This is very long as I am going to lay out the arguments with SST (Sea Surface Temperature) graphics.

Here are some suggested reads for objective people in an honest search for the driver of the warming:

OCEANIC INFLUENCES ON CLIMATE ARE LITTLE STUDIED BUT HAVE BIG EFFECTS: ARTHUR VITERITO, PH.D.

The Correlation of Seismic Activity and Recent Global Warming (omicsonline.org)

1995: An Important Inflection Point in Recent Geophysical History (juniperpublishers.com)

I am compiling what has been swept under the rug to continue to bolster my position on the true source of what we are seeing today. Its warmer, but in a way that is similar to climate optimums of bygone eras. Funny how a victim mentality buys what is an optimum as an emergency because they are told that.

image.gif

The attribution to man-made influences is so overdone that it has led to a rush to judgment. And given the upheaval it is causing in the world today, it will result in disastrous setbacks for the advancement of the human condition. It is a phony climate war. Just to remind you, the opposite has been true in regard to what fossil fuels have done over the last 100 years, The human condition has advanced dramatically. As Alex Epstein’s book says, there is a moral case for fossil fuels!

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

In light of that, adaptions’ to what I believe is an overwhelmingly natural occurrence is what is called for. The insane energy policies of the phony climate war have not only weakened our nation on every conceivable front for our safety and our chance to thrive, but put us in the peril of a growing abyss. Man’s ability to respond will be weakened to what we obviously have grown quite good at doing due to the advancements made with freedom, competition and fossil fuels.

Underwater Volcanic activity began a rapid increase in the 1980’s. The first resultant hot spot showed up in 1985 in what was largely a cooler than average ocean compared to the 1991-2020 record of the planet:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

Now, if the SST was this cool now, no matter how much CO2 you put in the air, it would not have warmed as much. The cool oceans would be limiting any of the feedback from CO2 since it relies on outgoing longwave radiation to perform its task.  Cooler ocean, less OLR. And plus it would mean that there are limits to how warm it would get. We all know that. As I have said, it is a wonderful hypothesis if it’s all you are looking at, then of course, you would believe it. When I am done here, you are going to wonder why this is not the focus since the warming of the ocean leads to the increase in WVwhen spread out, this explains the distorted warming. It also leads to more outgoing OLR due to the earth’s surface being warmer. But the source of the warming is not the CO2, putting it at the mercy of all around it. The previous blog delved into this: How global hurricane activity can rebut climate exaggeration.

But watch what happened when the natural fightback and replacement of the warm blob occurred. See below:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

There was an El Niño response. Keep in mind that there is an active volcanic cluster in the eastern tropical Pacific near the Galapagos Islands. Major eruptions in 1997 and 2015 set off super Niños and the step-up response we see in temperatures are due to the influx of immense amounts of WV and its spreading out. YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND, IT TAKES FAR LESS WATER VAPOR TO WARM THE AIR WHERE IT IS  COLD AND DRY. So once dispersed, the warming shows up in the coldest driest areas.

Let’s look at the following year:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

The next hot spot starts showing in 1990, but notice the ocean around it is warmer than in 1985 above. The warming can be traced to active volcanoes in the ring of fire and the subsequent spreading out of the warming.

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

The next hot spot appears in 1993. The winter of 93-94 is very cold across the US as these do have regional effects. They promote warming north and east of them and more ridging over NW Canada. These definitely have shorter-term effect, but after each hot spot occurs the returning base state of the oceans are warmer. See below:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

500mb pattern DJF 93-94:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

But then the first super Niño goes off:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

Immense amounts of WV surge into the air and the result is undeniable. A step up in the temperature and then a pause but at a higher base state as the adjustment occurs. See below:

image.gifimage.gifimage.gif?

You can see plainly the result of the 2 super Niños: 1997 and 2015. They are natural and linked to massive Volcanic eruptions off the coast of South America. One of the links abovethe talk by Dr. Wyss Kimwill show you the impressive evidence in just the past 10 years alone including the massive 2015 eruption that set off that Super Niño, the step up and now new pause at the higher level. That is the result of more energy in the systemadjustment but at a higher level. Of course if one ignores that and just looks at CO2 you take out the step-ups, then you draw a line from the start to the finish and say CO2, settled science. Let us crush the planetary economic engine and make it a social justice issue.

Anything that has as its motivesomething different than the question at handshould be looked at with great skepticism.

In the false front to conserve life, they destroy lives. Bottom line.

So the response to the super Niño is a giant La Niña trying to fight back. This is classic Le Chetillers, the system attempting to establish a new base state after the introduction of an extra ingredient. In this case, immense amounts of heat from the ocean floor. Just where is that heat going to go?

image.gif

It cools. But again relative to 1985, its overall warmer and there is already a reload starting. The warm AMO with the increased activity in the mid atlantic volcanic belt also starts showing up.

2002:

image.gif

Another El Niño and a NE Pacific hot spot. A central-centered hot spot  in the Pacific like this is the kind of El Niño that promotes a colder and snowier US winter. And with the NE Pacific hot spot throwing in its input, it was.

2003

image.gif

It reverses and disperses, but notice how much more of the ocean is now warmer than average.

Lets go to 2011. Big La Niña. Cold spot in the NE Pacific and 11-12 is a very warm winter, and much of the US as it promotes a western trough, But even with all the cooling in the eastern Pacific, warming has moved up into the arctic oceans and the crucial Ind0-Pacific basin is now warmer than average.

image.gif

2014:

image.gif

As the La Niña comes off, the warming reveals itself more. And then comes the 2015 super Niño:

image.gif

The base state of the oceans continues to warm despite the obvious attempts at balancing it. Again, looking at the  temperature, the next step up occurs:

image.gif

When the smoke clears in 2017:

image.gif

Eighty percent of the oceans are warmer than average. The cool response is blunted a bit. The warmth of the Atlantic process is up northwest of Europe.

2018: Notice how the surface has cooled a bit northwest of Europe but other warmer areas appear. The overall base state continues to rise as that energy comes up and has to spread out, while the natural feedback processes and oceanic circulations try to respond:

image.gif

2020:

image.gif

NE Pacific warm patch. A cold winter especially in February with Texas getting its coldest period in 100 years. But other areas are now trying to warm even more.

The response tries in  2021:

image.gif.

But still, there is the hot spot from underwater activity ready to expand which it does for where we are now:

image.gif

It’s no secret this is right over the Pacific ring of fire:

image.gif

When we get La Niña, we really see what is going on.

And while there is a La Niña trying to respond should the volcanoes go off strongly again off South America, that will reverse. But in the meantime look where we started vs where we are now:

image.gif

It comes down to what is warming the ocean. Is it the air above?  Seems like a long shot doesn’t it, given the oceans have so much more of the thermal energy of the system? Plus if you have a pot of water…

image.gif

And you need to boil it, do you use a blow dryer?

image.gif

Or the stove?

image.gif

So why are they insisting it’s the CO2 feedback into a system that relies so much more on water vapor, than the warming of the number one source of water vapor, the ocean looks geothermal driven?  Given the amount of sun beating down on the tropics, what is most shocking and telling and directly contradicts a runaway CO2 warming is the mid troposphere over the tropics IS NOT WARMER AND IS DRYING OUT.  The Hadley cell in balloon measurement can’t be detected (that paper is coming out soon). WHY ARE WE NOT STUDYING THE OCEANS?  The increase in volcanic activity, and the computation of energy added to the system by this, should be front and center in the research. When fish are coming to the surface cooked and the sea surface is boiling like was seen in some of these, that of course has to be incorporated. It breaks my heart to say so because there are a lot of good people that believe the CAGW missive, but they are guilty of looking for their answer no matter what rather than the correct answer. It would not be so bad except we have formulated policy around it.

Look at how much colder it was in the 1980’s at 500 mb:

image.gif

This means of course the warming is where it was cooler. But look at the tropical Pacific. Worse yet, look at the drying over the tropics indicating net sinking, opposite of what the Hadley cell is supposed to do.

The blue here represents where it was moister. Again we are looking at what it was vs 30 years means. If it was moister, then it is drier now. This means the Hadley cell schematic is in doubt with its upward motion centered over the tropics due to the focusing of heat and moisture there: