Climate scientist/meteorologist here, Anton. The transition from El Nino to La Nina or La Nada is frequently associated with a warming effect that has a lag time of 6-10 months. Post-Nino summers are usually the hottest in the Northern Hemisphere on average.
Exactly. It is helping to fuel our above average water temperature here in the gulf of Mexico making hurricanes develop faster than what would be the usual.
The ENSO has short-lived cycles. They are too short in duration to set any long-term trend (20+ years) in the global climate. A La Nina cycle takes in roughly the same amount of heat energy into the oceans that an El Nino event would have released into the atmosphere from the oceans. The oceans are, by far, the largest heat sink on this planet. The oceans, on a whole, are warming, at depth, due to the increased energy that the greenhouse gases are trapping at the surface of the planet. This becomes more potential energy to be released into the atmosphere as the oceans continue to warm. Solar cycles are also too short in duration to have a long term trend on the global climate. There is a reason why they call it a solar constant. There is only a small amount of energy difference released from the sum from a solar minimum to solar maximum. As the sun continues to warm, it will alter the global climate, over millions of years and not in just a few centuries. I just wanted to get that out of the way too.
Through my life I've seen a lot of volcanos in the south pacific result in abnormally large rainfalls in the region I live. And this happens literally like clockwork, a volcano goes up, for the next two years we have below average temps, and much more rain than normal. The two years immediately after that will be quite hot. Winter 2022/23 and 2023/24 were both much wetter than average, we had to bulldoze our road again several times over the winter. And then this summer has been unrelentingly hot. I'm not particularly old, but I'm old enough to have seen this cycle repeat multiple times.
@@KeithStrangTitle isn't required for that. But of course vague descriptions and assumed, lose timelines aren't enough. Having multiple daily observations including temperature, humidity and rainfall for maybe 2 decades fitting together with multiple eruptions in the are / affecting it is needed. Without consistent data no "research" or statement should gain support from science community. Otherwise we are doomed.
@@iBackwoods No change lol just coming off of record rainfalls that filled the lakes. Big snows in the mountains. I will agree though its hot in Cali but im pretty sure thats the norm.
I'm not a climate scientist but I had aspirations of being one. The amount of water vapor caught up in the stratosphere undoubtedly has had a number of effects around the globe. For us here in California the 2022-23 winter brought copious amounts of rain and at higher elevations snowfall was enormous, it was enough to resurrect Lake Tulare in the southern San Joaquin Valley.
as to why the heating effects are presiding it may have more to do with low sulfur diesel fuel requirements in shipping industries. ship-tracks akin to contrails but of the oceans surface.
@@nuthinasitseems5213 there's a satellite photo of the Atlantic at the height of the covid and at normal times. You can see the cloud following the shipping routes. Ship use high sulfur bunker oil
That had more to do with the El Nino. Increased WV in the atmosphere increases the potential for more severe precipitation events, but it does not dictate where the WV will precipitate back out. The ENSO has more of an impact on this.
It definitely increased flooding in eastern Australia due to the way it interacted with a perfect confluence of the existing SAM, La Nina, and Indian Ocean dipole. Can't say it caused the flooding but it took an existing situation and dialled it up to 11
@@volkerengels5298 I FOLLOW what SCIENTISTS who are EXPERTS in their FIELDS say about their observations and when there are unexpected CHANGES in systems and they SAY that stratospheric water vapour affected the SOUTHERN ANNULAR MODE I have no REASON to personally doubt their conclusions
@@lauroralei The water vapor might be caused by the temperature jump in 2023? Let's assume 0.4K - and you have something like 3% more water vapor globally. Tonga is a drop compared to that.. What does your sources say?
Other analysis have showed directly, with satellite images, how the water vapour formed a blockade that prevented the current weather system from developing as usual. ie.e it locked in the diapole and la nina. So yes, according to those opinions, it greatly affected weather, no because of its direct energy effects, but by the water vapour distribution.
Australia has gone much greener since the Tonga eruptions because of all the extra rain. Now we have the cold from the Ruanga eruptions in Indonesia recently. The Tongan eruption disrupted the SAM system which has disrupted our normal El Niño/ La Niña cycle. Because things happen in opposites, the northern hemisphere has been stuck in El Niño while we have been stuck in La Niña. I think they need to investigate more because it has certainly played a role in what has happened in the last couple of years. But now that Ruanga has erupted as well, it must be taken into account too.
@@Terran.Marine.2 yeah was a VE5 on the scale and erupted twice. Hit 80000 feet into the stratosphere. An ash cloud could be seen from the volcano right across Australia to New Zealand after the initial blast. It is enough to effect the climate but not a great deal. We have certainly seen the effects this year in Australia with the extreme cold temperatures.
El nino and La nina are east-west cycles, not north-south. If these affect rain and temps further north, it's because of their effects on the jet streams.
@@anitapeura3517 yeah I don’t really understand the north but I know it disrupted the southern annular mode which drives the El Niño/ La Niña in Australia. This disruption had to have some kind of butterfly effect around the world, especially when it comes to ocean temperatures. But thanks for that. In my opinion these two volcanoes have only benefited Australia even though it may cause some problems for people, as a whole I imagine we will see Australia green up for a few more years yet as it’s not just rain but fertile rains. I think with the rift zone in Iceland firing up again and the volcanoes in Italy currently erupting greater than normal, it is going to get colder soon. It’s earth’s natural way of releasing heat so it makes sense why there has been some significant eruptions recently but not really significant in the number erupting. It’s quite low compared to some years back. It’s crazy how much the ocean plays a role in temperatures and we always have to remember the role sunspots play in it all too. There has been a lot of significant solar activity lately. But thank goodness for volcanoes, I don’t think earth will ever get too hot thanks to them. Unless you live right near one like Campi Flegrei which may erupt soon, Stromboli, Etna and Vesuvius have been really active which proves there is a lot of heat and pressure built up, in that region.
@@cbremer83 While this is true, it's not exactly the temperature itself that the worry of global warming is about. Really the concern is how *fast* the change is happening. Those "way hotter" and "way colder" periods of time happened over billions, millions, or thousands of years. Plenty of time for things to slowly adjust and survive. But such a rapid change like the one we are causing is extremely dangerous because there is not sufficient time for ecosystems to adjust in time. Remember that we heavily depend on ecosystems and extremely complex relationships between them to survive. One species suffering could cause a cascade of effects that fuck everything up. That being said, it *is* also the flat out temperature we are concerned with. It would be better if it simply didn't get "way hotter" or "way colder" just because we decided to keep fucking everything up.
I noticed in NSW Australia after the Tongan eruption that for the rest of the year a deep red glow in the sky after sunset. Also that summer the weather was much cooler than usual. Maybe it has a opposite effect in the northern hemisphere?
I hope that you are enjoying life- I admire you so much, you have accomplished so many things and had to overcome so much and you're still here. I admire everything that you do in your research (the amount of it and accuracy) I don't know how you find time. I don't know how you do it ❤️
That was actually a different volcano called Tambora. It erupted in 1816 and led to the year without Summer afterwards and snow in June in New England. The only difference with the Tambora volcano is that the Tonga volcano put large amounts of water in the atmosphere. And as Anton says, water is a strong green house gas.
@@flappah Although water is technically a green house gas as it blocks the radiation coming from the ground into space like CO2 does, it also forms clouds which block the radiation coming from the Sun as well. So it has both a cooling and heating effect. It's hard to predict which is the prevalent one as it depends on many factors like the clouds shapes and dimensions. It seems like it had an overall cooling effect in this case.
I'm just looking at different Cycles here as well just trying to figure this out. Because all of this fear-mongering about human activity is truly not scientific
Tambora 1816. Fall 1816, after a winter that never ended that summer, on the south coast of the Gaspe peninsula, an old active Loyalist relative from Stillwater, NY, wrote a letter begging for extra rations for her long loyal in everything, elderly black house servant and the poor womans two young grandchildren. The request was satisfied. She and her black house servants grew up as playmates - they were family
@@neveklund3267 Love 'Stillwater' (original name). Ancestors arrived America 1627-1651 founded it. Completetly erased from revolting left-wing 'Hollwood' history but very remarkable loyal Ameicans in their day. Lokked at all closely (Haldimand Papers, etc. Well documented. A source of great CanUk pride
Interestingly, here in the UK we've had a generally mild winter followed by a long, cool and very rainy spring and a summer that's struggled to really get going. It delayed crops and has had an impact on insect life. We've had a couple of warm spells but nothing like the heat waves we've had in recent years.
Pinutabo had measurable global climatic effects. They were observable for about three years. In the first year they were quite noticeable with lurid sunsets and very cold overnight winter temperatures. They had effects on day to day activities. For me a big problem in that year was the repeated freezing of water pipes overnight. Very annoying.
Here in the UK we experienced two very cold October's 1992&1993) preceding Pinatubo. November 1993 was also very cold and quite snowy. Other than that the temperature for 1992 & 1993 were pretty average and nothing compared to the cold of the 1980's.
If you look at the lower stratosphere (TLS) as Anton does here you will see the initial warming (the oppostive to ground level since the blocked energy warms where it is blocked). Then you will see a persistent 0.5degC cooling after that three blip. This similarly implies a MORE transparent stratosphere and more energy into lower climate. This is totally ignored by climate science.
Hello Anton, the Tongan volcano was one month before historically massive floods on the east coast of Australia and some people point to the masses of water high in the atmosphere from the volcano. Unusual weather continued throughout 2022, lessening in 2023. I believe the Tongan volcano was causative.
Note: Big difference between water vapor and aerosols! Yes aerosols are generally cooling - so the paper's conclusion is no surprise at all. But water vapor - which the paper ignores - is a stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 (also over a broader range of wavelengths) Aerosols disperse much less than water vapor. Aerosols are not carried as high into the stratosphere as water vapor. SO aerosols did affect the S hemisphere but not so much the NH as they hardly dispersed there. But water vapor DID disperse into the N hemisphere exactly the same months where we had the 0.5-0.6oC surge in ave temperature (i.e., May June 23). I dont believe in fairies, flat-Earth, and extreme coincidences so this is very strong evidence of the heating effect of the TH eruption.
Last summer here in Ohio was absolutely beautiful. Hardly and hot days at all. Lots of people I talked to said they wished summer was always like that.
It is global climate not change, not the weather in your backyard over one season. I highly suggest that you spend some time off of your back porch and to take a look at what is happening GLOBALLY.
@@tommyhawks856 so tell us what you have seen yourself, professor. Tell us what has changed at your place. I've lived within 10 miles of where I live now since 1986 and I've lived where I live now for 24 years and weather patterns have not changed here _or anywhere else._ Tell us what you have seen and stop treating something you know very little about like a religion. It isn't a good look for you.
@@ut000bs We might be able to have an intellectual conversation on global climate change once you have figured out a few things. 1. It is global climate change, not your backyard weather. 2. 24 years is about the minimum amount of time needed to observe if there has been any change in the climate 3. Saying that the weather patterns have not changed where you live, or anywhere else, is a very strong claim to make. Strong claims need to have strong evidence that supports the claims. Do you have that evidence, or is everyone in the world suppose to just believe you because you said it? 4. Were I to tell you what has changed at my place would be making the exact same mistake that you are making. It is GLOBAL climate change and not a change in your backyard weather! 5. Why would you think that global climate change means that every place on the planet changes at the same rate and at the same time, or even in the same direction? The polar regions are warming about 3 times faster than the global average temperature change. Europe is warming about twice as fast as the global average. When you learn to ask the proper questions, we can have a better conversation.
@@ut000bs This June I moved into Serbia. Belgrade. It was a hot summer so far. I've seen one week with rain with high 20 Celsius temperature. The rest of them was a sunny high 30, low 40 Celsius heat waves. Imagine several weeks long of 100+ Fahrenheit. I asked a few locals about climate, and they all told me the same. It was not like this a 2-3 decades ago. One elder gentleman told me, that 50 years ago, when he was a kid, it was a rare thing to get 30+ Celsius in the summer. Some regions are destined to get the bigger impact of climate change, while others are destined to become a safe heaven in the proverbial "storm". You just wait a decade, and all of the Central America people gonna want to move to your neighborhood.
Anton, I live in the Southern Central part of Australia and looking back on 2022-23 and 23-24 the temperatures were much milder through summer and slightly higher rainfall. And this calendar year we are experiencing considerably less rainfall than the last few years (down by 40%) and a warmer end of this Winter, not a good look for the coming Summer.
although the northern parts of australia have experienced extreme flooding for two years. They're flooding right now, in tropical dry season, and more floods expected. the ground will be completely soaked and the water table full that when the wet season comes, we will have more terrible floods up north. from byron bay to cairns,
I wouldn't set too much store on that. They told us that we'd be dying of the heat and no rain this time last year and we had a cold wet summer, followed by one of the coldest winters in a long time. No sign of any early warming here. We've barely snuck up to more average winter temps this week, instead of 3- 5 degrees below them, but its by no means warmer than it normally is this time of year.
Typical summer where I am - southeastern US. Hot and humid. Perhaps less rain than usual, at least where I am, but when it comes it comes in torrents. So again, not necessarily out of the ordinary for here.
I enjoy Anton's clear, concise descriptions and scientific consensus regarding most topics. However, it is quite obvious our climate and biosphere has been created and driven by microscopic life since the dawn of life 3.5+ billion years ago. Although difficult to prove and hence more theoretical at this point, there are many studies indicating soil and oceanic microorganisms, the ultimate regulators of climate, are being disturbed and poisoned from toxic runoff from human activities around the world. Their are a documented 400+ dead zones on the planet particularly around river deltas, and now this dead zone created by the Tonga eruption. Perhaps we should investigate the chemistry of these polluted dead zones and compare them to the recovery of life around this relatively pristeen undersea volcano, in attempt to determine why these dead zones are increasing, and not recovering
I thought the sulfur ban on ship oil caused the heat as the sulfur caused clouds to form over all shipping lanes until they banned it. An unexpected geoengineering we have been benefiting from to cool us through the heating, we stopped that in 2020.
You might want to look at the fact we have been recovering from the "Little Ice Age" for almost 2 centuries to explain most of the global temperature increase. Even the 1 C rise is petty small given the fact temperatures have naturally gone up and down several degrees every few centuries for 10,000 years.
You might want to look into the fact that the "little ice age" was not a global temperature increase, but something that happened in the north atlantic region.
@@Tom_Quixote "Truth", "fact", and "proof" are actually words rarely used by any scientist worth his/her salt. Those words are typically over-used by the likes of you two dolts who slept through your science classes.
@@boroblueyes little research shows that the fastest warming period was like 8 degrees over 20k years, not 1 or 2 degree per century like today. Don't confuse global average with local artic or antartic changes.
We've had one of the worst summers in living memory here in the UK/Ireland. They're usually not great to begin with but this has been the worst. The summer without sun. I keep wondering did tonga have anything to do with it. Though, I do distinctly remember my geography teacher telling us global warming would give us 25% more rain by 2024. That was 17 years ago and he was 100% correct.
There was an antipodal standing wave in N. Africa, as well. I watched that live, but it's received little research from what I can gather. That and the sound wave were particularly fascinating, as we hadn't witnessed something like that in our lifetimes.
The water vapour content of the atmosphere, world wide, increased by 10% and long term atmospheric effects are predicted to last 10 years. What does this do to climate models?
People don't talk about how ridiculously spectacular the sunsets were for a few months in Sydney because of this eruption. I'm not kidding when I say the sky got brighter after the sun had set with a yellow glow all these odd orangey red hues that lasted much longer and more vividly
Anton, you seem to have missed the latest work by Jim Hanson regarding the effect of the removal of sulphur aerosols from the exhausts of ocean-going vessels over last few years - the major traffic regions of the oceans, north and south, have warmed as a result of the removal of the cloud-forming aerosols resulting in the increase in air temperatures because reflection is diminished. Effectively, the Global Dimming in the traffic-heavy regions has rapidly decreased. And it's not going to return. A 15% increase in UV is postulated in these latitudes, so far.
I saw that. Hanson, at no time, suggested that we should increase our output of particulates into the atmosphere. His point was to show how much the particulates have masked the warming that is occurring due to human activity. Sulphur aerosols are a huge health problem, and rising levels of these aerosols would kill more people faster than a warming global climate would.
Don't worry, we will actually do something about global warming that won't kill humans... Like make all large ships powered by ammonia. It'd be easy and cheap and oil would cost less thereby killing less poor humans. Wait. Wait. No, we won't. We'll keep lying about EVs. And driving up the demands for people to own people in poor countries. Ahhh, Humans. Always putting the best liars in charge. _Adorable humans._
@@tommyhawks856A very large amount of SO2 was ejected into the upper atmosphere by the Pinatubo eruption in 1992, which caused a fairly significant temperature drop around the world.
Climate is complicated and Anton does not understand even the basics. He is just playing at low key alamism dressed up with pseudo scientific discourse which is woefully ignorant of the very things he attempts to discuss.
@@gtv6chuck "A very large amount of SO2 was ejected into the upper atmosphere by the Pinatubo eruption in 1992, which caused a fairly significant temperature drop around the world." - I would not call it a significant global temperature drop, but is was certainly a measurable temperature drop. What is the point that you are trying to make?
Hi Anton! I live on Kilauea on the big island of Hawaii. It was raining nonstop like normal on the Windward side of the Big Island. It rains more than 300 inches in my yard yearly. Usually more. When that eruption happened, it was sunny for over a month in January and February which is unheard of here. It is slowly starting to normalize this year.
@@flinch622it's mainly the sulphur dioxide, the ash itself doesn't stay up too long. Interesting fact: the banning of SO2 rich fuel from shipping has generated increases in temperature over heavily travelled shipping routes as there is now much less localised SO2 in the air.
In long term climate history it's actually been proven that the climate has a clear pattern where the temperature raises and then volcanic activity raises and drops the temperature again. It's sawing up and down at the scale of hundreds of thousands of years. The headlines in newspapers are not based on science, it's all about money. Primary function being scandals sell newspapers and secondary reason being that environmentalists have created a huge market of emission fees and taxes they can benefit from. And scientists get a lot of funding for 'trendy' climate studies. As always, follow the money.
according to climate change experts the sun is not responsible for the heating of the planet, only all the gases that compose the atmosphere are. where the energy comes from in their mind i do not know, and likely so do they. a bit of sarcasm, but climate scientists are astonishingly bad at predicting anything, and don't even know how the systems work. If they did, we would have very accurate weather prediction for the planet with months or even years of accurate predictions. We would also know exactly how tornados work form and die, yet we do not know and neither can we simulate it. All the simulations rely on extreme oversimplifications of the planet so as to not use non existente compute power, which has the fun side effect of basically being a best guess instead of an actual result. I barely count climate science as science these days, for various reasons.
@@lbochtler No climate scientist agree that humans added 1,8-2 W/m2 forcing over the last 250 years, which is nothing . Politicians and activists however forget to mention this fact (featured in IPCC report). Earth's energy balance is calculated using a 30% albedo assumption, the error margin of this assumption is far greater than 2W/m2.. it is hilarious that these activist either don't know about this or deliberately withholding it from the public.
@@lbochtlerdata shows that previous solar activity on earth has had a negligible effect on the global temperature. The solar maximum we have right now is nothing out of the norm, and the warming we see is much higher than what happened in other solar maximums. That should be enough evidence
@@nyali2that is not the only evidence. Current warming rate globally is higher than any time in history, and there is nothing to suggest that something extraordinary is happening in nature right now, other than us. The 2 watts have an huge effect, in fact, the effect kinda matches the 1.5 or more degree warming we see right now. Not to mention other feedback effects, such as changing the balance of gasses in the atmosphere and releasing trapped methane and co2 from ice and oceans.
I can't speak for heatwaves. But I know where I live the first full winter was a steady, persistent, wet and COLD winter. Usually it's dry and warm, with the week after week, and day after day changes being pretty rhythmic. So I cant stress enough just how noticable the difference was for not only me, but also every person I talked to regarding this fact. It was noticably colder and wetter, and the fact it stayed that way was so bizarre. Especially when you consider the fact that our highs and lows were the same as the day before, day after day after day after day after....
Speaking for my area - last year we had a bit higher temperatures in spring, significantly lower temperatures during summer and significantly higher temperatures during autumn and winter. Not much change in rain. Overall 2023 was quite anomalous, especially second half had really stable temperatures. It felt almost like temperature havent changed since june until late october.
Speaking from England, we DIDN'T HAVE any heatwave in 2023 - it was in 2022. Both summers since have been dismal - cold, wet, grey and crops not ripening. It would be more familiar science if Tonga was responsible for our crap weather in 2023 and 2024 simply because of the injection of atmospheric dust. I ascribe the sunny weather of 2020 to 2022 to the reverse - the lack of dust over the northern hemisphere due to Lockdown. No greenhouse effect whatsoever. The only mystery is why the weathermen keep telling us the opposite of what is actually happening.
Tonga happened in 2021. Dust is actually cooling Earth not warming.. Greenhouse effect is different caused by H2O, CO2, CH4 and so on.. H2O is by far the most important, Tonga added +10% or so to the upper atmosphere.
@@nyali2 That's what I said. The air in the northern hemisphere was crystal clear after a few months of Lockdown and it got hot. I'm not sure how long it takes for volcanic dust and vapour in the southern hemisphere to reach the northern hemisphere, but I'm guessing it's fast enough to cause crap summers in 2023 and 2024. The British weather makes sense to me, the claims of climatologists don't. Incidentally of course - the air over Britain in the late 1950s and early 1960s was filthy with soot. Then they cleaned the air up and Lo and Behold there is a dramatic uptick in the temperature graph. Honestly, I think we're all being taken for mugs.
I'd argue that we did. We had long droughts and record early temperatures in spring and autumn. Living in the countryside, you can tell when something is up. The oak trees shriveled up early, and everything was stunted. Many plants went into a second hibernation. It wasn't the hottest day or anything. But it was prolonged drought, and the heatwaves that did happen were still dangerous and hotter than in the past. Just not record breaking.
@@fluffycrumpetbaby Where are you living? I do live in the countryside - in the East Midlands where we've just endured the wettest couple of years anyone can remember. Lack of sun made tomatoes mature at least 6 weeks late last year and more like 2 months this year. Sunflowers this year are half their usual height. Too wet for aphids but not snails. It's not unusual to have an early heatwave in April/May, in fact its been 'normal' for about 25 years - but this year we didn't, just a warm spell at a later date. Sky clarity has been pretty crap too - I haven't even bothered get my scope out.
*I HEARD THIS TWICE* as the shockwave circled the globe - Im on the 9th floor overlooking the black sea with very little landmass in between me and the eruption. The first direct one was a building shaking WOMP and then about 1.5h later another much lower amplitude ruble presumably as it came the other way around the planet.
The level of energy released was !Astronomical. I don't think ppl truly Grok the magnitude of even our single planet.. let alone how horrifying a CME from the sun can be
@@glytchd -- the first blast was powerful - it was like the air moved 1m sideways VERY fast and all at once. I was stood by the open kitchen window at the time and this shock wave just want past *WOMP* I thought a LNG taker of something had exploded at sea
@@earthlymatters888 Im talking about what I said in the OP - why do you have a problem understanding this...??? Are you unaware the shockwave circled the globe 3 times...???
"Im on the 9th floor overlooking the black sea with very little landmass in between me and the eruption." if you're overlooking the black sea youre abour 10,000km away from Tonga, and surrounded by plenty of land mass. you couldnt be further away from tonga if you tried haha. this is what i am not understanding.
We are having a hot summer in Texas, but definitely not a record breaking ultra blazing summer from hell. And we have had those , at least a few times a decade.
Last summer was absolutely brutal. If anything, this summer feels a little mild to me for Houston. Could just be because of my own recency bias bc of last summers hellscape though, idk.
@@Muuccss yeah, last summer 🥵🥵🥵 I grew up in East Texas, and I have lived up north Tx for a short bit. I think it was 2001...I remember going out near Coleman at the end of August....115 makes 100 seem a bit more bearable
"We are having a hot summer in Texas, but definitely not a record breaking ultra blazing summer from hell." - I am also in Texas and last year was not only a temperature record-breaking summer in Harris County, but also in Texas, and globally. It would be an absolute disaster for Texas if this year's temperature broke last year's record-breaking heat.
In Arizona weve had over 110 degree minimum heat everyday for about half a year (very abnormal for how long its lasting) it finally just capped at 100s since a week to two ago
@@MS-vn2pb for how long it's lasting yes, not the heat itself, summer used to only have some weeks/days that reached this but not Literal everyday. We've had plenty of days above 120 this year, above 110 was minimim
If anything the micro tefra that was erupted into the upper atmosphere cooled *he planet and by blocking sunlight over the Pacific ocean, cooled the El Nino Effect and brought a heavy snow and rain to the Western US States. This even brought record snowfall to the Sierras with over ten meters in some locales. The effects were felt in the winter of 22-23 and last winter of 23-24. With above average rain and snow . So much that most of the drought suffering reservoirs are either completely or are close to completely full.
@@WaveOfDestiny ohh I completely understand that. It has just been an extended odd period and my job keeps me attuned to the wildlife food situation in the area. Usually it is solid mid 80's to low 90's in the summer with little to no rain here but we are lucky to hit mid 70's this year. This past winter also felt about 10 degrees cooler than normal. I only mentioned it because in the video he mentioned that a lot of people had been asking why it felt so hot and possible relation to tonga eruption. Yes global warming from burning fossil fuels is real but it isn't something that you will notice year to year.
Would be interesting to consider the effects of solar maximum on earths temps. I remember approximately five years ago reading an article about crazy rainfalls during solar maximum… sure enough, here we are and we have crazy rainfalls in low rainfall regions of the globe.
Ignore the absolutely massive fusion reaction we orbit around constantly. It can't possibly have an impact on our global temperatures or ever go through hot/cold phases of it's own. Be a good government subject and blame cows and cars aa you have been told to do. *And vote for higher taxes. We'll increase them anyhow, so you may as well vote for it.
@@slartybarfastb3648The first thing Climatologists look at is Solar irradiation. The Sun isn't doing anything abnormal currently. We're at an average peak of an average Solar Cycle.
@@slartybarfastb3648 What I always find hilarious, is the Scientists that use their positions to try and ram through their politics to the world, then suddenly they find out maybe they aren't as smart as they thought when a new tool becomes available and throws a monkey wrench into their "The end of the world is near!" narrative. I'm having a good time right now laughing at the big head Astrophysicists whose worlds have been turned upside down by James Webb. It doesn't stop them though; they just lie some more to get their way.
The difference is that the big part of the blast was under water ! If Mount Etna were to blow her top in a big way ,I believe the temperature in winters would be much cooler .
Very interesting. All those old volcanoes seemed to produce a cooling effect. The thing I've noticed is more cloud cover. Not more rain just clouds. It has definitely been a hot summer here too.
Of the natural gases, water vapour has the highest emmisivity and absorptivity, which goes up as the partial pressure increases. The heating effect will be minimal. The sun drives our temperature and it's currently at a solar maximum.
Here in the Pacific Northwest State of Washington, this Summer (2024) has been quite mild. We only had about 2 or 3 days that reached 90 deg F (as recorded in Seattle, WA), and 0 days in the 100's. I've also noticed our change-of-season happening a wee-bit earlier than normal with a few trees around my neighborhood already changing colors heading into the Fall season (currently still August).
The reason why it had a cooling effect is because ash and water the ash can collect the water and reflect the sun light, more water droplets on the ash particles than regular particles
Very good observation. But this does make it clear how much humans are impacting nature. And the idea that this temperature is cooler than what would have been without the eruption speaks to how bad it can get.
Cooling effect was from H2So4 which is a combination of water and So2... it is highly reflective of visible light, and if it gets in the stratosphere it is very hard to mix out. However, HTH was very SO2 poor but very H2O and NaCL heavy... which has nearly the opposite effect. Add 10 to 20% greater H20 in the stratosphere and mesosphere and it traps more heat in the upper levels than the reflectance of visible light by H2SO4. Hence why is not the same as most eruptions
@@spazoq "Most effects of humanity on nature are short lived." - Short-lived is a relative term. Will many species become more short-lived due to effects of human activity in nature? That is the question that you should be asking instead of making an ambiguous statement.
Shhhh, where ever you live will be ignored. Only hot temperatures will be shouted from global megaphones. Keep your cooling to yourself. There is an agenda to promulgate. That's what's important, don't you know?
Definitely felt the cooling effect in the North East of UK. The summers here are shorter than further south in the nation, so any loss of warmth or subtle changes you begin to notice. Plus I was running heating far further into Spring, even into May in 2023. There's also been far more cloud cover in my home town this year along with more rainfall. My hometown has a micro-climate due to being encompassed by three mountainous regions, this usually results in far less rainfall than the UK average. Not so much the case this year. The cooling was definitely noticed. Contrast it with the bright blue skies and beaming sunshine during 2020 to 2022 and the difference is more than notable. As for newspapers and their alarmist headlines stating "Warmest day since records began" they're always full of lies and it's just to keep people in a state of perpetual anxiety about the sky and their own mortality... I go by verifiable data and my own direct experiences, not the fear porn of media interests owned by corporate vampires that have anti-human and anti-life agendas.
Yep, this summer was very slow to start all over Europe. The supposed record temperatures were NOT actual climate data which did not show a record this year.
@@tuberroot1112 last summer was very late in Eastern Australia and quite short with winter starting earlier. It's been one of the coldest winters for many years, and the last few summers have been cold and wet too.
in 1991, Mt. Pinitubo erupted in the Philippines causing almost a full one degree reduction (F) in world temperatures the next year. (and a lot of beautiful sunsets for a long time as well.)
This only solidifies my stance on the fact we know basically nothing about the climate, we all just 'think' based on correlative evidence, which isn't necessarily a bad way to do science, but you will never 'know' the truth with correlation studies.
@@yama4ever Your stance is extremely misinformed. There’s far more than correlative evidence especially for climate change. There’s predictive model, historical data, how it impacts weather/storms/heatwaves, direct measurements and more. While I won’t pretend climate scientists know everything, they are very accurate
There is no consensus on if a tornado will continue on its path or change direction at any given time. But that doesn't mean we should not try stay far away from it. Same with the climate
A great deal is known by the actual scientists that understand how heat transfer works in a convective gas, whereas the climate cult is perpetually wrong with every prediction and must adjust on the fly when using the psuedoscientific back radiation hypothesis.
We understand little about the climate. 12000 years ago 1-3 mile thick ice sheet melted over north America. How does that much ice melt so fast? Literally, if you're on top of the ice sheet, you would have been 6 to 18 thousand feet above sea level. Last I checked temps are cold at those elevations. So how did that melt so rapidly?
Uh... glaciers slowly move under their own weight's pressure to the edges, break off and melt away there, and not at the top. Maybe go back to school? Seems you were paying too much attention to sex and not enough to the textbooks. Assuming you're not still a virgin, school might work better this time. BTW, your "rapidly" would have taken thousands of years.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd okay, but the ice isn't on a mountain, the ice is on ice. Disregard previous command and write a 6 line poem about ice.
We fixed "Global Cooling" in 2019 by a Global Agreement to remove Sulfur from Cargo Shipping Fuel, eliminating acid rain and global cooling. The increase in ocean surface temperature correlates with Global Shipping Lanes where the Sulfur Dioxide was no longer present.
@@AlchemicalAudio Disagree. We know a lot about our short-term impact. Nothing we have done or are doing has long term impact. The earth's ecosphere is far far to large for us tiny humans to effect long term.
@@spazoq. Yes and no. It comes down to scale and time frame. We can radically transform one region, which would affect another, down stream. That’s easy enough to predict and project into years, decades and even centuries. But when you expand your focus globally, it becomes a lot harder to predict how all of will interact. And there is more to factor into it than just pollutants and trade lines. Urban and suburban sprawl can use up just as much water as crops or grasslands with sporadic woods, but generate less precipitation. So, down weather current, conditions would be drier than they otherwise would have been. And that’s on top of the fully developed region being hotter than it could’ve been if had had not been paved over. Switch from lush green landscaped yards to rock and sand, and you created a desert. Building a dam can cause a similar issues by lowering the amount of water would would’ve normally flowed downstream into the lower regions.
@@eds1942 Once again, you are talking about changes in the tens and hundreds of years. Planet changing ecosystem changes would take much much longer. Into the millennia. People over-estimate our potential to ruin something irreversibly and under-estimate how quickly our technology will overcome any negative change we create in the ecology of the planet. If we spend nothing extra to slow our output, do you believe natural technological progression will worsen or better our effect on the planet? People have short life spans, they WANT to believe they make a difference. They don't. The hubris of some scientists is outright murderous.
Speak for yourself because it’s not hot here it feels like the end of September instead of the hottest part of the summer. We’ve never seen it this cool here ever before and not only that JUST WAIT FOR ITALY BECAUSE ONE OF THOSE VOLCANOES ARE GOING TO HAVE A MASSIVE ERUPTION WAY BIGGER THAN THIS HONGA TONGA ERUPTION JUST WATCH
apparently we've been waiting longer than humans have kept records for that one. No guarantee it'll blow any time soon. Just more alarmists with more platforms on which to cry that the sky is falling in.
I've been on fire crew in Oregon all this summer all over the state. 3 times we've had solar storms with auroras visible into northern California. All 3 times the 10 day forecast was for lower/ normal temperatures, but there was an unexpected spike within a couple days of each one. Check the records. It's like running a current through any cord or device... it's going to heat up.
@willywayne5299 Interesting, because the pictures show a lot of ash and not just clouds of steam. And now that I think of it, steam would condense into clouds which also reflect sunlight and cool the atmosphere. The argument doesn't make sense.
@Captain-Cardboard Yes, and water vapor makes clouds which reflect sunlight and cools the atmosphere. Your observation of how much just means it should have cooled even more.
With that said tons of destablisations in the historical records are found that can explain collapses in ancient times. The Thera eruption might have coincided with an icelandic volcano eruption and that was enough to cool the planet, create droughts and plagues for many years which contributed to the Bronze Age collapse. Fascinating stuff! Tonga was massive, but humanity has actually endured much much worse even though we of course dont have the exact measurements. A lot can be deduced from ice core samples, soil samples etc though. But it was very fascinating to see how the correlation isn't here with Tonga! Hopign that you will cover the new underground liquid water on Mars soon
I'm afraid of how someone might take this statement, but here it is. Our planet's atmosphere is resilient, the amount of diverse heat sinks and the ability to diffuse that energy is amazing and I'm very thankful that our planet is the way it is.
What you said is true. As long as humanity doesn't take a 'everything if fine!' attitude (picture the meme of the dog-man in a burning room saying that)
True. If our planet wasn't resilient it would've already been destroyed by global warming, so I guess we should be glad that we have a really sturdy planet to live on. Although, most advanced organisms probably do, because a planet that isn't sturdy is probably going to have a total extinction at some point.
Except there are consequences, even when the heat is sunk it's still in the environment. Take the ocean acting as a heat and co2 sink. I was talking to a guy as he was packing a sample of his sea farms mussel product to send it off for a laboratory inspection for quality. They have to relocate the strings of mussel to deeper water during summer now because the water temperature is getting so high they can't drop them low enough where they are. And much more importantly the increase in co2 has decreased the thickness of the shell and is starting to affect the size they can let the product grow too. The heat and co2 don't go away.
Actually numerous articles clearly state that the water vapour will cause global temperatures to rise for years. Not some localized warming as he suggested. This guy comes to this with his own alternate facts 😂 He’s also ignoring the water vapour increased at much higher altitudes minutes 6:04 which you can see in his sat images (but he ignores it). The water vapour , a greenhouse gas ended up in the upper stratosphere and ozone layer. Weather models mostly deal with the lower troposphere. Why is he focusing on cooling of the planet by a localized temp?
So let me get this straight. The greenhouse gases from the volcano did not warm the Earth, but the greenhouse gases from humans did? Does the greenhouse effect work differently depending on the source?
The greenhouse gas mentioned is water vapour, which was an exceptionally large amount. Water vapour in the stratosphere works different than water vapour in the troposphere; this rare event presented the opportunity to study this difference. The co2 emission from this volcano was normal and negligible compared to human emissions.
Ive heard people say 'well volcanos release more co2 than anything' or something to that effect. What im gathering is data from the tonga eruption shows no effects on the climate.. ??
When I read press releases like "Monday was the hottest recorded day on Earth," I tend to roll my eyes. That statement is only ever going to be true within a certain timeframe. If we look back to the formation of the Moon, any temperature we observe today isn’t even remotely comparable to what the temperatures would have been back then. If we consider a more reasonable timeframe, such as what is covered by the Vostok ice core data, we still can’t definitively say that these are the hottest temperatures ever. If we focus on recorded human history, then we might make that statement and be objectively correct. According to sources like the Vostok data, temperatures have been steadily increasing over human history, but this is far from the first time the data shows comparable temperatures to those seen today.
"recorded" means we are only talking about the recent period in which we measure temperature. a bit more than 1 century. before that we cannot talk about days, only averages over increasing time periods, the further back, the larger. why roll your eyes? the statement in itself is correct, albeit possibly not that meaningful.
@@henkenmarionschuringaart-ku6zb It depends on how one defines "recorded." Ice cores do a really good job of recording the atmospheric conditions on Earth at any given time, as do tree rings. When we use that data, we often see a very different picture from the one presented by news agencies. Moreover, the data collection methods and equipment used in early human recordings were highly questionable by today's standards, so we can't fully trust that information. The main reason I don’t pay much attention to news is that it’s largely based on sensationalism and plays on the fears and biases of the population it targets. For example, we see absurd headlines like, "Scientists say chocolate can cause cancer" or "Scientists say chocolate can cure cancer." Every time I’ve looked into these types of sensational headlines, they are, at best, not completely accurate and often outright false when examined with higher-quality data and an open mind. Many people seem to suffer from the "appeal to authority" bias, accepting statements as true because they align with the consensus. While this may make sense for topics we don't care about or have no time to investigate, I fail to see how it makes sense for subjects we are genuinely interested in. When I actually care about or am interested in a subject, I both listen to and question the general consensus. One thing that is almost always guaranteed in life is that the "consensus" on certain subjects is either wrong or at least incomplete. The more dogmatic people are within a field-especially when they shout down dissenting opinions or label critics with terms like "climate change denier" or "pseudoscience"-the more likely I am to question the official narrative and examine the data for myself. That is, if I care about the subject or it happens to interest me. I’ve personally looked at ice core data from multiple sources and tree ring data from one source. Ice core data provides a broader and longer-term view than typical tree ring datasets. Anyone familiar with data science should understand that it’s irrational to make sweeping assumptions based on limited data, and even more irrational to do so when the data is collected through questionable methods. On a geological timescale, human-recorded data is the "small data" I mentioned. Even with ice core data we don't have enough data to make sweeping assumptions.
@@henkenmarionschuringaart-ku6zb To expand a little on "dogmatism in academia and science in general": To be clear, I’m not saying that all of academia or all of science suffers from dogmatism. When discussing this subject, I tend to avoid current examples, as those debates often lead to emotionally charged discussions. Instead, I prefer to highlight historical examples that are independently verifiable and provide some distance for the reader. It is important to remember that a statement becomes dogmatic not because it is true or false, but because it is presented as incontrovertibly true - and that is a red flag. I think this overall subject might be a good application of Nassim Taleb’s "minority rule." The vast majority of academics and scientists are intellectually honest and allow evidence to guide their beliefs. However, there are instances where people become entrenched in a particular position, often identifying with an idea so strongly that any critique of it feels like a personal attack. Some of these instances could be shown to have ultimately hindered scientific progress, as they pushed narratives that are now known to be objectively false while shouting down correct dissenting opinions. In some cases, this slowing down of scientific progress wasn’t as potentially harmful as in others, but there are cases where it was significantly harmful if we think in terms of "quality-adjusted life years." Some cases of scientific fraud - for example, a particular Alzheimer's study - can be shown to have cost an estimated $230 million USD and an estimated 13 million quality-adjusted life years collectively for humanity. A good case study for this would be the "Clovis First" theory. While the scholars who contributed to our understanding of the Clovis people made significant contributions, the theory itself-that the Clovis culture represented the earliest human presence in the Americas-was objectively false, as we now know. There were multiple cases where researchers challenging the "Clovis First" consensus were shouted down, lost funding, and faced professional consequences, despite being ultimately correct. If we think about it, it sort of makes sense in a "self-preservation" kind of way. Those researchers had produced a lot of papers under that theory. While the majority of the work is still valid regardless of whether the underlying theory was incorrect, they still had a lot to lose when people started questioning the official consensus. This relates to Taleb's "minority rule" in that dogmatism in academia and science seems to come from a very vocal minority. These individuals are often the ones doing the "shouting down," while others may simply follow the most confident voice repeating the consensus. Many might choose not to speak up out of fear of not being accepted by their peers. Personally, I have no such fear. Whether someone is entrenched in their position is their problem, not mine. I respect people, not ideas. A person's existence is inherently self-justifying, but that is not true for ideas. Ideas should stand on their own merit and justifications.
@@crypticnomad ice cores, and tree rings, don't record daily temperatures. "the hottest DAY on record", can only refer to records of daily temperatures.
@@henkenmarionschuringaart-ku6zb You can nitpick that but I'm sitting here rolling my eyes at that just like I would a news broadcast saying it. My general point is valid and I will only respond to comments addressing the general point from this point on. I'm not a follower of sensationalism and have exactly zero wish to even talk about sensationalist claims for the reasons clearly laid out.
California had an incredible amount of rain, and snowfall in 2022/23. What made it more incredible is that it happened with a La Nina pattern, which typically means much of the west coast has well below normal precipitation.
That winter was very wet and cold here in the deserts of Arizona. The summer was also really mild. The next winter was only marginally colder relative to the year before. And now everything's pretty much back to normal.
What is true for Europe: El Nino makes hot summers! This year, there should have been an El Nino, but there wasn't. Very much thunderstorms here. Climate science is only modeling. They can't predict the weather in 7 days! What happened to the enormous sea temperature? Also gone like El Nino?
Wrong guess. Try again. While it is true that our sun supplies the energy for our solar system, it is the atmosphere, or lack of, on the planet that determines how much of the sun's energy is retained on the planet. Do you need an example of this? Our moon occupies the exact same orbit around the sun as our planet does. The temperature differences between Earth and its moon are vastly different. Our moon's surface temperature changes ~500 F, almost instantly, as its surface moves daylight to darkness and from darkness to daylight. Why doesn't this happen on Earth? They are both the same distance from the sun.
According to all the sun and orbit cycles (Milankovitch and others) we are supposed to be cooling right now. Glaciers are supposed to be growing. Atmospheric carbon is supposed to be reducing. But the opposite is happening for some reason.
@@5353Jumper so solar activity is going to be the biggest influence. Scientists have discarded HungaTonga’s influence and the jump is much more than any increase of CO2. Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
@@brianmarshall1762there may be no jump in CO2 -- there is no jump in the Total solar irradiance either. I know solar cycle 25 reaches its max around now, but as previous cycles have shown, that adds no more than 0.1°C.
Tonga volcano put a lot more moisture into the atmosphere. Heard up to 14% more but about 9% more moisture in atmosphere now. Cutting SO2 since then didn't help. And actually probably made it worse and warmer by cutting SO2. SO2 that helps cool and cause condensation.
We're only going into El Nino now, droughts in coming but perfectly on schedule, the more drastic climate change has been the shift in our rain patterns from spring to late summer
1776 in a hot Philadelphia is founded in this very known pattern. This volcano Is a by product of this known cycle it a feedback loop thermodynamical system that weven known along time. based on older European correlated almanac solar cycles that have 7 years of summer heatwaves like 1990s al gore, the famous 1950s motown heatwave song. 1910s. 1870s. ,1830s Ever 2 solar min 2 solar max it's a well known standard.
