Spot the science error

One should do a 13-years running average analysis of the aa index and river flow data to eliminate the sunspot cycle oscillation and see how these results correlate with the corresponding analyses of global temperature and length-of-day (see Fig. 2.2 of the fao-report, below).
World climate is a regular quasi-periodic phenomenon (see Fig. 2.1 of http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y2787E/y2787e03.htm ) that is driven by solar activity with a period of 75 – 85 years (Gleissberg cycle). Because of this regularity, it can be stated with absolute certainty that the mean Earth temperature will continue to decrease until 2040.
1. There exists an extremely close correlation between the changes in the mean global temperature and the small changes in the rotational velocity of the Earth – two physically unrelated geophysical quantities – (see Fig. 2.2 of http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y2787E/y2787e03.htm), which has been ignored by the mainstream climatologists, and leaves little room for a human influence on climate. Note that temperature lags rotation by 6 years. This close correlation results from the action of an hitherto unknown form of gravitational waves, galactic vacuum density waves, on the Sun and on the Earth (see http://www.icecap.us/images/uploads/Lobert_on_CO2.pdf ).
2. The orbital periods of all Solar System planets are very close to integer multiples and integer fractions of the periods of the Hale (22.14 years) and the Gleissberg (84 years) solar cycles. (See the posts of September 26, 2009 and October 6, 2009 in http://www.pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/a-new-book-elucidates-the-life-and-work-of-Dr.-Abdus-Salam ). This provides further evidence for the existence of super-Einsteinian gravitational waves and of their action on all celestial bodies of the Solar System.
Progress in climatological science can only be achieved if the above physical facts are looked into in full depth.

Further to my previous post (since North America hasn’t woken up yet) let me paraphrase Svalgaard’s initial comment on Perry’s work to say that this is an example of Svalgaard’s own desperate need to refute Sun-Climate connections.
On WUWT in September, Svalgaard likened Henrik Svensmark to Al Gore. It amazes me that on a skeptical website this man is treated as some kind of guru, when he keeps dismissing the main scientific challenge to the CO2 story.

At least the Perry’s proposed relationship can be easily tested during the next years – if the Ol’ Man River will indeed follow the aa values 34 years ago. Plain and simple.
We don’t have to wait till the end of the century or insert corrections for this and that, like with global climate models.

This debate reflects well on WUWT – instead of just piling on, some readers took the trouble to check Leif’s finding, faulted it, and he acknowledged his error.
It would be good for Leif to complete the process by updating his post.

Nigel Calder (04:42:11) :
On WUWT in September, Svalgaard likened Henrik Svensmark to Al Gore. It amazes me that on a skeptical website this man is treated as some kind of guru, when he keeps dismissing the main scientific challenge to the CO2 story.
At least some of us are switched on.
Dr. Scafetta is switched on also, and recently showed the correlation of the PDO and Solar distance from SSB, I wouldnt discount anything he has to do with so quickly, especially if you have little knowledge in this area.
The upcoming AGU conference should be interesting, Dr. Scafetta invited me to speak but unfortunately I am unable to attend…maybe 1 more year might make a big difference.

I have seen a couple of papers of Charles Perry before on this theme:
‘Midwestern streamflow, precipitation and atmospheric vorticity influenced by Pacific sea surface temperatures and TSI Int. Journal of Climate 26 (2) 207-218 (2005)
‘Evidence for a physical linkage between galactic cosmic rays and regional climate time series’ Advances in Space Research 40, 353-364 (2007)
Perry & Hsu (2000) ‘Geophysical, archeological and historical evidence support a solar output model fro climate change’ Proc US National Academy of Sciences 10.1073/pnas.236423297
So, Leif before you jump the gun on peer-review, check out these papers in respectable climate journals. I have been impressed by Charles Perry’s willingness to take on a difficult issue that crosses many disciplines and at a time when the generally established view is set against solar drivers of climate change. What astonishes me is that the science community fails to cite work like this and gets away with it. All three citations are in my book ‘Chill’, together with a discussion of Perry’s thinking – of inrterest to me because it fits with some of my observations and conclusions that:
a) there are pulses of short-wave energy to the earth’s surface picked up by satellite surveys and these correlate to the highs of the solar cycle – such pulses are larger than would be the case from TSI variability and obviously involve less cloud cover (as Svensmark readily found for cycle 22 – but with much less clarity for cycle 23) – it is for this reason that Perry cites the GCR connection – from the peer reviewed solar science literature;
b) whatever the ultimate cause (and I am not entirely convinced of the GCR factor), the pulses are real. These will create pulses of warm water in the ocean surface (70% of the planet) – and this heat is stored (unlike in the atmosphere or on land) and the signal – according to Warren White’s work at Scripps, e.g.:
‘Sources of global warming of the upper ocean on decadal period scales’ J.of Geophysical Research 108 (c8) doi:10.1029/2002JC001396
and
‘Responses of global upper ocean temperatures to changing solar irradiance’ J Geophysical Research 102, 3255-3266 (1997)
c) as even the IPCC admit – 80% of the ‘global warming’ signal is held in the upper ocean, and as model analysis has shown
(Compo & Sardeshmukh (2008) ‘Oceanic influences on recent continental warming’ (Climate Diagnostics Centre, U of Colorado)
this signal is transferred to land.
d) so then we come top Perry’s hypothesis which relates not so much to the ultimate cause – or the mechanism – as a geolgist/hydrologist he is simply referrring to the peer-reviewed solar-terrestrial science literature, but to the nature of the time-lagged correlation – which does indeed show a similar time period to the PDO.
The whole purpose of an hypothesis is to stimulate new thinking and new ways of gathering data in the development of theory – and often this requires stepping out, being willing to make mistakes, and being opne to feedback – that is the very lifeblood of science. The reason so few go down this road is well illustrated by the rush to judgement and comment bordering on ridicule – which I would have hoped not to see on WUWT – its the kind of response one gets from RealClimate if you try to outline anything contrary to their model-based faith in warming (as I recently did!).
Consider therefore that we do not yet know what drives the 30-40 year oscilllation in the northern Pacific, or the amplitude of ENSO to which it is connected:
(Biondi et al, 2001 ‘North Pacific Decadal Climate Variability since AD 1661’ J of Climate 14 (1) 5-10
My suggestion (rehearsed in a chapter devoted to ocean cycles in my book) that the PDO was important in global temperature patterns, I was ridiculed by Gavin S. Yet the peer-reviewed literature leads to this conclusion.
Perry’s work should have long ago stimulated research into time-lags – yet it has been systematically ignored. I could readily see teleconnections between the phase of the PDO and Arctic Ocean temperatures. Those temperature patterns follow a pattern in sea level pressure (time lag about 5 years according to Polyarkov at IARC).
What happens in the Arctic and north Pacific connects to what happens in the mid-West.
The solar cycle has long been recognised as a signal in sea surface temperatures
as also in the Asian Monsoon. But if you are predisposed to think there can be no such link, then you don’t look for the literature – it is abundant.
I am not so convinced the shorter term pattern of pulses is entrained in the thermo-haline circulation because that turnover is on centennial time scales (though longer frequency oscillations may be at work – such as the MWP/LIA type variability). Rather, i would look to the nature of surface currents – which are not as simple as most maps indicate, but rather zigzag and take much longer to move warm water from the equatorial regions to the massive accumulation in gyres of the Pacific and Atlantic’s northern waters. i detail this in my book – drawing from analyses of the spatial distribution of the upper ocean heat content – perhaps it takes 30 years to accumulate and 30 years to release and the pulses feed into this pattern – the release phase of the PDO (dumping heat on Alaska) ended late in 2006 and coincided with the current solar minimum. These phases of accumulation and release also link to the shifting jetstream (which Perry also looks at). The Atlantic is now on the turn after 25 years of build up in the northern gyre – the jetstream also shifting, with huge dumps of rainfall over Britain and Europe in the last three years leadign to serious flooding – my guess is that once that heat reservoir is exhausted, the accumulation phase will begin again and northern Europe will really freeze up.
Although GCR may have some impact, I am inclined more to finger the UV signal and its effect on the Polar Vortex – also very under-researched.

My initial thought whenever I see these kind of correlations is:
1. There are lots of physical processes in nature that exhibit cyclic behaviour.
2. A subset of 1. will have cycle lengths of approx 9-12 years (or 22 years or whatever).
If you add in some wiggle room from lags (and allow the lags to vary in length) then you’re always going to find some correlations if you look hard enough. I’ll keep an open mind though.

Leif Svalgaard (06:32:36) :
I have sent an update to Anthony.
I hope your update includes an apology to the conveners of the AGU session.

If anybody wants to look at the data, it is here.
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/nwisman/?site_no=07010000