It seems the ocean cycles get a bigger role than GHG’s in this study. Plus Antarctic models are still FUBAR:
The gradual warming of the North and tropical Atlantic Ocean is contributing to climate change in Antarctica, a team of New York University scientists supported by the National Science Foundation has concluded.![]()
Press Release 14-013
Analysis indicates that North and tropical Atlantic warming affects Antarctic climate
![]()
Several glaciers in the Antarctic Peninsula as photographed by a NASA Operation IceBridge aircraft.
|
January 22, 2014
The gradual warming of the North and tropical Atlantic Ocean is contributing to climate change in Antarctica, a team of New York University (NYU) scientists supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) has concluded.
Their findings appear in the Jan. 23 edition of the journal Nature.
Their work draws from more than three decades of atmospheric data and shows new ways in which distant regional conditions are contributing to Antarctic climate change.
“Our findings reveal a previously unknown and surprising force behind climate change that is occurring deep in our southern hemisphere: the Atlantic Ocean,” says Xichen Li, a doctoral student in NYU’s Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences and the study’s lead author. “Moreover, the study offers further confirmation that warming in one region can have far-reaching effects in another.”
NSF is responsible for managing the U. S. Antarctic Program in Antarctica and in the Southern Ocean.
NSF supported the research in part through a collaborative grant made during the International Polar Year 2007-2009 (IPY), during which researchers from 60 nations deployed to the Arctic and Antarctica as part of a global campaign of fieldwork. NSF was the lead U.S. agency for the IPY. NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences also provided funding, as did NASA.
Over the last few decades, Antarctica has experienced dramatic climate change, with the Antarctic Peninsula, which reaches northward towards South America, exhibiting the strongest warming of any region on the planet.
During its summer, Antarctic changes have been attributed to greenhouse gas increase and stratospheric ozone loss. However, less clear are the forces behind climate changes that occur during its winter. In addition, the effects of these changes during the cold season are complex, adding a layer of difficulty to the efforts to find the atmospheric culprit.
It has long been known that the region’s climate is affected, in part, by changes in the distant Pacific Ocean climate. But the phenomena brought on by the Pacific have shorter-term influences–for instance, due to El Niño. Less well understood are the longer-term forces that have produced warming along the Antarctic Peninsula or the sea-ice redistribution in the Southern Hemisphere’s winter over many decades.
To address this question, the NYU researchers focused on a different candidate: the Atlantic Ocean, which has been overlooked as a factor behind Antarctic climate change.
Specifically, the scientists looked at the North and Tropical Atlantic’s Sea Surface Temperature (SST) variability–changes in the ocean’s surface temperature–focusing on the last three decades. This metric, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, had previously not been considered in seeking explanations for Antarctic climate change.
Using a time-series analysis, in which the scientists matched changes in the North and tropical Atlantic’s space-based SST data with subsequent changes in Antarctic climate, the researchers found strong correlations. Specifically, they observed that warming Atlantic waters were followed by changes in sea-level pressure in the Antarctic’s Amundsen Sea. In addition, these warming patterns also preceded redistribution of sea ice between the Antarctic’s Ross and Amundsen-Bellingshausen-Weddell Seas.
David Holland, co-author of the study, a professor at NYU’s Courant Institute and past-director of NYU’s Center for Atmospheric Ocean Science, explained that the research consisted of two parts, incorporating both observational data and computer modelling.
The first part of the study, using observational data, found a link, or correlation, between the Atlantic and Antarctic data sets. But a correlation means simply that two things appear to happen in conjunction and does not explain what may be causing a phenomenon.
The second used a global atmospheric model, which allowed the researchers to create a simulated warming of the North Atlantic. The model responded, as the researchers had suspected, by “changing” the climate in Antarctica.
“While our data analysis showed a correlation, it was the use of a state-of-the-art computer model that allowed us to see that North Atlantic warming was causing Antarctic climate change and not vice versa,” he said.
The study’s findings raise a number of deeper questions, such as, is Antarctic sea-ice change fundamentally different from the well-reported changes in the Arctic? In contrast to the sea-ice decline in the Arctic, Antarctic sea ice has not diminished. Rather, it has redistributed itself in ways that have perplexed scientists, with declines in some areas and increases in others.
Holland responds, “from this study, we are learning just how Antarctic sea-ice redistributes itself and also finding that the underlying mechanisms controlling Antarctic sea ice are completely distinct from those in the Arctic.”
The study’s other authors included Edwin Gerber, an assistant professor at the Courant Institute; and Changhyun Yoo, a Courant post-doctoral fellow.
-NSF-
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Several glaciers in the Antarctic Peninsula as photographed by a NASA Operation IceBridge aircraft.
How many decades of reasonable sea level pressure data do we have for the Antarctic’s Amundsen Sea?
Why not? Is it because there is no mechanism for the influence?
That still doesn’t provide a mechanism. It sounds like it was tuned on a found correlation and then they got the same correlation.
Is this any more than reporting a newly found correlation between changes in the AMO and the Antarctic peninsula?
“Our findings reveal a previously unknown and surprising force behind climate change that is occurring deep in our southern hemisphere: the Atlantic Ocean,”
could it be the sun
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/Ap-NHT.htm
“The model responded, as the researchers had suspected, by “changing” the climate in Antarctica.”
Not much chance of bias induced output, then? Humph!!! As I have said before, they have to show a given amount of warming for a given amount of CO2, that they programme into their models dependant upon what sensitivity level they dictate, it won’t do it all by itself!!!!
“Moreover, the study offers further confirmation that warming in one region can have far-reaching effects in another.”
That statement would seem to be very supportive of the MWP being a global, not a regional phenomenon.
The report seems very circular in its reasoning. But just this week were told that ozone is the reason the Antarctic is not behaving. Now it is the Atlantic.
What is clear is that AGW promoters are far from being able to honestly say they have useful predictive or even descriptive tools to make large global claims.
Brilliant article, classic climate science in the format of BS baffles brains.
There is one very obvious flaw: there is no warming in the South Atlantic, which means that Trenberth’s hidden heat flows 3,000 miles along the bottom of the South Atlantic Ocean to re-emerge in Antarctica where the ice sheets are growing steadily year by year.
Makes perfect sense to me, but maybe after my morning medication I will think different.
“In contrast to the sea-ice decline in the Arctic, Antarctic sea ice has not diminished. Rather, it has redistributed itself in ways that have perplexed scientists, with declines in some areas and increases in others.”
Just couldn’t bring themselves to say antarctic sea ice has been increasing.
And none of these changes happened before we had satellites and SVU’s?
It’s this what done it!
AMO and low pass filters
http://snag.gy/iEDyx.jpg
the Atlantic Ocean, which has been overlooked….
Breaking news: Climate Scientists discover previously unknown ocean
..film at 11:00
“This metric, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, had previously not been considered in seeking explanations for Antarctic climate change.”
I considered it:
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/amazing-graph-of-amo-vs-arctic-sea-ice-vs-antarctic-sea-ice/
But it is even worse than you think!
Not only is Antarctic sea ice not merely “redistributed”, but it has been increasing steadily for 2-1/2 years, through all phases of sea ice: summertime melt, late summer minimum point, winter freezeup, AND early spring maximum’s!
Antarctic sea ice is setting all-time record high extents – not “”declines in some area and increases in “some” others” …. Antarctic sea ice has been at or above +2 sigma levels above normal for almost all of 1-1/2 years now! It is not “redistributed’ by any but a CAGW dogmatic religious belief in CO2.
At today’s rate year-by-year of continuous increase, Antarctic sea ice will force closure of the Cape Horn sea route in 8-12 years …. Which is “bad” – Cape Horn would be (logically) be closed to easy ship traffic at the time of maximum Antarctic sea ice (late September to very early October each year), BUT the Potentially “open” Arctic sea route is only “open” (potentially open!) for sea traffic only during the early August-late August mid-summer melt. The rest of the year, the small straits immediately north of Canada for blocked by ice.
Thus, by September, you could not go north around the continent because the Arctic straits are blocked, but you could (likely) get around the south route – “IF” you could get to Cape Horn before late September. Otherwise, you might be locked out from transit for several weeks until Cape horn thawed out. You could try to go north, BUT you’d have to reach safe passage north of Canada island’s and get entirely through to Alaska’s north shore before mid-September. Be just a few days short, and you’re locked in like the Donner party: Trapped in the Sierra Mountains for the winter because they tried to cross the mountain pass one day too late.
(I am somewhat exaggerating the problems getting through Cape Horn, but not much. In those stormy seas, you cannot use ice breakers. It is too dangerous when two ships are close behind each other trying to use the channel through the ice.)
RACookPE1978 says at January 24, 2014 at 7:01 am…
I am very sceptical of extrapolating a 2½ year trend by a decade (and I’ve no idea if your sums are right anyway) but it is an interesting idea. It raises lots of questions.
What would happen to global sea currents if the passage between Antarctica and Africa were blocked at the surface?
I am always suspicious when a nebulous cycle is used to explain something that is hard to understand. Using the AMO defined for the North Atlantic to explain what happens around the South Pole tells me that these guys know nothing about what is going on there. The fact that their model shows something about the Antarctic makes it even worse for me. None of the models IPCC has been using for years work and now they want to extend their non-working models to the Antarctic. And that gets accepted by Nature, supposedly a high reputation journal? They ought to fire their staff assigned to publishing climate articles.
[S0 News January 24, 2014: Climate, Mars, Spaceweather
at 01:45 comments on How unusual were the Antarctic sea ice conditions that trapped a research ship on Christmas Eve 2013?
January 22, 2014 .C(lie)mate.gov: http://www.climate.gov/news-features/…
The NOAA climate piece cites a paper- Parkinson, C. L. and Cavalieri, D. J., 2012: Antarctic sea ice variability and trends, 1979–2010. The Cryosphere, 6, 871-880.
For AA sea ice extent in 6 different regeons see-
Fig. 4. Sea ice extent monthly deviation plots, November 1978 through December 2010, calculated from SMMR, SSMI, and SSMIS satellitedata, for the following regions and hemispheric total: (a) Weddell Sea, (b) Indian Ocean, (c) western Pacific Ocean, (d) Ross Sea, (e)Bellingshausen/Amundsen Seas, and (f) Southern Hemisphere as a whole.
Fig. 7. Same as Fig. 4 except for ice areas instead of ice extents.
Isn’t this curve-matching with a post-conclusion, technical explanation?
The underlying assumption is that globalism dominates, not that a global situation is the culmination of regional changes. Computational reality, i.e. add it all up, divide by three and you see what is affecting everything, vs Representational reality, i.e. look at Antarctic cooling and Atlantic warming as regional changes as a result of underlying (or overlying) processes.
The analysis starts with the assumption of a global dominance, something striking everywhere but having different local results. That is an assumption of CAGW. It is not a conclusion as the warmists would like it to be from such a study, but an assumption.
Another case of circular reasoning.
Call me a pedant, but it seems unfair to have a research grant for an International Polar year that lasts from 2007-2009. Did they get twice as much, or were they forced to take only half as much per year during these hard times when energy costs are rising in so many places due to government or EPA fiat?
They just can’t bring themselves to say Antarctic (and global) ice extent is increasing, can they? Redistribution is the new increase.
“The gradual warming of the North and tropical Atlantic Ocean is contributing to climate change in Antarctica, a team of New York University scientists supported by the National Science Foundation has concluded.”
——————
Suggestion: get Chris Turney to head an expedition to check on things down there. Be sure to bring a lot of deck chairs, short-sleeve shirts, parasols, and booze.
Oh yeah, bring lotsa family members too.
This is obsurd. They left out “Man made (coded)” state of the art models. These people act like the models are sentient beings. They only do what we code them to do.
One wonders how those state of the art models did in hindcasting things. I bet you cant find that info anywhere without an FOIA request. PFFFT!
Isn’t it more likely that AMO and the variations in the Antarctic have a common cause? Like lunar tide cycles…
Yep and the North Atalntic influences mostly the Antarctica Peninsula… the rest not so much. Next correlation with Bieber’s DUI…
Is the “climate change in Antarctica” dangerous and if so why?
The Antarctic sea ice has, no, not increased, but “redistributed” itself. And there’s a correlation between what happens in the Atlantic, apart from the sign, which is not mentioned, because it’s negative.