The journal Nature embraces 'the pause' and ocean cycles as the cause, Trenberth still betting his heat will show up

From the “settled science” department. It seems even Dr. Kevin Trenberth is now admitting to the cyclic influences of the AMO and PDO on global climate. Neither “carbon” nor “carbon dioxide” is mentioned in this article that cites Trenberth as saying: “The 1997 to ’98 El Niño event was a trigger for the changes in the Pacific, and I think that’s very probably the beginning of the hiatus,”

This is significant, as it represents a coming to terms with “the pause” not only by Nature, but by Trenberth too.

nature_the_pause

Excerpts from the article by Jeff Tollefson:

The biggest mystery in climate science today may have begun, unbeknownst to anybody at the time, with a subtle weakening of the tropical trade winds blowing across the Pacific Ocean in late 1997. These winds normally push sun-baked water towards Indonesia. When they slackened, the warm water sloshed back towards South America, resulting in a spectacular example of a phenomenon known as El Niño. Average global temperatures hit a record high in 1998 — and then the warming stalled.

For several years, scientists wrote off the stall as noise in the climate system: the natural variations in the atmosphere, oceans and biosphere that drive warm or cool spells around the globe. But the pause has persisted, sparking a minor crisis of confidence in the field. Although there have been jumps and dips, average atmospheric temperatures have risen little since 1998, in seeming defiance of projections of climate models and the ever-increasing emissions of greenhouse gases. Climate sceptics have seized on the temperature trends as evidence that global warming has ground to a halt. Climate scientists, meanwhile, know that heat must still be building up somewhere in the climate system, but they have struggled to explain where it is going, if not into the atmosphere. Some have begun to wonder whether there is something amiss in their models.

Now, as the global-warming hiatus enters its sixteenth year, scientists are at last making headway in the case of the missing heat. Some have pointed to the Sun, volcanoes and even pollution from China as potential culprits, but recent studies suggest that the oceans are key to explaining the anomaly. The latest suspect is the El Niño of 1997–98, which pumped prodigious quantities of heat out of the oceans and into the atmosphere — perhaps enough to tip the equatorial Pacific into a prolonged cold state that has suppressed global temperatures ever since.

“The 1997 to ’98 El Niño event was a trigger for the changes in the Pacific, and I think that’s very probably the beginning of the hiatus,” says Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. According to this theory, the tropical Pacific should snap out of its prolonged cold spell in the coming years.“Eventually,” Trenberth says, “it will switch back in the other direction.”

…none of the climate simulations carried out for the IPCC produced this particular hiatus at this particular time. That has led sceptics — and some scientists — to the controversial conclusion that the models might be overestimating the effect of greenhouse gases, and that future warming might not be as strong as is feared. Others say that this conclusion goes against the long-term temperature trends, as well as palaeoclimate data that are used to extend the temperature record far into the past. And many researchers caution against evaluating models on the basis of a relatively short-term blip in the climate. “If you are interested in global climate change, your main focus ought to be on timescales of 50 to 100 years,” says Susan Solomon, a climate scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

The simplest explanation for both the hiatus and the discrepancy in the models is natural variability. Much like the swings between warm and cold in day-to-day weather, chaotic climate fluctuations can knock global temperatures up or down from year to year and decade to decade. Records of past climate show some long-lasting global heatwaves and cold snaps, and climate models suggest that either of these can occur as the world warms under the influence of greenhouse gases.

One important finding came in 2011, when a team of researchers at NCAR led by Gerald Meehl reported that inserting a PDO pattern into global climate models causes decade-scale breaks in global warming3. Ocean-temperature data from the recent hiatus reveal why: in a subsequent study, the NCAR researchers showed that more heat moved into the deep ocean after 1998, which helped to prevent the atmosphere from warming6. In a third paper, the group used computer models to document the flip side of the process: when the PDO switches to its positive phase, it heats up the surface ocean and atmosphere, helping to drive decades of rapid warming7.

IPCC-AMO-PDO-Warming

Scientists may get to test their theories soon enough. At present, strong tropical trade winds are pushing ever more warm water westward towards Indonesia, fuelling storms such as November’s Typhoon Haiyan, and nudging up sea levels in the western Pacific; they are now roughly 20 centimetres higher than those in the eastern Pacific. Sooner or later, the trend will inevitably reverse. “You can’t keep piling up warm water in the western Pacific,” Trenberth says. “At some point, the water will get so high that it just sloshes back.” And when that happens, if scientists are on the right track, the missing heat will reappear and temperatures will spike once again.

Read the full article here:

http://www.nature.com/news/climate-change-the-case-of-the-missing-heat-1.14525

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
418 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
brians356
January 16, 2014 1:37 pm

To listen to these impromptu explanations for “where’s the heat?” reminds me very much of the lovable Professor Irwin Corey whose doublespeak gibberish act on The Ed Sullivan Show tickled our family no end. It’s now degenerated to a carnival shell game, and they don’t care if we (the “marks”) knows the game is rigged, they assume we will be fascinated and entertained all the same. I hear W.C. Fields’ voice: “Go away, kid, you draw flies.”

david dohbro
January 16, 2014 1:49 pm

Natural cycles, cycles, cycles. It’s been evident in the temperature data for years, but (deliberately!?) overlooked by many, until now. This is a key paper. It explains (most of) the LT trend in observed GSTAs: natural oceanic cycles. Not surprisingly since the Earth is 2/3rds ocean… The PDO clearly explains most of this cycling (trend). Now overlay the ENSO cycle, add the solar cycle and as a result there’s very little left for CO2 to explain the LT GSTA trend… Natural variability goes both ways: it cools and it warms our planet. It doesn’t go one way; cooling only… Similar cycles in time have been elegantly identified using a simple tool borrowed from the financial industry: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/01/if-climate-data-were-a-stock-now-would-be-the-time-to-sell/
The highs and lows in GSTAs identified in that post: 1911 to 1945: +0.0136°C/yr; 1945 to 1976: -0.0022°C/yr,; 1976 to 2007: +0.0186°C/yr; match those presented in this Nature paper’s plot “the pacific’s global reach”. It also means that from 1976 to 2007 the Earth warmed only 0.005 C/yr faster (37%) than during the previous warm-phase PDO. Add to this the in the Nature paper identified el-nino dominated ENSO cycle from 1976-1998 (Seager et al), and -as mentioned before- there’s little left for CO2 to explain any of the observed warming. Btw, the ENSO cycle can be easily identified by plotting a running-total of the ONI data: bottomed 1976, peaked 1998. It is in a decline since…. Given that this ~25yr cycle has also been identified by others (e.g Giesse and Ray, 2011), it is most likely that ENSO is now in a la-nina dominated 25yr cycle ending in the mid 2020s… Add to that that the PDO is now also in a cool-phase, and GSTAs will likely continue to decline (As identified in the MACD post). Of course el nino’s will occur even during a la nina dominated phase and the next el nino is likely around the corner, but any spike in GSTAs is thus due to the el nino and NOT due to CO2.

TRM
January 16, 2014 1:57 pm

Where does Bob Tisdale collect his Nobel?
Failing that we’ll award him one by buying his books and recommend it to your local library if they support ebooks.

Joe Chang
January 16, 2014 1:59 pm

regarding the interpretation of computer models over short or long terms. There are a number of known issues with the general circulation models. if the models cannot reproduce key elements of earth’s climate, example trade winds, Hadley cells, precipitation patterns, then there is no way to substantiate that the model is correct over either short or long periods. Furthermore claiming a discretization of the Navier-Stokes equation is accurate long-term but not short-term goes against everything that is known about propagation errors. Someone clearly started smoking weed before Jan 1 in CO?

NikFromNYC
January 16, 2014 2:05 pm

Just split at 1950 and de-trend to see that the song remains the same in our high emissions era:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1949/to:2012/detrend:0.35/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1895/to:1950/detrend:0.35/offset:0.35
Hey code warrior Steve Mosher, head over to Goddard’s blog to justify the official climate data’s non-peer reviewed yet utterly linear progressive adjustment to the data all of climatology relies upon:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/noaanasa-temperature-corrections-are-junk-science-at-its-worst/
Go peer review it, insider, as we are all waiting for you and yours to finally do so.

euanmearns
January 16, 2014 2:06 pm

Scafetta – I just looked at the pictures – awesome!

January 16, 2014 2:08 pm

dbstealey,
Thanks! I’ll take a look at those links. Yes I remember reading about ‘corrections’ for Argo. Let me guess the correction had the effect of increasing the temperature trend. Is there ever any other direction for corrections? Sad sad days.

January 16, 2014 2:12 pm

dbstealey,
So looking at ‘actual’ data, the warming is not hiding in the ocean (even given their ‘corrected’ data). How can they keep saying it is? It makes no sense.

RH
January 16, 2014 2:18 pm

How do we know that the “hiatus” is actually a hiatus? Maybe they just ran out of wiggle room in the data and are now left with reality. The only data that I really trust is the UAH satellite data from Dr. Spencer. Not because I trust Dr. Spencer, but because if there was something wrong with his data, the consensusarians would be out with pitchforks.

aaron
January 16, 2014 2:19 pm

So, the real question is, “what does Dr. Trenberth propose as the mechanism that will move this the heat lost to the deep sea back to the surface?” And, “What about feedbacks?”

aaron
January 16, 2014 2:27 pm

How do methane concentrations correlate with these quasi-cyclical ocean and weather patterns?

Steven Devijver
January 16, 2014 2:34 pm

The next El Nino was always going to be a serious battlefield.

January 16, 2014 2:36 pm

aaron
And also, how did that heat magically ‘beam’ there in the first place without being detected by Argo measurements?

ColdinOz
January 16, 2014 2:37 pm

Bob Tisdale says “I’m on my lunch break right now. And tonight I’ll be finishing a post I will be publishing tomorrow morning.”
Looking forward to it Bob.
Just add or rather to ask. Why does Trenberth speak as though recent ElNino’s are anomalous events, which they would have to be to support his assertion/prediction. Stochastic, or apparently stochastic they may be, but not anomalous

Steven Devijver
January 16, 2014 2:39 pm

They’ve misspelled denier.

Homer J. Simpson
January 16, 2014 2:40 pm

“Sun-baked water”…..mmmmmmm.

Homer J. Simpson
January 16, 2014 2:41 pm

“Sun-baked water”….mmmmmm….

GeneDoc
January 16, 2014 2:41 pm

When I first started looking at the validity of the CO2 hypothesis, I was floored to see statements of the type “We can’t think of anything else that could be accounting for the warming, so it must be the increased CO2.” Egads–made me realize how poorly developed this field really was, especially modeling such a complex chaotic system. Really? You accounted for _everything_ else?
At least the pause is forcing them to think a little harder and even to (maybe) collect some data. Progress, I guess. I wonder how hard they’ll think when the cooling starts? Sad to see people who think this way this labeled “scientists”.

Dale
January 16, 2014 2:44 pm

Congrats Bob Tisdale!

aaron
January 16, 2014 2:57 pm

Ian Schumacher, I don’t know. How deep does the pool get? Could there be a deep ocean current that brushes by it that ARGO can’t detect? Dr. Spencer proposed a mechanism for heat transfer to the deep ocean we wouldn’t detect and says there are others (IIRC).

January 16, 2014 2:58 pm

What Trenberth used to say:
“What about the future of El Nino? According to NCAR senior scientist Kevin Trenberth, ENSO’s impacts may be enhanced by human-produced climate change.”
What Trenberth says now –
“The 1997 to ’98 El Niño event was a trigger for the changes in the Pacific, and I think that’s very probably the beginning of the hiatus,”
So global warming drove El Nino’s right up until the point where he decided El Nino’s drive global warming. Only in Climate Science can you flip your cause and effect and be heralded a sage. What will his theory be next year? 😉
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/kevin-trenberth-on-el-nino-a-tracking-of-the-evolution-of-his-perspective-on-this-issue-since-1997/

Russ R.
January 16, 2014 3:03 pm

Matt G says:
January 16, 2014 at 1:30 pm
“The ocean currents are always wanting to move the solar heated tropical oceans energy towards the poles. With a La Nina the energy in the tropics is quickly dispersed to other regions via ocean surface currents.”
I refer you to animation 1 in Bobs discussion of heat build up in the western pacific region, during La Nina:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/199798-el-nino-through-1998990001-la-nina-animations/
I suspect there is a large amount of heated tropical energy leaving the western pool. But I also think it is vast enough, and trapped by the land features, that force heated surface water down. If you have done river rafting, you know what happens when the river is squeezed into a narrow channel. That is happening in the South China Sea, and backing up the westward flowing river, forcing it northward, but also creating a pool of water waiting to exit the area. As long as the trade winds blow this will continue. When they stop, the bulge of water flows back east.

James Hein
January 16, 2014 3:16 pm

Cripwell
Sadly you are correct. When I tried to point one of our local media lightweights (in my opinion at least) in Adelaide, Tory Shepherd, to a well researched article here debunking some of her statements her resonse was “I think I’ll stick with the bureau over deluded online blogs” This is the same BOM that has been adjusting old temps down and modern temps up to support the political meme
This is an obviously adopted position based on what someone else has said and that as a journalist highlights where journalism has regressed to in the Post-modern era. We really need a Marc Morano here in Australia. Sadly we don’t have one nor the TV platform to make alternative arguments against the rubbish the publis here gets to see and here on a regular basis. Australia will be either the last or second last (after the UK) to finally admit it was all a farce.

January 16, 2014 3:17 pm

January 16, 2014 at 8:00 am | Gail Combs says:
“Dr. Judith Curry already beat them out the door.”
January 16, 2014 at 8:07 am | Alan Millar says:
That’s why they revile her so much. They can’t stand that she was cleverer than them in putting on her life jacket and abandoning ship.
———–
No lifejacket required, Dr Curry walks on water 😉

Matt G
January 16, 2014 3:37 pm

Russ R. says:
January 16, 2014 at 3:03 pm
That is correct, “With a La Nina the energy in the tropics is quickly dispersed to other regions via ocean surface currents.” I was referring to the W equatorial Pacific here and it is also directed towards the mid equatorial Pacific especially with depth, but much more slowly when against trade winds.
The ocean surface currents move N, move S and move W into Indian ocean, but also currents are forced down and help fuel the next El Nino. This then flows back east when the trade winds ease and resurfaces in the E equatorial Pacific.
Already linked a graph in a previous post that shows this behavior too.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/mnth_gif/xz/mnth.anom.xz.temp.0n.1996.04.gif
Thats why you can have many years with no El Nino and little surface warming in the W equatorial Pacific.

1 9 10 11 12 13 17