Solar Linkages

Here is some more connecting the dots in the business of climate modeling. This is hardly a reassurance that core players think that the science is settled. Most important is the apparent complexity of the linked events. This is very sophisticated and promises years of sleuthing. Surely no one thinks we are about to run out of connections to link up.

And that is the point. These type of links are seductive, yet a sudden change elsewhere might totally change all of them as we disappear into the world of fine detail.

At least the climate models must be getting more realistic.

This is still neat work any may hold up. That it shows early signs of having predictive power is very encouraging


Scientists Uncover Solar Cycle, Stratosphere And Ocean Connections

by Staff Writers
Boulder CO (SPX) Sep 01, 2009


http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Scientists_Uncover_Solar_Cycle_Stratosphere_And_Ocean_Connections_999.html


Subtle connections between the 11-year solar cycle, the stratosphere, and the tropical Pacific Ocean work in sync to generate periodic weather patterns that affect much of the globe, according to research appearing in the journal Science. The study can help scientists get an edge on eventually predicting the intensity of certain climate phenomena, such as the Indian monsoon and tropical Pacific rainfall, years in advance.

An international team of scientists led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) used more than a century of weather observations and three powerful computer models to tackle one of the more difficult questions in meteorology: if the total energy that reaches Earth from the Sun varies by only 0.1 percent across the approximately 11-year solar cycle, how can such a small variation drive major changes in weather patterns on Earth?

The answer, according to the new study, has to do with the Sun's impact on two seemingly unrelated regions. Chemicals in the stratosphere and sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean respond during solar maximum in a way that amplifies the Sun's influence on some aspects of air movement. This can intensify winds and rainfall, change sea surface temperatures and cloud cover over certain tropical and subtropical regions, and ultimately influence global weather.

"The Sun, the stratosphere, and the oceans are connected in ways that can influence events such as winter rainfall in North America," says NCAR scientist Gerald Meehl, the lead author. "Understanding the role of the solar cycle can provide added insight as scientists work toward predicting regional weather patterns for the next couple of decades."

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR's sponsor, and by the Department of Energy. It builds on several recent papers by Meehl and colleagues exploring the link between the peaks in the solar cycle and events on Earth that resemble some aspects of La Nina events, but are distinct from them. The larger amplitude La Nina and El Nino patterns are associated with changes in surface pressure that together are known as the Southern Oscillation.

The connection between peaks in solar energy and cooler water in the equatorial Pacific was first discovered by Harry Van Loon of NCAR and Colorado Research Associates, who is a co-author of the new paper.

Top Down and Bottom Up

The new contribution by Meehl and his colleagues establishes how two mechanisms that physically connect changes in solar output to fluctuations in the Earth's climate can work together to amplify the response in the tropical Pacific.

The team first confirmed a theory that the slight increase in solar energy during the peak production of sunspots is absorbed by stratospheric ozone. The energy warms the air in the stratosphere over the tropics, where sunlight is most intense, while also stimulating the production of additional ozone there that absorbs even more solar energy.

Since the stratosphere warms unevenly, with the most pronounced warming occurring at lower latitudes, stratospheric winds are altered and, through a chain of interconnected processes, end up strengthening tropical precipitation.

At the same time, the increased sunlight at solar maximum causes a slight warming of ocean surface waters across the subtropical Pacific, where Sun-blocking clouds are normally scarce. That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing additional water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains and reinforcing the effects of the stratospheric mechanism.

The top-down influence of the stratosphere and the bottom-up influence of the ocean work together to intensify this loop and strengthen the trade winds. As more sunshine hits drier areas, these changes reinforce each other, leading to less clouds in the subtropics, allowing even more sunlight to reach the surface, and producing a positive feedback loop that further magnifies the climate response.

These stratospheric and ocean responses during solar maximum keep the equatorial eastern Pacific even cooler and drier than usual, producing conditions similar to a La Nina event. However, the cooling of about 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit is focused farther east than in a typical La Nina, is only about half as strong, and is associated with different wind patterns in the stratosphere.

Earth's response to the solar cycle continues for a year or two following peak sunspot activity. The La Nina-like pattern triggered by the solar maximum tends to evolve into a pattern similar to El Nino as slow-moving currents replace the cool water over the eastern tropical Pacific with warmer water. The ocean response is only about half as strong as with El Nino and the lagged warmth is not as consistent as the La Nina-like pattern that occurs during peaks in the solar cycle.

Enhancing Ocean Cooling

Solar maximum could potentially enhance a true La Nina event or dampen a true El Nino event. The La Nina of 1988-89 occurred near the peak of solar maximum. That La Nina became unusually strong and was associated with significant changes in weather patterns, such as an unusually mild and dry winter in the southwestern United States.

The Indian monsoon, Pacific sea surface temperatures and precipitation, and other regional climate patterns are largely driven by rising and sinking air in Earth's tropics and subtropics. Therefore the new study could help scientists use solar-cycle predictions to estimate how that circulation, and the regional climate patterns related to it, might vary over the next decade or two.

Three Views, One Answer

To tease out the elusive mechanisms that connect the Sun and Earth, the study team needed three computer models that provided overlapping views of the climate system. One model, which analyzed the interactions between sea surface temperatures and lower atmosphere, produced a small cooling in the equatorial Pacific during solar maximum years.

The second model, which simulated the stratospheric ozone response mechanism, produced some increases in tropical precipitation but on a much smaller scale than the observed patterns. The third model contained ocean-atmosphere interactions as well as ozone. It showed, for the first time, that the two combined to produce a response in the tropical Pacific during peak solar years that was close to actual observations.

"With the help of increased computing power and improved models, as well as observational discoveries, we are uncovering more of how the mechanisms combine to connect solar variability to our weather and climate," Meehl says.

ENSO Linked to Climate Change

This is an extremely important paper that does several things.

First it reveals the importance of the El Nino Southern oscillation as a predictor of global temperature shifts. Our own postings had picked up on several other phenomena but not this one in particular. In fact the others strongly hinted at an important southern Oscillation. This paper clarifies how important.

Secondly it is able to establish magnitudes that effectively make the CO2 hypothesis unnecessary. This is a major disconnect because it also reveals that the CO2 hypothesis was tossed in to make up for the missing input now understood to be provided by ENSO. Whoops!

Thirdly, we have narrowed down our key variables to Solar, Volcanic injection and these atmospheric engines that can shift decadally and have absolutely nothing to do with human activity, although we are obviously trying.

I would estimate that the probability of CO2 content been a significant climate forcer just dropped by an order of magnitude. In short this is very bad news for the true believers. The northern hemisphere is still warmer than it has been and we are likely to lose our Arctic summer sea ice. This will preserve the benefits of this warming cycle for a lot of years, perhaps until we have a volcano that causes a large enough drop in temperature to rebuild the ice.

El Nino is presently charging and I presume it will induce another injection of heat into the north over the next two years. This is a guess only, based on recent surprising behavior from 2007. We may also have a bad hurricane season next year, although I would not count on it.

Most important, we now know that ENSO is the hot button to watch. I do not know if this is a valid observation, but is seems that a cycle of warming induced by a slight increase in solar energy is accumulated in the tropics and has been released by the activation of ENSO at a faster pace than previously. This sounds almost plausible but I simply have only conjecture and many others should be available.

Peer-Reviewed Study Rocks Climate Debate! 'Nature not man responsible for recent global warming...little or none of late 20th century warming and cooling can be attributed to humans'

'Surge in global temps since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean'

Wednesday, July 22, 2009By Marc Morano – Climate Depot

A new peer-reviewed climate study is presenting a head on challenge to man-made global warming claims. The study by three climate researchers appears in the July 23, 2009 edition of Journal of Geophysical Research. (Link to Abstract)

Full Press Release and Abstract to Study:

July 23, 2009

Nature not man responsible for recent global warming

Three Australasian researchers have shown that natural forces are the dominant influence on climate, in a study just published in the highly-regarded Journal of Geophysical Research. According to this study little or none of the late 20th century global warming and cooling can be attributed to human activity.

The research, by Chris de Freitas, a climate scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, John McLean (Melbourne) and Bob Carter (James Cook University), finds that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key indicator of global atmospheric temperatures seven months later. As an additional influence, intermittent volcanic activity injects cooling aerosols into the atmosphere and produces significant cooling.

"The surge in global temperatures since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean that made warming El Niño conditions more likely than they were over the previous 30 years and cooling La Niña conditions less likely" says corresponding author de Freitas.

"We have shown that internal global climate-system variability accounts for at least 80% of the observed global climate variation over the past half-century. It may even be more if the period of influence of major volcanoes can be more clearly identified and the corresponding data excluded from the analysis.”

Climate researchers have long been aware that ENSO events influence global temperature, for example causing a high temperature spike in 1998 and a subsequent fall as conditions moved to La Niña. It is also well known that volcanic activity has a cooling influence, and as is well documented by the effects of the 1991 Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption.

The new paper draws these two strands of climate control together and shows, by demonstrating a strong relationship between the Southern Oscillation and lower-atmospheric temperature, that ENSO has been a major temperature influence since continuous measurement of lower-atmospheric temperature first began in 1958.

According to the three researchers, ENSO-related warming during El Niño conditions is caused by a stronger Hadley Cell circulation moving warm tropical air into the mid-latitudes. During La Niña conditions the Pacific Ocean is cooler and the Walker circulation, west to east in the upper atmosphere along the equator, dominates.

"When climate models failed to retrospectively produce the temperatures since 1950 the modellers added some estimated influences of carbon dioxide to make up the shortfall," says McLean.

"The IPCC acknowledges in its 4th Assessment Report that ENSO conditions cannot be predicted more than about 12 months ahead, so the output of climate models that could not predict ENSO conditions were being compared to temperatures during a period that was dominated by those influences. It's no wonder that model outputs have been so inaccurate, and it is clear that future modelling must incorporate the ENSO effect if it is to be meaningful."

Bob Carter, one of four scientists who has recently questioned the justification for the proposed Australian emissions trading scheme, says that this paper has significant consequences for public climate policy.

"The close relationship between ENSO and global temperature, as described in the paper, leaves little room for any warming driven by human carbon dioxide emissions. The available data indicate that future global temperatures will continue to change primarily in response to ENSO cycling, volcanic activity and solar changes.”

“Our paper confirms what many scientists already know: which is that no scientific justification exists for emissions regulation, and that, irrespective of the severity of the cuts proposed, ETS (emission trading scheme) will exert no measurable effect on future climate.”
--

McLean, J. D., C. R. de Freitas, and R. M. Carter (2009), Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, Journal of Geophysical Research, 114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.

This figure from the McLean et al (2009) research shows that mean monthly global temperature (MSU GTTA) corresponds in general terms with the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) of seven months earlier. The SOI is a rough indicator of general atmospheric circulation and thus global climate change. The possible influence of the Rabaul volcanic eruption is shown.

Excerpted Abstract of the Paper appearing in the Journal of Geophysical Research:

Time series for the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) and global tropospheric temperature anomalies (GTTA) are compared for the 1958−2008 period. GTTA are represented by data from satellite microwave sensing units (MSU) for the period 1980–2008 and from radiosondes (RATPAC) for 1958–2008. After the removal from the data set of short periods of temperature perturbation that relate to near-equator volcanic eruption, we use derivatives to document the presence of a 5- to 7-month delayed close relationship between SOI and GTTA. Change in SOI accounts for 72% of the variance in GTTA for the 29-year-long MSU record and 68% of the variance in GTTA for the longer 50-year RATPAC record.

Because El Niño−Southern Oscillation is known to exercise a particularly strong influence in the tropics, we also compared the SOI with tropical temperature anomalies between 20°S and 20°N. The results showed that SOI accounted for 81% of the variance in tropospheric temperature anomalies in the tropics.

Overall the results suggest that the Southern Oscillation exercises a consistently dominant influence on mean global temperature, with a maximum effect in the tropics, except for periods when equatorial volcanism causes ad hoc cooling. That mean global tropospheric temperature has for the last 50 years fallen and risen in close accord with the SOI of 5–7 months earlier shows the potential of natural forcing mechanisms to account for most of the temperature variation.

Received 16 December 2008; accepted 14 May 2009; published 23 July 2009.

David Paul and the Global Warming Debate

This article by David Paul sums it up quite nicely. While we are presently in a warm climate interlude in the Northern Hemisphere, it is nonsense to claim it is caused by human activity. What we are seeing appears to be more natural than nothing else and certainly fits that conjecture.

If CO2 is contributing anything at all, it is certainly lost in the noise produced by the other factors and the most compelling factor is possibly increased solar radiation over the past decades, although again our data is spotty and uncertain by today’s standards.

The real jolt that is coming however and the wolf criers will exploit it to the hilt is the eminent final collapse of the arctic sea ice arriving now amazingly fast. It should be obvious long before 2012.

The Global Warming Debate

http://www.klfy.com/Global/story.asp?S=10666569

Posted:
var wn_last_ed_date = getLEDate("Jul 8, 2009 8:34 PM EST"); document.write(wn_last_ed_date);
July 8, 2009 05:34 PM

Disclaimer: The views expressed in these reports are mine alone and don't necessarily represent the views of TV-10, management, etc. Speaking as a scientist, these are my views on the global warming topic with facts to support those views. You may agree or disagree, which is the beauty of having an opinion! I believe open, honest debate should rule the global warming topic and politics should be set aside. The purpose of these reports is to share my view, which happens to go against what's dominated the national dialogue. -David

Where do you stand on the global warming debate? And why do you believe, what you believe? Have you done the research, or have you just heard what others say?

The mainstream media, movie-makers, and politicians are certainly trying to convince Americans the global warming debate is settled.

President Barack Obama: "There is no longer a debate about whether carbon pollution is placing our planet in jeopardy. It's happening."

Former Vice President al Gore: "...and the reality is that scientists have been warning us, with ever-greater clarity and ever-greater urgency, that we simply must start cutting the pollution that causes global warming."

But think again. Tens of thousands American scientists don't agree that anthropogenic, or man-made, global warming is threatening society as we know it.

A petition at www.petitionproject.com has the names of almost 32,000 American scientists as this report was put together.

Let's start with the basics. Is climate change real? Of course, the climate's been changing since the beginning of time. Are carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere rising? Yes, but they've been much higher at times in the past, in fact, 20 times higher 500 million years ago. Is there a climate crisis? I say, absolutely not! But is the climate warming? Well, in recent decades, yes. But there's more to the story..."
The United States has perhaps the best climate monitoring system in the entire world. But the climate record is extremely short - only around 140 years for some of the longest stations. And in that time changes to the local environment and urbanization have undoubtedly given temperature readings a warm bias.

A comprehensive study by Anthony Watts reveals stunning problems. Eight hundred and fifty-four (854) of the 1221 official climate monitoring stations across the country were surveyed and nearly 90% are not properly sited.

Some are located next to buildings and heat-generating electrical equipment. This alone taints the climate record and leads to erroneous warming. Other changes have imparted irregular warming, such as changing the coating on the Stevenson screens, the shelters used to house thermometers, from a whitewash to latex paint in 1979.

An experiment by Watts proves the latex-painted shelters are slightly warmer than the whitewashed shelters. And then you have to account for the change in the actual thermometers, from those requiring manual readings to the new electronic version that's been gradually phased in since the mid 1980s.

But even with the warm bias in the records, it is safe to say we have seen a warming trend in recent decades. However, if you look at the temperature of the atmosphere just above the ground using satellite data, you'll actually see a gradual cooling trend since 2002. What's also worth pointing out is the global temperature spike in 1998 that was caused by a natural phenomenon - an historically strong El Nino in the Equatorial Pacific.

To figure out the climate record before thermometers and satellites we rely on ice core data, boreholes, tree ring analysis, and other means. Since the beginning of earth there have been distinct periods of warming and cooling. Well before man dominated the landscape.

So why the fuss lately about man-made global warming? The melting Arctic? Do you know we've only been monitoring the extent of Arctic ice via satellites since 1979? And while Arctic ice coverage has declined, it's actually been rising since 2006. And have you heard Antarctic sea ice has increased by nearly 14% since 1979?

The global warming crowd is quick to blame the release of carbon dioxide thru the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil, gasoline, natural gas, and coal, for warming our climate and setting us on a path for doom.
Since before the industrial revolution the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been rising, up to around 385 parts per million by volume today. That amounts to a miniscule 0.0385% of the atmosphere. Increased CO2 levels are beneficial to plants since they require carbon dioxide to grow. In this experiment, plants exposed to CO2 levels of 1,090 parts per million by volume by far exhibited the most growth.

So, does carbon dioxide drive the climate? The answer is no!

Natural cycles play a much bigger role with the sun at the top of the list. A look at total solar irradiance since 1600 shows a distinct correlation to temperature readings. Readings are higher now than anytime in the past 400 years!

Then there's El Nino Southern Oscillation, the North Atlantic Oscillation, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation, the Arctic Oscillation, the Pacific-North American Teleconnection, Milankovitch forcing, ocean variations, and so on and so forth.

Is there any way to model all these variables? Again, the answer is no! The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, has tried and failed!

Back in 2001 the IPCC released a suite of computer model solutions depicting the future state of the atmosphere. These reports by the IPCC are used repeatedly to drive policy around the world. But, if you look at what's happened since then, global temperatures are actually on a downward trend, whether you look at actual thermometer readings across the world or satellite-derived temperatures. This when the IPCC models were predicting continued warming.

As a forecaster I'll tell you this. Forecasting in the short-term is fairly accurate compared to forecasting long-term. So if these climate models are so far off already, there's really little chance of them being right further out. That's because there's much more driving the climate than carbon dioxide.

There are so many variables at work, known and unknown, that not a single person, or computer model, can predict the future climate for sure.

Just know this; climate change has occurred in the past, is occurring now, and will occur in the future. Trying to pinpoint that change on carbon emissions and human activities...is really a stretch.

David Paul

Sources:

CO2 levels, Mauna Loa, Hawaii: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/iadv/

Global temperature trend: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/global-jan-dec-error-bar-pg.gif...and here...

NH sea ice extent: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2009/may/nh-seaice-200905-pg.gif

SH sea ice extent: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2009/may/sh-seaice-200905-pg.gif

Lower tropospheric cooling since 2002:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2009/may/uahncdc-may-lt-global-land-and-ocean-pg.gif

Improperly sited climate stations: http://www.surfacestations.org/USHCN_sites.htm

El Niño of 1998: http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/eln/rcnt.rxml

Historical CO2 level data:

http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/vostok.co2.gifhttp://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/images/CO2History.htmlhttp://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/Geocarb_III-Berner.pdf

Reconstructed Total Solar Irradiance:

http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/245.htm

Chinese Revolution

As should be understood by those who have worked through my posts, the CO2 climate driver hypothesis is very likely untenable. Simple and obviously normal decade and century long fluctuations in the temperature of the ocean surface is the prime climatic driver. And this is exactly what El Nino and La Nino is all about.

In our current geographic configuration, the Antarctic has become our principal heat sink and principal control reservoir. It is a very large cold tank. Most of the incoming solar energy is actually absorbed by the oceans and then redistributed very slowly through the various currents.

The atmosphere is principally influenced and conditioned by these ocean temperatures long before any sojourn over land. It absorbs its share of solar energy, particularly over land and then re-emits that energy as heat which can also be absorbed by the moisture in the atmosphere. The point is is that the ocean is the heat sink for the atmosphere also. This is all very obvious but seems to get forgotten in the heat of this debate.

If the atmosphere ever truly got a little too hot, the surplus energy will get dumped back into space as certainly happens over the deserts. After all where does all that warm desert air go at night?

Curiously, building great forests in the desert will actually collect more solar energy on Earth than at present while actually moderating and humidifying that desert air.

All this leaves the CO2 problem as a pollution management problem which can not be ignored but not as a very convincing driver of climatic change. Left to itself, its impact will be a more robust growth of plant material.

Those ocean current fluctuations are too large and too compelling to ignore. They are real heat engines comparable only to the impact of a hurricane which strips surface heat from an ocean and moves it a few hundreds of miles onto the adjacent continent.

I read a very encouraging bit of news today. It appears that the Chinese have successfully implemented a forest management system throughout China that seems to be partially self financing and self sustaining. They are actually going to show us how to do it. The press coverage makes it out to be a great success, but in light of the general tenor of all the previous news that I have ever seen from China about the historic despoliation of the forests I am happy to take this one at face value. After all this was always one fix that simple government policy could easily implement, and they had the manpower to do it.

Core to the program is the removal of marginal lands from cultivation and the building of forest barriers on the edge of the deserts, particularly west of Beijing. That is actually the most difficult part of all. Any sensitive observer saw that the lands needed this form of enlightened policy and it is wonderful to see it happen. This will make it easier to establish the same sort of practice elsewhere.

This will be the true Chinese revolution.