Guest Post by Bob Tisdale
The new paper by McCarthy et al. (2015) Ocean impact on decadal Atlantic climate variability revealed by sea-level observations has gained some attention around the blogosphere. McCarthy et al. (2015) was discussed by Jo Nova here, at ReportingClimateScience here and LiveScience here. Also see the University of Southampton press release Global climate on verge of multi-decadal change.
As could be expected, the alarmist mainstream media have so far chosen to ignore a paper that discusses an upcoming multidecadal natural suppression of global warming…probably because indicates the slowdown in global surface warming should continue and it implies the natural variability of the North Atlantic contributed to the global warming we have seen since the mid-1970s.
QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE ATLANTIC MULTIDECADAL OSCILLATION
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) is a mode of natural variability that reveals itself in the sea surface temperatures of the North Atlantic. It is normally portrayed by detrending the sea surface temperature anomalies of the North Atlantic. See Figure 1, which includes monthly the sea surface temperature anomalies of the North Atlantic (top graph) and the detrended data, the AMO (bottom graph). The detrended (AMO) data are often smoothed with multiyear filters.
Figure 1
Note: I borrowed the graphs in Figures 1 and 2 from my upcoming book, which I’ve been working on for more than a year.
According to the NOAA Frequently Asked Questions about the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation webpage, the AMO can enhance global warming or suppress it.
Looking at the comparison graph of global sea surface temperatures and those of the North Atlantic, Figure 2, we can see that the sea surface temperature anomalies of the North Atlantic often run in parallel with the global data. (The data have been smoothed in that illustration.) At those times, it isn’t enhancing global warming or suppressing it.
Figure 2
During the early cooling period from the late 1870s to about 1910, the North Atlantic data dropped at about the same rate as the global data, so the North Atlantic sea surface temperatures did not enhance or suppress that cooling. Keep in mind though that the global data is sampled very poorly during that early cooling period, so the comparison may not be too realistic at those times. From 1910 to about 1920, the data show the surfaces of the North Atlantic warmed more slowly than the global data, so the North Atlantic was suppressing the global warming during that initial part of the early warming period. Then, from 1920 to about 1940, the surfaces of the North Atlantic warmed at a much faster rate than they did globally. This overcame the initial deficit and allowed the North Atlantic to enhance the global warming for the entire early warming period of 1910 to 1940.
We see similar responses during the mid-20th Century cooling period and the late warming period. That is, the North Atlantic sea surface temperatures run in parallel with the global data for the initial 10 to 15 years of those periods. It’s only after those initial periods that the North Atlantic either cools or warms more rapidly than the global data, which then enhances the cooling or warming.
INTRODUCTION TO MCCARTHY ET AL. (2015)
McCarthy et al. created a new index based on the U.S. east coast tidal-gauge measurements of sea level north and south of Cape Hatteras, from Florida to Boston. They used the new sea level based index as a proxy for variations in ocean circulation of the North Atlantic. See their “accumulated sea level index” shown in blue in their Figure 3, which is also my Figure 3.
Figure 3
McCarthy et al. confirmed the belief that (1) the North Atlantic Oscillation (a sea level pressure-based index that reflects changes in wind patterns there), (2) ocean circulation in the North Atlantic (the flow of warm tropical waters northward by the Gulf Stream) and (3) the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) are linked.
The abstract of McCarthy et al. reads:
Decadal variability is a notable feature of the Atlantic Ocean and the climate of the regions it influences. Prominently, this is manifested in the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) in sea surface temperatures. Positive (negative) phases of the AMO coincide with warmer (colder) North Atlantic sea surface temperatures. The AMO is linked with decadal climate fluctuations, such as Indian and Sahel rainfall1, European summer precipitation2, Atlantic hurricanes3 and variations in global temperatures4. It is widely believed that ocean circulation drives the phase changes of the AMO by controlling ocean heat content5. However, there are no direct observations of ocean circulation of sufficient length to support this, leading to questions about whether the AMO is controlled from another source6. Here we provide observational evidence of the widely hypothesized link between ocean circulation and the AMO. We take a new approach, using sea level along the east coast of the United States to estimate ocean circulation on decadal timescales. We show that ocean circulation responds to the first mode of Atlantic atmospheric forcing, the North Atlantic Oscillation, through circulation changes between the subtropical and subpolar gyres—the intergyre region7. These circulation changes affect the decadal evolution of North Atlantic heat content and, consequently, the phases of the AMO. The Atlantic overturning circulation is declining8 and the AMO is moving to a negative phase. This may offer a brief respite from the persistent rise of global temperatures4, but in the coupled system we describe, there are compensating effects. In this case, the negative AMO is associated with a continued acceleration of sea-level rise along the northeast coast of the United States9, 10.
The last two sentences are noteworthy. Good news: the surface temperatures of the North Atlantic are going to suppress global warming for the next couple of decades…after enhancing them for the past 3+ decades. The bad news: there will likely be an accelerated rise in sea level from Cape Hatteras to Boston during that time.
HEADING THE CO2-OBSESSED OFF AT THE PASS
I suspect the true blue believers in catastrophic human-induced global warming will attempt to downplay the role of the AMO by citing the curious paper Steinman et al. (2015), which clearly illustrated model failings, even though they were attempting (and failing) to make other points. See the posts:
- On Steinman et al. (2015) – Michael Mann and Company Redefine Multidecadal Variability And Wind Up Illustrating Climate Model Failings
- Another Couple of Notes about Michael Mann’s “Faux Pause” Post and Steinman et al. 2015
We’ve illustrated and discussed how poorly climate models simulate sea surface temperatures in the posts:
- Alarmists Bizarrely Claim “Just what AGW predicts” about the Record High Global Sea Surface Temperatures in 2014
- IPCC Still Delusional about Carbon Dioxide
For more information on the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, refer to the NOAA Frequently Asked Questions About the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) webpage and the posts:
- An Introduction To ENSO, AMO, and PDO — Part 2
- Multidecadal Variations and Sea Surface Temperature Reconstructions
[My thanks to Marcel Crok and blogger Alec aka Daffy Duck for the heads-up.]
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Come on man. The ocean currents and ocean temperature is the tail. The sun is the dog.
Has anyone noticed that the Greenland Ice sheet summer melt is now a month behind the 20 year historical average? There is a sudden increase in Arctic multiyear ice. There is a sudden increase in Arctic ice volume. There is record Antarctic sea ice for every month of the year, starting in 2012. The purpose of looking at all of the observations at the same dang time rather than looking at a single observation at a time in separate papers or just ignoring what is happening as there is no physical explanation and/or appealing/assuming the magic wand ‘chaos’ is the cause of the anomalies, is that holistic analysis (listing the dang anomalies is step one) is the only way to solve holistic physical problems.
There is now sudden simultaneous cooling of both poles. Ocean currents cannot suddenly change in both hemispheres due to internal mechanisms and cannot change for no physical reason. An outside forcing function is required to explain what is happening to the earth.
The outside forcing function is the sun. Sudden cooling of the Atlantic ocean? Sudden increase in the frequency of La Niña events and suppressing of El Niño events? A sudden unexplained drop in the geomagnetic field intensity (ten times greater drop in intensity than is possible for a core based change) and an abrupt change in the magnetic pole location, ten times faster change in the magnetic pole drift velocity starting in the mid 1990s?
It is a fact that there is correlation of past abrupt climate changes with abrupt geomagnetic field changes. There is an interesting story to explain why there was a ten year delay in finding the correlation of the geomagnetic field changes with planetary temperature. It has assumed that cosmogenic isotope changes were caused by temperature effects on cosmogenic isotope accretion in the ocean sediment proxy, as it was assumed the geomagnetic field cannot change rapidly and was assumed the geomagnetic field cannot change cyclically. The initial ‘solution’ to make the anomaly go away was to ‘correct’ the ocean sediment proxy record for temperature.
The breakthrough in cracking the geomagnetic field/climate change puzzle was the study of ancient fired floor tiles by French scientists which enabled an accurate determination of the geomagnetic field intensity and orientation and an accurate timing of changes by a method that is not affected by ambient earth temperature. (There is an interesting Nova special that describes how the tile analysis was and is done.)
Bingo!!! It is a fact that the geomagnetic field is currently rapidly changing and has rapidly changed cyclically forced by some unknown forcer. Big surprise there is a physical explanation for past and current changes to the geomagnetic field. It’s the sun!!!
The sun and the stars are significantly different than the standard model. There are hundreds of astronomical anomalies/paradoxes that support that the assertion that the sun and stars are different than the standard model. The key to solving the solar/star puzzle is looking at the quasar anomalies/observations (roughly a couple of hundred papers that discuss twenty or so independent quasar anomalies that go away with the correct model/mechanism) which can be used to determine what happens when large bodies collapse.
Geomagnetic field changes caused the past abrupt climate changes which explain how a relatively short change in the solar cycle can cause the Younger Dryas abrupt climate change that lasted for 1200 years.
There are in addition to the smaller cyclic warming and cooling events, unimaginably large and extraordinarily rapid abrupt cooling changes in the paleo record. All of the cyclic events have the same periodicity as the smaller Little Ice age and Medieval warming type cyclic events which some may have heard of.
The logical reason for the same periodicity for all climate change events (small, medium, and super large climate events) and the fact that there is correlation of cosmogenic isotopes changes at all of the events (interesting solar gate story which explains recent monkeying with the proxy record analysis to try to make the solar cosmogenic isotope changes go away), is solar cycle changes are causing all of the cycles.
The sun changes cyclically in a manner to cause small climate changes, medium climate changes, and very, very large abrupt climate changes. The very large abrupt climate changes are modulated/amplified by the orbital position of the earth at the time of the restart of the solar cycle. We are currently in the position for maximum amplification of the solar restart’s affect on the earth. What is currently happening to the geomagnetic field is what has happened before when there was a very large climate change event.
What is currently happening to the sun has happened again and again and again and again and again, …. The current change to the solar cycle is what causes cooling similar to the 8200 Bp present abrupt cooling event.
https://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/74103.pdf
http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/440/1/012001/pdf/1742-6596_440_1_012001.pdf
http://www.falw.vu/~renh/pdf/Renssen-etal-QI-2000.pdf
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/d-o-ride-my-see-saw-mr-bond/
This is a very interesting article on the climate and is the correct path.
The AMO is linked to the NAO which is linked to solar activity. A sun which exhibits an AP index of less then 5 is more likely to give rise to a -NAO which will have an impact on the AMO.
The best way to see where the climate is heading is through observation and what past data tells us and then try to see which theory holds up to this the best.
AGW theory for example failing on all fronts.
A detailed investigation of the precise alignments between the lunar synodic [lunar phase] cycle and the 31/62 year Perigee-Syzygy cycle between 1865 and 2014 shows that it naturally breaks up five 31 year epochs each of which has a distinctly different tidal property. The first 31 year interval starts with the precise alignment on the 15th of April 1870 with the subsequent epoch boundaries occurring every 31 years after that:
Full Moon Epoch 1 – 15th April 1870 to 18th April 1901
New Moon Epoch 2 – 8th April 1901 to 20th April 1932
Full Moon Epoch 3 – 20th April 1932 to 23rd April 1963
New Moon Epoch 4 – 23rd April 1963 to 25th April 1994
Full Moon Epoch 5 – 25th April 1994 to 27th April 2025
[N.B. During New Moon epochs, the peak seasonal tides are dominated by new moons that are predominately in the northern hemisphere.]
[N.B. During Full Moon epochs. the peak seasonal tides are dominated by full moons that are predominately in the southern hemisphere.]
If you allow a 10 year delay for the oceans to respond to the tidal changes you get transition dates that correspond to the (approximate) years of AM) maximums and minimums:
1880 = AMO maximum
1911 = AMO minimum
1942 = AMO maximum
1973 = AMO minimum
2004 = AMO maximum
2035 = AMO minimum
This strikes me as something that is not the result of pure chance.
Peter Sable said:
“You are barely inside of Nyquist criteria of having a minimum of two periods.
@ur momisugly Peter Sable – the ocean temperature data only goes back to the early 1870’s, However the 60 year cycle in the Earths climate can be seen in the:
Indian Summer Monsoon: back till 1820
Atlantic trade winds: back to 1680 (and possibly earlier)
Ref: http://astroclimateconnection.blogspot.com.au/2010/03/60-year-periodicity-in-earths-trade.html
Ian a question. According to your work on lunar and associated tidal forcing what kind of climatic trend is the lunar influence (in absence of solar) indicating for the climate for the next 20 years?
In addition can you explain (as simple as possible) the different configuration of the lunar/earth /climate connection that would promote a cooling scenario versus a warming scenario? Thanks.
However the 60 year cycle in the Earths climate can be seen in the:
Oh I agree the multi-decadal cycles are there and we have enough data to prove they exist. Determining a period (frequency) doesn’t take much, in fact that only takes 1 cycle (2 crossings).
Determining magnitude AND frequency requires Nyquist. And the bigger the error bars, the more periods it requires. To determine a trend across an entire sample requires basically a notch filter on (in this case) not enough data.. I also note his data only goes back about 2 cycles. IMHO trending any periodic data or walking data is just a bad idea in general… all you can really do is ferret out different frequencies. Usually DSP folks use wavelets with known properties to attempt to get maximum resolution of phase, magnitude, and frequency and time location at the same time, not the ad hoc stuff I see here in climate science…
I’ve often said that I’ll believe we understand something about temperature trends when we have 120 years of accurate satellite data. That’s 2 cycles of PDO, AMO, etc. since 1979. Let’s discuss climate again in the year 2099… (I wish)
Of course then there’s the 1000 year trend. Maybe we should be discussing climate in the year 3979…
“The Atlantic overturning circulation is declining and the AMO is moving to a negative phase.”
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v521/n7553/full/nature14491.html
That is backwards. Low AMOC events happen during negative NAO episodes, and negative increasing negative NAO drives a warm AMO mode.
This is what we will be finding out. Will both the AMO and NAO trend negative or will the NAO become more negative while the AMO remains or becomes more positive?
Salvatore – I am not sure that I can answer that question to your satisfaction as I only have a partial picture.
Clearly the Sun is the dominant source of energy that drives the climate system and so any variations in its influence upon the Earth needs to be taken into account. However, if we distinguish between lunar and solar influences, we can ask ourselves the question, what unique effects can we attribute to the Moon, if any?
I believe that both the Sun and the Moon interact with the Earth’s climate system via their influence upon the Earth’s rotation rate. However, these interactions depend upon the time scales being considered and the mechanism involved.
I will try to elaborate in a latter post.
Obviously, AMO is simply a geographically-constrained COMPONENT of the global SST average. Thus there necessarily MUST be some correlation between the two. To speak of the AMO as a mechanism “enhancing or suppressing” the global average is to miss that crucial point.
sigh
Salvatore,
I think that the lunar tides influences the El Nino/La Nina pattern in the tropics (via its interaction with the Earth’s rotation rate) and that the eventual redistribution of the absorbed solar heat from the tropics to the mid-latitudes takes ~ 10 years. Hence, the ~ 60 year AMO pattern that is phase locked to the
precise alignments between the lunar synodic [lunar phase] cycle and the 31/62 year Perigee-Syzygy cycle, but delayed by 10 years.
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/the-moons-orbit-is-wrong-it-can-change-a-lot-and-tides-will-too/
Ian any commentary on this study? Thanks.
Thanks Ian I think you are on to something here.
Circulation during the winter was favorable for the Atlantic and Europe, but since 2010 AMO index falls sharply.
http://oi60.tinypic.com/1zqty55.jpg
From 1980 to 2010 it is exactly 30 years.
“For the summers (as was case for the winters) the CET data are de-trended,
showing similar trend with the annual values, except again for the 1900-1950
period (shaded in Fig.26).
There is a relative harmony between the AMO and the summer CET before
1950, this may be true relationship or result of the SST data corrections.
After 1950 the AMO lags the summer CET between 9 and 12 years,
eventually dropping to about 3 years around 1980s and since remained there.
The summer CET follows closely, with no delay the Reykjavik pressure
during the cooling periods, before 1900 and again 1940 –-1960, in a way
reminiscent of the winter’s CET – RPA relationship. This may suggests that cooling
CET summer phase is consequence of the Icelandic Low not moving enough far
north for the CET to break away from the winter’s direct teleconnection.
During the summer’s warming phases (1910-1940 and post 1980) the
Icelandic Low moves further north, following the Arctic ice retreat, the winter’s
direct atmospheric teleconnection breaks down and is replaced by the indirect
teleconnection, with some delay between the CET and the Reykjavic pressure.
The warming periods the delay indicates that the ensuing summer
teleconnection falls back onto the ocean currents induction.
it appears that cooling / warming phase onset is predetermined by some
independent factor. Although the CET does not resolve the AMO–RPA delay
dilema, it does reveal a new and important relationships.”
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/AMO-NAO-relationship.pdf
McCarthy threatens
‘with a continued
acceleration of sea-level rise’.
While FIFA’s Sepp Blatter annnounces ‘Ich vergesse nie’
– ‘Ill never forgive: forget’.
Lagarde declares Greece ruined
1. Lehmann Brothers.
2. US economy.
3. The whole planet.
Obama knows of doomsday by climate change.
And Merkel neighbours with Obama.
Putin is another continent, negligeable.
Anothther glory asylum morning.
Looking at the data and eyeballing….
Warming peaks were in 1880, 1940, 2010
Cooling troughs in 1915,1977
Cycle 64 years
AMO cooling then expected 2010-2042, which also coincides with what many solar scientists are forecasting as well.
Эффективные диеты для похудания. У нас вы найдёте самые эффективные диеты, проверенные не только в теории, но и на практике