Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
A comment on my previous post got me to thinking about cumulative sums of a series of numbers. In a “cumulative sum”, we start with the first value in the series, and make a new series by adding each number in the old series to the total of the new series.
So if the series is say (1, 3, 7, 10), the new series that is the cumulative sum of the old series is (1, 4, 11, 21). It’s calculated as
- 1
- 1 + 3 = 4
- 4 + 7 = 11
- 11 + 10 = 21
Why is a cumulative sum of interest? It can reveal underlying trends and changes in datasets. For example, consider the “Pacific Decadal Oscillation”, also known as the “PDO”. This is a slow change in the Pacific, in which the northernmost part alternately gets cooler and warmer.

Figure 1. The two extremes of sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
And here is a graph of the PDO Index, which measures the state of the PDO.

Figure 2. PDO Index, and the date of the “Great Pacific Climate Shift” of 1976-1977.
And what is the “Great Pacific Climate Shift” when it is at home? It was the date of the first shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation that was identified by scientists. (As a long-time commercial salmon fisherman, I greatly appreciate the fact that the PDO was first noticed in records of salmon catches in the Pacific Northwest … but I digress). From the Journal of Climate article “The Significance of the 1976 Pacific Climate Shift in the Climatology of Alaska“:
In 1976, the North Pacific region, including Alaska, underwent a dramatic shift to a climate regime that saw great increases in winter and spring temperatures, and lesser increases in summer and autumn, when compared to the previous 25 yr.
And what does the 1976 Pacific Climate Shift have to do with cumulative sums? It becomes obvious when we graph the cumulative sum of the PDO Index as shown below.

Figure 3. Cumulative sum of the PDO Index, and the date of the 1977 Pacific Climate Shift
As you can see, the cumulative sum of the PDO index clearly shows the date of the shift in the Pacific climate to the warm phase of the PDO.
What else can cumulative sums do? They can show us if two datasets are related to each other. Here are the cumulative sums of
along with the PDO.

Figure 4. Cumulative sum of the PDO Index, and the date of the 1977 Pacific Climate Shift
These four indices of the climate are based on very different things. The PDO Index is the first Principal Component of sea surface temperatures north of 20°N. The Southern Oscillation Index is based on the difference in barometric pressure between Tahiti and Australia. The NINO34 Index is based on sea surface temperatures in the region 5°N-5°S and 170°W-120°W. And the North Pacific Index is based on the area-weighted sea level pressure over the region 30°N-65°N, 160°E-140°W.
And despite that, they all clearly show the 1976 Pacific climate shift …
What else can we do with cumulative sums? Well, we can also use them to show which datasets are not related … here’s a couple of examples.

Figure 5 Cumulative Sums, Pacific Decadal Oscillation Index, North Atlantic Oscillation Index, and Monthly Sunspots
Not a whole lot of commonality in those three. And by implication, this shows that sunspots and the North Atlantic Oscillation are also not closely related to the El Nino indices shown in Figure 4 … and that’s it for cumulative sums for now.
[UPDATE] A commenter pointed out that I hadn’t included the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) in the analysis. Here’s that graph:

w.
Technical Note: Cumulative sums are very sensitive to initial conditions and anomalies. If there is an upward trend in the data, or if the zero point is lower than the values, a cumulative sum will head for the sky, and vice versa. However, the anomaly of that same data will behave very differently. All of the cumulative sums above were first expressed as an anomaly about the mean of the dataset in question. For trendless indices, this makes little difference. It does ensure that they return to the value at which they started. Taking them as anomalies around any other zero point will lead to an overall trend depending on the point chosen. As a result, the trend of a cumulative sum is generally meaningless, but as shown above, the variations in the cumulative sum can be quite meaningful.
My Usual Note: Please, I implore you, quote the exact words you are discussing. Without that it is often impossible to tell either who or what you are referring to, and misunderstandings multiply.
Oops! The North Atlantic Oscillation index needs to be inverted as negative NAO is associated with El Nino and warmer PDO.
Willis is the smart guy from far Northern CA while I’m just the bumpkin from not quite so NorCal so this is probably a pointless comment but my first thought is the Great Change of 1976 is no more significant than the one in ~1939. In fact from peak to trough so far, 1939 is considerably more significant.
My second thought is we can trace the warm period of the 1920s and 30s in the PDO along with the long cooling trend from ~1940 to ~1975 and the subsequent warming of the succeeding 20 years and then even the “pause” of the last 20.
So why spend all this time and effort measuring CO2, methane and everything under the sun, so to speak, when the PDO index seems like an excellent analog for what global temps are doing?
And I will note that here in NorCal, on the receiving end of the PDO, the trough of 1976 coincided with two consecutive terrible drought years followed by some very wet ones including a couple of record years in 82, 83, IIRC.
And the trough in ~2014 coincided with two even worse drought years followed immediately this time by two more record wet years.
La Niña continues to operate. A typhoon is developing in the western Pacific.
http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/mtpw2/product.php?color_type=tpw_nrl_colors&prod=wpac×pan=24hrs&anim=html5
There was of course a change in the Arctic Oscillation associated with the 1976-77 climate shift, because that is what leads the shift in ENSO and the AMO. The AO had a positive regime 1970-1976 and shifted to a negative regime from late 1976 to early 1982. In response to this collapse in the solar wind speed:
I am trying to get people to look at this new paper.
https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs_2020041718295959.pdf
University of Oslo on CO2 forcing . Smarter people than me need to comment.
An interesting paper – with an experimental setup that reminds me strongly of the “The Amateur Scientist” columns back when the magazine was rightly called Scientific American rather than Global Scientism.
Nothing wrong with that at all, but there is something niggling at me in the back of my brain which refuses to come out. Perhaps due to the time closing in on 10 PM in my neck of the woods. Might come to me overnight, in which case I’ll post again tomorrow. (Or not, in which case, I’ll keep quiet!)
Thanks . Maybe the experiment design is too simple lol.
PDO-AMO-climate shift
there might be a tiny probability of a link to the Earth’s magnetic field,will write more details if anyone interested
There is definitely a turnaround event in 1976.