Bob Tisdale has another go at his favourite person, Dana, who wrote an article about ENSO, short term variation and long term trends - on Skeptical Science. Every time Dana mentions ENSO, Bob trots out the same old line. Each article looks the same as every other piece he writes. You'd think he'd have cottoned on by now. But no. Bob asks a number of questions on WUWT. I'll paraphrase because it seems to be just the one question:
Why doesn't the earth cool as much from La Niña as it heats from El Niño?I'll add another question. After La Niña and El Niño, when ENSO returns to neutral, why does the earth still get hotter?
Seems simple to me (and to Tom on WUWT). If there were no global warming, this is a simplified representation of what would happen in relation to ENSO:
If Earth's temperature were rising, like there is global warming, then this is what would happen (simplified):
You can read about the three phases of ENSO at the Bureau of Meteorology.
Bob nearly answers his own question but doesn't seem to know it:
It is blatantly obvious to anyone ... that there would be little to no long-term warming of the lower troposphere temperature anomalies for mid-to-high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere if lower troposphere temperature anomalies had cooled proportionally during the La Niña events of 1988/89 and 1998-01.Let's look at this chart from this WMO report showing La Niña and El Niño years.
Yes, both La Niña and El Niño years are getting hotter as are the ENSO neutral years. Sometimes the simplest answer is the right answer.
I wonder if Bob will ever manage to connect the pieces and have a 'light bulb' moment.
.GIF)
For a more detailed look at ENSO, see related article here, and more here. Not to forget this or this, given Bob's latest article and ensuing comments (archived here). (Sou - Jan 14)
Yes, a very nice illustration you've got here. It's amazing that Bob Tisdale thinks that his question illustrates a problem with AGW when, in fact, it indicates an issue with his own theory. It's almost like a clever double bluff.
ReplyDeleteSaw the update on today's post that links here and had to comment again...Bob simply doesn't understand conservation of energy. It's that simple.
ReplyDeleteI figure Bob came up with the ENSO notion because he thought it might be going too far if he rejected the temperature record as well as the greenhouse effect. He might also be feeling sorry for poor maligned carbon dioxide.
DeleteRemember too, he's in direct competition at WUWT with Willis Eschenbach, who's been trying to resurrect Lindzen's debunked Iris theory (while claiming it for himself). Bob needs to offer an alternative or he couldn't justify his "books".
Bob's dug a hole for himself over the years and after self-publishing his books and trying to make a buck from them, he can't afford to admit he is wrong, even if he had the brains to work it out.
Anthony Watts doesn't care one way or another. Anything to keep up his daily quota and blog hits. He gets all his articles for free.