Quote:

While the Australian Bureau of Meteorology is keeping an alert for the event, it has pushed the start time from July to September or later, and it says a strong event is unlikely, Bloomberg noted. Last month, the World Meteorological Organization put the odds of an El Niño at 60 percent between June and August, climbing to up to 80 percent between October and December.

Yes ENSO is really weak and has dropped in the last week. It is now marginally above neutral.

http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/elninometer-current.gif

The metre got to just above 0.5, dropped back to just under 0.5 and has now dropped further.

lee wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 12:00pm:

Yes ENSO is really weak and has dropped in the last week. It is now marginally above neutral. http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/elninometer-current.gif The metre got to just above 0.5, dropped back to just under 0.5 and has now dropped further.

How does such a meter work?

From Rick Werme's home page-

'I'm a software engineer with roots that go way back'

'I've long been fond of the "qualitative display of quantitative data," i.e. graphs, plots etc.'

http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/

So I guess he graphically represents the data.

You can also find it at Watts page along with the ENSO data down the right hand strip. The ENSO page links to BOM, NOOA etc. If you click on the graphs they take you direct to BOM, NOOA etc.

lee wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 12:00pm:

Yes ENSO is really weak and has dropped in the last week. It is now marginally above neutral. http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/elninometer-current.gif The metre got to just above 0.5, dropped back to just under 0.5 and has now dropped further.

Surely must make you wonder, lee, why we're experiencing record high monthly temperatures even with such a weak El Niño effect.

;D

You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you?

Too funny   ;D

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 8:17pm:

;D You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you? Too funny   ;D

That's got to be it' greggery. That's got to be why the scientific community is so confused.

  http://cgcarwein.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/frogs-cartoon.jpg

MOTR wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 8:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 8:17pm: ;D You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you? Too funny   ;D That's got to be it' greggery. That's got to be why the scientific community is so confused.

It's just one of the reasons.

'months'   ;D

MOTR wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 6:29am:

Quote: While the Australian Bureau of Meteorology is keeping an alert for the event, it has pushed the start time from July to September or later, and it says a strong event is unlikely, Bloomberg noted. Last month, the World Meteorological Organization put the odds of an El Niño at 60 percent between June and August, climbing to up to 80 percent between October and December.

A little late. People in the know  8-) are way ahead of you and BOM

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1401667246/25#25

progressiveslol wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2014 at 3:12pm:

lee wrote on Jun 2nd, 2014 at 2:57pm: I see we may have an El Nino, probably not a Super El Nino. I also see Trenberth is moving to a position where El Ninos provide a 'stepped' global warming. Something like SKS 'Skeptic Belief' graph. I haven't seen any characterisation of El Ninos being caused by an increase in CO2. the temperature data manipulators, homoginisors have been fighting hard to keep the temperature data flat even more so since the time between super el nino has gone sinse 98. They will find it harder to digusise their fraud as the el nino will be weak for some time and not create the great step

The scary thing is that we might get a record high with a relatively weak El Niño. The concern has to be what sort of heat waves are going to come with the next super El Niño.

Interesting thing about your last post is that you seem to be arguing that there is a relationship between El Niño and warmer temperatures. Something you have denied in the past.

'An updated list of at least 29 excuses for the 18 year ‘pause’ in global warming, including recent scientific papers, media quotes, blogs, and related debunkings: '

1) Low solar activity

2) Oceans ate the global warming [debunked] [debunked] [debunked]

3) Chinese coal use [debunked]

4) Montreal Protocol

5) What ‘pause’? [debunked] [debunked] [debunked] [debunked]

6) Volcanic aerosols [debunked]

7) Stratospheric Water Vapor

8) Faster Pacific trade winds [debunked]

9) Stadium Waves

10) ‘Coincidence!’

11) Pine aerosols

12) It’s “not so unusual” and “no more than natural variability”

13) “Scientists looking at the wrong ‘lousy’ data”

14) Cold nights getting colder in Northern Hemisphere

15) We forgot to cherry-pick models in tune with natural variability [debunked]

16) Negative phase of Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation

17) AMOC ocean oscillation

18) “Global brightening” has stopped

19) “Ahistorical media”

20) “It’s the hottest decade ever” Decadal averages used to hide the ‘pause’ [debunked]

21) Few El Ninos since 1999

22) Temperature variations fall “roughly in the middle of the AR4 model results”

23) “Not scientifically relevant”

24) The wrong type of El Ninos

25) Slower trade winds [debunked]

26) The climate is less sensitive to CO2 than previously thought [see also]

27) PDO and AMO natural cycles and here

28) ENSO

29) Solar cycle driven ocean temperature variations

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/30/list-of-excuses-for-the-pause-now-up-to-29/#more-113709

It has links to the papers- Trenberth and others.

Yes I know it's WUWT but even Trenberth rates WUWT (according to his media page), but he doesn't rate SKS.

MOTR wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 7:50pm:

Surely must make you wonder, lee, why we're experiencing record high monthly temperatures even with such a weak El Niño effect.

But that's only if you accept NOOA above its stablemate NCEP.

3 points Lee.

1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic.

2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans.

3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different.

MOTR wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 8:09pm:

3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different.

So how many degrees have these oceans warmed up then?

MOTR wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 8:09pm:

3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different.

Are you talking AGW or global warming generally?

lee wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 9:23pm:

MOTR wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:09pm: 3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different. Are you talking AGW or global warming generally?

LOL, THE WEDGE POLITICS  :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*

Rider wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 8:21pm:

MOTR wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:09pm: 3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different. So how many degrees have these oceans warmed up then?

DO YOU KNOW THAT TEMPERATURE IS JUST AN INDICATOR  :D :D

THAT IS WHY ERROR VALUES ARE NEEDED... ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE TAKEN WITH INDICATORS AND SO ALL MEASUREMENTS HAVE ERROR VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM: DO YOU EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT i'M SAYING BRO?

OF COURSE YOU DO... VESTED INTERESTS KNOW ENOUGH  8-) 8-) 8-)

lee wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 11:59am:

MOTR wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 7:50pm: Surely must make you wonder, lee, why we're experiencing record high monthly temperatures even with such a weak El Niño effect. But that's only if you accept NOOA above its stablemate NCEP.

OOOH, MORE WEDGES  :o :o :o SERIOUSLY, IS THIS LIKE A GAME PLAYED WITH YOUNG CHILDREN?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 8:17pm:

;D You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you? Too funny   ;D

uM, "WHAT ISN'T A MAN-MADE CONCEPT?", MAY I ASK THE ENLIGHTENED ONE CALLED GREGGERY  :o :o :o

;)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 11:34pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 8:17pm: ;D You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you? Too funny   ;D uM, "WHAT ISN'T A MAN-MADE CONCEPT?", MAY I ASK THE ENLIGHTENED ONE CALLED GREGGERY  :o :o :o ;)

SEE, sheeple, this is where the toad hole hits the (insert whatever makes sense here!): measurement is a man made concept and science admits it with error values!!


"Why bother measuring yadda yadda to try and measure yadda yadda in the first place?"(the art of science if you will  :o :o)..............oooooooooh 'nother man-made contrivance there greggy you sure got your work cut out for you maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaate  ::) ::)  :-*

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 11:27pm:

Rider wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:21pm: MOTR wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:09pm: 3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different. So how many degrees have these oceans warmed up then? DO YOU KNOW THAT TEMPERATURE IS JUST AN INDICATOR  :D :D THAT IS WHY ERROR VALUES ARE NEEDED... ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE TAKEN WITH INDICATORS AND SO ALL MEASUREMENTS HAVE ERROR VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM: DO YOU EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT i'M SAYING BRO? OF COURSE YOU DO... VESTED INTERESTS KNOW ENOUGH  8-) 8-) 8-)

Divergence. When reality trumps fraud.

http://notrickszone.com/2014/08/01/divergence-between-model-temperature-and-reality-reaches-record-high-and-is-now-accelerating/

Rider wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 7:35am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 11:27pm: Rider wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:21pm: MOTR wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:09pm: 3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different. So how many degrees have these oceans warmed up then? DO YOU KNOW THAT TEMPERATURE IS JUST AN INDICATOR  :D :D THAT IS WHY ERROR VALUES ARE NEEDED... ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE TAKEN WITH INDICATORS AND SO ALL MEASUREMENTS HAVE ERROR VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM: DO YOU EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT i'M SAYING BRO? OF COURSE YOU DO... VESTED INTERESTS KNOW ENOUGH  8-) 8-) 8-) Divergence. When reality trumps fraud. http://notrickszone.com/2014/08/01/divergence-between-model-temperature-and-reality-reaches-record-high-and-is-now-accelerating/

Do you know the difference between an equation and a relationship?

:D :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 8:58am:

Rider wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 7:35am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 11:27pm: Rider wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:21pm: MOTR wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:09pm: 3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different. So how many degrees have these oceans warmed up then? DO YOU KNOW THAT TEMPERATURE IS JUST AN INDICATOR  :D :D THAT IS WHY ERROR VALUES ARE NEEDED... ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE TAKEN WITH INDICATORS AND SO ALL MEASUREMENTS HAVE ERROR VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM: DO YOU EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT i'M SAYING BRO? OF COURSE YOU DO... VESTED INTERESTS KNOW ENOUGH  8-) 8-) 8-) Divergence. When reality trumps fraud. http://notrickszone.com/2014/08/01/divergence-between-model-temperature-and-reality-reaches-record-high-and-is-now-accelerating/ Do you know the difference between an equation and a relationship? :D :D

Sure. Do you know the difference between bovine and equine excrement?

Cause either of these is all that you've got.

Rider wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 11:42am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 8:58am: Rider wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 7:35am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 11:27pm: Rider wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:21pm: MOTR wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:09pm: 3 points Lee. 1. Atmospheric warming is not monotonic. 2. There is no pause in global warming if you honestly factor in the warming of the oceans. 3. If you cherry pick the right dates you can statistically manufacture a pause in atmospheric warming. But only if you are deliberately trying to hide the truth. A more honest appraisal tells us something very different. So how many degrees have these oceans warmed up then? DO YOU KNOW THAT TEMPERATURE IS JUST AN INDICATOR  :D :D THAT IS WHY ERROR VALUES ARE NEEDED... ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE TAKEN WITH INDICATORS AND SO ALL MEASUREMENTS HAVE ERROR VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM: DO YOU EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT i'M SAYING BRO? OF COURSE YOU DO... VESTED INTERESTS KNOW ENOUGH  8-) 8-) 8-) Divergence. When reality trumps fraud. http://notrickszone.com/2014/08/01/divergence-between-model-temperature-and-reality-reaches-record-high-and-is-now-accelerating/ Do you know the difference between an equation and a relationship? :D :D Sure. Do you know the difference between bovine and equine excrement? Cause either of these is all that you've got.

Oh, you're saying i didn't check out your link  ;D ;D ;D ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 11:34pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 8:17pm: ;D You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you? Too funny   ;D uM, "WHAT ISN'T A MAN-MADE CONCEPT?", MAY I ASK THE ENLIGHTENED ONE CALLED GREGGERY  :o :o :o ;)

Weather, and climate.

You're trying to analyse forces of nature by applying man-made abstract concepts. 

Too funny    ;D

The IPCC the suppository of all knowledge AGW states=

'that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. - IPCC AR5 WG1 Summary for Policymakers[13]'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#CITEREFIPCC_AR5_WG12013

That includes the ref #13 for those that don't like wiki.

So that means there are other warming mechanisms. Because there are other warming mechanisms temperatures will continue to increase naturally, until we get a cooling.

That CO2 is the dominant driver, as per IPCC, means that the increasing levels of CO2 should be increasing the trend over and above natural increases. However the trend has been flat. It doesn't necessarily mean that there are no increases. Although some satellite data and radiosonde seems to suggest that may be the case.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:50pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 11:34pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 8:17pm: ;D You do realise that 'months' are a man made concept, don't you? Too funny   ;D uM, "WHAT ISN'T A MAN-MADE CONCEPT?", MAY I ASK THE ENLIGHTENED ONE CALLED GREGGERY  :o :o :o ;) Weather, and climate. You're trying to analyse forces of nature by applying man-made abstract concepts.  Too funny    ;D

How else is analysis done, mr greggary?

lee wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:53pm:

The IPCC the suppository of all knowledge AGW states= 'that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. - IPCC AR5 WG1 Summary for Policymakers[13]' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#CITEREFIPCC_AR5_WG12013 That includes the ref #13 for those that don't like wiki. So that means there are other warming mechanisms. Because there are other warming mechanisms temperatures will continue to increase naturally, until we get a cooling. That CO2 is the dominant driver, as per IPCC, means that the increasing levels of CO2 should be increasing the trend over and above natural increases. However the trend has been flat. It doesn't necessarily mean that there are no increases. Although some satellite data and radiosonde seems to suggest that may be the case.

GO THE WEDGE, i mean ------------------> FUD  ::) ::)