Those who think they know what they know, don’t know what they ought to know
1 Corinthians 8:2
I can’t go over the myriad of people, blaming climate change for what just happened in Texas. But given the way they talk, that passage from the Bible seemed an appropriate opening, I will now demonstrate with a couple of example, of really dozens, a refutation of what is being pushed.
Now that the High pressure driven arctic attack is over, lets expose the Polar Vortex opportunist for what they are: weaponizers in a phony climate war, that actually do not know what they are talking about. They are classic examples of talking like they know something, but obviously do not know what they need to or they would not have said what they said.
First off here are the temperatures for February
Now lets look at the mean 500 mb level during the time of Siege on the Deep south
The Polar Vortex is near 70 north and 90 west. There is a strong trough moving across the lakes in the means and extends back into the southwest ( this is a dam bursting event similar to 1983 where you hae the main part of the arctic feature moving eastward to the north and existing cold air build up that had been developing for several days then comes south in full force.
Temperatures in this outbreak reached lower levels in the LRGV by degrees than the most recent one.
But the surface map showed the classic ridge line into Texas in both and there is the key, the low level delivery of arctic air that was at the doorstep.
Most recent event
Notice in both cases the ridge line is right over where wind turbines are, implying lighter winds in that area and the stronger winds and more extreme wind chills relative to averages in the populated east. So even without the freezing up due to precipitation there would have been some problems with demand vs the lack of ideal winds. These arctic outbreaks in west Texas have the wind come through quicker than further east and that is largely due to the resistance and lower pressure that is going to form over the gulf to the front ( you can see it here in the blue over the gulf.). This means longer duration of direct discharge into the populated eastern part of the state, where the demand is.
Now as far as deviation from normal of the upper features it’s impressive
But its centered back to the west which is why Texas had 2 snow events, 2 features came out of it. But that is not more impressive against the means than whats west of Spain. But was anyone saying anything about that. Of course not, because these kind of events happen quite often. How about Good Friday 1976, ( see how I can pull these examples out. Comes with the territory of actually knowing what happened before, as opposed to claiming you know what is happening now and tomorrow without even knowing)
How crazy is that. Stronger trough and ridge. Even more extrem. It snowed in El Paso and hit the 90s in NYC.
So the polar vortex argument is a shallow, almost ignorant, sound bite explanation, and saying climate change is going to lead to more of it, ups the level of that.
A look at the ice age scare of the late 1970s shows this is not getting worse. No matter how much they try to erase that missive, those of us that remember it know what was being said. As the inevitable backing away started in the 1980s, and in tandem with counter to Reagans America first policy, Al Gore seized on an issue that has made him the legend people believe he is. At the very least, even though it was preying on what people did not know, he took full advantage of it and had a fall back position to continue to stay relevant even if and when he lost the election. He simply doubled down. And do you think for on second, he, or John Kerry, or AOC, want to even know what I am going to show below. So here we go
Lets look first at the stratospheric warming that so often precedes these cold shots. This is a gross oversimplification of something people have spent much time researching, so forgive me if I do not do it justice, but for my audience I want to explain.
- A column of air will expand when warmed
- If we have a constant level from the surface to the top of the stratosphere, then if we expand one part the other part must contract
The faster molecules move, the hotter the air. As the molecules heat and move faster, they are moving apart. So air, like most other substances, expands when heated and contracts when cooled.
If the stratosphere warms, then the troposphere under must contract. This is how high pressure begins to build up as a precursor to the outbreaks.
4 The source regions of such events may be related to the movement of the MJO through the Indian ocean and the post event sinking of air NE of the Himalayans. So the seeds of the Texas outbreak were being planted well before, perhaps by a reaction to thunderstorm activity over the tropics and the convective feed back
I am sure AOC, John Kerry, Al Gore were all watching the Indian Ocean in November and December. And the evolution of the MJO pattern started back last April when it got cold due to favorable phases of the MJO for that. Those by the way are favorable for high impact seasons for hurricanes which is why I went ballistic with our impact forecast in April as you have seen a dozen times here, and why we emphasized in our winter forecast the high variability risk, I termed it like the result of a roller coaster ride. You may wind up standing a platform where you boarded, but the way you got there would be through a lot of twists and turns, more so than normal
Get the picture. You have spokespeople blaming climate change when they have no idea what lead up to it.
In any case look at this stratospheric deviation from normal in November through January , not in one winter, but 3, in the late 70s
There’s the warming over the pole.
Now look at the response at 500mb for the winter
So here we have warming over the pole, which now is climate change, but this was 45 years ago and spurring talk of an ice age
So here is this years event.
You see that positive over the Pacific. That is what limited this to a one month response rather than the onslaught we had in 70s. But there is the telltale warming over the pole at. 50 mb and the response at. 500 mb
Now a) you can see the link as to why it would get cold. But B) how in any way shape or form could that be portrayed as being more extreme than 3 winters , with stronger longer response. If anything if you want to say this is a sign of things to come, then its LESS, not more extreme in the large sense!
So let see if I have this straight. 9 months of severe cold with warming over the pole were not climate change. But one month was. So its getting so much worse, right? Well look at those 3 winters of the late 70s