What's Up With Weather in the West?

This is twist This Week in Science episode number 1073 recorded on Wednesday, August 26, 2026. What's up with weather in the West? Hey everyone, I'm Dr. Kiki and tonight we will fill your head with weather, climate, and maybe some brains because you know I like baby brains and other brains and all sorts of brains. But first, thanks to our amazing Patreon sponsors for their generous support of Twist. You can become a part of the Patreon community at patreon.com/thisweek science. Disclaimer. Disclaimer. Disclaimer. When I leave this mortal coil, I hope it is said that I gave instead of took, that I taught instead of sold. told that I shared instead of stole that I laughed and loved and inspired the same in others. The world is a little less today with the passing of Dolly and Tim. But I hope you prefer, as I do, to think of the richness that they brought to the world while they were in it. We are all better because of their kindness, determination, and spirit. Let's all do the time warp because we're working 9 to5 again. on tonight's episode of This Week in Science. Coming up next. [music] I've got the kind of mind that can't get enough. [singing] I want to learn everything. I want to fill it all up with new discoveries that [music] happen every day of the week. There's only one place to go to find the knowledge I seek. I want to know what's happening. What's happening? What's happening this week in science? What's happening? What's happening? What's happening this week in science? >> Good science, everyone. Welcome to another episode of This Week in Science. I'm back again. No Blair tonight. Justin's still not here, but I am joined by the amazing Dr. Daniel Swain and we are going to have a great conversation about weather, climate, specifically El Nino. I also have stories tonight related to oh the shingles vaccine, maybe some bad antibodies for science, a pulsating mass that isn't quite right for you yet, and baby brains. But before we jump into the show, I do want to remind everyone that if you are interested in listening to This Week in Science, we are live on Facebook, YouTube, and Twitch on every Wednesday night, 8:00 p.m. Pacific timeish. And you can find those recordings on those on those networks, on those platforms. After the fact, we also podcast. You can find us, look for This Week in Science on favorite podcast platform. Our website is twist.org. TWWIRG. Go there if you're interested in show notes, information about our stories, our guests, etc. We also have a link to our Patreon and also to our Zazzle store there. Please help us grow, get other people to subscribe. And it's time for the science. Thank you everyone for joining me tonight. And I am going to take this opportunity to introduce our guest for the evening, Dr. Daniel Swain. Daniel is a weather and climate scientist focused on the dynamics and impacts of extreme events. These are droughts, floods, storms, wildfires on a warming planet, which not just a warming planet, I would say our warming planet. This one is >> yeah this one Daniel's appointment primary appointment is as a climate scientist associate researcher at the California Institute for Water Resources within the University of California uh agriculture and natural resources and has also been a research partner at the NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research. I feel a connection even though we haven't met in person as a fellow UC Davis alum. Um he also you also Dave Daniel also got his PhD at Stanford University in earth system science and his posttock work was at UCLA. He authors the weather west blog at weatherwest.com and this is and is also on blue sky and YouTube at weather west. Welcome to the show Daniel. Thank you so much for joining me. >> Thanks for having me. I'm glad we were able to to squeeze this in in between all of the the geoysical excitement these days. >> Yeah, it's I mean this this hot northern hemisphere summer in the West Coast. We've got we got fires. There was uh what there was a massive they call it a flash flood, but it was a glacial event apparently in Nepal. We've got extra hot in Southern California. We've got the El Nino and are there is there more? Am I missing more? >> Well, you know, that's that's that's a pretty good list of today's events, I guess. Um, but there's just been such a laundry list of things going on recently between the record shattering heat events in in Europe and North America and South Asia and extreme precipitate. You know, the list goes on and on, which is kind of the point. That's you can pick any month these days and find a lot of um unprecedented extreme heat events. Not finding too many unprecedented extreme cold events these days. >> Yeah. So it that is one of the interesting things right with the way that the the increasing temperatures are shifting and people talk about in the summers you have hotter nights so that there isn't as much cooling at night and in the winters you maybe don't have the extreme cold as much. Is is that generally the the trend? >> Yeah, I mean we >> is it north and south everywhere? >> Obviously, you know, it depends a little bit, you know, where you are and and the season, but you know, we often think about climate change as sort of shifting the whole temperature statistical distribution upward toward warmer temperatures and and sort of keeping some symmetric distribution and that's actually not always what happens. We do see we have seen uh in in the US and a lot of the world that the nights have warmed faster than the days on average which has resulted in some people maybe underappreciating just how much warming there's been because a fair bit of it has been at night when we're a little bit less active hopefully not everybody but for a lot of people. Um, and you know, we we also think about the average temperature change. Um, and not as much about the extremes, but in many cases it's it's sort of it's the it's the statistical tales of the distribution, the hottest hots and the coldest colds that are shifting most dramatically. And that's actually sort of where we really feel a lot of the impacts. To your point, we're losing a lot of that really extreme winter cold and we're gaining new magnitudes of extreme heat on the upper end. In some places that's happening faster than others, but the summer's been a real poster child for those extreme heat events in Europe and North America in particular. >> Yeah. So, you were at UC Davis around 2011. Is that or you were >> I got to think about >> 2010. [laughter] I think ending uh Yeah, ending in 2011 was when I was not there on a permanent basis. Although, I will add I'm in Davis more often than a lot of places these days. Um >> that's interesting. Well, as a I I grew up in the Central Valley, went to UC Davis and um you know, there's the long time period of human experience, right? Where we grow up in certain places and the weather is a certain way. It was always hot in the summer in the Central Valley. That's just an expected expected regular occurrence. But now it's much hotter. It's for longer periods of time. Um, and I remember growing up the we talked about and and and when I was doing twists years ago on KDBs at the radio station in Hen Davis, we would talk about El Nino's coming and we would talk about the the weather or the climactic changes that were occurring. And I if I feel like El Nino is happening more often than it used to, is it happening more often or is are people just talking about it more? >> So this this is a always sort of a perennial question when it comes to extremes in a warming world is how much of this is smartphone camera era. We're documenting everything and so we're seeing more of everything as opposed to how much of things are truly changing. And you know often it it ends up being a mix of of both things where things actually are uh increasing and also we hear more about them by virtue of the interconnected world that we live in. I think El Nino is an interesting one because very few people if any people are actually documenting El Nino per se. You know they're documenting maybe the the indirect effects of El Nino. But I guess maybe this first makes sense to back up and ask what is El Nino? >> That was going to be one of my next questions. Absolutely. >> So I'll back up and answer that one first and then come back to the question about how it's changing. >> Um and I think this one's in in a in a trivial sense is kind of a straightforward answer. Uh what is Elino? El Nino is an episodic warming of the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean. That's it. That's that's what El Nino is. It is a warm blob of water in the surface of the ocean in the eastern part of the tropical Pacific Ocean. So think >> close to the west coast of the United of nor the northern and southern hemispheres of u of Americas. >> Yes. So under circumstances the eastern part of the tropical Pacific. So we're talking the Pacific off of the coast of Peru and Ecuador near the Gapagos Islands is actually pretty cold for a tropical ocean. It is not as warm as you would expect. It's certainly not as warm as the western Pacific. So, think Indonesia, for example, where the ocean is sometimes almost bathtub warm. >> It's not quite as chilly as the the the ocean off the California coast, but it is much colder than you'd expect for a tropical ocean. And the coastal climates uh in Peru, for example, are a mirror that they're much cooler and cloudier than you might imagine. There's a lot of marine layer and and fog there, kind of like San Francisco, but on the equator. >> Yeah. But what happens during El Nino is that actually dramatically reverses and it's as if you know the ocean off the coast of San Francisco were suddenly 10 15 degrees warmer. That's actually what's happening off the coast of Peru right now. And unlike a terrestrial heat wave where it's not unusual during, you know, a central valley heat wave in August to have temperatures 10 or 15 degrees above average, that wouldn't be all that extreme. It would be very extreme if the ocean were to warm by that same amount because of course, as we know, takes a whole lot more energy to heat up water than it does to heat up air. And so this is a vast shift of energy from the West Pacific to the East Pacific. that warm water literally sloshes eastward uh over the course of weeks and months and it gets >> so the hotter water is coming from the western Pacific and just through is it through grav gravit gravity waves the surface waves that kind of carry it or is this um is this ocean oceanic currents that are so things that are happening one of them is primarily gravity because it turns out that the Pacific Ocean is actually sloped the surface of the Pacific Ocean is higher by about two feet in the West Pacific than it is in the East Pacific. So, it's >> not something that's perceptible, but the persistent east to west winds keep the ocean slope. And I'm exaggerating, of course, because >> yeah, but making an example of it, >> the entire slope over the course of several thousand miles is probably literally not that much more than my arm, but you know, it's the whole ocean >> is sloped like this under normal circumstances because the winds are pushing. So there so yes. So there's so there's this winds holding up the water slightly higher in the west. Gravity wants to equilibrate it make it even but the winds are the for providing the force to keep it from slashing back due to gravity. >> So interesting. Okay. >> And then we lose those winds. So by whatever means and often sometimes it's random. Sometimes it's just oh there's a big storm north of the equator and it causes the easterly winds to become westerly just for a few days or a week. But sometimes that's all it takes. you get one or two of those events in a year and that water starts on the move because gravity really wants to make it slash back eastward and so the water is much warmer. So when it does move east, it's transporting warmer water in toward the east. But then the other thing that happens is that once you no longer have those strong easterly winds blowing, the other thing that happens is that the eastern side of the basin, so again near Peru, near the Galapagos Islands, normally you'd have those east to west winds inducing upwelling. So vertical movement of cold water from the deep ocean because the surface water is getting pushed westward. So you're kind of making the circulation occur because of the circulation force. And because the water can't materialize out of thin air, it can't come from east to west from the continent because it's a continent. There's no water. >> Uh it's got to come from somewhere unless it's going to create a massive vacuum in the east Pacific Ocean. And since that's not going to happen, it comes up from beneath. And so you have cold nutrient-rich water. So this is the normal state of things. But during El Nino, you already have this warm water on the move slashing eastward. And then you lose this cold water upwelling as well at the same time. So it's a secondary mechanism. It's not >> okay >> warming but it's lack of cooling. >> Yeah. The the cool water the up the cooling water is not coming in to compensate. >> And so the combined result of that is actually pretty dramatic. The net effect is that the surface gets a lot warmer. And this process becomes self- sustaining after a certain point because once you start to get warmer water now those easterly winds don't want to blow as much. And so as soon as you establish this process, it's a vicious cycle of positive feedback where once the initial warming begins, additional warming wants to occur by virtue of the initial warming which gets it gets even stronger warming. That's where we are now with this this uh this positive. So anyway, so that's >> this is a this is a normal cycle. This happens where you have the movement of the air against you know by the winds. You have this the loss of that. You have the warming of the the eastern part of the Pacific. This is what they the what is it the El Nino southern oscillation. And >> yes, this is all this is all a natural process. The the the El Nino is the warm phase of this semiyclical uh process. Leninia the cool phase would be would be the other end of the spectrum. And this is one of the very few things we often talk about climate cycles and I'm using air quotes in case anybody's just listening to the audio >> because they're not most of the things we talk about in the climate are not really cyclical. They're just things that happen occasionally but kind of randomly in time. But El Nino and ENSO uh El Nino southern oscillation they're an exception to this. They actually are semiperiodic. They sort of we go back and forth every two to seven years or so. And the reason for this is essentially El Nino is serving as a giant global thermostat or an emergency heat release for the the climate system. So over several years a lot of excess energy accumulates in the tropical oceans. You constantly have that hot tropical sun beating down on them. Um you have you have ocean currents that allow water heat to accumulate in that in that ocean. And it's got to, you know, unless it's just going to continue warming up without bound, it's got to go somewhere and equilibrate. And the way that happens is through El Nino events which then end up releasing vast amounts of energy stored in the deep ocean into the atmosphere in the eastern tropical Pacific when it warms through, you know, evaporation and heat transfer. And that is why El Nino matters so much for the rest of the world. Obviously, it matters if you're in Peru or Ecuador or the Galapagos Islands because it's locally a dramatic effect. But all these indirect effects in Indonesia and Africa and California and everywhere else, they arise indirectly from this enormous heat release that's occurring in a part of the tropics where it doesn't usually. And so this alters global weather patterns and storm tracks and increases the total amount of moisture and energy in the global atmosphere at large. And so it ends up being especially if you've got a strong event as we do this year. We'll talk more about that. >> Yeah, that's what we want to talk about. >> Yeah. So this energy release, so this this the kind of buildup of energy and the storage of energy that we know that the ocean water, the ocean has a high heat capacity. And so as we're talking about climate change and people talk about that wonderful blanket of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere um that's leading to the trapping of heat um and and the eventual transfer and storage of that heat in the oceans. How is how is this related to this cycle of El Nino Linia? Um, >> so you know, as I've alluded to recently, we we live essentially on a water planet. Something like 70% of the Earth's surface is covered by by water of some form or another. It's mostly oceans with some small contribution by giant lakes and such, but it's a water planet. If you were to just use one descriptor of what most of the surface of the Earth is, it's it's it's a liquid water. And that matters because you know the earth system is warming and we call it climate change. We call it but but global warming actually encompasses not just climate change but also ocean change. And in a lot of ways it is actually primarily ocean change because that is where the majority of the accumulated energy is going uh as as the earth system warms. Now the challenge is then that the ocean is tightly connected with the atmosphere and so what goes into the oceans does eventually come out in large part back into the atmosphere and in fact >> much of that occurs during El Nino events. That is the mechanism that the earth system uses to for lack of a of a better term burp out all this extra energy uh in these >> Yeah. So is and and when you're talking about it coming out and and the energy transfer we're leading we're getting a lot of evaporation water vapor and this is when when we talk about in California or on the west coast of the Americas we talk about El Nino we expect precipitation is this and this is part of it and and the warmth of the precipitation also is a factor in getting the heat and the water out of the ocean. So what's interesting is that the main way that the ocean actually gets the energy out is through latent heat release. So it is directly through evaporation of huge amounts of water from the surface of the ocean where it is most uh anomalously warm. Uh and we know you know that that the um the amount of energy that's required to evaporate water is is very high. And so what's happening is that there's enor this enormous evaporation event occurring over this really warm water. Um that's actually way more efficient at at transferring energy than it would be if the warm ocean just had to sit against the atmosphere and passively transfer that energy through through conduction or even or even uh convection uh in in the surface layer. So this evaporation is like the most efficient thing. Think of how we cool our bodies when we're hot. We sweat. It's it's the same >> idea. We are shedding the heat. In this case, the ocean is shedding the heat that way. But what it does then is there's this huge injection of moisture and energy essentially into the lower atmosphere. >> Uh and really there's two things going on. Uh so there's two things that lead to this warming as I mentioned. There's the sloshing and there's the shutting off of the cold water upwelling. And now in terms of the global climate impacts, there's two key things that happen too. The most obvious one is just that this massive injection of energy and moisture into the climate system is global in scale. We will see probably the Earth's average temperature rise by about 0.4.5 degrees Celsius. So close to a degree Fahrenheit just this year. And that doesn't sound like a lot, but if you compare it to the amount of global warming that we're also worried about to date, that's on the order of 2 degrees Fahrenheit or >> Yeah. I I was looking at one of the websites that you have recommended recently, the um dashboard, the climate dashboard, the climate brink dashboard, and um the the main page, it says this year's on track for 1.6 degrees C above pre-industrial era. And if you add the 04 degree degrees of heat from El Nino being released, >> well, so next year, um so some of that 1.6 6 is is actually including the early effects of El Nino. But next year is where things get really dicey because actually going into 2027, there's now very high likelihood, in fact, it's almost certain [clears throat] that next year is going to be the warmest year on record because we're probably going to go beyond 1.6 because a lot of this excess heat, it takes a little while for it to get fully converted into global temperature. So that's actually going to happen next year once this Elino event is fading. We haven't even gone to the peak and this is going to happen after it begins to fade. >> Okay. So, they're kind of these latent effects as a result of, you know, when we in terms of the global average temperature being temporarily elevated. Yes, that's actually going to probably be maximally extreme next year. But what happens in terms of precipitation, that's a sooner thing. That's that's going to happen probably this winter in a lot of places. Uh, and the way and this and that's sort of the second effect that I was going to talk about. So we have this global just redistribution of heat and moisture accelerates the whole global hydroclimate cycle. More heavy downpours, more dry events, more everything in between. But it also disrupts the actual spatial pattern of storm track. So there's both a zero sum game um involved and a nonzero sum game all at once. So essentially the nonzero sum game meaning that not it's not halves and have nots. essentially the whole cycle becomes accelerated. More heavy downpours in general around the world. But uh the storm track shifts usually mean that some places get wetter and some places get drier. And this is because these big tropical thunderstorms that usually develop in the western Pacific where usually it's much hotter are instead occurring in the central Pacific or even the eastern Pacific. And you can kind of think of these big tropical thunderstorms like ripples in the atmospheric uh in the global atmosphere. So they they they sort of serve as these catalysts for um for sort of setting the stage for storm tracks, high and low pressure systems, defining where jet streams end up. >> When the position of these huge tropical thunderstorm complexes shifts by a couple thousand miles, >> it completely redirects the global storm track. And that is what really is potentially going to be a big deal in California this winter. And so, and if we're talking about where in California, we've got coastal California, we've got inland California, we've got the mountains of California. And I mean, this is, you know, the the topography of the the West generally from Northern California up to um, you know, from central California all the way up to Washington. Um, and so do we have differential impacts that communities should be uh should be paying attention to and kind of looking out for for this year? Um, I guess while we're talking, but we hadn't we hadn't really gotten back to the the main reason that I asked you to the show, >> which is that you you've been talking about this and I've been following you for for a bit. I've been I first came across you on Twitter back before it was X and you know I've been following your account for many years. Um, but this year you have been trying to do information damage control and blue sky is the place where um I've I've been seeing you post your work and this year you uh posted this uh this week you posted a a one-pager that you've developed about this potentially historic El Nino event. And so I guess the question is as we're talk before we get into what specific communities should be concerned about >> is what is the main thing that is contributing to making this a potentially historic and what uncertainty what uncertainty do we have there event? >> Yes. Yes. Thank you for the the the reminder. Uh [laughter] yes. So this the reason why we're even talking about this right now really is not because this is just any old El Nino that happens every 2 to seven years on a semi-recurring cycle which they do. It's because this particular event is already very strong. It's already essentially among the strongest that we've ever recorded as of you know this conversation in late August. And we actually now expected to become the single strongest ever recorded by a significant margin. So we're near record-breaking today and expected to be become unambiguously record-breaking in the months to come. So what does that actually mean? What do I actually mean by historical record-breaking? Well, because El Nino is defined by how warm relative to usual the eastern equatorial Pacific is, the short and kind of an interesting answer is that the eastern tropical Pacific will be warmer than it has ever been before and therefore the El Nino event will be record-breaking. But beyond that, that is true and it is important because we all know that global average temperature is actually very important and so is regional average temperature. But the other thing that's going to happen is that the the blobiness the relative warmth of the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean uh relative to the rest of the Pacific Ocean. So the the the degree of warmth in the eastern tropical Pacific will be really extreme even relative to all other El Nino events historically. So not only do we have we're headed for the warmest water ever observed in this part of the ocean, but it will also be relatively warmer than its adjacent regions to a degree we haven't seen before. And the reason why that latter point matters is a little bit subtle, but it's actually not subtle on its impacts because that is what drives storm track shifts like those that we are worried about in California. So it's not just how warm is it, but it's how warm is it relative to other places. So you could imagine that if the whole world were uniformly one or two degrees warmer, we wouldn't have that effect. But if one region is much warmer than adjacent regions, then things really go haywire. I'm not exactly >> this is this just following basic physics principles of gradients where if you have a higher differential you'll have greater flow from one one region to another is that >> in this case it's actually even weirder in the sense there's even more links in the concatenation in the daisy chain the the Rub Goldberg machine whatever it is uh that we wanted you to describe you know sort of the downstream effects of El Nino but it is related to the gradient so the concept of differential and gradients is key, but it's sort of a second and third order effect of that gradient. And it really tells us that >> essentially these the location where these big tropical thunderstorms form really dictates the part of the Pacific Ocean basin where that jetream is very strong. And in a typical winter, it's actually not that strong near California most of the time. It's strong way out in the West Pacific, >> but we only get the dregs at a typical winter relative to usual. Uh in a winter like this one, uh we're probably not only going to be getting the drags, the strongest part of the Pacific jetream might actually be right offshore of California. And that's a pretty big difference from what we typically would be seeing. And and so that's sort of why the the this this matters. Um because you know in practice, not only do we get the amplified global warmth, probably record-breaking global warmth late this year into next year. Not only we get acceleration of the global hydraologic cycle, but we get these regional flood and drought impacts that will be at the very upper end of what we've seen historically with El Nino events and quite frankly possibly beyond it because we've never seen an event of this magnitude uh in modern meteorological history. Um, from a meteorology perspective, when you have massive amounts of warmer, even though it's winter, warmer air, rain, precipitation coming into say California, it's great along the coast, rain, central valley, rain, but you hit the mountain tops where you're supposed to get snowpack. What's hap what's going to be happening there? Are we not going to get snowpack? Are we going to see um the b the the be I guess a perpetuation of drought conditions because the precipitation and warmer temperatures will keep snowpack from growing and giving us a water base. It's a great question because there's two really strongly competing effects and we actually see this in pretty dramatic fashion in the western US in recent years where the obvious one I'll start with first which is that when it gets warmer you have more rain and less snow because you're on the wrong side of freezing more often in more locations more of the time you might get a 33 degree in rain instead of you know 30 degrees in snow with a couple of degrees of warming but because of what I like to call the expanding atmospheric sponge effect uh which is an analogy my colleagues and I have begun to use to describe the increased capacity of warmer air to hold water vapor. So, a higher ceiling of how much water vapor can be in the air. >> When it's saturated, when the relative humidity is 100%, when you're in a cloud, when it is precipitating, by definition, you're you're you're saturated, uh, then you actually have more moisture in that air mass. And so there's this interesting Goldilock situation where if you are high enough up the mountain slope >> uh where you it used to be really cold well below freezing during a typical winter storm let's call it I don't know 25 degrees Fahrenheit and say it's warmed three or four degrees which it has in many places that's a significant amount of warming well in that particular location say you're at 10,000 ft at the top of the chair lifts at Lake Tahoe or something it's still 31 degrees so it's a fully 3 or 4 degrees warmer, but you're you're still below the freezing line. Now, you've got about 4% per degree Fahrenheit more moisture in that atmosphere. So, you can actually get much heavier snowfall because it is warmer. And this may feel counterintuitive, but it actually explains why places along the Arctic Ocean shoreline, for example, are seeing more snowfall in a warming climate because warmer air, more moisture, and ironically, more open water because there's less ice and there's more ability for that moisture to actually get into the warmer but still subfreezing atmosphere. Same thing is true up at, you know, 9 or 10,000 ft where we're actually seeing snow events that are just as heavy as their historical counterparts, if not heavier despite this warming. But the problem is in a place like California or Oregon or Washington, there's not a lot of land at that elevation. >> Yep. >> Most of the mountains, most of the ski slopes even are more like five, six, 7,000 ft rather than 10,000 ft. And at that elevation historically, a lot of historical snow events were occurring right around 31 32 degrees. So right at that marginal freezing zone. And now with three or four degrees of warming, we're more often than not on the wrong side of that. So we're seeing this interesting elevational gradient. We're losing tremendous amounts of snow at lower elevations. And unfortunately, you know, just think of the shape of a mountain. There's a lot more volume at lower elevations >> than at the top. So, we're losing net snowpack in that way, but we may not be losing as much up high. So, long story short, what I think might happen this winter is it's pretty likely that we'll see a wetter than average winter in California. Uh, potentially much wetter than average. We can get into that if you want, but the odds are stacked about as strongly in favor of a wet winter in California that I think is physically possible from a predictive standpoint. I don't really think there could be a stronger predictor than this a magnitude, you know, whatever we want to call it. Uh, extreme super Elnino. I'm I'm okay with any of these superlatives. A lot of [laughter] >> I was going to wonder. I mean, there's like the the if we use certain words, it might make it, you know, it makes it too exciting, right? It's the >> Yeah. Sometimes I sometimes I I sometimes feel like there are some scientists [clears throat] who are like allergic to relevance. It really I I it's it almost is like a a learned um I don't know it's it's it's interesting. I mean is is super El Nino a scientifically defined term? No, it is not. There is no formal quantitative definition of it. But if it is in if it is used in the context of an El Nino event that greatly exceeds even the very strong events of history then then I mean okay we could find some other word for it but that's you know that's very ivory towerish if we decide that it needs to be the >> superlatively anomalous El Nino rather than super Elnino. I mean, okay. So, I'm fine with super Elnino in this case because it it really matches the superlative, but I think what might happen in terms of snow, >> uh, is at least we might have this remarkable elevational gradient where we just by virtue of global warming. It's just warmer than it used to be. And El Nino doesn't necessarily make it greatly or colder. We kind of the warm long-term warming trend is probably a larger margin than the degree to which El Nino will make it, you know, change the temperatures this winter. We may see a lot of snow at very high elevations >> and and then a lot of rain and not a lot of snow at elevations that historically might have seen a lot of snow. Doesn't mean it won't snow in Lake Tahoe. I'm sure there'll be at least a couple of snow events, but it does mean that we're more likely to be on the wrong side of the freezing line for more of the mountain. We could get incredibly heavy snowfall at very high elevations. And so there's this interesting divergence there. And this leads into all sorts of um you know when I think of it systemically uh for so for society it leads into all sorts of questions about you know how do we plan and manage for you know are there going to be more super elinos? How do what about more wet winters that have just the snow at higher elevations and not at the lower? How do we manage our water needs? How do we, you know, so I mean there's I know you you you look at societal aspects of um you know these climate and weather issues as well. So I don't do you have any thoughts on what are we going to do? >> Yeah. Well, first and ask and ask your and answer your original question of the day actually and say okay what's going to happen with El Nino? >> Yeah. >> Um one is that we know that El Nino interacts with global warming. It's all alino events are unfolding in the context of a rapidly warming climate that is already experiencing more accelerated hydraologic cycle and warmer temperatures. This year's is concerning partly because it is occurring after about a degree and a half celsius about two degrees Fahrenheit of global mean warming. That's part of the reason why this event is going to be such a problem because it's kind of like going, you know, going up to the ninth floor. Now El Nino is going to get get us to the 11th. Yeah. Um but the you know the actual science on what climate change is doing to El Nino itself is surprisingly uncertain. >> Uh and the only thing that really appears to be pretty clear at this point is that the the most extreme El Nino events will probably become more extreme um just by virtue of the fact that again El Nino is this heat release mechanism and we're cramming more and more extra heat into the tropical oceans. But whether it will do so because we increase the frequency of all Elnos or just the extreme ones remains to be seen. And some interesting thing that's happened so far is you've actually seen more leninia events historically, >> but also more extreme Elino events. So we're kind of spending more time in the opposite end of the compressed spring, but we're letting it release more and more violently. And that would probably be the most disruptive version of the future, which of course means it's probably the most likely because it's 2026 and that just seems to be how things are going these days. >> Yeah. >> But we don't know for sure. And it's a really active area of research because it's critically important. Now, all of that said, we do know, you know, the the big picture. It's getting warmer with less mountain snowpack overall. We're going we're starting to see more variability bigger swings between good and bad snow years and frankly more variability between wet and dry in general this notion of hydroclimate whiplash. So regardless of what happens to El Nino Alino will will contribute to that and some years that will be a major contributor and other years less so. But the overall direction is sort of more variability, more whiplash when it comes to hydroclimate. >> And interestingly, this is something I've had to put >> drought [clears throat] super like on the west and we talk about pineapple expresses all the time. Yeah. >> It's just going to be like drought conditions and pineapple expresses. >> So, yeah, we sort of lose the middle. um another another you know another societal conversation where we're kind of the the missing middle is is very much where we expect to see with with uh wet and dry events. So not just precipitation but especially if we consider the full spectrum of precipitation and evaporation and the whole water cycle on the whole more extreme downpours but fewer of them and more extreme evaporation in between them. So, you know, the expression when it rains it pours. You can just kind of extend it now. Increasingly, when it rains, increasingly it pours. Um, and so this is why we can't look to changes in average precipitation. We don't see much of a change in average precipitation in California. We may not have much of a future change in average precipitation. And some have taken that to mean that, well, in California, you know, water doesn't isn't going to change very much. It'll get a little warmer and then the rest of it's the same. That's not at all what we think. That's not at all what we're experiencing. And it actually makes a pretty big difference in terms of how we manage some of these changes. Because if you plan for a future where it's exactly the same historical precipitation distribution and that's how you interpret no change in the mean versus a huge increase in the wetest events and a large increase in the driest events, you're operating in a completely different environment in terms of managing and and and sort of mitigating the risks of drought and flood and all these things. And so, you know, the first step is to um not, you know, to make sure we're measuring the right thing to understand what we actually need to be adapting to in the first place. >> And I guess that's one of those questions of, you know, which science, which research are you doing? Are we trying to solve a societal problem of the the drought conditions and water availability in the western US? are we trying to solve for um the safety of coastal uh populations with rising sea levels or with with erosion from uh greater storm surge? Um you know they're they're different problems but all part of that same water cycle climate change system >> and and and it becomes it becomes really difficult to disentangle some of these things. I mean, in my, you know, in my job, sometimes I I'm context switching constantly between actually walking people through act, you know, specific disasters in real time, sometimes minute by minute, and then taking a step back and then launching myself into coding and writing and figure plotting for a few months and then moving on to sort of talking about that work and integrating it in different settings. And right now, it's kind of super El Nino all the time. That's going to be the the media blitz probably for the next three to six months. Clearing my calendar. Um >> which I'm so glad that you we got tonight. >> It's [laughter] already full again. But but the but the you know it it is I think most scientists I think it's not true of everybody. You obviously can't speak for everyone but I think most scientists do what they do at least partly because they think that what they're doing is useful in some way. It's a job also and sometimes it's important to remember that you know we all need health insurance too but um and that scientists are people which sounds like a silly thing maybe for the audience of this particular program but is a surprisingly bold reminder in some settings the >> even with the use of AI now the majority of scientists are still human. >> Yeah. [laughter] Yes we are. I I assure you and maybe and maybe the you know the live streaming glitches are now becoming a valuable asset as a reminders that we are very much human still um our AI overlords would not make such silly mistakes with dates. >> How do we prove our authenticity? Oh, it's the human error. So it's all strategic that for anyone in the audience that's entirely how why uh but >> absolutely >> but I think it's like I think that this is this is a real thing like the average American can't name one living scientist and I don't think that's actually the fault of the average American. I think that that's a confluence of a lot of other exogenous factors that have brought us to the point where that's the case. And so I think, you know, I think part of being available and making yourself available in the world, part of I think our role as scientists is to do that. And it's not just to communicate the science. That's obviously important. It's not just to integrate the science with society, but it's also to humanize the scientists, which again seems like a silly >> endeavor. human person who does science and is not afraid to talk about it with people. >> Yeah. [laughter] Um yes, honestly. Yes. >> So, I was curious about this media blitz and the work that you're doing and you've obviously been cultivating your your presence in communicating science for many years now. Um how how is the media treating the things that you say? Do you feel like the messages you want to be spreading are spreading appropriately or do you feel like uh there are misunderstandings that are being caused? >> So, I'm in a somewhat unusual position where I actually have a truly systematic sample to draw from from this. I recently did my 2,000th media interview. >> Oh, wow. >> So, I actually have a four figure sample size and this year I've done about 250. So it's, you know, it's I have enough experience that I have a pretty good ex sense of like the range of ways that things can go wrong and the ways in which things can go right and how much these things are outliers. >> And I would say that in general, and I've been doing this for long enough also to sort of see this the sea change in in journalism. I mean, it really has been an alarming decline in my own career over over 10 or 15 years. I mean just the collapse of American journalism but really global journalism >> and science journalism even more so >> it's almost in some circles cease to exist as its own entity. I mean the number of people who I'm talking to to you know these days who have no um background in covering anything that's particularly science related. I mean I'm talking to sports reporters. I'm talking to you know political people who are on Capitol Hill a lot. So I think that it's a challenge and I I think that it's a it's an increasingly difficult environment which is not really the fault of individual journalists. It's more again the largecale environment of of misinformation and clickbait media and everything being driven by viewership rather than nuance or accuracy. Nuance is a dirty word in 2026 and I absolutely refuse to let that um be the way that I operate. But you then still you do still need to be able to offer sound bites, right? Like I you need to have like the 10word version of what you're saying, the 10 sentence version, you know, the 10-minute version. And I'm not >> sometimes the, you know, 45 minute to an hour. >> Sometimes you get long form every every once in [laughter] a while. Um, and I think it's difficult sometimes. Some of these things you really just can't get into 10 words. You just can't. And you're asked to like, I need a 10-second soundbite. I'm like, I literally cannot do that on the topic that you're asking. But essentially, generally speaking, it's generally a positive experience. That's what I want to reflect is that it across all of these many many hundreds of of interviews per year and thousands cumulatively in a career in general the word is getting out about things and in general it's it it's more correct than not. Is every single line accurate? You know, is did you know we scientists do has statistically like to pick things apart? You know, most of us in general speaking as part of a group like to lead with the caveats. We like to focus on the minor errors and kind of miss the the >> the for the bigger picture. Yeah. >> Sometimes and often I'm left saying, well, what is the overall is this is this article going to do more to inform people or more to disinform them. And as long as it's net positive, then I'm I'm okay with it. Even now the one thing that really I get hung up on these days and this has actually gotten worse in the last couple years I think as a ad revenues are squeezed headlines. >> Yeah, >> headlines have gotten really really bad and increasingly they're just not accurate. They are literally in many cases the opposite. literally >> they say something it's emotionally triggering and it's only the headline is there only to grab people's attention and this is what we see people sharing >> on it's what gets the clicks it's the preview banner on social media is >> and the irony is that in almost all cases it wasn't even the journalist that wrote the article that wrote the headline >> it's a headline writer >> in some cases and it used to be their editors at least might be the ones to punch it up a little bit. Now it's not even the editors. Now it's the social media experts that are literally optimizing keywords for clicks to the point where >> and and this is and so this is a challenge, you know. So not to dwell on the negatives, but I I I think that >> but people need to be aware of what they're seeing. So I appreciate it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um but it is one reason why I spend so much time talking to journalists. I mean it is a huge part of my job at UC agriculture and natural resources. is really the only place that's allowed me uh explicitly to sort of spend that much time. I mean, I was doing it anyway, >> but now it is officially part of my job, whereas before it was just sort of another 30 or 40 hours a week on top of everything else. >> Yeah. Um it's still 30 or 40 hours a week, but at least it's it's considered to be >> it's part it's part of what you're [laughter] >> um but but I think that like the I think the reason we don't see more scientists engaging in that way first of all is it's hugely timeconuming and unless it is part of your job. It's very difficult to find the time because journalist requests and now I'm going to stereotype journalists. They're almost always last minute at the worst possible time. Just somehow it's Murphy's [laughter] law. >> Just the way it goes. They saw the news. they they know they have to get it. But yeah, >> last minute deadlines, you know, whatever whatever the case may be. But I I just think that it's, you know, it's it's difficult to shoehorn it into an existing job and be successful because you do get better with practice and it's daunting the first few dozen times you do it and it takes a while for most scientists to have done a few dozen of these. It takes years sometimes. And then I think it's also >> this fear that you're, you know, what you say is going to get misconstrued somehow. And it is a risk. It does happen sometimes. I would say statistically one in about 50 to 100 interviews something gets egregiously twisted around in a way that seems conspicuous. But honestly, it's like 95% or 98% not the case. It's literally like 95 to 98% >> that seems that seems I mean if you were doing you know your your p value of 0.05 like you're right you're in there >> as is my point about a statistically significant sample size. I mean I I think it is I've done enough of these that I think it is it is something that is genuinely anomalous when there's something that is other than than good faith. And I think that is reassuring. >> Yeah. But I think it means that if you're a scientist and you've only done one or two interviews and one of them didn't go very well, um either that's because you're new to it or maybe you just got unlucky and you're in that 5% of of the cases where things don't go so well and you just kind of got to keep charging forward. >> One of the big questions from a lot of scientists interested in getting into science communication now specifically uh since since the pandemic, but I know climate scientists have been dealing with it for a very long time. is the um the politicization and the personal attacks that occur and um the concern that um institutions are not necessarily going to have protective measures in place to help the scientists >> be able to communicate safely >> in a public fashion. And so have you had um I mean I just I went on went to one link of yours that ended up on the e on X and there are people there you know you are an activist climate scientist with an extreme view. You're pushing an extreme view Daniel >> right yeah [laughter] >> I I keep a a running record of the I call it uh unsolicited criticisms. It's a word document. I just copy and paste things into it. It's been open. It's a, you know, it's 70s something pages long now. I've had it since probably 2007. Um, and it's really just me just just sort of mo mostly just for my own edification, but occasionally maybe for, you know, who knows if there's any uh future legal proceedings, but you know, the the weird comments, the hate mail, the death threats, whatever the case is. And there's all of the above. Um, and the interesting thing is that a lot of it does relate to perceived political ideology and a lot of it is I mean for other people who don't look like me it's actually directed in other ways. Interestingly for me, it's directed mainly, you know, um what is it? The liberal commie elite fearmonger climate scientist is some some combination of those things. Sometimes all of the things at once. >> Um you know, for other people it's directed more toward their outward physical appearance or something based on their, you know, how they >> I'm sure I'm sure Katherine Katherine Heiho >> Yeah. people's identity, you know, outward identity [laughter] is often a target. Um, but whatever the case may be, you know what it I I think the challenge is that there really is not institutional support. I mean, the the total honest answer is is there isn't. And actually, you're lucky sometimes if your institution is is going to even leave you alone. Sometimes there's active inhibition, I would say, and especially now in the last couple years. I mean, it's gotten to the point where I'm pretty comfortable calling it overt censorship. Not in my case. So to be clear, I'm not talking about UCR, University of California, but I'm talking about colleagues in a lot of other places who have been quite directly told, >> do not say these things. Do not use these words. Really, don't even talk to the media at all unless there's a PR person literally sitting over your shoulder. I I was recently interviewed as part of a documentary on the history of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. um where I desk but um I'm [laughter] not employed by them in any way. >> And is is this the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which was going to be shut down? >> Yes. And that's still a risk, but it has they've sort of gotten a bit of a stay of of execution um thanks largely to genuine um pretty effective community organizing and some actually some fairly effective regional and state leaders. It's not a done deal. It's still very much at risk, but >> it's still there, you know, everyone's still there. Yeah, >> still operating. But my but but there's a big butt here. One of the outfalls of this is that there is they essentially couldn't get >> they couldn't get any of the ENCAR climate scientists to speak on camera about climate change, >> right? >> Because they had essentially a PR media handler in the room just off camera left standing there >> and basically going, "Nope, you can't say that. Nope." or talking about the intersection with partisan political politics, which unfortunately to my great regret is a very relevant part of that story as to how Encar got to be threatened in this way and as has since come out over the past week that there was literally an email in which it was asked what are the ways we can punish the state of Colorado where ENCAR is located for putting Tina Peters in jail. So, so essentially the the county clerk who interfered with the with the election >> who was convicted of this >> by the Republican attorney general. >> Yeah. >> Actually jailed. This was retaliation for that in writing in government emails that are now subpoenaed. So, this was speculation at the time. It turns out to have been literally the case. Like >> it was a hu I mean that was a huge question. I remember when the announcement was coming out the this is a basically supported nonpartisanly supported uh government like ENCAR has been around for decades. >> Yeah. It's like everybody supports it. It's been doing great work and the question was why? >> What happened? >> So this is part of it and the other part of it is another partisan political thing that I wish wasn't relevant but is which is Russell vote and project 2025. This was explicitly something that is in that policy. >> Yeah. >> What has become a policy blueprint document which was described as such and I don't think too many people took it seriously. I don't quite know why at the time. >> I did. >> I was very worried. >> Yeah. I mean I mean I was running live streams you know in the September and October for the election reading verbatim from the section in project 2025 on weather and climate and why ENCAR would probably be a target in this environment. And then so the the broader point is not to get too off topic, but it's it's really that it's become impossible to separate these things. And I think the argument that science is not political was never true. Science has always been political because it intersects with people's lives and we make decisions about how to do things that are hopefully informed by science, but those decisions are ultimately political ones. >> But partisan politics is a little bit different. A lot of these things It is true that in the past there have at least been periods where a lot of these things were not as partisan. They were still political. >> Now it is also overtly partisan which is really unfortunate but then it sort of becomes a denial of reality to pretend that it's not. We are at this point right now where if I could have one wish come true, it would be that people would stop denying reality and that we could get back to actually um you know having real life and doing [laughter] the work. But um in in in the sense of the science that you're working on and maybe specifically El Nino, is there is there anything that you know you see over and over again that is a a mis a misperception, a misunderstanding whether for a propagandist or just you know misunderstanding kind of reasons that you would love to correct that you'd love if you know people could stop having to have this thing [laughter] repeat it over and over again. >> Well, and I actually I'll it's going to be a general topic because I actually think it does work both ways. So, there are this is this this is the origin for a lot of different conspiracy theories. It's a lot of reasons. It's it's an origin for people wondering why we don't implement A or B obvious. Uh it's it's a reason why we need you know all of these seemingly u infernally complicated um weather models and supercomputers and these massive systems of observations which is to say it is very difficult to trace cause and effect >> in the earth system. We cannot say you do this somewhere in the world on you know a day 6 months ago and the effect 6 months down the line somewhere else on earth is going to be why uh unless we have some really sophisticated ability to model the whole earth system. That sounds very abstract. So let me give a spec few specific examples of why this ends up being so important. Um one is and this has been in the news a lot recently. I don't know if you've seen these stories about people believing that the government can control the path of storms or is redirecting hurricanes or strengthening hurricanes or for whatever strategic, military, political reasons. It's not necessarily that I trust the government of any government that they wouldn't do it if they >> if they could, [laughter] right? >> It's more that I I trust the physics of the situation that make it impossible to do these things. And part of it is simply because we do not possess the ability to understand even if we had essentially magically powerful tools, space lasers or whatever the invoked technology is in these in these theories. We do not have the ability really to understand what it would actually do to any particular storm. You could maybe imagine some sci-fi futuristic James Bond villain level space laser that could be bad, but would it be able to control the path of a hurricane? Please explain to me. >> It would have to be a very strong space laser to be able to heat the surface of the ocean in a very specific path with the appropriate energy to maintain the storm. Even if you could do that, [laughter] >> how would you guarantee where the storm is going to go? Now, you also have to control the trade winds blowing between Africa and the United States. You also need to control the amount of dust in the vertical atmospheric column, the amount of saharan dust. You need to control the vertical distribution in temperature across a 3,000 square mile area. So at that point, any technology that would be profound enough to affect storms on that level would be so dramatic it would probably just destroy the earth. So it's not >> so let's not go there. Yeah. [laughter] >> But my but my point is it's not so much that that that that that we we wouldn't dare do it. It's more that we can't for better for worse. Probably for better after all that. uh but that we wouldn't even be able to know exactly what effect that was going to have. All you could say is this is going to do something dramatic, but not it would move this particular storm to this particular location or it would intensify in this partic particular predictable way. Ironically, the most direct way that we're influencing the weather is by warming the climate. So we are in fact influencing all storms on Earth, but not in a way that we get to exquisitely control their specific path, intensity, or position or anything like that. We're kind of just um you know, we're just sort of throwing all that extra energy out there and seeing what happens. So that's one thing is we can't we we don't we can't exert that level of of exquisite control not because we wouldn't if we could but mainly because we do not fully understand cause and effect to the level that we could even achieve that outcome if we possessed that near magical level of technology. That also explains why unintended effects can arise even from well-meaning interventions. So we have all these people saying let's green the deserts, let's plant forests. Let's refreeze the Arctic. Let's put huge phytolanton blooms in the Pacific by dumping iron or something. >> Let's bring mammoths back. >> Let's bring mammoths back. Let's whatever it is. >> And while these at least maybe aren't coming from a place of James Bond level villainry, they're they're intended to solve a societal or ecological problem. The problem is there are so many unintended consequences and they're not subtle. When we for example model what the effect of removing a forest like a you know a 200 300 square mile patch of forest in the Amazon or in the Canadian boreal forest or adding a patch of forest as has been proposed to the Sahara Desert by pumping in a bunch of water from the Mediterranean. These things do weird things like cause droughts in the great plains of North America or screw up the monsoon in India, places that are just very far away and you might think are indirectly connected. >> But the point is like you changed something somewhere and you've probably changed something very different somewhere else in a way that is not intuitive at all to our human brains >> and you can kind of get there. >> The butter the quantum butterfly wings flapping, right? >> Yeah. I mean it's there's there's a bit more >> and yeah that's a whole another problem. So now we have companies out there and there's a New York Times headline that a company claims it's going to um >> solve the western water crisis by doubling the flow in the Colorado River through cloud seeding >> and really oh yes well cloud seeding with the the silver particles or sulfate particles like there have people have been wanting to do this for a while they've >> wanting to do it and succeeding in doing it. Yeah, >> two very different things >> and succeeding to in doing it to the extreme that is necessary to double the water flow through the col. >> So so far as we understand it, it's not even theoretically possible to do so. Um the theoretical limit on how much you can really augment uh clouds through cloud seating for example is on the order of like 10%. It's not very much. And so, frankly, I don't know. I don't know where they're coming from. And it's clearly ludicrous and also misunderstands the problem, which is actually a lot of it is not lack of precipitation. It's too much evaporation. >> Yes. >> So, how you going to solve that one? >> Too much evaporation and also water rights that have allowed for different groups taking more water in different places. And it's it's a whole system that is so >> Exactly. So so so it's it's hubristic and not scientifically plausible but also misunderstands what the problem is which is that it isn't even just a physical science problem. It isn't just a climate change problem. It is those things but it's also that we grow alalfa in the desert and we sign the Colorado River pact in a window that was unexpectedly wet. It turned out it was pretty uncharacteristic of the region and we just happened to sign it in that wet window. So, uh, so I guess my broader point just to bring it back home and there's an interesting little bits and pieces that >> it's, um, none of this is is maybe as obvious as it seems. There are reasons why we have these systems in place that seem overly complicated for prediction and for projecting into the future and for trying to understand the causes and the effects of either interventions in these systems or disruptions to these systems. you know, El Nino, um, maybe this brings it home, is a really good example of a pretty localized perturbation. This is something that's only happening initially in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean and a relatively small patch of water, a few hundred miles on a side for the most part. It's a little bit bigger than that this year, but it's in the scheme of things, it's not a very big patch of ocean, but it is a really important patch of ocean when it does what it's doing right now. And I think that that's a good example of how, you know, these cascading effects all around the world. This patch of the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean could lead to floods in California could help partially temporarily for a little while at least alleviate the Colorado River water crisis, could lead to droughts in in South Africa, floods in East Africa, could disrupt the Indian monsoon, could reach to record breaking heat and wildfires next summer. So we're already talking about a year ahead. So, it's this profound influence from this little patch of water uh in the East Pacific uh in a very remote part, I would add, of the of the East Pacific Ocean. Uh the only populated island is the Galopagos and than there aren't any other people out there. >> Yeah. That's populated by lots of animals. [laughter] >> Lots of animals. Yes. partly by virtue of the occas [laughter] are just, you know, the one of the most, as a biologist, it's one of the most amazing amazing spots on our planet. And I do wonder, you know, these El Nino events, the heat that the oceans are going to be having. And we don't we don't need to answer all these questions and we probably can't but you know it the impacts over time of these extreme events. How will they impact isolated island populations of animals of people? How will they impact the you know localized communities where where they're occurring? I think these are the, you know, you know, we're we're anthrop anthropocentric, but um at the same time, if we can take care of ourselves, maybe we can take care of the planet, too. >> I hope so. >> I do hope so. [laughter] >> That's that's certainly what I would what I would hope. And, you know, part of it is it's thinking about the whole planet as as as a system and that you can't you can't escape your problems by going somewhere else. Speaking of escaping, uh, someone asked earlier if mountaintops, the really high mountain tops are the places that, uh, the billionaire bunkers should be built. Now, [laughter] >> now I have to answer whether I think billionaire bunkers should be built. >> No, no, no, no. We're not going to answer that question. If you were building a billionaire bunker to survive through, you know, however many years, >> well, let me put it this way. >> Where would you build it? >> Let me put it this way. the places where the billionaires are actually building their bunkers is not where I would build mine if I were the type of person to have a billion dollars and to be in a mindset to build bunkers and either of those two things is true >> are happening [laughter] awesome thank you so much for joining me tonight um is there anything that we've covered a lot of ground a lot of the El Nino and some extra information in there but is there anything that um you know if there's one thing you want people to understand about what's happening right now or just one message that you want people to take home? >> Yeah, I mean in terms of El Nino, I think um this is a big one. It might even be the big one of our of our lives. And what does that mean in practice? Well, it depends where you are in the world. If you're in California, as I suspect a fair bit of the audience might be this evening, um then it really does mean that the odds are shifted significantly towards a wetter than average winter this year and maybe even a very wet one that would carry an increased risk of flooding. So, it's a good year to consider flood insurance if you don't have it. Fewer than 2% of Californians do, so it's a very low number. Um majority of those in flood plans do not have it of particular note. um or even more basic things like clearing your gutters and your culverts and making sure there's no suspicious cracks on hillsides near where you live. You know, things like that, basic things. Also, coastal flooding. So, Elino will result in a temporary elevation of sea level by about a foot. So, it's almost like a sudden doubling of global warming related sea level rise this year. It will go back down next year until it rises again because of global warming. But, this is a temporary essentially like a doubling. So, king tides, uh, potential for big-time coastal flooding, major disruption, um, not just along the oceanic coast, but also the bays, San Francisco Bay, Monterey Bay, Humboldt Bay, San Diego Bay. Um, and this could be a significant problem for a lot of people, uh, you know, around California and other parts of the world where there's similar temporary elevation and sea level from this. So, that's a very Californiaentric perspective. There will be other disruptions in other regions. Um, but this is about as big as they come in terms of El Nino. And that doesn't guarantee historic impacts just because El Nino itself is historic because of all the other concatenating factors we've just been talking about. Other factors are at play. They can amplify or offset. >> But let me just put it this way. You know, El Nino of this magnitude is like a person shouting through a megaphone in a crowded room. You know, a more ordinary Alino event might be somebody like kind of speaking at their normal voice in a room with a hundred people. You can hear them if you're close by. You're probably gonna get drowned out if you're farther away. But this year, that person with the quiet voice has got a battery powered megaphone >> and is standing on a table. [laughter] >> Yes. >> Yeah. So yeah, there's a lot lot for us to think about this year, but I I really appreciate you taking the time to clarify some of the science behind the El Nino event and the phenomena as it occurs in its oscillations and also for this very specific event that we are looking at this year. And yes, while there is some uncertainty, the certainty is that it's going to be a lot. >> It's it's going to be another one of those years. And you know, we'll learn some things scientifically. Um and you know, I'll just keep my fingers crossed for a minimum of harm. Let's let's let's say that. >> Yeah. May all of us hope for a minimum of harm to a uh minimum number of people, homes, etc. Thank you so much for joining me tonight. Uh where can people find you? We've got you at your your blog. >> Yes. >> Where are you online? So people can can find you and search you up. >> Very online. Um people have various opinions on on whether that's a good or a bad thing. But I am very accessible available on most any platform. Uh, the ones I'm really emphasizing these days, as you mentioned, the WeatherWest blog, weatherwest.com. Uh, my YouTube channel where I do um less well produced live streams than you do, um, at weather west. Uh, they are, as you'd expect, mainly weather and climate focused occasionally elsewhere. Um, and then, uh, also on Blue Sky as well. And, you know, if you're a LinkedIn person, you can find me there and some other places, too. But I I I would say Weather West blog, YouTube, Blue Sky, the main stays these days. >> Wonderful. I hope people do follow you if they are not already because uh you have and continue to put out amazingly helpful, useful information that um it just clarifies things. And so I just app really appreciate the work that you do. Thanks for thank you for your service. >> [laughter] >> Well, thank you. And uh and likewise uh you know, part of part of the the half the battle is just having these conversations in the first place and finding forums to have them. So >> yeah, let's have more of them and I know you plan to. So have a wonderful night. Thank you so much for joining me everyone. Dr. Daniel Swain. He is Weather West online and uh I I recommend that you check out his YouTube as there was a wonderful webinar that he put out uh this last week or so talking about the El Nino event. Another one that he's done more recently talk about talking about warming in Southern California. Um there's some just great information in there if you want to spend some time rabbit holeing. So, >> thank you. And um yes uh keep it going. >> We will. Thank you very much for your time. Have a good night everyone. This is this week in science. I am Dr. Kiki and tonight I thank you for joining me for another episode with this wonderful interview with Daniel Swain. What fun. Um talking about a very serious subject. Actually I I mean there is a little bit of excitement and joy in there. There's the ooh we can learn things from this historic event that's that's coming. Um and there's a side of the scientist and the researcher there that is that is very optimistic about what can be learned. But in the process uh we must always keep our awareness of what is the reality that's happening on the ground. Thank you for joining me tonight. If you are interested, check out This Week in Science. Every Wednesday night, 8:00 p.m. Pacific time, we live stream like we are right now to Facebook, Twitch, and YouTube. You can find us looking for This Week in Science. We are online on social media, Twist Science. We are also on just about every podcast platform that's out there. So if you want to listen to this as a podcast, please look for this week in science on your favorite podcast platform, our website is twist.org and that is where you can go to find our Zazzle store link if you're interested in any Twist merchandise. It's one way that we that we support the show. It is um we are listener supported. We do not take advertising. I have always uh thought that a listener forward approach is the best way so that we can remain unbiased in this media field where we do not have any advertisers that we have to please. It's all about you the audience. So if you are interested in supporting independent listenerupported science media, head over to twist.org and click on the Patreon link as well as that Zazzle link. Patreon is uh the community that we use for the crowdfunding of our efforts. We can't do we can't can't do it without you. Thank you for your support. Thank you for believing in curiosity and information uh that's free. All right, everybody. I do have no animal corner. I'm sorry about that. But it is time to talk about a few other science stories before we leave for the night. They're going to be quick so that I don't, you know, I don't want to bore you with all this news. If you've ever wanted to lie around and get the benefit of exercise without actually exercising, apparently there is a uh a research study that has come out in nature this last week where the researchers have essentially developed muscle grafts of self-stimulated puls pulsating muscle tissue. issue. Um the study is entitled contractile myiographs confer systemic anti-aging benefits and the caveat here is in mice. Okay, yet again in mice. Myiors that is muscle grafts. These researchers publishing in nature aging developed subcutaneous transplantation of differentiated autotogus meioytes muscle cells that are autotogus so from the patient. So they are personalized medicine. So they had mice that they took muscle cells from, grew muscle cells and created these muscle grafts, myior grafts that were implanted subcutaneously, so on their backs underneath their skin and they pulsated. They were constantly pulsating, kind of moving around a little bit. Um and the mice, older mice, um any mice that had these pulsating myior grafts. Oh boy. Yeah. Well, they um they got the benefits of exercising. They did not have as rapid aging. They did not show the metabolic signatures of nonex exercise non that that normally come along with aging um when you don't move or exercise. So the idea for these muscle grafts is of course it's not going to work the same in a mouse as it would in a human scale is completely different. Um, and where these myiors improved whole body muscle mass and function, metabolic and regenerative outcomes in aging and obese mouse models. According to their abstract, this would be more difficult to uh make work in people and you'd have to put put it all over your body. You'd have to implant it in lots of different places. And so the people who would be most likely to need the benefits of exercise, who cannot exercise, those who are bedridden, who are paralyzed, unable to move, they would you you'd have to poke them a lot to be able to um implant enough of these pulsating muscle masses to potentially have the impact on the whole body aging process in humans. So, that's one of the big questions is how would this really work in people? Could it work in people? But, um, yeah, pulsating muscle masses. It's a it's it's it I don't know if I could handle it. It would be like having a a muscle twitch that you couldn't control because it would constantly be moving under your skin all by itself. Just Yeah. One by land, two by sea. it. This is not um exercise pills. This would be uh little exercise implants. Next story. Um let's talk about let's see let's talk about uh an an issue in science. We have talked about many stories uh over the years related to a compound called beta galactoidase. Beta Calactoidase has been identified by multiple studies and used in hundreds of studies, antibodies for it to be able to identify it within cell cultures and um and other work looking into the metabolism of aging and scinessence. And so scinessence is this process where the cells shut down. And it's a it's a common process of cells during the aging process. We have scinesscent cells all over our bodies from the minute we're born and and more of them I guess as we get toward death. But one of the questions is how can we improve the health of our cells for longer periods of time so that we reduce those scinsesscent the need for those sess scinesscent cells. Betagal galactoidase in mamalian models has been identified um and been used as a target over and over and over again. This summer, a uh researcher Schulto David, he's a UK-based molecular biologist, he came across a study that used a beta galacticase for E.coli instead of the mamalian betagalactoides. He looked at that and went that's not going to work, right? because the bacterial galactoides antibbody would not connect to a mamleian galactoidase in the same way. It may not give the same signal. And he went on to look further and um on August 21st, nature reported that there are they found more than there are more than 50 papers on cellular scinessence that seem to have used bacterial E.coli coli based beta galactoidase antibodies as opposed to the ones that are targeted to mamalian proteins. So the question is what difference did it make? Does it make do these studies need to be revalidated? Um there's big questions in this field right now, but uh we're looking at the the possibility that uh there are hundreds of papers that have been affected by antibodies like this where researchers have not validated their antibodies and are using an inaccurate antibbody in their study and potentially getting getting um the wrong signals. So, it's a big question and it's a big story that came out and it's potentially impacting the aging the field of aging science, but um we don't know for sure how it's going to play out yet. There are many researchers who have been contacted. Some researchers say, "Yeah, I did use it for some experiments, but they didn't necessarily uh those experience experiments didn't have any say in this particular result." So you know it there is uh there's a lot of question as to um what the outcome of this will be because there are uh there are teams looking into um revisions into re recalling uh retracting papers and uh lots of groups for research integrity are um are really taking a look at this because it could be uh an issue that impacts a lot of science. So why don't we why don't we have systems where people have a better way of validating their antibodies and making sure they're using the right ones. Come on people. That's oh and one of the things that's been brought up by many individuals is that the ongoing use of artificial intelligence LLMs to develop ideas and directions for scientific research could actually make the problems of using these beta galactoidatises worse because if they're basing everything on the improper use of an E.coli E coli antibbody as opposed to a mamalian antibbody. It's going to just keep on going and I don't know, it could make science worse. Yay. Artificial intelligence. For those of you who uh were babies once a time once upon a time, we we all were at one point or another. If you were never a baby, I would like to know how that possibly happened. Um researchers just published an open access paper in cell reports on what they call retrospenial cortex maturation aligns with the transition from infant forgetting to persistent memory. What does this mean? Well, what this means is that I'm going to put a picture up on the screen right now. What this means is that the researchers who published this paper were trying to figure out why we can't remember our our baby experiences. Why do we forget that period of time after birth until we're about 2 or 2 and a half years old? And there have been uh questions about what parts of the brain are mature enough to be able to handle the conditioning of memory, the collecting of memory, the where we put it. And so this particular study, they were able to focus on the retrospenial cortex. This is important for adult memory consolidation, but nobody's really been able to understand the role that it plays during development very well. And so they were like, hey, maybe this is important for memory recall. If it's important for putting the memories somewhere, consolidating them, maybe it's important for allowing us to recall them as well. In the mouse models where they studied the retrospenial cortex, they showed that the timing of when the retrospenial cortex is starting to be active and when they get like specific dendritic spines where the dendrites are connecting with other neurons and starting to make connections. Um it's it's really about the developmental trajectory of the retrospenial cortex. It is not mature enough [snorts] at least in the mice. It's not mature enough at the time up until about 2 years, 2 and a half years somewhere around there. And of course there's going to be variation from brain to brain to brain. But that infantile amnesia is not that the brain couldn't recall it. if the memories could be consolidated, but that the retrospenial cortex wasn't working. It didn't make the connections yet. It didn't have all its dingic spines. It wasn't ready to take the information in and consolidate the information where it needed to be so that it could be recalled later. So in effect with the way the hippocampus, the retrospenial cortex, all the things working together, in effect because the infant brain is not mature enough or connected in the right way to allow for these network connections that allow that network of neurons that is a memory to be put in place. That's why we have amnesia. It's because the brain it just isn't it isn't writing it down yet. >> [laughter] >> That's kind of that's pretty much it. The brain's the brain doesn't have an eraser in it. It just never had the the the the tools to write it down until it develops at the right right point in that infant development. Okay, last story. It has to do with older adults. If you had chickenpox, I did. um you might you know you probably want to get that shingles vaccine and we've talked several times about the benefits of the shingles shingles vaccine to individuals and apparently there is a new study out it's uh news is out all over for this if you have been putting your shingles vaccine on the the slow burner and been waiting to have it done for individuals over 50 years old for whom shingles can be a problem. There is a vaccine called Shingris which is um it's known as a recombinant vaccine and this recombinant vaccine Shingri based on the records of 70,000 people in the United States has found that there's a 12% lower risk of cardiovascular diagnosis cardiovascular disease, heart failure, um heart attack in individuals within the three within three and a half years after getting the shingles vaccine that there's a 12% lower risk of these heart cardiovascular diagnosis if you get the Shingris vaccine. Zosttovivvax is the first vaccine that became available against shingles in 2006 and that's a weakened version of chickenpox virus and shingris is newer technology and it's uh in the UK is being rolled out but it has been available for this study in the United States and um researchers tracked adults 60 years and over for seven years after vaccination and there's two doses, an initial dose and a booster. Um, and by the end of the followup, according to the Guardian, and this is published in Nature Medicine this week, uh, the vaccine is associated with a 4% risk of cardiovascular diseases. Um, and so this is there's the Shingris being a 12% re reduction that is in the first three and a half years, but by the end of the seven years, it's over. it's a 4% lower overall this is um could be a big change for individuals and if you know you don't want to get shingles it's not fun and that's not good and if you can have a vaccine that also helps protect your heart for whatever reason that it's doing that because I mean who know I don't understand why um but and they don't either they're trying to get more definitive evidence as to why it could be protective and it maybe that shingles itself increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Um there's also it could be that the vaccine leads to immune system boosting. So maybe getting rid of inflammation. There are multiple reasons why it could be having this impact. But the bottom line is that this is the first study where they have been able to show um in a particular way for not just between unvaccinated and vaccinated populations, but actually being able to compare um people who got one part of the vaccine, the boo just the the first dose as opposed to the booster versus unvaccinated versus, you know, a different shingles vaccine. So this whole population they're they're looking at the um the comparison of being vaccinated before and after the switch from zostax to shingris in the United States which happened in 2017. And so if you have not gotten if you're older and you have not gotten your shingles vaccine oops leaving up some mouse brains for a little bit. Um, maybe you should think about it. It'd be good for your heart. I care about your heart. I heart your heart. And so, Aaron Anathema got Shingri. Wonderful. Yes. Fingers crossed for you. [laughter] I fingers crossed three and a half years that uh or maybe seven years that you will be cardiovascular event free. That would be amazing. [gasps] Okay, everyone. I hope you sleep on that. I hope we've got I got a little bit of good news in there beyond the um extreme event of El Nino information that Daniel Swain was able to bring to the show tonight. I do hope that um you all go into the next week being happy and you know curious, you know, that's what we try to do here. Thank you all for joining all of you in the chat room. Thank you for your questions. Thank you for your comments. Thank you for thinking and being a part of this audience. I really do appreciate everybody Twitch, YouTube, Facebook who come comment and are a part of this whole conversation and this community. And thank you for keeping the community a respectful great place to be so that we can all continue to talk to each other about sometimes what can be difficult subjects but sometimes can be a lot of fun. Fada, thank you so much for your help with social media and show notes. Gourd, R and Lure, others, thank you again for your help in the chat room. Identity4, thank you for recording the show and Rachel, thank you for editing and thank you of course to our Patreon sponsors. Thank you to Aaron Anathema, Adam Mishkan, Alan Viola, Ali Coffin, Andrew Swanson, Ardam, Arthur Kepler, Bob Calder, Brendan Minish, Brian Carrington, Chris Wnjak, Christopher Drier, Christopher Rapen, Craig Landon, Craig Pototts, Daryl Mshack, Dave Wilkinson, David Youngungl, Derek Schmidt, Don Mundus, EO, Eden Mundell, Eric Knap, Flying Out, Fred 104, G Burton, Latimore, Greg Briggs, Jack, Jason Olds, John Atwood, John McKe, John Ratnes, Swami, Johnny Gidley, Ken Hayes, Kent North Coat, Kevin Peritan, Kevin Rearden, Kurt Larson, Lon Makes, Lauren Gford, Mary Girtz, Marjorie, Mark Hessenflow, Mark Jenkins, Noodles, Patrick Pecaro, Paul Paul D, Disney, Paul Ronovich, Pierre Velazarb, Richard Badge, Robert Norland, Robert W. Farley, Rodney Lewis, Raw, Rudy Garcia, Day, Sean Clarence, Lamb, Shu, Stephanie Embry, Steven Alberon, Steve Leeman, aka Zasu, Dost, Teresa, Smitch, Tony, Steel, Vagard, Chefad, and what the if. Thank you all for your support on Patreon. And if you would like to be a part of this list, make sure that you head over to twist.org, click on the Patreon link, and subscribe to support us at $10 or more per month. Of course, you can offer any amount. We will we will take it. You all of your help helps. But um for those people who do support us at more than at $10 or more, I get to try and read your name at the end of the show. I think it's kind of fun. On next week's show, we will be back. Hopefully Blair will be back broadcasting live from our Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook channels at 8:00 p.m. Pacific timeish on Wednesday. If you want to listen to us as a podcast instead of live, look for This Week in Science wherever podcasts are found. If you enjoyed the show, please get your friends to subscribe, too. Please. I think it would be wonderful. Don't you? Yes. We love your feedback. Send me an email. Right. There's a topic you want us to cover, address, a suggestion for an interview, please let us know on one of our social media accounts. Like I said, send me an email. Put twists in the subject line though so your email doesn't get spam filtered into a Pineapple Express slamming into the California coastline during this particular El Nino event this winter. I would never find it in that downpour. We look forward to discussing science with you again next week. And if you have learned anything from the show, please remember it's all in your head. >> This week in science. [music] This week in science. This [music] week in science. It's the end of the world. So I'm setting up shop. Got my banner unfurled. It says [music] the scientist is in. I'm going to sell my advice. Show them how to stop the robots with a simple device. I'll reverse global [music] warming with a wave of my hand. And all it'll cost you is a couple of grand. Cuz this [music] week, science is coming your way. So everybody listen to what I say. I use the scientific method for [music] all that it's worth. And I'll broadcast my opinion all over the earth. Cuz it's [music] this week in science. This week in science. This week in science. Science. Science. Science. This week [music] in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week [music] in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week in science. [music] This week in science.