This year I have sketch notes and a few predictions. I am limited in
time to do this, but have a full winter of writing and research so
that I do have a few things to say and I will add analysis to this
thread in the next few weeks. This was the warmest winter according
to the MSU data from December to February. Interestingly, the ENSO
SIO signal largely remained nuetral during this time, even though
SSTs were warm anomaly starting this fall and the tropical storm
season was dramatically suppressed by the El Nino SSTs in the
tropical Pacific. Well, let me put my two cents in. The current dogma
is that El Nino suppresses tropical storms. But I see it the other
way--that global electrical conditions that suppress tropical storms
allows the displacement currents from global strikes to power bigger
walker circulations. Of course once SSTs are warm anomaly, the east
tropical pacific can become the low impedence place on earth, and
then displacement currents will flow there and not to organize
tropical storms. But it's a dependant relationship on CO2--one of the
links below shows that relationship, how CO2 local levels vary by
ENSO.

My predictions this year are that there will not be suppression from
ENSO, or put another way there were be globally enough storms to
prevent extremes of the SOI--the wind/pressure part of the electrics
impact. That includes perhaps much of a negative event.

And BTW while I am at it, in terms of mechanism, I want to talk a
little more about where the decarbonation impact specifics. Salinity
is big. So the high pressures seem to be over the salty places--
salinity tells you a lot about the capacitive couplings. But once you
get into the ITCZ . . . by season the storms will track along a path
with similar salinity. So next comes, IMHO, with the cloud and the
lows electrics by dielectrics and by decarbonation. Yet at some point
the winds become so huge that there is salt water spray and an
increase in the surface area of that spray and probably a drop in
what decarbonation means to the electrics. At the same time there are
lightning strikes in the inner eye which probably plays by gas plasma
on the couplings. To what degree has never been tested--indeed some
of the images real time of strikes globally with passing tropical
storms is like just this winter kind of cutting edge.

Gas plasma--the kind that makes for paths of electric currents in
lightning bolts, are HOT. Several thousands of degree. So that bolt
hits the ocean surface--how does it interact with the decarbonating
oceans with that surface low? How does plasma change the interplay of
inner eyewall strikes and the capacitive couplings that form?

Then what does life do to the whole thing--how do protoplankton
blooms play?

This year following such a warm winter, there just isn't much bloom
activity, except perhaps in the tropical Pacific where some what of a
mild cold event has formed. But there is nothing going on of
signficance along the Gulf coast or Carolinas this year . . . so far.

Meanwhile, the Arctic continues the record melting, and Three Gorge
dam is filling with water. Both are wild cards here--there is no
climatology for these significant electrics event. And there is even
a suggestion that arosols may have a play in the global electric
circuit in terms of where the anomalies are . . . another wild card.
What we do know is that the earth EMF has shrunk and the anomalies
are between the two asteroid impact sites at the Yucatan and Wilkes--
and it seems that places away from between those impact sites are
seeing some of the more radical climate changes. The AMO is also
positive this year, as is the QBO, both factors that push the storm
season. The Indian Ocean has recovered, so that reduces the MJO
impact, IMHO. It's a complex bag of features which cannot be really
looked at statistically simply because there is no real history for
what is going on now.

In fact, I would argue the biggest threat to climate is not warming
or cooling per se but INSTABILITY. Strange jumps from the modulated
or dampened climate the biosphere has become used to and which it has
created for itself.

Anyway, with all that to me it looks like we are still on track with
1935 as a model year and the key feature of that year was the big
storm to south Florida. And that's about all I am going to say about
this year. I do NOT think that the Carolinas are that threatened,
because there is no present bloom activity there. There was some
volcanic activity in the eastern Carribean, and that may mean a storm
or two there.

The key general feature to appreciate will be the drought and heat
from the implications of drought in the SW and then the Three Gorge
dam and the model year. The drought and heat will be the story of the
season--plus the Florida storm.

Also following 2005 I don't think that the deep electrics recovers so
quickly. And as Steve and I have discussed here with the moon having
induction meaning, as well as the larger planets having electrics
meaning from their gravital meaning, cycles like what produced the
activity of 2005 doesn't happen all the time because it involves a
huge amount of discharging electrics that take time to charge.

So my numbers are going to be not 2005 big at all. Storms--16.
Hurricanes--8. Majors--5.

These numbers are largely speculation--but I will say that because of
the reasons I have outlined, there is no history on which you could
make much of a meaningful prediction.


Let me sum it up another way. I have always been about posting what I
think is going to happen based on what the biosphere has been doing--
where the big blooms were. Like in 2005 there was the bloom in the
north GOM where Katrina struck and in 2003 there was a bloom off the
Carolinas where Isabel struck.

This year--nothing of significance by way of protoplankton blooms. I
feel comfortable in predicting to you that when it is how I will
sweat or when it is cold I will shiver. I don't feel that comfortable
making a prediction that it will be hot or cold in a basin--because
the way that you make these kinds of predictions is based on
statistics that I think are horribly flawed by changing underlying
histories on which they were based and at the same time by scientists
who have the wrong causal mechanisms in mind.

Some of the more significant bio feedbacks that are NOT related to
blooms have to do with methane hydrate fields, and Florida is set
apart because it has corals, not hydrate fields like the GOM or like
coastal Carolinas. By history, the 1935 storm followed the active
1933 season, which I have pointed out in the past, followed the
change to the Bolder dam in 1932 with its first diversion.


Notes:


Indian Ocean recovers from tidal wave that so impacted 2005.


http://webflash.ess.washington.edu/

This lightning flash link to global strikes is now in movie form.

Strike image associated with Isabel.

http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/atlight.jpg

Stanford paper on the electrics of Isabel

http://nova.stanford.edu/~vlf/publications/2005-04.pdf


http://www.utdallas.edu/physics/faculty/tinsley.html

http://www.utdallas.edu/physics/pdf/Atmos_060302.pdf

See figure 2.1 on page 3:

Dr. Tinsley has published--and it's accepted science, that there are
more storms around the magnetic south pole. That pole is skewed off
to the side of Antarctica and that's were the statistically
significant added precip has occurred. Why? How are the closing
downward isobars of the south magnetic field DIFFERENT than the
closing downward isobars of a capacitive coupling?

Here is another paper by Tinsley looking at electrics and the sun:

http://www.utdallas.edu/physics/pdf/Tin_rev.pdf


The Keeling Whorf paper, found here
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/070047197 , shows the cycle of
the moon as to the Little Ice Age and smaller sub cycles. Those sub
cycles include the same sub cycles that exist with the so called
cooling in the 1970s and the 88 year cycle referred in the above
article.


http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod2007/28mar07/hexaurora_strip.jpg

Saturn storm on north pole. Note that Saturn's EMF poles are at its
TROPICS.


Here is a link that shows how scientists know over time the pole
direction of the earth EMF

http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/interior/seafloor_spreadi
ng_interactive.html

which shows reversal timeline from sea floor spreading.

This image shows where the south EMF pole is:

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/travel/dg/maps/a4/750x750_antarcti
ca_m.gif

There is a theory that asteroid striking the earth cause mass
extinction. A new one was just found and it was posutlated, IMHO
incorrectly, that this asteroid killed a lot of life. I it was not an
large extinction event strike even though it was a large impact:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/Antarctica_Ma
p_Wilkes_L_Crater.png/300px-Antarctica_Map_Wilkes_L_Crater.png

The reason why the impact of Wilkes Land mascon did NOT cause a mass
extinction is the electrics consequences of the impact was actually
more climate STABILITY! That's because by impacting near the
geographical pole the conductive region formed between the surface of
the earth and the depths -- which is molten and conductive, enabled
the charges that form a negative pole and remain that way for
millions of years. Thus, the date for such an impact would be about
120 million years ago -- by the timeline of magnetic field reversals
per sea floor spreading data:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/magnetic/images/timeline.gif

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/06/KT_boundary_054.jp
g/300px-KT_boundary_054.jpg

There is no reasonable explaination why the K-T boundry marks a
remarkable difference in the rates of energy and retention of that
energy within the system. What I will show you below is that the
impact itself didn't add much more the heat energy to the system than
it already dispenses within a year of an El Nino. The theories that
exist why that everything over 50 pounds died include that there was
soot from the impact that blocked sunlight--the so called nuclear
winter. But even that theory doesn't explain MILLIONS of years
climate and even Wilma and Gilbert's behavior and after behavior.

Energy of the impact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event


quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Based on crater formation rates determined from the Earth's closest
celestial partner, the Moon, astrogeologists have determined that
during the last 600 million years, the Earth has been struck by 60
objects of a diameter of five kilometers or more. The smallest of
these impactors would release the equivalent of 10,000,000 (ten
million) megatons of TNT and leave a crater 95 kilometers across. For
comparison, the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated, the Tsar
Bomba, had a yield of 50 megatons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------



Comparable energy that the earth distributes in one year on order of
scale--an El Nino's heat in the oceans:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elnino/anatomy/origins.html


quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Or if you want to think in more violent terms, that's all the energy
produced by about half a million 20 megaton hydrogen bombs, gone into
heating water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------


Consider how a scratch on a circuit board with small energy for the
scratch can impact larger energies for the life of that board (unless
someone comes and repairs it). Then consider that the path of Gilbert
and Wilma, the strongest storms in the Atlantic ever recorded, all
ran straight into the Yucatan impact site. Co ink a dink? Nah.



http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/drmon.gif

drought monitor

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/Correlation/qbo.data

2005 -0.45 -0.88 0.06 -6.64 -15.09 -20.59 -24.20 -25.87 -27.80 -
28.76 -29.55 -25.04
2006 -18.83 -11.24 -0.38 5.00 10.36 11.47 10.75 9.10 10.20 10.86
10.10 6.21
2007 2.61 2.43

http://nsidc.org/sotc/images/meanextent.gif

http://nsidc.org/sotc/sea_ice.html

Arctic Ice decreasing


http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/faq_fig2.jpg

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/faq_fig2.php

AMO and model year 1935

http://www.weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/1935/index.html


Impact of Three Gorge

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/Archive/Mar2007/nchina
_tmo_2007083.jpg
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php
3?img_id=14187
Dust storm in China

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/Archive/Mar2007/china_
tmo_2007085.jpg
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php
3?img_id=14182

Haze over China



Let's take a look at the unseen--the electrical organization behind
the a tropical storm:

ELECTRON VAN ALLEN BELT (charges are relative to each other and
partially held by the flux lines of the earth magnetic field)


....................+..............+
.....................\............/
......................\........../
........................v .......v
........................^......^
.........................\..../
..........................\../
..........................-.-
..+ -----><----- - + - -----><----- +
...........................-
...........................|
...........................|
...........................v
...........................^
...........................|
...........................|
...........................+

PROTON VAN ALLEN BELT (partially held by the flux lines of the earth
magnetic field)

....................-..............-
.....................\............/
......................\........../
.......................v .......v
........................^......^
.........................\..../
..........................\../
..........................+.+
...- -----><----- + - + -----><----- -
...........................+
...........................|
...........................|
...........................v
...........................^
...........................|
...........................|
...........................-


UPPER IONOSPHERE

....................+..............+
.....................\............/
......................\........../
.......................v .......v
........................^......^
.........................\..../
..........................\../
..........................-.-
..+ -----><----- - + - -----><----- +
...........................-
...........................|
...........................|
...........................v
...........................^
...........................|
...........................|
...........................+


LOWER IONOSPHERE

....................-..............-
.....................\............/
......................\........../
.......................v .......v
........................^......^
.........................\..../
..........................\../
..........................+.+
...- -----><----- + - + -----><----- -
...........................+
...........................|
...........................|
...........................v
...........................^
...........................|
...........................|
...........................-


ATLANTIC SURFACE (warm conductive Gulf Stream)

....................+..............+
.....................\............/
......................\........../
.......................v .......v
........................^......^
.........................\..../
..........................\../
..........................-.-
..+ -----><----- - + - -----><----- +
...........................-
...........................|
...........................|
...........................v
...........................^
...........................|
...........................|
...........................+

ATLANTIC SUB-SURFACE

....................-..............-
.....................\............/
......................\........../
.......................v .......v
........................^......^
.........................\..../
..........................\../
..........................+.+
...- -----><----- + - + -----><----- -
...........................+
...........................|
...........................|
...........................v
...........................^
...........................|
...........................|
...........................-


Ionosphere to space Capacitive Coupling above Eye (not to scale):

............................-.-+-.- electron van Allen belt
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................v..v..v
............................^..^..^
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................+.+-+.+ Proton van Allen belt
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................v..v..v
............................^..^..^
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................-..+..- Upper ionosphere
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................v..v..v
............................^..^..^
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................+..-..+ Lower ionosphere
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................v..v..v
.......................***o*o*o*** Cloud level
............................^..^..^
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................-..+..- Ocean surface
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................v..v..v
............................^..^..^
............................|..|..|
............................|..|..|
............................+..-..+ Ocean sub surface

And it is on the surface of a tropical storm where the low pressures
and winds cause CO2 to come out of solution and then rise to that
surface and run back to ion form--changing conductivities for periods
that impact the cloud microphysics of the storm per the China paper:

http://www.ichmt.org/abstracts/Vim-01/abstracts/04-01.pdf


Shrinking earth EMF

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/000A3C38-C656-1C71-
9EB7809EC588F2D7_arch1.gif

http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleID=000A3C38-C656-
1C71-9EB7809EC588F2D7&catID=3

CO- levels during ENSO:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/Images/globalco_mo
p_200611.jpg

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?
img_id=17569