This is the biggest El Niño on record, and a killer La Niña is coming

[trichrider]

El nino is the hot dry season


la nina is the cool wet season




These periods have yearly, multi-year, decade-long, and hundreds years long cycles.


It is caused by warming or cooling of the pacific waters, which pushes air currents up along cali to washington and across the USA.



There can be some interesting weather when you are in a short term la nina/el nino and a long term one (ie. the 1-1/2 yearly cycle versus the ~7-12 year cycle).


When you have el nini cali will be hot, dry, and burn. When it flips you get all the rains.


If you learn the el nino/la nina cycles you can predict the weather of the west with amazing accuracy, and even predict the weather in the east as it also affects things here, to the point people will think you are a wizard.


You will never be tricked or confused by lying news media and moron claims of "global warming" (the earth has been COOLING the last 10+years)

just a few posts up^^^^^this prediction was explained. spot on.
igrowone's post verified it.
guy's a wizard.

 

[Dube]

El nino is the hot dry season


la nina is the cool wet season




These periods have yearly, multi-year, decade-long, and hundreds years long cycles.


It is caused by warming or cooling of the pacific waters, which pushes air currents up along cali to washington and across the USA.



There can be some interesting weather when you are in a short term la nina/el nino and a long term one (ie. the 1-1/2 yearly cycle versus the ~7-12 year cycle).


When you have el nini cali will be hot, dry, and burn. When it flips you get all the rains.


If you learn the el nino/la nina cycles you can predict the weather of the west with amazing accuracy, and even predict the weather in the east as it also affects things here, to the point people will think you are a wizard.


You will never be tricked or confused by lying news media and moron claims of "global warming" (the earth has been COOLING the last 10+years)

The climate may be cooling in the short term, but not in the long term. You are being misleading.

 

[Cannabologist]

The climate may be cooling in the short term, but not in the long term. You are being misleading.

The long term like what, thousands and thousands of years??? Are you one of those gobble warming types



The earth has been warming since the end of the last ice age and will continue to warm for thousands of years until this warming peaks, levels off, and we move into another ice age. This process will take anywhere from 5k to 20k years.

Nothing going on today, tomorrow, in the past, or in the future, has to do with humans or human activity.



CO2 is a (great) benefit to plants and has no effect on temperature - the physics of CO2, cloud cover, and the carbon cycle are 3 reasons alone that CO2 is prevented from ever acting as a warming agent in the environment.

Not to mention, it is temperature that makes CO2 go up or down in the environment, not the other way around


So, the type of cloud cover that matters here, is low atmospheric cloud cover. These clouds COOL the earth. And it turns out, low atmospheric cloud cover has more of a cooling effect on the planet than all green house gasses combined, and then some.



The effect is so over-dominant to other effects, it's pretty staggering really.... And once again, it is water vapor, not other minuscule greenhouse gasses, that is the real factor here over any and all others.


This water vapor, incidentally, absorbs all the infrared radiation before other greenhouse gasses like CO2 can absorb that radiation, meaning there isn't any radiation, ie. heat, left over for CO2 to absorb, hold on to, and then re-radiate later (and there's another big point to this as well..!!!) and thus act as a greenhouse gas... Water does all the work first.


And remember what I just said about absorb, hold onto, and re-radiate later? Well CO2 wouldn't be a greenhouse gas if it just absorbed heat and them immediately re-radiated it - the reason it is thought to act as a greenhouse gas is because it holds onto this heat for a period of time, then re-emits it later on.


This period if time has actually never been experimentally observed or verified to happen - it is only assumed and modeled.

The modeling for this re-remittance of heat varies - most estimates put it at around 20 to 40 years, with some as high as 50 or 60 years.



One asshole (because of the problems we will see with this in a moment), was able to come up with modeling that puts to 10-20 years... Which, doesn't work for the global warming hypothesis if it only holds onto heat for 10 to 20 years, then re-emits it, so anyway...

So we'll take for given an estimate, just for the warmist's sake, at 20 years time, which is the number most will use for this process.



BUT! What this whole idea hinges upon regardless is residence time, ie. how long CO2 is actually in the atmosphere before it is re-absorbed and moves somewhere else in the carbon cycle, like plants or the oceans.

This we absolutely know and have experimentally verified....

And that time is an average of 5 years.

In other words, CO2 is emitted from a source anywhere, that CO2 is then re-absorbed somewhere else in the system after 5 years time.




20 years............ 5 years.




20 years............... 5 years....


THE CO2 IS NEVER AROUND LONG ENOUGH IN THE SYSTEM TO EVER ABSORB ANY HEAT AND RE-EMIT IT LATER

Co2 is not, never was, and simply by the very nature of physics and other mechanisms on earth can never be a greenhouse gas.


You can take it into a lab and do whatever you want with it, but it will never ever in nature be a warming agent.



So where IS a majority of that extra CO2 coming from then if not humans? Its coming from the oceans. As the oceans change in temperature, they either suck up or release CO2.



The total amount changes over time, but what is absorbed also remains constant over time - in other words CO2 is released, and absorbed, but what is released is re-absorbed after 5 years, which is then replaced by what was released prior to that, and is then re-absorbed again 5 years later.

More off-gassing releases more CO2, which can change the total amount, but what's absorbed factors with this.



Again, with no amount of time is CO2 ever in the system long enough to absorb enough heat to re-emit later and act as a greenhouse gas in the system.



It is cycled in the system somewhere else before this heat absorption and release process can ever take place.

The amount of CO2 that is naturally around in the system pales in comparison to what humans emit - our CO2 contributions are minuscule, a drop in the bucket.



But it doesn't mean we shouldn't try - the more CO2 we emit, the bigger, stronger, and faster plants grow, and the more they yield. So we should do all we can to put MORE CO2 into the environment and give nature a boost.



The hypothesis that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere can cause global warming or cooling, is false