Spotting the Solar Regime Shifts Driving Earth's Climate

Some people cite scientists saying there is a “CO2 control knob” for Earth. No doubt there is, but due to the logarithmic effect of CO2, I think of it like a fine tuning knob, not the main station tuner. That said, a new data picture is emerging of an even bigger knob and lever; a nice bright yellow one.

The ultimate power shifter - artwork by Anthony - click to enlarge

A few months back, I found a website from NOAA that provides an algorithm and downloadable program for spotting regime shifts in time series data. It was designed by Sergei Rodionov of the NOAA Bering Climate and Ecosystem Center for the purpose of detecting shifts in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

Regime shifts are defined as rapid reorganizations of ecosystems from one relatively stable state to another. In the marine environment, regimes may last for several decades and shifts often appear to be associated with changes in the climate system. In the North Pacific, climate regimes are typically described using the concept of Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Regime shifts were also found in many other variables as demonstrated in the Data section of this website (select a variable and then click “Recent trends”).

But data is data, and the program doesn’t care if it is ecosystem data, temperature data, population data, or solar data. It just looks for and identifies abrupt changes that stabilize at a new level. For example, a useful application of the program is to look for shifts in weather data, such as that caused by the PDO. Here we can clearly see the great Pacific Climate Shift of 1976/77:

Another useful application is to use it to identify station moves that result in a temperature shift. It might also be applied to proxy data, such as ice core Oxygen 18 isotope data.

But the program was developed around the PDO. What drives the PDO? Many say the sun, though there are other factors too. It follows to reason then the we might be able to look for solar regime shifts in PDO driven temperature data.

Alan of AppInSys found the same application and has done just that, and the results are quite interesting. The correlation is well aligned, and it demonstrates the solar to PDO connection quite well. I’ll let him tell his story of discovery below. – Anthony

=================================

Climate Regime Shifts

The notion that climate variations often occur in the form of ‘‘regimes’’ began to become appreciated in the 1990s. This paradigm was inspired in large part by the rapid change of the North Pacific climate around 1977 [e.g., Kerr, 1992] and the identification of other abrupt shifts in association with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) [Mantua et al., 1997].” [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/Regime_shift_algorithm.pdf]

Pacific Regime Shifts

Hare and Mantua, 2000 (“Empirical evidence for North Pacific regime shifts in 1977 and 1989”): “It is now widely accepted that a climatic regime shift transpired in the North Pacific Ocean in the winter of 1976–77. This regime shift has had far reaching consequences for the large marine ecosystems of the North Pacific. Despite the strength and scope of the changes initiated by the shift, it was 10–15 years before it was fully recognized. Subsequent research has suggested that this event was not unique in the historical record but merely the latest in a succession of climatic regime shifts. In this study, we assembled 100 environmental time series, 31 climatic and 69 biological, to determine if there is evidence for common regime signals in the 1965–1997 period of record. Our analysis reproduces previously documented features of the 1977 regime shift, and identifies a further shift in 1989 in some components of the North Pacific ecosystem. The 1989 changes were neither as pervasive as the 1977 changes nor did they signal a simple return to pre-1977 conditions.”

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7B-41FTS3S-2…]

Overland et al “North Pacific regime shifts: Definitions, issues and recent transitions”

[http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/foci/publications/2008/overN667.pdf]: “climate variables for the North Pacific display shifts near 1977, 1989 and 1998.”

The following figure from the above paper show analysis of PDO and Victoria Index using the Rodionov regime detection algorithm. A regime shift is also detected around 1947-48.

The following figure shows regime shift detection for the summer PDO, showing shifts at 1948, 1976 and 1998.

[http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/data/Images/PDOs_FigRegime.html]

(For detailed information on the 1976/77 climate shift,

see: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/The1976-78ClimateShift.htm)

Regime Shift Detection in Annual Temperature Anomaly Data

The NOAA Bering Climate web site provides the algorithm for regime shift detection developed by Sergei Rodionov [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/index.html]. The following analyses use the Excel VBA regime change algorithm version 3.2 from this web site.

The following figure shows the regime analysis of the HadCRUT3 annual global annual average temperature anomaly data from the Met Office Hadley Centre for 1895 to 2009 [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/annual].

The analysis was run based on the mean using a significance level of 0.1, cut-off length of 10 and Huber weight parameter of 2 using red noise IP4 subsample size 6. Regime changes are identified in 1902, 1914, 1926, 1937, 1946, 1957, 1977, 1987, and 1997. Running the analysis based on the variance rather than the mean results in regime changes in the bold years listed above.

Regime Shift Relationship to Solar Cycle

The NASA Solar Physics web site provides the following figure showing sunspot area.

[http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml]

The following figure compares the Hadley (HadCrut3) monthly global average temperature (from [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/]) overlaid with the regime change line (red line) shown previously, along with the sunspot area since 1900. The sunspot cycle is approximately 11 years. The sun’s magnetic field reverses with each sunspot cycle and thus after two sunspot cycles the magnetic field has completed a cycle – a Hale Cycle – and is back to where it started. Thus a complete magnetic sunspot cycle is approximately 22 years. The figure marks the onset of odd-numbered cycles with a vertical red line, even-numbered cycles with a green line.

From the figure above it can be seen that the regime changes correspond to the onset of solar cycles and occur when the “butterfly” is at its widest. The most significant warming regime shifts occur at the start of odd-numbered cycles (1937, 1957, 1977, 1997). Each odd-numbered cycle (red lines above) has resulted in a temperature-increase regime shift. Even-numbered cycles (green lines above) have been inconsistent, with some resulting in temperature-decrease regime shifts (1902, 1946) or minor temperature-increase shifts (1926, 1987).

An unusual one is the 1957 – 1966 cycle, which in the monthly data shown above visually looks like a temperature-increase shift in 1957 followed by a temperature-decrease shift in 1964 but the regime detection algorithm did not identify it. This is likely due to the use of annually averaged data in the regime detection algorithm.

The following figure shows the relative polarity of the Sun’s magnetic poles for recent sunspot cycles along with the solar magnetic flux [www.bu.edu/csp/nas/IHY_MagField.ppt]. The regime change periods are highlighted by the red and green boxes. Each one occurs on as the solar cycle is accelerating. The onset of an odd-numbered sunspot cycle (1977-78, 1997-98) results in the relative alignment of the Earth’s and the Sun’s magnetic fields (positive North pole on the Sun) allowing greater penetration of the geomagnetic storms into the Earth’s atmosphere. “Twenty times more solar particles cross the Earth’s leaky magnetic shield when the sun’s magnetic field is aligned with that of the Earth compared to when the two magnetic fields are oppositely directed” [http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/themis_leaky_shield.html]

The following figure shows the longitudinally averaged solar magnetic field. This “magnetic butterfly diagram” shows that the sunspots are involved with transporting the field in its reversal. The Earth’s temperature regime shifts are indicated with the superimposed boxes – red on odd numbered solar cycles, green on even.

[http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrsp-2010-1&page=articlesu8.html]

The Earth’s temperature regime shift occurs as the solar magnetic field begins its reversal.

Solar Cycle 24

Solar cycle 24 is in its initial stage after getting off to a late start. An El Nino occurred in the first part of 2010. This may be the start of the next regime shift.

Climate Regime Shifts

[last update: 2010/07/04]

The notion that climate variations often occur in the form of ‘‘regimes’’ began to become appreciated in the 1990s. This paradigm was inspired in large part by the rapid change of the North Pacific climate around 1977 [e.g., Kerr, 1992] and the identification of other abrupt shifts in association with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) [Mantua et al., 1997].” [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/Regime_shift_algorithm.pdf]

Pacific Regime Shifts

Hare and Mantua, 2000 (“Empirical evidence for North Pacific regime shifts in 1977 and 1989”): “It is now widely accepted that a climatic regime shift transpired in the North Pacific Ocean in the winter of 1976–77. This regime shift has had far reaching consequences for the large marine ecosystems of the North Pacific. Despite the strength and scope of the changes initiated by the shift, it was 10–15 years before it was fully recognized. Subsequent research has suggested that this event was not unique in the historical record but merely the latest in a succession of climatic regime shifts. In this study, we assembled 100 environmental time series, 31 climatic and 69 biological, to determine if there is evidence for common regime signals in the 1965–1997 period of record. Our analysis reproduces previously documented features of the 1977 regime shift, and identifies a further shift in 1989 in some components of the North Pacific ecosystem. The 1989 changes were neither as pervasive as the 1977 changes nor did they signal a simple return to pre-1977 conditions.”

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7B-41FTS3S-2…]

Overland et al “North Pacific regime shifts: Definitions, issues and recent transitions”

[http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/foci/publications/2008/overN667.pdf]: “climate variables for the North Pacific display shifts near 1977, 1989 and 1998.”

The following figure from the above paper show analysis of PDO and Victoria Index using the Rodionov regime detection algorithm. A regime shift is also detected around 1947-48.

The following figure shows regime shift detection for the summer PDO, showing shifts at 1948, 1976 and 1998.

[http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/data/Images/PDOs_FigRegime.html]

(For detailed information on the 1976/77 climate shift,

see: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/The1976-78ClimateShift.htm)

Regime Shift Detection in Annual Temperature Anomaly Data

The NOAA Bering Climate web site provides the algorithm for regime shift detection developed by Sergei Rodionov [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/index.html]. The following analyses use the Excel VBA regime change algorithm version 3.2 from this web site.

The following figure shows the regime analysis of the HadCRUT3 annual global annual average temperature anomaly data from the Met Office Hadley Centre for 1895 to 2009 [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/annual].

The analysis was run based on the mean using a significance level of 0.1, cut-off length of 10 and Huber weight parameter of 2 using red noise IP4 subsample size 6. Regime changes are identified in 1902, 1914, 1926, 1937, 1946, 1957, 1977, 1987, and 1997. Running the analysis based on the variance rather than the mean results in regime changes in the bold years listed above.

Regime Shift Relationship to Solar Cycle

The NASA Solar Physics web site provides the following figure showing sunspot area.

[http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml]

The following figure compares the Hadley (HadCrut3) monthly global average temperature (from [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/]) overlaid with the regime change line (red line) shown previously, along with the sunspot area since 1900. The sunspot cycle is approximately 11 years. The sun’s magnetic field reverses with each sunspot cycle and thus after two sunspot cycles the magnetic field has completed a cycle – a Hale Cycle – and is back to where it started. Thus a complete magnetic sunspot cycle is approximately 22 years. The figure marks the onset of odd-numbered cycles with a vertical red line, even-numbered cycles with a green line.

From the figure above it can be seen that the regime changes correspond to the onset of solar cycles and occur when the “butterfly” is at its widest. The most significant warming regime shifts occur at the start of odd-numbered cycles (1937, 1957, 1977, 1997). Each odd-numbered cycle (red lines above) has resulted in a temperature-increase regime shift. Even-numbered cycles (green lines above) have been inconsistent, with some resulting in temperature-decrease regime shifts (1902, 1946) or minor temperature-increase shifts (1926, 1987).

An unusual one is the 1957 – 1966 cycle, which in the monthly data shown above visually looks like a temperature-increase shift in 1957 followed by a temperature-decrease shift in 1964 but the regime detection algorithm did not identify it. This is likely due to the use of annually averaged data in the regime detection algorithm.

The following figure shows the relative polarity of the Sun’s magnetic poles for recent sunspot cycles along with the solar magnetic flux [www.bu.edu/csp/nas/IHY_MagField.ppt]. The regime change periods are highlighted by the red and green boxes. Each one occurs on as the solar cycle is accelerating. The onset of an odd-numbered sunspot cycle (1977-78, 1997-98) results in the relative alignment of the Earth’s and the Sun’s magnetic fields (positive North pole on the Sun) allowing greater penetration of the geomagnetic storms into the Earth’s atmosphere. “Twenty times more solar particles cross the Earth’s leaky magnetic shield when the sun’s magnetic field is aligned with that of the Earth compared to when the two magnetic fields are oppositely directed” [http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/themis_leaky_shield.html]

The following figure shows the longitudinally averaged solar magnetic field. This “magnetic butterfly diagram” shows that the sunspots are involved with transporting the field in its reversal. The Earth’s temperature regime shifts are indicated with the superimposed boxes – red on odd numbered solar cycles, green on even.

[http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrsp-2010-1&page=articlesu8.html]

The Earth’s temperature regime shift occurs as the solar magnetic field begins its reversal.

Solar Cycle 24

Solar cycle 24 is in its initial stage after getting off to a late start. An El Nino occurred in the first part of 2010. This may be the start of the next regime shift.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
660 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 7, 2010 7:09 am

Stephen Wilde says:
July 7, 2010 at 1:26 am
It is not necessary for energy to be propagated downward, merely for it to propagate upwards variably
But also that that upwards propagation be controlled externally, which is the crux of the matter. BTW, your ‘upwards propagation of energy’ is another one of your self-invented, undefined terms.

July 7, 2010 7:22 am

“Bob Tisdale says:
July 7, 2010 at 3:54 am
Stephen Wilde replied. “Each successive CYCLE appears to change PHASE from net global warming to net global cooling.”
No. Each cycle consists of a cool phase and a warm phase. I even broke it down for you by dividing by two. So your assumed periods are off by an average factor of approximately two.”
What about this then ?
http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
“Shoshiro Minobe has shown that 20th century PDO fluctuations were most energetic in two general periodicities, one from 15-to-25 years, and the other from 50-to-70 years.”
A general average of 30 or so years seems to be widely used in the blogs.
or this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_decadal_oscillation
“The Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) is a pattern of Pacific climate variability that shifts phases on at least inter-decadal time scale, usually about 20 to 30 years.”
If you can’t fault the logic then ‘attack the terminology or the man’ seems to be your approach.
Besides the precise length is irrelevant, the initial point that I made remains valid as long as there is any variation over time in the net effect of combined El Nino and La Nina events.

July 7, 2010 7:23 am

Wilde says:
July 7, 2010 at 6:08 am
“At present I don’t need to go into the reasons why the sun varies.”
Aah, but that is how we tell the difference between a modern winter and a traditional one. Anyway, the distribution and polarity of these `events` are the source of the perceived cycle phase.

July 7, 2010 7:27 am

tallbloke says:
July 7, 2010 at 4:53 am
The way you ‘marked’ the comments of the JGR reviewer who recommended rejection of your critique of McCracken in red ink had me giggling. 🙂
In our second cut at this http://www.leif.org/research/IDV09-Review-History.pdf we ran into the same reviewer, who this time recommended ‘major revision’ not ‘rejection’, but luckily the two other reviewers and the editor agreed that we had taken the comments into account adequately and that that reviewer was biased [and had broken the review-rule that a paper should be judged on its merit even if the reviewer may disagree with the result]. So he deserved the red ink..

July 7, 2010 7:51 am

Nylo says:
July 7, 2010 at 6:05 am
Slightly OT, but when are they going to update their prediction for SC24? It is looking really bad already.
The panel [now disbanded] is not going to update anything. David Hathaway updates his monthly. Here is his latest http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif As long as the wiggly line stays between the two dotted curves, he is happy.

Editor
Reply to  Leif Svalgaard
July 7, 2010 8:04 am

Leif: “The panel [now disbanded] is not going to update anything. David Hathaway updates his monthly. Here is his latest http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif
Wow, Leif. Hathaway is now predicting a 65 peak sunspot count to SC24? Isn’t that like, definite Dalton Minimum level? Wasn’t he calling people bad names just a few years ago if they made such predictions?

tallbloke
July 7, 2010 8:11 am

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 7, 2010 at 7:27 am (Edit)
he deserved the red ink..

Lol. Fair enough.
I want to ask you about 10Be again. You asked if the curve fit produced by my friend Ray Tomes had taken into account the geomagnetic data, and pointed me to a graph which seemed to imply that the geomagnetic proxy was in a fairly tight negative correlation to the 10Be curve. I took this to mean that you believe the changes in Geomagnetism were affecting 10Be depostion, and thus giving us a skewed view of 10Be as a solar proxy.
How are the relative amplitudes calibrated before the addition of the curves to leave a flatter residual, and do you have a graph of the residual? Or have I misunderstood?
Also, Since geomagnetism is affected by heliomagnetism, is there not a danger of falling into a circular argument here?
Thanks

July 7, 2010 8:12 am

Stephen Wilde replied, “An interannual event such as the ENSO cycle is unlikely to itself develop a 30 year phase change from cycle to cycle without a seperate influence.”
Really? What separate influence dictates the low-frequency component of ENSO?
You replied. “The Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) is a pattern of Pacific climate variability that shifts phases on at least inter-decadal time scale, usually about 20 to 30 years.”
Sorry, Stephen. You don’t use that definition of the PDO. You wrote above that you use “the term ‘PDO’ to refer to the approximately 30 year phase shift whereby the ENSO phenomenon first causes a period of global warming and then a period of global cooling.”

July 7, 2010 8:22 am

Sad, solar wind velocity well down again http://www.spaceweather.com/ and only a minor coronal hole stream to reach us around the 9th July. Well I`m sure many places are in need of the rain coming with this `brief` temperature drop.

July 7, 2010 8:27 am

“Leif Svalgaard says:
July 7, 2010 at 7:09 am
Stephen Wilde says:
July 7, 2010 at 1:26 am
It is not necessary for energy to be propagated downward, merely for it to propagate upwards variably
But also that that upwards propagation be controlled externally.”
No it doesn’t need to be ‘controlled’ externally, merely affected to some degree which could be pretty small as long as it is enough to disturb the balance between energy going up from the stratosphere to space and energy entering the stratosphere from below.
“Tides in the thermosphere directly linked to the troposphere
The atmosphere has periodic oscillations that are driven by solar heating of the troposphere, the atmospheric layer closest to Earth’s surface, where weather patterns
form. Scientists have now observed that one of these atmospheric tides, known as
diurnal wave number 3 (DE3), propagates upward to reach the thermosphere.”
from here:
http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL041845.pdf
The essence of the article is that the diurnal coming and going of sunlight creates irregularities in the energy flow or flux from troposphere right up into the exosphere.
It follows that similar effects must occur from any solar variability on all timescales.
Last time you tried to counter that by saying that it is just part of the internal climate system variability but that will not do. Those phenomena are a response to the external solar forcing. As solar variability occurs then so will the response to that solar variability and if that is enough to alter the upward energy flux on all time scales (as it clearly does on a diurnal basis) then that is all I require.

July 7, 2010 8:30 am

mikelorrey says:
July 7, 2010 at 8:04 am
Wow, Leif. Hathaway is now predicting a 65 peak sunspot count to SC24? Isn’t that like, definite Dalton Minimum level? Wasn’t he calling people bad names just a few years ago if they made such predictions?
We don’t really know what the level was during the Dalton Minimum [sunspot number very uncertain]. David H is not into name calling and is a good scientists. That he was wrong earlier is just the way it goes with predictions: sometimes they fail.
tallbloke says:
July 7, 2010 at 8:11 am
I took this to mean that you believe the changes in Geomagnetism were affecting 10Be deposition, and thus giving us a skewed view of 10Be as a solar proxy.
Not the deposition, but the production as the Earth’s magnetic field controls the flux of cosmic rays that reaches the Earth. The geomagnetic effect is much larger than the solar modulated, but can be compensated for in different ways.
How are the relative amplitudes calibrated before the addition of the curves to leave a flatter residual, and do you have a graph of the residual? Or have I misunderstood?
Here is the 10Be curve:
http://www.leif.org/research/10Be%20Flux%20and%20Geomagnetic%20Field%20Strength%2060k%20Years.png
For 14C it looks like this:
http://www.leif.org/research/CosmicRays-GeoDipole.jpg
The tiny wiggles are the solar modulation. Another one is here:
http://www.leif.org/research/14C-past-11000-years.png
The blue curve shows what is thought to be the solar part after subtracting the geomagnetic part [black curve]. Note that the ‘Year’ is counted from the ‘present’, with year 0 being A.D. 1950.
Also, Since geomagnetism is affected by heliomagnetism, is there not a danger of falling into a circular argument here?
Geomagnetism is not affected by heliomagnetism.

Layne Blanchard
July 7, 2010 8:58 am

Leif,
Of all components of TSI, do we have a good understanding of the intensity of individual wavelength groups over time? Is there ample study of modulation among wavelengths that would warm oceans more at some times and less at others? Not only IR, but particularly those with microwave effect?

July 7, 2010 9:02 am

Stephen Wilde says:
July 7, 2010 at 8:27 am
The essence of the article is that the diurnal coming and going of sunlight creates irregularities in the energy flow or flux from troposphere right up into the exosphere.
It follows that similar effects must occur from any solar variability on all timescales.

That doesn’t follow at all. The diurnal wave number 3 (DE3) that propagates upward to reach the thermosphere is driven from below [weather and day-night cycle] and not related to solar activity and are not “response to the external solar forcing”.
I’m getting a bit tired of having to explain this again and again… [there is a hint there]

July 7, 2010 9:33 am

Leif Svalgaard:
“That doesn’t follow at all. The diurnal wave number 3 (DE3) that propagates upward to reach the thermosphere is driven from below [weather and day-night cycle] and not related to solar activity and are not “response to the external solar forcing”.
So a phenomenon that involves the day – night cycle is not related to solar activity ?
Higher or lower solar activity or even simply an albedo change would affect the intensity of the response though.
Still, the difference of opinion is clear. Let’s leave it there as you suggest.

July 7, 2010 9:56 am

Layne Blanchard says:
July 7, 2010 at 8:58 am
Of all components of TSI, do we have a good understanding of the intensity of individual wavelength groups over time? Is there ample study of modulation among wavelengths that would warm oceans more at some times and less at others? Not only IR, but particularly those with microwave effect?
Yes and No. There has been a lot of guesses and extrapolations. Only with the most modern instruments are we beginning to get a more correct picture, e.g. http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/2010ScienceMeeting/doc/Session7/7.02_Pilewskie_TSIS.pdf
Slide 10 shows an interesting finding: that UV varies inversely with IR, that is more solar activity, more UV, but lower IR. Interesting enough, the IR can penetrate to the surface and warm it directly…
See also slide 4 of http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/2010ScienceMeeting/doc/Session3/3.02_Harder_SSI.pdf
The implications of this modern data are not clear yet. Some are discussed here:
http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/2010ScienceMeeting/doc/Session4/4.04_Cahalan_atmos_model.pdf

AJB
July 7, 2010 10:16 am

Ulric Lyons says: July 7, 2010 at 8:22 am

Sad, solar wind velocity well down again http://www.spaceweather.com/ and only a minor coronal hole stream to reach us around the 9th July. Well I`m sure many places are in need of the rain coming with this `brief` temperature drop.

Ulric, here’s a bunch of seaweed. Please hind cast your choice of significant weather event that occurred in the latter half of this bunch and this bunch explaining numerically how you established the location and supplying any other data required. It rains somewhere every day.

July 7, 2010 10:27 am

Bob Tisdale said:
“You replied. “The Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) is a pattern of Pacific climate variability that shifts phases on at least inter-decadal time scale, usually about 20 to 30 years.”
Sorry, Stephen. You don’t use that definition of the PDO. You wrote above that you use “the term ‘PDO’ to refer to the approximately 30 year phase shift whereby the ENSO phenomenon first causes a period of global warming and then a period of global cooling.””
And the difference is significant how exactly ? However one puts it my hypothesis is not falsified by an absence of such shifts because such shifts clearly exist.

Pamela Gray
July 7, 2010 10:55 am

I am unimpressed with the strength of these small solar ups and downs to change and oscillate our global climate. The following free ebook always serves to remind me of the incredible internal variability encased within our own atmospheric, geologic and hydrologic terra firma and, like Dorothy, to consider my own backyard first before I go looking for an external force greater than that.
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/contents.html

July 7, 2010 11:05 am

Hi all
Hate to intrude on the interesting exchange,
but you may wish to consider an alternative
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC1.htm
already showing promising results elsewhere
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC1.htm
Thanks.

July 7, 2010 11:22 am

Rich (July 7, 5:44am): “Hadcrut monthly – Interesting to compare with the one in the post.”
Here is a comparison: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/Had_MonAnnual.jpg with your monthly line in dark blue added to the original one based on annual data.

July 7, 2010 12:10 pm

“Pamela Gray says:
July 7, 2010 at 10:55 am
I am unimpressed with the strength of these small solar ups and downs to change and oscillate our global climate.”
Agreed, but I have no problem envisaging small solar ups and downs having a modulating effect on a major internal oscillation from the oceans by adjusting air pressure distribution via an effect on stratospheric temperatures.

Paul Vaughan
July 7, 2010 12:22 pm

So if the climate is a drum skin on a drum on a roller coaster, the sun is a drummer (but not the roller coaster!!)
It’s like splashing the water around with a kayak paddle while running a white-water river maybe. Interesting, but maybe not the main action. Nonetheless all details matter – and there may be more to notice – who can absolutely guarantee there is not?
Interesting article Alan. Thanks.

July 7, 2010 12:54 pm

Vukcevic (July 7, 11:05am)
I had incorporated your NFC1 (AT-GMF) in my older Earth Magnetic Field page. I am taking a closer look at the magnetic connections.

tallbloke
July 7, 2010 1:05 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 7, 2010 at 8:30 am (Edit)
Geomagnetism is not affected by heliomagnetism.

Is it affected by the interplanetary magnetic field?

July 7, 2010 1:06 pm

tallbloke says:
July 7, 2010 at 1:05 pm
“Geomagnetism is not affected by heliomagnetism.”
Is it affected by the interplanetary magnetic field?

Not at all.

wayne
July 7, 2010 1:47 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 7, 2010 at 1:06 pm
tallbloke says:
July 7, 2010 at 1:05 pm
“Geomagnetism is not affected by heliomagnetism.”
Is it affected by the interplanetary magnetic field?
Not at all.

Now Leif, be crystal clear here. i just read your comment to tallbloke and on one plane of thought you are exactly right. Just had to jump in here. I take it there you are speaking of some type of permanent warp of the field by the solar or planetary fields, htereby “affected”.
But others might read that wrong. If you are measuring the geomagnetic field here on earth it will see, however small, could be under detection level depending on the instruments, the other fields superimposed on earth field, right? In one aspect you could call that “affecting”. Just afraid some other readers might take that statement at point blank without a little deeper clarification.

1 10 11 12 13 14 27