days of my youth when as a student I got to play in the garden of the gods and they would talk to you not down at you. In any case we are seeing what a moderate La Nina did in the back of a super Nino and then another though lesser one right behind it. There was a big drop off of temperatures.
So I ask the reader, if the oceans were to cool back to levels of the 1980s, what do they think the result in temperature would be whether co2 kept rising or not? And what does that say for co2’s relative role. So is it not the cyclical nature of the ocean that must be the prime driver? Could co2 increases and WV increases level off, or even reverse? And if they did not, but there was a temperature response that chopped the step up function in half, or perhaps more, what would that say about a panic that is largely a weaponization of modeling and individual events in the first place?
The 18-19 el nino helped sustain enough of the warming off the super nino to make 2020 the second warmest on record. But a year later its nowhere near that and right now is 6th coolest since 2000. One moderate La Nina and we see what happened. The link is obvious. So an open minded person would naturally question the authority of assigning co2 the role of climate control knob when you can see the direct link to the oceans in the up and down of the temperature in response to their actions.
June 12, 2021 at 11:02AM