By Joe Bastardi
Suppose you had four enclosed boxes made of metal. The inner box had a height of 3 inches, the next one 6, the next one 9, and the next one 12. Each was separated by 3 inches.
Obviously, the area of the 12-inch box is larger than the 3-inch one. Each one to fill needs increased volumes of liquid.
Now, what happens if you start filling the inside box with water at a pace greater than what you are draining it at?
It rises to the level of the box and then overflows. You keep filling the inner box. Obviously, the level of the inner box is at a new height from when there was no water input, but now you are filling the area on the outside. So what happens when it fills completely? It overflows, and a new equilibrium for the total system is established ( the two boxes).
But you keep filling it. And the same thing will happen at the next 2 levels, Until such a time that the input equals whatever can be drained out or stops so that what can be drained out can start returning it to normal, it will continue to rise.
Well, that is what you are seeing, and how this is not obvious is beyond me.
You have 40 years of no Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Change and whatever atmospheric warming you want to say occurred, yet looking at the 10-year means I can’t tell if it was warmer or colder in the ’80s than in the ’50s.
All this time, CO2 was ramping up. Yet the oceans were largely unchanged as far as the total area of cool, though changes took place, some cooler, some warmer in regional areas. This can be attributed to the natural exchanges that go on in the ocean and interaction with the air.
I guess the ’50s were a bit cooler, so since CO2 was on the rise, you can use that as a baseline increase and certainly it is not run away or catastrophic. But the Arctic had not warmed BECAUSE THE INPUT OF EXTRA WATER VAPOR DUE TO THE WARMING OCEAN HAD NOT STARTED.
Here is the geothermal input to the ocean, the introduction of the water to the boxes, so to speak.
What happens when the is too much buildup? The base state “overflows” and the strong El Ninos enter in response.
Up goes the temperature in response to water vapor, and where is the greatest increase? In the coldest, driest areas.
Well, here are SST with the jump:
So we got from large scale colder than normal in the ’50s-’80s to large scale normal to above, once the geothermal aspect is introduced (we start filling the boxes).
This cannot be linked to CO2 in any way that would make it the climate control knob. It’s a bit player, minor at that and its actual effect was probably whatever you can find from 1951-1990.
The greatest flip is in the polar regions, where water vapor (WV) makes the biggest difference.
A couple of things. If you are looking at the boxes filled with water, you now have four enclosures, and this means there is a lot of water. So, to continue to increase it so it overflows again, you need an increase in the rate of input. Enter the huge volcano last year, mainly underwater, which showed that the geothermal aspect is huge. But what is incredible is that we DO NOT QUANTIFY WATER VAPOR WHICH IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO TEMPERATURE, BUT WE DO QUANTIFY CO2, WHICH THERE ARE NO KNOWN CORRELATIONS. HENCE THE ARGUMENT THAT CO2 is going UP, SO IT MUST BE WHY THE TEMPERATURE IS GOING UP. Temperature is a lousy metric for evaluating the energy of the system compared to water vapor. But think about what is going on here. What is the source of water vapor? It is not your SUV or fossil fuels. It’s the ocean. So by hiding the source, or dismissing it, the people pushing the CAGW manmade climate change either are ignorant to fundamental questions that need to be addressed, or they darn well know what will happen if we bring in the natural forcing. It’s likely the reason the climate models are all too warm, except for one that did not have the CO2 forcing.
How does it change? IT ISN’T UNTIL SUCH A TIME THAT THE NATURAL PROCESS CHANGES. It does have a diminishing return relative to the absolute value of the input, for once input and output are equal, the temperatures will level off. So it is important that we track underwater volcanic activity. Basically, whether by accident or design, we have swept under the rug the answer to the question. An answer I suspect many pushing the climate catastrophe don’t want to see. That it’s not men, and of course your control of men, that rule the climate, but nature itself.
The so-called boiling oceans reveal how little CO2 has to do with it. That’s right, the warming exposes the whole thing because it reveals the true nature of it! The warming has to be from large natural sources. The volcano and its water vapor input simply put an exclamation point on it. And anyone not willing to confront this, (actually, they are but saying it’s relatively minor) violates basic laws of nature.
Joe Bastardi is a pioneer in extreme weather and long-range forecasting. He is the author of “The Climate Chronicles: Inconvenient Revelations You Won’t Hear From Al Gore — and Others” which you can purchase at the CFACT bookstore.
His new book The Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate war can be found here. phonyclimatewar.com