Guest essay by David Archibald
The warning signs have been there for some time now – persistent failures of the wheat crop in Norway for example. The North Atlantic is cooling. The cooling trend was evident at the time of an expedition to investigate this phenonemon three years ago. The rate of cooling has now steepened up since then based on the latest data collated by Professor Humlum of the University of Oslo. From that data set, this graph shows the heat loss since 2004 for the top 700 metres of the water column:
Figure 1: Monthly heat content anomaly in the uppermost 700 metres of the North Atlantic
As Figure 1 show, North Atlantic heat content peaked in 2004. The decline since the peak has been steeper than the rise. What would be the reason for 2004 being the peak year? Part of the answer may be that 2004 was the second peak of Solar Cycle 23 with a big increase in the proton flux. Another part of the answer may be that there was a big fall in the Ap Index in 2005 down to solar minimum-like levels followed, a couple of years later, by a discontinuity as the level fell through the floor of the established minimum level of activity. That is shown in this graph:
Figure 2: Ap Index 1932 – 2016
We might not care too much about the animals that live in the North Atlantic water column but the temperature of the surface is the main control on the climate of Europe. So what has that been doing?
Figure 3: Time series depth-temperature diagram along 59 N across the North Atlantic Current from 30° W to 0°W.
As Figure 3 from Professor Humlum’s work shows, summer heating is penetrating to half the depth it used to 10 years ago and in winter earlier this year sub-8°C water was at the surface for the first time in more than ten years. That cooling trend is quantified in the following graph:
Figure 4: Average temperature along 59° N, 30°-0°W, 0-800m depth
This is data from the main part of the North Atlantic Current. The average temperature has fallen 1.0°C from 2006 to 2016. That is a trend of 1.0°C per decade but with 60% of the cooling in the last two years. Europe’s climate has responded with snow down to 2,000 metres in August in Germany this year. And how much lower can the North Atlantic temperature go? The lowest point on Figure 1 was in 1973 during the 1970s cooling period and corresponds to a fall of a further 1.5°C. At the decadal trend since 2016, we would get there in 2031. At the trend of the last two years, we would get there in 2021. That is supported by what is happening to solar activity. Over those last two years the F10.7 flux has been in a steep downtrend:
Figure 5: F10.7 Flux 2014 – 2016
Figure 5 shows that the F10.7 flux is in a steep, orderly downtrend that will take it to the immutable floor of 64 about three years before solar minimum is due. After that comes Solar Cycle 25. Back in 2003, esteemed solar physicists Ken Schatten and Kent Tobiska warned that:
“The surprising result of these long-range predictions is a rapid decline in solar activity, starting with cycle #24. If this trend continues, we may see the Sun heading towards a “Maunder” type of solar activity minimum – an extensive period of reduced levels of solar activity.”
They got the decline of Solar Cycle 24 right and the North Atlantic cooled in response. If they get the “Maunder” part of their prediction correct too, then it will be some years before North Atlantic cooling bottoms out.
David Archibald is the author of Twilight of Abundance (Regnery).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Pardon me for asking a dumb question, but if -8°C water is making it to the surface of the North Atlantic, shouldn’t it increase Arctic ice cover?
I’m pretty sure that “sub-8C” means below 8C, not below -8C. In this case the ‘-‘ is a spacer, not a negative number indicator.
Definitely confusing.
This is simply not true.
I live in Norway, read daily newspapers and consider myself well oriented, but I have never heard any mention of failures of the wheat crop. The reason is that the temperatures are not falling and the crops are doing well.
Wheat production cannot be used as a proxy for temperatures in Norway. The production level is dominated by the subsidies the farmers receive for different crops.
Anyway, there is no reason to use proxy for temperatures, when good temperature data are available.
Norway has an excellent site for national climate statistics, although it is only in Norwegian language, the graphs should be easy to understand. See http://www.yr.no/sted/Norge/klima.html
/Jan
Have subsidies been cut, accounting for the drop in production?
I looked here on the farmer organization’s web site.
The subsidies are a complicated affair, but a clue is that they say that grain production in recent years has had very low pay per workhour, compared to other farmer products such as meat and milk.
/Jan
Thanks, Jan.
As the son, grandson, great grandson, etc of wheat and other grain farmers, I appreciate your looking. I know little of agriculture in Norway.
Thank you for the link Jan .
I highly recommend readers looking at that site and cycling through the individual months .
It was , to me , very interesting to note that over decades the trend is effectively flat for most months, except for the Spring period where there is a slight warming trend in the last 20 years . But the difference is very small compared to the year to year difference and is not something anyone would be alarmed about , surely – well not at present anyway.
Thanks, Jan. I’d already come to the same conclusion above, based on zero Google hits and the FAO data, but it is always a plus to get information firsthand. It’s just another of David Archibald’s attempts to prop up his failing solar theories.
w.
Indeed, Willis.
There is a language drop down box in the upper right hand corner. English is an option or here is a link to the English version http://www.yr.no/place/Norway/climate.html
Thanks.
This site tells me that:
“In recent years, the mean temperature in Norway has generally been higher than normal. The exception was 2010, which was one of the coldest years since 1900. The highest mean temperature was recorded in 2014 with 2,2 °C above average. Other years with high averages are 1934, 1990 2006 and 2011, with 1.8 °C above average.”
http://www.environment.no/Topics/Climate/Norways-climate/
So is this nut shell the one the pea is under? Sorry, couldn’t resist. I’m an inquisitive serf, m’ lord..
Sorry, meant to be a reply to Pierre.
There is an important advantage of cycle 24, it’s short term. Soon the outcome will be known.
As usual, no matter what climate change cause camp one favors, the science is never ever settled.
The spawning stock of Northeast Arctic cod is currently at a high level. The northeast Arctic cod is the largest cod stock in the world, and the population has for centuries been central to Norwegian fisheries.
http://www.mosj.no/no/fauna/hav/torsk.html
lol .. what go’s up must come down .. and for the last 3-4k yrs it’s been going up .. shame we see so little that has come before …and we prepare for what is now rather than what will come .. would there be a climate scientist that would say this is not true ?? i’m sure 97% of you would agree in the long run ..
I find fig 3 the most interesting. I immediately thought ‘ocean currents’ in relation to the steep rise (cooling) in the last 2 years. However the gradual cooling throughout the record is also interesting, and possibly more significant
The problem is establishing the degree of change. When one looks at charts one needs to study scale and convert change to a %. We could be talking about a pea on a pumpkin. I never did enjoy maths
Whatever, this is useful data and an example of why I keep coming back to this site
Thank you
Just another solar takedown by Willis. 😉
https://iceagenow.info/video-headed-ice-age-scientist/
PROFESSOR ZHARKOVA has no agenda which makes what she says meaningful.
Further she has a good chance of being correct.
As far as the climate of the earth this period of time is in no way unique.
The climate in the big picture is controlled by Milankovitch Cycles, Land Ocean arrangements, with Solar Activity and the Geo Magnetic Field Strength of the earth superimposed upon this.
These factors then exert influences on the terrestrial items on the earth that determine the climate.
Terrestrial Items
Atmospheric Circulation
Sea Surface Temperatures
Global Cloud Coverage
Global Snow Coverage
Global Sea Ice Coverage
Enso
Volcanic Activity
All of this gives an x climate over x time. The historical climatic record supports this.
That is WHAT likely makes the climate change, NOT the scam they promote which is AGW.
The historical climatic record showing this period of time in the climate is in no way unique while changes in CO2 concentrations having no correlation in leading to resultant climate changes.
Now how the cooling evolves will have to be monitored. Of course going from an El Nino condition to an La Nina condition is going to cause an initial cooling.
For clues that if solar is involved the depth of the cooling will have to be monitored and if the cooling is accompanied by the terrestrial items I have mentioned above.
Each one of those terrestrial items having been shown to be linked to Milankovitch Cycles Land Ocean Arrangements in the big slow moving picture while solar and geo magnetic variability being factors that can change these terrestrial items on a much smaller time scale.
The solar parameters needed are
Solar Wind sub 350 km/sec.
AP index 5 or lower
EUV LIGHT 100 units or less
COSMIC RAY COUNTS – 6500 or greater
SOLAR IRRADIANCE – off by .15% or greater.
All very attainable going forward and being compounded by a weakening geo magnetic which if attained with sufficient duration of time will translate into bringing the terrestrial items that control our climate to values which will cause the climate to cool gradually if not in a sharp drop off if certain thresholds should be meant.
In addition the Arctic is starting to cool and the global temperatures from this point on will be down.
I really don’t care what any of you think. I’m far more concerned about a colder climate than a warmer one. Cold kills far more of us old folk than warm weather does.
My prediction is alive and well and once the low average solar parameters I have called for are attained then we shall see how the cooling evolves.
UV light is weakening and this is the wave length which penetrates the ocean surface the most and is responsible for the warming of the oceans in addition EUV light is on the decline which will influence the atmospheric circulation patterns. This will result in an increase in global cloud coverage, snow coverage and sea ice coverage.
Galactic cosmic rays will be on the increase which should result in more global cloud coverage and volcanic activity both cooling agents..
Solar irradiance itself will be on the decline which should aid with a .2 c drop in global temperatures in addition to what I have mentioned.
The real key to cooling is to get an increase in albedo which only needs to be on the order of .5 to 1% to get marked cooling wiping out all of the recent temperature gains.
volcanic activity is caused more by coronal holes which while the sun is in a low period are more common and can be larger ..
coronal streams effect large portions of the earth and the weather .
I want to remind you that we are in the process of inversion of the magnetic poles and we have a weaker magnetic field by 20% compared to the 1600s
A weaker magnetic field allows more of the lower end frequencies, such as microwaves. If you have a microwave oven in your house you will know that the microwave only generates one frequency to heat your food. Your food will not cook if water is not present. In fact except for water vapor already present, it wont even heat up. You might ruin your device though as there is nothing to absorb the waves. Microwaves are used extensively in satellite observations as they zip through clouds. Of course water won’t heat up immediately from a declining magnetic field. Nor will the water in your microwave.
Unfortunately I can’t find a read out of how much energy in the TSI is in different wavelengths. A magnetic field has no effect on light frequencies and above.. ( except exceptional strong fields like galaxies) .
While this may explain part of what’s going on today, it doesn’t explain past fluctuations.
A weaker magnetic field allows more of the lower end frequencies, such as microwaves.
No, there is no such ‘allowance’. A weaker solar magnetic field also means a lower microwave flux.
http://www.leif.org/research/HMI-Nugget-1.pdf
Unfortunately I can’t find a read out of how much energy in the TSI is in different wavelengths.
Earth’s magnetic field has declined. That does have an effect on incoming microwave energy.
No, none. And the microwave energy is truly minuscule and have no effect whatsoever on anything. It has been estimated that the total energy of all the radio [and micro-] waves ever received by all our radio [and micro-] wave telescopes since they were invented almost a century ago equals the kinetic energy of a single falling snow flake.
So the sun puts out very little energy below the IR Band? Really? Anyway this argument is academic anyway. However, as you know the field strength at the equator is different than at the poles. A decline at the equator would have very little effect on climate. However, moving towards the poles one would see an increase due to the cross sectional field decreasing significantly. Additionaly, there is the time component associated with warming due to energies in that band. Without knowing for sure what those energies are, I can’t calculate. But prima facia, it would look a lot what AGW says would be happening, in this particular instance. I suppose I could do a calculus problem and set it up so that one variable would be time function of energy and another with decreasing field strength from the equator to the magnetic pole and over time.
Perhaps if I do it backward I can calculate what that energy might be ( how much) over a 170 years.
Like I said it’s academic because I have no way of knowing whether the magnetic field strength weaken or increased during other time periods. I also don’t know what the Flux level is at a particular wavelength I am interested in, 2054 Mhz at top of field strength.
Just to give you an idea, I’ve seen some really strange things with lighting. I saw a plasma cloud set up over a house from lighting and fed energy into it for over an hour. Every piece of metal, silverware, edging, electrical wiring and components, door knobs, plumbing,( stick your hand in the toilet tank to see if the waters warm… no thanks, you first) and things you wouldnt think had metal in it, cooked. The house did not take a hit from the lighting.
One other thing that is puzzling to me is salt. Namely the sodium part and it’s ability to hold heat. As you also know pure water will not carry an electrical current. It’s a pretty good insulator. Salt water on the other hand conducts pretty well.
In any case, if I had a choice, I wouldn’t live on this rock. So very little to which there is control over. At the mercy of whatever happens at any given time. Except for an extremely few people, most of us live in little spaceship like pods, called houses.
I’m not done with this. The magnetic field exists for a reason. I think that without it, this planet would be a dead one. A 20% drop, as has been reported, I last saw 10%, but even so the field strength at the poles is substantially more. It is not a uniform drop everywhere, and can not be calculated as such. That’s not to say there aren’t spotty stronger umbrella areas, it means it isn’t a straight line.
http://www.windows2universe.org/sun/spectrum/solar_em_spectrum_smoothed_graph.gif
The Sun emits very little microwave energy.
Svalgard = Mosh very credible science. Just being sarcastic sorry if I offend LOL
I have( I must say) the best most straight forward comprehensive theory as to why and how the climate my cool. I have sent the complete theory over this site in the past which the monitors of this site found to be very interesting. How do I know because they said it after I sent it and I have that saved.
@Mike the Morlock: yes, “solar cycles” have been observed on some nearby stars.
http://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2012/07/aa19046-12.pdf
The deniers of a solar /climate connection are in fantasy land because all of the data show this not to be the reality. Cooling is coming the question is how extensive will it be and how will it evolve.
This first stage of the cooling having an ENSO connection.
Cooling is coming the question is how extensive will it be and how will it evolve.
And since it has not arrived yet, the question is also ‘when’. There is no doubt that cooling will come eventually [almost certainly in several thousand years], but nobody knows when.
It is happening now.
No sign of it.
Since around ’07.
=============
Since around ’07.
?w=720
hardly:
We shall see, Leif. Your illustration is of a tiny portion of the total. It is however, a pertinent portion and by a method in which I have trust.
================
For example, how much cooling of the ocean is represented by your lower tropospheric temperature spike recently? Maybe ARGO is showing it as we speak. I haven’t the chops to calculate it, but you do.
==========
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/images/mwp/ipcc_6_1_large.jpg
Sal, i found this interesting ipcc reconstruction graph… note the dalton dip (!) Goes to show what a little change in solar output can do. It’s my understanding that there was a volcano (tambora?) about that time, too. At least this gives us a taste of what may or may not happen…
Yes, starting winter 2017-18 using past plunges in ENSO as a guide then declining AMO after that. These are artifacts of solar. Real time solar minimums might contribute slight cooling but great effect regionally with stronger jet streams and cooler summers.
ur comment is lost due to some grammar error
lost in translation
Steven Mosher’s charts on temperature trends since 1900, 1950 and 1970 raise some interesting questions. They demonstrate that “‘global warming” is not global. Why is the greatest warming trend above 60 degrees north? Why does the smallest warming trend occur across all of the southern hemisphere? Is it the water/land ratio? Or does it get less sun? What meaning is there in reporting that the average global temperature is about 15 degrees C? Would 16 degrees be catastrophic?
“Steven Mosher’s charts on temperature trends since 1900, 1950 and 1970 raise some interesting questions. They demonstrate that “‘global warming” is not global. ”
global doesnt mean everywhere. technically it means in any given random location.
Why is the greatest warming trend above 60 degrees north?
Polar amplification, and you have localized feedbacks.
Why does the smallest warming trend occur across all of the southern hemisphere?
Ocean
Is it the water/land ratio?
Yup
Or does it get less sun? What meaning is there in reporting that the average global temperature is about 15 degrees C?
Very little meaning. its just a top level low dimension metric
Would 16 degrees be catastrophic?
probably not. if you live by a coast… maybe..
Robber,
There are almost no thermometers above 60 degrees N. Mosher knows this, and loves it, as he and his boss, Professor Mueller’s DAUGHTER, can spin this scant data any way they like. Guess which way they like?
And the media love it too, as a story encouraging us to destroy the economy of the First World appeals to media types, all of whom chose not to participate in the economy of the First World. Coal, oil, gas, which have produced Prosperity, all ENEMIES! Corporations which produce prosperity do it by Corruption.
This is where guys who cannot make it in the Corporate world find themselves, inevitably…
“Why is the greatest warming trend above 60 degrees North?” Because that is where there are almost no thermometers, and BEST can claim accurate extrapolations across 1,200 kilometers.
Because Professor Mueller’s daughter told him to do this.
Because Mosher needs a job, having been run out of the Profitable economy.
Sorry to dance on your head Steve, but you ask for it daily…
Global cooling is proof of global warming, just like everything else
Yes, the North Atlantic appears cooling, and 100F plus days across the globe are fewer than in recent decades. Claims that months in 2016 are the warmest on record are based on anomalous peak daily temps. above rend lines. Its like measuring micro-sunspots vs. actual visible sunspots.
CAGW folks argue/disagree in private.
Skeptics do it in public.
Just an observation.
Not true. watch Gavin criticize wadhams.
Has Gavin become that much of an outlier?
Did he also criticize Paul Beckwith too?
Way to respond to a probabilistic argument with anecdotal evidence.
Geez mosh.
Maybe if “JohnWho” had written something along the lines of
“CAGW folks always argue/disagree in private.”, or
CAGW folks only argue/disagree in private.”,
your point would be more probative.
The exception proves the rule. Moshestatistics.
============
JohnWho, your comment just jerked my head around. It slapped me silly with the realization that the “consegnati” would privately hold divergent beliefs, but withhold their true opinions in the public sphere.
The implication is that when an outlandish or untrue pronouncement is bruited by fellow climitariat members or compliant media outlets, all denizens of the “in crowd” will be expected to withhold any critical comment. That refusal to confront error reflects the evil results of ideological and coercive thought processes on the human soul. To sit idly by when untruths or shaded interpretations are propagated throughout professional and popular media is the ultimate in self-debasement.
Man-up, worms. If you cannot publicly speak known truth in the face of contrary orthodoxy, then why should the public support your pointless existence? What value have you? Simply regurgitating tired lines of study is not scholarship nor science.
Most of my intended audience will be uncaring of my exhortations. A few of you, hopefully, will look in the mirror. For that minority, I can offer only the many scars I bear from speaking truth to authority. In recompense, I have the memories of many triumphs, spiritual and monetary.
Dave Fair
I’ve long suspected that there will come a time when we feel sorry for these trapped climate scientists.
===============
Yes, first my observation is “in general”. There are virtually always exceptions. This thread stands as an example of how various “skeptics” disagree. Hopefully it enhances good science and our understanding of the climate. Contrast this to the CAGW folks responses to the bad science and misunderstandings that is the mainstay of the “SkS” site: crickets chirping.
I believe that Stephen Mosher could spend, in general, every waking moment for the next solar cycle correcting and debunking the misinformation on that site as long as he did it on his site because they would erase/delete his comments. I suppose though, that he wouldn’t think it is the “best” use of his time.
I about half think that with some of them, though it may once have been about fame money or power, it is now about shame.
==============
I was skeptical of this claim, given JB’s recent talks about the heat in the Atlantic and the hurricane season. But the NCEP data is backing up David Archibald’s claim about the North Atlantic running cooler.
Interesting…
Let me say this which is this period of time from now going forward gives us an opportunity to see who is on the correct path.
so…not enough advection and CO2?
God “Earth” (He sits at the center where his home is) is fighting back against Human Beings (Not Mankind) and their destructive Global “Warming” behavior by “cooling” our Oceans (And cooling the Sun too because He is all powerful) and bringing upon us an Ice Age !
The only thing that We can do to save ourselves is to give Him back “all” of the Oil We have extracted (With “Interest”), give Him back all of the Natural Gas We have extracted (With “Interest”), put/poor all of the Coal We have extracted into the mouths of Volcanoes so that it might find its way back to Him as to “restore” our Planet back to where it was when He created it !!!
It’s our only “Hope” !
Perhaps if the cooling gets to extreme before We can can complete our assignment, He can “Bring Fire down from the Heavens” to give Us warmth again ?
Perfect !