From a press release by: National Oceanography Centre, Southampton (NOCS)

Understanding past and future climate
The notion that scientists understand how changes in Earth’s orbit affect climate well enough for estimating long-term natural climate trends that underlie any anthropogenic climate change is challenged by findings published this week. The new research was conducted by a team led by Professor Eelco Rohling of the University of Southampton’s School of Ocean and Earth Science hosted at the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton.
“Understanding how climate has responded to past change should help reveal how human activities may have affected, or will affect, Earth’s climate. One approach for this is to study past interglacials, the warm periods between glacial periods within an ice age,” said Rohling.
He continued: “Note that we have here focused on the long-term natural climate trends that are related to changes in Earth’s orbit around the Sun. Our study is therefore relevant to the long-term climate future, and not so much for the next decades or century.”
The team, which included scientists from the Universities of Tuebingen (Germany) and Bristol, compared the current warm interglacial period with one 400,000 years ago (marine isotope stage 11, or MIS-11).
Many aspects of the Earth-Sun orbital configuration during MIS-11 were similar to those of the current interglacial. For this reason, MIS-11 is often considered as a potential analogue for future climate development in the absence of human influence.
Previous studies had used the analogy to suggest that the current interglacial should have ended 2-2.5 thousand years ago. So why has it remained so warm?
According to the‘anthropogenic hypothesis’, long-term climate impacts of man’s deforestation activities and early methane and carbon dioxide emissions have artificially held us in warm interglacial conditions, which have persisted since the end of the Pleistocene, about 11 400 years ago.
To address this issue, the researchers used a new high-resolution record of sea levels, which reflect ice volume. This record, which is continuous through both interglacials, is based on the ‘Red Sea method’ developed by Rohling.
Water passes between the Red Sea and the open ocean only through the shallow Strait of Bab-el-Mandab, which narrows as sea levels drop, reducing water exchange. Evaporation within the Red Sea increases its salinity, or saltiness, and changes the relative abundance of stable oxygen isotopes.
By analysing oxygen isotope ratios in tiny marine creatures called foraminiferans preserved in sediments that were deposited at the bottom of the Red Sea, the scientists reconstructed past sea levels, which were corroborated by comparison with the fossilised remains of coral reefs.
The researchers found that the current interglacial has indeed lasted some 2.0–2.5 millennia longer than predicted by the currently dominant theory for the way in which orbital changes control the ice-age cycles. This theory is based on the intensity of solar radiation reaching the Earth at latitude 65 degrees North on 21 June, the northern hemisphere Summer solstice.
But the anomaly vanished when the researchers considered a rival theory, which looks at the amount of solar energy reaching the Earth the same latitude during the summer months. Under this theory, sea levels could remain high for another two thousand years or so, even without greenhouse warming.
“Future research should more precisely narrow down the influence of orbital changes on climate,” said Rohling: “This is crucial for a better understanding of underlying natural climate trends over long, millennial timescales. And that is essential for a better understanding of any potential long-term impacts on climate due to man’s activities.”
The study was funded by the United Kingdom’s Natural Environment Council and the German Science Foundation.
Publication:
Rohling, E.J., et al., Comparison between Holocene and Marine Isotope Stage-11 sea-level histories. Earth and Planetary Science Letters (2010). doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2009.12.054
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Leif Svalgaard (14:04:05) :
I see now. Sorry that I was so thick.
I had misunderstood you all along. I see now that you believe and argue for long-term storage and thermal inertia so that all that [extra] heat from 1700 to 1725-1800 was quickly hidden away, to only surface now to fool some people into believing that the recent solar activity has anything to do with our climate. Silly me, that I could fall for that.
“So you are saying that the heat content since 1955 comes all the way back from 1700”
No, but it’s still increasing because it was much lower in 1700 and 300 years is not long enough to reach equilibrium.
lgl (14:50:44) :
No, but it’s still increasing because it was much lower in 1700 and 300 years is not long enough to reach equilibrium.
There is no evidence that it was ‘much lower’ in 1700 and in any case only briefly. It was higher in 1725-1800 than now, and higher 1590-1650 than in 1700, so the 300-400 years are still not enough for all the heat from 1590-1650 and 1725-1800 to have reached us yet. Perhaps you are saying that long-periods of heating have no effect, and short snaps of cooling do all the work?
“Perhaps you are saying that long-periods of heating have no effect, and short snaps of cooling do all the work?”
I think I have been saying the opposite.
OHC must have been much lower because the temperature reconstructions show much lower. And your Steinhilber graph shows a TSI lower than average 3/4 of the time last 600 years. My guess is 2 × 10^23 J from increased solar. (think that’s what I read somewhere 🙂
lgl (09:45:01) :
I think I have been saying the opposite.
So where is all the heat the sun delivered 1725-1800?
Leif: most of it will be heading past stars around 200 light years away about now.
tallbloke (10:47:32) :
Leif: most of it will be heading past stars around 200 light years away about now.
And the heat the Sun delivered 1950-2000 would be about 30 light years away on average. Now try to explain that to ‘lgl’. You might succeed where I failed.
“So where is all the heat the sun delivered 1725-1800?”
Most of it is 200 light years away but some is still in the ocean.
lgl (12:13:34) :
“So where is all the heat the sun delivered 1725-1800?”
Most of it is 200 light years away but some is still in the ocean.
Having managed to help create the cold 19th century…
Fascinating discussion Svalgaard and lgl!
Let us assume that the sun is not responsible for the temperature increase the last 300 years and that we further assume that CO2 started to have an impact around1950.
Then the billion dollar question is: how do we know that the (unknown) cause of the temperature increase the first 250 years did not continue the last 50 years, and how could we determine the quantitative impact of CO2 (the last 50 years) relative to the (unknown) cause that dominated the first 250 years?
What do you think Leif?
Invariant (14:47:43) :
What do you think Leif?
That both the Sun and CO2 have an effect, but both being tiny, so not the causes of the observed changes.
Thanks. Agreed!
Or let us assume that the sun is responsible for the temperature increase the last 1400 years. Then the relation is 0.4C/W TSI for the NH, through whatever amplifier. (after a minor surgery on Mann08 EIV no-dendro recon.) http://virakkraft.com/TSI-NHtemp-recon.png
lgl (11:31:22) :
Or let us assume that the sun is responsible for the temperature increase the last 1400 years.
The TSI is as far as I can see from Steinhilber and is not too bad. What is the thin blue line? The thin red one does not show any correlation.
The blue line is Mann08 EIV no-dendro http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/supplements/MultiproxyMeans07/SuppInfo.pdf page 13. But if you don’t like it you can just select one of the other variants to match something else:-)