Basil Copeland and I also found linkages between surface temperature and solar cycles in two articles we published in the last year. We were roundly criticized and ridiculed by warmists mainly due to a statistical error in the first essay, but the base premise remained and the second essay was improved due to that error. I’m pleased to see that NCAR has found other solar to earth linkages, such as this one in ENSO. This is exciting news, but by no means a complete solution to the climate puzzle. There is much more to be learned about this. This is but one connector of the hydra-like patch cable that Dr. Jack Eddy imagined – Anthony

Scientists find link between solar cycle and global climate similar to El Nino/La Nina. Credit: NCAR
Establishing a key link between the solar cycle and global climate, research led by scientists at the National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., shows that maximum solar activity and its aftermath have impacts on Earth that resemble La Niña and El Niño events in the tropical Pacific Ocean.
The research may pave the way toward predictions of temperature and precipitation patterns at certain times during the approximately 11-year solar cycle.
“These results are striking in that they point to a scientifically feasible series of events that link the 11-year solar cycle with ENSO, the tropical Pacific phenomenon that so strongly influences climate variability around the world,” says Jay Fein, program director in NSF’s Division of Atmospheric Sciences. “The next step is to confirm or dispute these intriguing model results with observational data analyses and targeted new observations.”
The total energy reaching Earth from the sun varies by only 0.1 percent across the solar cycle. Scientists have sought for decades to link these ups and downs to natural weather and climate variations and distinguish their subtle effects from the larger pattern of human-caused global warming.
Building on previous work, the NCAR researchers used computer models of global climate and more than a century of ocean temperature to answer longstanding questions about the connection between solar activity and global climate.
The research, published this month in a paper in the Journal of Climate, was funded by NSF, NCAR’s sponsor, and by the U.S. Department of Energy.
“We have fleshed out the effects of a new mechanism to understand what happens in the tropical Pacific when there is a maximum of solar activity,” says NCAR scientist Gerald Meehl, the paper’s lead author. “When the sun’s output peaks, it has far-ranging and often subtle impacts on tropical precipitation and on weather systems around much of the world.”
The new paper, along with an earlier one by Meehl and colleagues, shows that as the Sun reaches maximum activity, it heats cloud-free parts of the Pacific Ocean enough to increase evaporation, intensify tropical rainfall and the trade winds, and cool the eastern tropical Pacific.
The result of this chain of events is similar to a La Niña event, although the cooling of about 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit is focused further east and is only about half as strong as for a typical La Niña.
Over the following year or two, the La Niña-like pattern triggered by the solar maximum tends to evolve into an El Niño-like pattern, as slow-moving currents replace the cool water over the eastern tropical Pacific with warmer-than-usual water.
Again, the ocean response is only about half as strong as with El Niño.
True La Niña and El Niño events are associated with changes in the temperatures of surface waters of the eastern Pacific Ocean. They can affect weather patterns worldwide.
The paper does not analyze the weather impacts of the solar-driven events. But Meehl and his co-author, Julie Arblaster of both NCAR and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, found that the solar-driven La Niña tends to cause relatively warm and dry conditions across parts of western North America.
More research will be needed to determine the additional impacts of these events on weather across the world.
“Building on our understanding of the solar cycle, we may be able to connect its influences with weather probabilities in a way that can feed into longer-term predictions, a decade at a time,” Meehl says.
Scientists have known for years that long-term solar variations affect certain weather patterns, including droughts and regional temperatures.
But establishing a physical connection between the decadal solar cycle and global climate patterns has proven elusive.
One reason is that only in recent years have computer models been able to realistically simulate the processes associated with tropical Pacific warming and cooling associated with El Niño and La Niña.
With those models now in hand, scientists can reproduce the last century’s solar behavior and see how it affects the Pacific.
To tease out these sometimes subtle connections between the sun and Earth, Meehl and his colleagues analyzed sea surface temperatures from 1890 to 2006. They then used two computer models based at NCAR to simulate the response of the oceans to changes in solar output.
They found that, as the sun’s output reaches a peak, the small amount of extra sunshine over several years causes a slight increase in local atmospheric heating, especially across parts of the tropical and subtropical Pacific where Sun-blocking clouds are normally scarce.
That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing extra water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains.
As this climatic loop intensifies, the trade winds strengthen. That keeps the eastern Pacific even cooler and drier than usual, producing La Niña-like conditions.
Although this Pacific pattern is produced by the solar maximum, the authors found that its switch to an El Niño-like state is likely triggered by the same kind of processes that normally lead from La Niña to El Niño.
The transition starts when the changes of the strength of the trade winds produce slow-moving off-equatorial pulses known as Rossby waves in the upper ocean, which take about a year to travel back west across the Pacific.
The energy then reflects from the western boundary of the tropical Pacific and ricochets eastward along the equator, deepening the upper layer of water and warming the ocean surface.
As a result, the Pacific experiences an El Niño-like event about two years after solar maximum. The event settles down after about a year, and the system returns to a neutral state.
“El Niño and La Niña seem to have their own separate mechanisms,” says Meehl, “but the solar maximum can come along and tilt the probabilities toward a weak La Niña. If the system was heading toward a La Niña anyway,” he adds, “it would presumably be a larger one.”
Source: National Science Foundation (news : web)
h/t to Leif Svalgaard
Nogw (07:55:34) :
As far as I know, from Scafetta paper/conference to EPA, TSI followed solar cycle until somebody made corrections to some satellite data:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/wkshp.nsf/vwpsw/84E74F1E59E2D3FE852574F100669688/$file/scafetta-epa-2009.pdf
Heh, light the blue touchpaper, and stand well back…
tallbloke,
You’ve made some interesting comments. The next step is to explain the reversed phase relationship in the 1800s. Stephen Wilde is promoting focus on the hydro cycle. I agree – and I will suggest something a little more specific as a starting point: asymmetry in the hydro cycle. When I look at temperature ranges I see statistical relationships that do not show up when I work with means.
And SolarFlux is back to 66.
the unfixed or however you call it, just in case Leif starts chimping out…
Leif Svalgaard (18:58:58) :
And what happens to the cosmic ray link? The article does not refer to that [at least not in the blurb]. Now, the true enthusiasts will, of course, point out that the ‘cloud-free’ parts of the ocean at maximum are there because there are fewer cosmic rays to create clouds.
27-day variation in cloud amount and relationship to the solar cycle
Y. Takahashi1, Y. Okazaki1, M. Sato2, H. Miyahara3, K. Sakanoi4, and P. K. Hong5
Abstract. Linkages between solar activity and the earth’s climate have been suggested in previous studies. The 11-year cycle in solar activity evident in sunspot numbers is the most examined example of periodicity, and it is clearly recognized in variations in the thermal structure and dynamical motion of the stratospheric atmosphere. Also the variations in the stratosphere related to the period of apparent solar rotation have also been suggested; however, for such a short period, no quantitative evidence indicating a relationship to the tropospheric phenomena. We clearly demonstrate a 27-day variation in the cloud amount in the region of the Western Pacific warm pool, which is only seen in the solar maximum years of the 11-year cycle. The average spectrum in solar maximum years also shows an enhancement in the range of MJO period. Long-term variations in the tropospheric phenomena, including the 11-year cycle, are generally investigated based on monthly or even yearly averaged data, but the present results may suggest an alternative possibility: short-period variations could modulate longer periodic phenomena.
Interference ?
http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/15327/2009/acpd-9-15327-2009.html
Stephen Wilde (09:12:07) : I see what you mean about the oceans dominating current weather. But if hotter ocean water causes more clouds, can’t the clouds in turn limit the amount of energy absorbed by the oceans. Maybe this cooler water goes under the surface only to come up again decades later … it just seems the Sun and especially clouds would still be in play. The way I see it, the Sun is the hammer, the Earth the anvil, and the atmosphere a mosquito. Except for clouds, which can modulate input energy from the Sun. Also, I believe it is not known if the Sun has other perhaps chaotic variations in output. The solar guys certainly couldn’t predict the length of this solar minimum and they had to revise their forecast for the peak of cycle 24 didn’t they … they don’t really understand it, do they?
tallbloke (23:52:42) : Do you have a mechanism that would inhibit or block OLW when the Sun is peaking vs when it’s quiet?
http://sprg.ssl.berkeley.edu/~tohban/wiki/index.php/Chree_Analysis_for_Flares
Conclusions
“Even a simple-seeming and intuitively correct analysis technique can have tricky consequences. The Chree analysis does work in this case (see Ref. 3), but not as well as one would like. For a given SNR for the detection of a single X10-class flare, the extension to the M1 level (a factor of 100 in magnitude) would correspond to an increase in SNR of 3.6 (using the slope from Figure 1). While this is certainly not to be sneezed at – it might be just the factor needed to learn something really important about flare energetics – the weak dependence suggests that it is a difficult analysis.”
Even the author acknowledges more ambiguity than Dr. Svalgaard.
Re: maksimovich (17:47:45)
Too bad they didn’t plot the power spectrum (figs. 3 & 4) as a function of time. The way they did it (i.e. just discrete max vs. min) makes me suspicious that there might be something they would prefer us not to see… Another possibility is that they are fond of antiquated methods…
Jim (20:03:36) :
tallbloke (23:52:42) : Do you have a mechanism that would inhibit or block OLW when the Sun is peaking vs when it’s quiet?
Not certain Jim, but as the ocean emits strongly when the sun is quiet, as evidenced by the correlation between el nino’s after solar minimum and heightened OLR, maybe the el nino’s which occur at solar max don’t lose as much heat to space because the atmosphere is generally warmer and wetter. More water vapour, less OLR.
Also, since the ocean must somehow manage to store heat into areas deeper than the mixed near surface waters to account for the thermal expansion component of sea level rise, I wonder if the there is an alternating net up ward flow of warm water near solar min, as heat escapes, and a corresponding downward flow near solar max when the heat storage is occuring. If so, the circulation must bring cooler water to the surface to be warmed as it would be displaced.
Warm water going downwards is very counter-intuitive, yet it must be happening. I wonder if salinity is a factor. The surface waters will become more saline and denser as the evaporated water heads skywards.
This is all a priori rambling though, I wish an oceanography expert would come on here to tell us more.
Paul Vaughan (21:46:22) :
Re: maksimovich (17:47:45)
Too bad they didn’t plot the power spectrum (figs. 3 & 4) as a function of time. The way they did it (i.e. just discrete max vs. min) makes me suspicious that there might be something they would prefer us not to see… Another possibility is that they are fond of antiquated methods…
Here’s an interesting plot from near solar min of global troposphere temps at 4km that was posted on the Pielke prediction thread.
http://davidsmith1.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/0718091.jpg
Sure looks like solar rotation period spikes to me. At solar min not max. Dunno if there’s another explanation like it being raw data not corrected for some satellite related issue, I’ve asked for clarification.
Paul Vaughan (12:49:37) :
I will suggest something a little more specific as a starting point: asymmetry in the hydro cycle. When I look at temperature ranges I see statistical relationships that do not show up when I work with means.
No OLR data from back then. 🙂
Look forward to seeing your graphs though. The cycle length one was interesting. What does it tell us that a normal plot like Schatten’s doesn’t?
tallbloke,
I’m very curious to hear what you might propose to explain the reversed phase relationships of the 1800s.
This is absolutely key.
James F. Evans (21:11:22) :
“it might be just the factor needed to learn something really important about flare energetics – the weak dependence suggests that it is a difficult analysis.”
Even the author acknowledges more ambiguity than Dr. Svalgaard.”
Of course, he does not. All he is saying is that the signal is so weak compared to the background noise, that even the powerful Chree analysis has a hard time pulling the signal out. There is no ambiguity at all. It is a question of signal-to-noise ratio, and the signal is just so weak that it will be hard to show that there is one for weaker flares. This is not a problem with the analysis, but with the flares. They simply make such a little contribution to the total energy that they are hardly observable. I know the author [Hudson] well, we are colleagues at Berkeley [see e.g. the next nugget], and I know exactly what he meant.
\
tallbloke (22:26:41) “What does it tell us that a normal plot like Schatten’s doesn’t?”
Can you provide a link?
Anyone who studies Landscheidt, Charvatova, NAO, &/or drought severity might appreciate this one:
Fye, Falko K.; Stahle, David W.; Cook, Edward R.; Cleaveland, Malcolm K. (2006). NAO influence on sub-decadal moisture variability over central North America. Geophysical Research Letters 33(15), L15707.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006GeoRL..3315707F
*Please take the time to watch this youtube video showing time lapse images of solar cycle 24’s spots and the bias present in viewing these spots.*
The topic of whether these specks would have been seen 400 years ago is being discussed on solarcycle24.com and if this video shows the resolution and disc size that was analysed for spots back then it would clearly indicate a major issue that must be resolved.
Paul Vaughan (22:44:22) :
tallbloke (22:26:41) “What does it tell us that a normal plot like Schatten’s doesn’t?”
Can you provide a link?
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image6.gif
Paul Vaughan (22:33:48) :
tallbloke,
I’m very curious to hear what you might propose to explain the reversed phase relationships of the 1800s.
This is absolutely key.
Well it’s obvious, the Oojmaflip is in anticorrelation to the wotsit.
Seriously, show me a graph or two, and I’ll throw a SWAG at you.
If you posted ’em, I missed it.
:o)
tallbloke (22:08:46) : Here is a good article on ocean currents. Some are driven by wind, some by tides, and some by changes in temperature and salinity. As water from the surface evaporates, the water becomes saltier, which in turn increases the density. It is obvious the ocean is a major player in climate, second only to the Sun which supplies the driving energy. I am still intrigued by the possibility that the Sun could be more variable than we think which would explain the paleo record. The Sun’s output could go up a bit, warming the planet and releasing CO2 from the oceans. This would explain where the warming came from and why the temp goes up first and CO2 800 years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation
Anthony, I don’t know that the paper showed all that the write-up is claiming. There are too many “may pave the way tos…” and “results point to…” and “tends to…” I found the abstract along with some figures of the Pacific Ocean at Dr. G. Meehl’s site — summary of achievements: http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/research/profiles/2009/meehl.profile.html (sorry, I still can’t do links).
Didn’t want to spend the $22. The specifics are: “[We] show that dynamical coupled processes initiated by the response in the tropical Pacific to peaks in solar forcing produce wind-forced ocean Rossby waves near 5N and 5S. These reflect off the western boundary, producing downwelling equatorial Kelvin waves that contribute to transitioning the tropical Pacific to a warm event…that lags the peaks in solar forcing by a couple of years.”
You had a post some time ago that referred to Rossby waves, maybe by Bob Tisdale, or maybe my research led me to look up Rossby waves. Anyway, I think this is already “known”, but Meehl and Arblaster (2009) are linking these waves to a lag from solar maximum. Very interesting. I’d sure like to see some “proof”. Can you get the article for WUWT or does one of your readers have further information?
Wow, I actually did a link!
Paul Vaughan (18:19:39) :
Sunspot Cycle Length 1800-1960
via Wavelet Analysis:
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/SunspotCyclePeriod.PNG
——————————————————
Paul,
So what is that showing us? Just that recent cycles have been shorter? Or that there is perhaps a centennial scale variation in cycle length?
Basil
tallbloke (22:26:41) “What does it tell us that a normal plot like Schatten’s doesn’t?”
Paul Vaughan (22:44:22) “Can you provide a link?”
tallbloke (05:28:15)
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image6.gif
The wavelet approach gives monthly estimates of solar cycle length from monthly data …and without fussing around with “where was the max? where was the min?”
– –
Paul Vaughan (18:19:39)
Sunspot Cycle Length 1800-1960
via Wavelet Analysis:
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/SunspotCyclePeriod.PNG
Basil (07:21:11) “Paul, So what is that showing us? Just that recent cycles have been shorter? Or that there is perhaps a centennial scale variation in cycle length?”
For now, I’ll leave it open for people to interpret themselves. One thing that struck me immediately was the timing of 11.1 year power when the period was decreasing rapidly. (This suggests other analyses which I may pursue when I have time.)
I may have more comments as time passes. In the meantime I’ve presented this result to raise awareness of what can be done with wavelets in Excel.
Also, I’ll be completely honest: I’m sick of seeing power spectra that are not plotted as a function of time. People are way too willing to assume stationarity – even when the assumption is patently untenable. [This is adding a thick layer of unhelpful distortion & confusion to discussions (that otherwise might be fruitful) about phase relations.]
– –
tallbloke (05:35:02) “[…] show me a graph or two, and I’ll throw a SWAG at you. If you posted ‘em, I missed it.”
Remember this?
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1850/to:2009/isolate:78/mean:39/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1850/to:2010/scale:0.0005
[Note that I’ve adjusted “isolate” from 156 months to 78 to emphasize that this is still a work in progress.]
It’s not as simple as “temps follow solar cycle”. It looks like there is interaction with another (or more than one) cycle(s) that throw[s] *apparent* reversals into the phase relationship.
It looks like something that can be worked out. This doesn’t look like the “hopelessly impossible” problem some paint it to be. I’ll be working on the phasing over the weeks/months/years ahead.
This is a multi-disciplinary problem. Your comments on mechanics are appreciated – thank you for stimulating discussion.
Re: pyromancer76 (06:47:02)
Careful here …
“The important role of the 11 year cycle of solar forcing is emerging in model simulations that have been analyzed, along with observations, to confirm earlier hypotheses (Meehl et al. 2003) and model results in that the effect of enhanced solar forcing is to strengthen the climatological precipitation regimes in the tropics. This produces a La Nina-like response in the tropical Pacific with teleconnections to the North Pacific that reduce precipitation with greater solar forcing in the Pacific northwest and northern California.”
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/research/profiles/2009/meehl.profile.html
This appears to avoid the phase reversal centred ~1931. [The PNW precipitation phase relationship with solar variables flips over.] Perhaps this point needs to be hammered repeatedly until people acknowledge what may be inconvenient.
Explaining the flip should be objective #1 for people working on the mechanics.
I’m concerned that people are going to go to great lengths to get the mechanics wrong. We all know how fond people are of their computer models after they’ve poured years of their lives into them.
Let’s do the research community (in general) a favor – without delay – by pointing out things apparently swept under-the-rug (due to inconvenience). Even an acknowledgement like, “Yeah, we know about that – we’re going to go back & work on it later,” might help other researchers avert a potentially (very) wasteful path.
Part of the reason for all of the secrecy is the scarcity of funding.
pyromancer76 (06:47:43) :
Wow, I actually did a link!
If you don’t try to do any tags but just paste the link, the wordpress software will do the rest for you.