
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The alleged weakening of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation appears to be triggering a growing amount of speculation about abrupt cooling, like the plot of the movie “The Day After Tomorrow”.
Crippled Atlantic currents triggered ice age climate change
The last ice age wasn’t one long big chill. Dozens of times temperatures abruptly rose or fell, causing all manner of ecological change. Mysteriously, ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica show that these sudden shifts—which occurred every 1500 years or so—were out of sync in the two hemispheres: When it got cold in the north, it grew warm in the south, and vice versa. Now, scientists have implicated the culprit behind those seesaws—changes to a conveyor belt of ocean currents known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC).
These currents, which today drive the Gulf Stream, bring warm surface waters north and send cold, deeper waters south. But they weakened suddenly and drastically, nearly to the point of stopping, just before several periods of abrupt climate change, researchers report today in Science. In a matter of decades, temperatures plummeted in the north, as the currents brought less warmth in that direction. Meanwhile, the backlog of warm, southern waters allowed the Southern Hemisphere to heat up.
AMOC slowdowns have long been suspected as the cause of the climate swings during the last ice age, which lasted from 110,000 to 15,000 years ago, but never definitively shown. The new study “is the best demonstration that this indeed happened,” says Jerry McManus, a paleo-oceanographer at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, and a study author. “It is very convincing evidence,” adds Andreas Schmittner, a climate scientist at Oregon State University, Corvallis. “We did not know that the circulation changed during these shorter intervals.”
…
Another question is whether the AMOC—currently known to be in decline—could drop off suddenly today, as depicted in the 2004 movie The Day After Tomorrow, causing temperatures to plummet across northwestern Europe. Schmittner says the past provides an eye-opener. “It’s evidence that this really did happen in the past, on short time scales.” But McManus says that studies looking deeper into the ice ages have found that the 1500-year climate oscillations tend not to be nearly as strong during interglacial periods. “It would suggest that this kind of thing isn’t so likely to happen today,” he says. On the other hand, he adds, “In most interglacials, Greenland didn’t melt … and Greenland is currently melting.”
Read more: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/06/crippled-atlantic-conveyor-triggered-ice-age-climate-change
The abstract of the study;
North Atlantic ocean circulation and abrupt climate change during the last glaciation
The last ice age was characterized by rapid and hemispherically asynchronous climate oscillations, whose origin remains unresolved. Variations in oceanic meridional heat transport may contribute to these repeated climate changes, which were most pronounced during marine isotope stage 3 (MIS3), the glacial interval twenty-five to sixty thousand years ago. We examined climate and ocean circulation proxies throughout this interval at high resolution in a deep North Atlantic sediment core, combining the kinematic tracer Pa/Th with the deep water-mass tracer, δ13CBF. These indicators suggest reduced Atlantic overturning circulation during every cool northern stadial, with the greatest reductions during episodic Hudson Strait iceberg discharges, while sharp northern warming followed reinvigorated overturning. These results provide direct evidence for the ocean’s persistent, central role in abrupt glacial climate change.
Read more: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2016/06/29/science.aaf5529
Is the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation slowing? Models suggest it should be – but observation based studies have not found evidence of a slowdown.
Who else is speculating about abrupt cooling? One name which might surprise you is former NASA GISS director James Hansen. From Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 ◦C global warming could be dangerous p3774;
… Global temperature becomes an unreliable diagnostic of planetary condition as the ice melt rate increases. Global energy imbalance (Fig. 15b) is a more meaningful measure of planetary status as well as an estimate of the climate forcing change required to stabilize climate. Our calculated present energy imbalance of ∼ 0.8 W m−2 (Fig. 15b) is larger than the observed 0.58 ± 0.15 W m−2 during 2005–2010 (Hansen et al., 2011). The discrepancy is likely accounted for by excessive ocean heat uptake at low latitudes in our model, a problem related to the model’s slow surface response time (Fig. 4) that may be caused by excessive small-scale ocean mixing.
Large scale regional cooling occurs in the North Atlantic and Southern oceans by mid-century (Fig. 16) for 10-year doubling of freshwater injection. A 20-year doubling places similar cooling near the end of this century, 40 years ear- lier than in our prior simulations (Fig. 7), as the factor of 4 increase in current freshwater from Antarctica is a 40-year advance.
Cumulative North Atlantic freshwater forcing in sverdrup years (Sv years) is 0.2 Sv years in 2014, 2.4 Sv years in 2050, and 3.4Sv years (its maximum) prior to 2060 (Fig. S14). The critical issue is whether human-spurred ice sheet mass loss can be approximated as an exponential process during the next few decades. Such nonlinear behavior depends upon amplifying feedbacks, which, indeed, our climate simulations reveal in the Southern Ocean. …
Read more: http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/acp-16-3761-2016.pdf
Naturally most of the climate scientists who make such predictions expect the cooling to occur over a relatively short timescale, before the ice melt forcing which causes the predicted cooling is overwhelmed by our continued sinful emissions of CO2. But a fallback prediction of imminent abrupt cooling does conveniently make it rather difficult to falsify anthropogenic climate theories based on temperature alone, should global temperatures suddenly drop.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ferdinand Engelbeen July 3, 2016 at 9:08 am
“If you can’t explain the 1910-1945 warming from natural causes, you can’t blame humans for the 1976-2000 warming, as you don’t know the influence of natural causes.”
Agree. The N. Atlantic SST should provide a clue
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/AMOq1.gif
There was one off jump of 0.2 C in the SST around 1925.
This could have been caused by recalibrations in the methods used (e.g. bucket to engine intake etc).
It is also equally likely that this is due to the N. Atlantic’s currents intensity or velocity changes due to unknown factors affecting the Mid Atlantic Ridge around the same time (1925) as clearly detected by the geomagnetic stations in the area.
http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/images/dDtimeseries.jpg
GLOBAL WARMING CHECKLIST
– scale up Thorium energy, build HVDC loops, grid below ground
GLOBAL COOLING CHECKLIST
– scale up Thorium energy, build HVDC loops, grid below ground
The last time this happen it lasted 40 days n 40 nights ,it happen n the spring,around may 5.Pray it don,t happen n late fall or early winter!!!
My initial response to the question posed in the headline was NO. After reading the article that view was confirmed.
We see here another blatant (and I suspect intentional) miss-interpretation of a legitimate scientific study on the part of a media reporter. Nowhere within the the abstract do I see the suggestion that the Atlantic currents triggered glacial-interglacial change. It observes an association. That is all. If I were the author of the study I would be very angry. These editor-reporters need to be sued for spreading miss-information
When we compare the flow volume of the Nth Atlantic currents with the total of all other oceanic currents it is minor. It is THE trigger? Just another article to sell media to the American public
I stopped reading when they made the claim that Greenland was melting.
Send it to the shredder.
So Hansen is suggesting that instead of moving the goal posts back that the alarmists should move the goal posts side ways by changing their primary metric from global temperatures to “Global Energy Imbalance”? I guess he foresees that no amount of tampering with the temperature data is going to keep the scam alive.
Mr. Michael Carter July 3, 2016 at 1:13 pm Asks an important question, often raised by other readers.
“The monthly means from November 1722 onwards are given to a precision of 0.1 °C. ………
What is you view on the “precision of 0.1 C” from 1722 onward”
This is an important point often raised.
In this graph:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CETx.gif
– blue colour represents the monthly CET data as quoted to one decimal point precision.
– Red colour represents the monthly CET data rounded to the nearest integer (whole number)
Graph shows that for the practical purpose of the ‘climate change’ research it makes very little difference.
click on the image to enlarge and see the error time line.
Vukcevic … I have a particular interest in the question of temp rounding. In your test, all monthly temperatures before 1900 were rounded to the nearest degree so it’s not surprising the 11 year averages were identical in whole and decimal. However, it assumes that there was perfect 50/50 up-down rounding by the observers who first recorded the temps on a daily basis. It’s very unlikely that happened. In my opinion it was more likely a 40/60 up-down rounding.
Many of the thousands of observers who wrote the thermometer readings in the Midlands and in locations around the world weren’t meteorologists. Most were ordinary folk, a fair few with poor eyesight at 6am or whenever they were trying to read the tiny markings on a Fahrenheit thermometer. Many who saw it was 67 point something would write 67. For many people who aren’t pedantic, 67 is true but 68 is a bit of a fib. Some observers were lazier than others. More would round 67.6 to 67 than would round 67.4 to 68. A smaller number would round round 67.7 to 67 but even fewer would round 67.3 to 68, etc. Human behaviour and psychology would create a downward bias in the recording of whole F temperatures – not universal, of course, but 40/60 up-down rounding is a fair guess.
Well over half of all temperature recordings in Australia before 1972 metrication were rounded .0F. Numerous countries went metric in the 1970s, a decade that supposedly heralded the beginning of rampant global warming.
A presumed accuracy of daily temp rounding within historic records is an unlikely presumption. Australia’s BoM concedes that rounding bias may have caused a 0.1C artificial cooling in pre metric temps but chooses not to adjust the historic record because of heavy rainfall in the early 70s (?). I estimate the F rounding bias in Australia was somewhere between 0.2 and 0.3 C.
Historic temp rounding is an influence that is consistently ignored, often on the false assumption that there was reliably equal rounding that averaged accurately over a month, year or decade.
WAC Thanks for your extensive comment.
in the graph above all monthly temperatures from 1722 to 2015 were rounded to the nearest degree
“However, it assumes that there was perfect 50/50 up-down rounding by the observers ”
No it doesn’t, since there are errors between two, which decrease when averaged across 11 years (one solar cycle) of + and – 0.1C (click on the graph to see the error time line).
as it was said:
“Graph shows that for the practical purpose of the ‘climate change’ research it makes very little difference.”
whatever gets them the most government grants will be the position they take. “follow the money “
Give it a rest you silly human slaves! You don’t control the weather, volcanoes, asteroids, or your own life. You are debt-enslaved robots, working your a$$es off, voting in the “right vs left” paradigm, overly worried about fake/cyber/virtual reality BS like facebook, NFL/NBA/MLB, and esoteric nonsense. You are essentially dead for all intents and purposes. Just enjoy the day off the elite give you today, and get your a$$ to work tomorrow and shut the hell up already. Sheesh, I’ve never heard so much “noise” from a group of mutes!
Back in the 1960s, the government Iron Mountain Report, they said there were going to be a new ice age.
Since Vietnam they have made man made weather changes with chemtrails and co-engineering.
The latest news is that all this man made climate by the NWO idiots is out of control and causing all this weird weather.
Let’s cover all possibilities and just call it Globalist wealth redistribution.
Frankly, I didn’t waste my valuable time reading the whole article. It grows increasingly obvious to anyone with a grain of common sense that so-called climate “scientists” are clueless, and what they say has all the credibility (and maybe less so) than a primitive witch doctor. Where goes the grant money? That’s a much better predictor of scientific “findings” than objective evidence.
None of this is surprising for those of us who have kept our minds open and not fallen for the “religion” of Global Warming. As predicted, all the time, energy, and untold billions spent on trying to change natural cycles has been a complete waste.
Once again this shows that our climate is too complex for anyone to clearly understand. It also shows that the use and cherry picking of proxy data can show anything the user wants to show.
This is really funny! It is amusing to consider the massive combined scientific ignorance of how the geological earth actually works, yet we “know” that CO2 causes global warming!
What we DO know is that any conclusive theory that Al Gore could understand is akin to the Tooth Fairy!!!
Garbage In.
Garbage Out.
Keep it simple.
Garbage In.
Garbage Out.
All I know is that we should give all of our salaries to these people, because they are truly our saviors.
It is all a scam foe taxes to bribe democratic voters and keep them in the hellholes they created for them 55 years ago.There is never enough money to bribe democrats, Marxists or UN dolts.Some facts:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/28/climate-change-the-biggest-conspiracy-against-the-taxpayer-in-history/
Many of us knew it was a giant scam to enrich Professors, lobbyists, Marxists, those promoting “green” products and politicians. We can now sleep better.
Global warming is a hoax.
Look at the chart from 1950 to 2016 and you will see only a one degree change in temperature, which is well within the normal variance.
The fact that it’s tapered off just illustrates the absurdities of the claims.
Wait for it – “Global cooling is caused by global warming.”
You’ve got it — they’re right (and you’re to blame) no matter what happens. I’ll have to give them credit for clever rhetoric…they’ve come up with a faux-scientific, fear-inducing fabulation that’s impossible to falsify!
Here’s a hint. Check the warming from below the ocean. There just might be energy transfers from beneath the oceans bottoms to the water.
Well of course there is. The earth is very hot at the center. The oceans are cool. But the oceans are insulated from that center by thousands of miles of rock. With that much insulation, the energy transfer is very slow. It’s just not a variable. Energy from the sun shows up minutes later, arriving at the speed of light. Energy from the earth’s core has a long, slow trip to the oceans.
Or,
When our tax money runs out or we stop the theft the climate will still do as it pleases .
The article uses the term “ice age” when it is really referring to a “glacial period”. Glacials average approx 85,000 years, ice ages average millions of years. We currently live near the end of an interglacial period (average approx. 15,000 years) within an ice age that began over one million years ago. During an ice age, there is permanent ice at the poles. We are now transitioning from an interglacial to a glacial period. The transition alone takes thousands of years.