Natural Climate Cycles Discussion

[BornFromTheVoid]

SPARKICLEThe cycle you have identified is the AMO ( Atlantic multi-decadal cycle)The AMO is a major cycle because it best follows the global temperature cycleThe hiatus periods in global temp' follow the AMO cycle very wellYou would be correct in saying we have reached a Max' around 2000 and are at the summit or stalling point of this cycleAs you predict , a downward trend in global temperature would be expected for the next 30 yrsSome cycle researchers like Qian and lu (2010)believe 2000 was a max' of a number of cycles and that we have reached the modern millennial warm peak and we are in downward cycleAs you can see from your trend line .Another larger cycle potentially overlays the AMO and has contributed to global warmingor alternatively AGWI am of the belief that a larger cycle is superimposed on the AMO and may have maxed as well at 2000Maybe a larger cycle like the 1600-1800 yr cycle has been in play ( constructive interference)The THC (thermo-haline circulation) also follows a 60 yr ish cycleand other variables like sea surface height anomaly also exhibit a ~60 yr cycle

 

So when are you expected the cooling to commence, crikey? You said "for the next 30 years", so beginning from now?

 

What do you think of the recent research published on the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation?

[VillagePlank]

So when are you expected the cooling to commence, crikey? You said "for the next 30 years", so beginning from now?

 

That's a litte disingenuous, BFTV. As you well know, the graph shows the rate of change, so we would expect the rate of change to slow down as observed, and confirmed, over the last ten years or so. If the rate of change's starting point was exceptionally high, we cannot expect the temperature record to post negative anomlies almost immediately - unless you believe that the temperature record is subject to some step-function of a hitherto unknown climate variable? For instance, the rate of change might change from 0.1C/30yr, to 0.05C/30yr: that still means the temperature record is posting above climatic average temperatures, and, subsequently, it seems, it would fail your apparent test of posting below 0C anomalies, which is how cooling is defined. Nevertheless, the absence of non-negative temperature anomlies is not evidence of a lack of a slowdown in the rate of warming.

Edited June 30, 2013 by Sparkicle

[BornFromTheVoid]

That's a litte disingenuous, BFTV. As you well know, the graph shows the rate of change, so we would expect the rate of change to slow down as observed, and confirmed, over the last ten years or so. If the rate of change's starting point was so high, we cannot expect the temperature record to post negative anomlies almost immediately - unless you believe that the temperature record is subject to some step-function of a hitherto unknown climate variable? For instance, the rate of change might change from 0.1C/30yr, to 0.05C/30yr: that still means the temperature record is posting above climatic average temperatures, and, subsequently, it seems, it would fail your apparent test of posting below 0C anomalies, which is how cooling is defined.

 

Nothing disingenuous, Sparkickle, she say's

"a downward trend in global temperature would be expected for the next 30 yrs"

 

If a downward trend in the rate of increase is what's what was meant, then fair enough. It just doesn't sound like that in the post. Which is why I asked, no trickery behind it.

[VillagePlank]

Nothing disingenuous, Sparkickle, she say's

"a downward trend in global temperature would be expected for the next 30 yrs"

 

If a downward trend in the rate of increase is what's what was meant, then fair enough. It just doesn't sound like that in the post. Which is why I asked, no trickery behind it.

 

Well, OK. But that's a bit pedantic, don't you think? Nevermind, I'll go hide in my hole, again

[BornFromTheVoid]

Well, OK. But that's a bit pedantic, don't you think? Nevermind, I'll go hide in my hole, again

 

Well, as we both now, there is a big difference between a drop in the rate of warming and a reversal of the warming.

If what she meant was the rate of warming, then no problem, these little mistakes happen online a lot

[crikey]

I agree KNOCKER. Ocean dynamics is not my favourite area of interest by any means

My favourite interest in climate and weather.. is cycles.

I have read widely in this area but it is an on going learning curve.

I will feel at home in this thread.

--------------

BtV AND SPARTICLE. I have put together the temperature rate graph that 'Sparticle' posted.

This shows a decline in global temperature rate declining during the downward negative phase of the AMO

see link and thumbnail below

I highlighted the decline in the previous downward phase that occurred at the inflection point at 1943

and continued downward until the inflection point that commenced the upward phase at 1975 .

I just find it absolutely fascinating that the change in phase is not a smooth curve but a point in time. a distinct 'flip' as it were??

The graph below l have borrowed from a talented researcher and mathematician from weather zone forum

'Surly bond'

He has calculated the trends in global temp' for changes mostly attributed to the AMO

Notice from 1943 to 1975 the trend for temp' decline was minus 0.37 deg C per century during this downward phase

The negative phase from 1897 to 1909 was a downward trend of minus 0.97 deg C per centuy ( much steeper)

and negative phase since 2005

He has calculated the inflection point for the current downward phase as 2005

and with a very small amount of data( 2005 -2012) he has calculated we are on the downward phase at a rate of minus 0.44 deg C/century

There is a risk this rate of decline may get steeper as the 200 yr cycle commences a downward phase currently as well and as you all may be aware another Dalton / Maunder phase is muted by some solar researchers.

Here is a link to my pictures to see a larger version of the thumbnail

https://picasaweb.google.com/104698633266954768357/CYCLESAndCorrelations#5895535698714271410

--------

new IPO research BTV . I did see that on your forum yesterday and will have a read tonight if lcan find it again..

A nice collection of new research there. Great to keep up to date there

Edited July 1, 2013 by crikey

[BornFromTheVoid]

Hi crikey. How do you determine the beginning and end of the +ve and -ve AMO phases? When do you think we'll start recording -ve annual AMO values again (the last one being 1996)?

[crikey]

BftV..Firstly a few notes on how the AMO is measured for those new to the topic
and thanks for your interest

"The Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation (AMO) is a fluctuation in de-trended sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic Ocean. It was identified in 2000 and the AMO index was defined in 2001 as the 10-year running mean of the detrended Atlantic SST anomalies north of the equator. There is a significant negative correlation with US continental rainfall with less rain during a positive AMO index.
(H.A. Dijkstra, "On the physics of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation", Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, Netherlands, 2005


Wikipedia on the AMO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Multidecadal_Oscillation

gives some indication of when the AMO wil turn negative
quote
"Assuming that the AMO continues with its quasi-cycle of roughly 70 years, the peak of the current warm phase would be expected in c. 2020,^[13] or based on its 50–90 year quasi-cycle, between 2000 and 2040 (after peaks in c. 1880 and c. 1950)"

and from the above statement , they refer to when the AMO index reaches zero anomaly and is heading down.

-----------------------

Surly Bonds data is indicating an inflection point and downward trend of Global surface temps from 2005 and that may be a hint that
the AMO has peaked and on its way down.

According to the last 2 cycles global air temp / AMO? . The cycle length from the diagram l have posted below was 62 yrs and 64 yrs
That is from Maximum Peak to peak

from another starting point
From zero anomaly to zero anomaly.
The cycle is far more difficult to quantify as it moves from neutral , pos , neutral to negative
However if using that approach 1927 to 1998 yields a cycle of = ~ 67 yrs

Keep in mind the AMO is not a pure sinusoidal wave and is quasi-periodic ( The frequency has a range in length of about 60 ish years)

------------

It is possible SurlyBonds identification of the global air temp ' inflection point at 2005 indicates a likely change in phase of the AMO is underway.

From the previous 2 cycles . The time taken to get from Max peak to zero anomaly was about 15 yrs 1879 to 1895 took about 15 yrs

and the next cycle
assuming a peak in 1943. The AMO reached zero anomaly 17 yrs later

So answering your question as when the AMO will reach zero anomaly trending negative direction

2005 + ~16 yrs = 2021

CAVEAT. Data sample too small.. and
The current known cycles overlay ( ie .60 yr ,21 yr .200 yr etc) are ALL entering a negative phase. The AMO may be affected by all of these cycles and may create an earlier entrance into negative territory?

Link to a larger snap to view details here

https://picasaweb.google.com/104698633266954768357/CYCLESAndCorrelations#5895605235664361634





 

Edited July 1, 2013 by crikey

[BornFromTheVoid]

Here's a graph of the AMO and global temperatures from GISS.

 

 

There does seem to be a good correlation between the two (+0.43), but something else in the background is driving things upward.

 

So if global temperatures don't start dropping (at a statistically significant rate) soon, will you be surprised?

[knocker]

There was a paper on this a couple of years ago.

 

Tracking the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation through the last 8,000 years

Understanding the internal ocean variability and its influence on climate is imperative for society. A key aspect concerns the enigmatic Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), a feature defined by a 60- to 90-year variability in North Atlantic sea-surface temperatures. The nature and origin of the AMO is uncertain, and it remains unknown whether it represents a persistent periodic driver in the climate system, or merely a transient feature. Here, we show that distinct, ~55- to 70-year oscillations characterized the North Atlantic ocean-atmosphere variability over the past 8,000 years. We test and reject the hypothesis that this climate oscillation was directly forced by periodic changes in solar activity. We therefore conjecture that a quasi-persistent ~55- to 70-year AMO, linked to internal ocean-atmosphere variability, existed during large parts of the Holocene. Our analyses further suggest that the coupling from the AMO to regional climate conditions was modulated by orbitally induced shifts in large-scale ocean-atmosphere circulation.

 

 

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v2/n2/pdf/ncomms1186.pdf

[knocker]

Greenland Sea surface temperature change and accompanying changes in the northern hemispheric climate

A sudden change in the reference Greenland Sea surface temperature (GSST) in 1979 is identified. It is found to be a part of complex changes in the northern North Atlantic seas. The GSST change, in particular, resulted in a major change in the near-surface baroclinicity in the region, in addition to a large change in the net surface heat flux at the air-sea boundary over the Greenland Sea. The differences in the atmospheric mean state between two periods, one before and the other after the GSST change in the late 1970’s, resemble those between the high- and low-North Atlantic Oscillations (NAO) index states. In addition to the changes in the mean state, major changes in the interannual variability of the atmosphere are found. A particularly interesting change in the interannual variability is found in the relationship between Jul GSST and the NAO phase in the following Feb. There is a strong correlation between Jul GSST and the NAO phase in the following Feb before the late 1970’s, but not at all after the late 1970’s. The characteristics of these changes suggest that they may be a part of the high-frequency details of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation.

 

 

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00435.1

Edited July 1, 2013 by knocker

[Coast]

 

New date set for the end of the world

 

Scientists have set a new date for the end of the world - but it is not for another two billion years.

 

All animals and plants will vanish from the Earth, which will be inherited by tiny microbes before life disappears completely, a new study suggests. Ironically, Armageddon is going to arrive as a result of too little, rather than too much, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

 

Currently experts are trying to find ways to cut levels of the greenhouse gas to prevent global warming running out of control.

But as the Sun ages and grows hotter, greater evaporation and chemical reactions with rainwater will take away more and more carbon dioxide. In less than a billion years, its levels will be too low for photosynthesising plants to survive, say scientists. When that happens, life as we know it on Earth will cease to exist.

 

With the loss of plants, herbivorous animals will also die out, as well as the carnivores that prey on them. Eventually microbes will be all that remains - and for the majority of them even their days will be numbered After another billion years, the oceans will have dried out completely leaving only the hardiest bugs, a group of microbes called extremophiles.

 

"The far-future Earth will be very hostile to life by this point," said astrobiologist Jack O'Malley-James, from the University of St Andrews in Scotland. "All living things require liquid water, so any remaining life will be restricted to pockets of liquid water, perhaps at cooler, higher altitudes or in caves underground."

 

The surviving organisms would also have to cope with extreme high temperatures and intense ultraviolet radiation, he said, and it is predicted that eventually they too will die out. Mr O'Malley-James made his bleak forecast at the National Astronomy Meeting taking place at the University of St Andrews. The predictions are based on a computer simulation of the impact long-term changes to the Sun are likely to have on Earth. As the Sun ages over the next billion years or so, it is expected to remain stable but to grow steadily brighter. The increasingly intense radiation will cause the Earth to heat up to such an extent that the oceans start to evaporate. The research may have implications for the search for extra-terrestrial life, according to Mr O'Malley-James.

 

"When we think about what to look for in the search for life beyond Earth our thoughts are largely constrained by life as we know it today, which leaves behind telltale fingerprints in our atmosphere like oxygen and ozone," he said. "Life in the Earth's far future will be very different to this, which means, to detect life like this on other planets we need to search for a whole new set of clues. "We have now simulated a dying biosphere composed of populations of the species that are most likely to survive to determine what types of gases they would release to the atmosphere. By the point at which all life disappears from the planet, we're left with a nitrogen/carbon-dioxide atmosphere with methane being the only sign of active life".

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10154162/New-date-set-for-the-end-of-the-world.html

[crikey]

BftV says

"There does seem to be a good correlation between the two (+0.43), but something else in the background is driving things upward.

So if global temperatures don't start dropping (at a statistically significant rate) soon, will you be surprised?

---------------

Re: the correlation value..

 

According to wikopedia. The AMO index graphs are often  detrended and the AGW signal is removed?

I think that the AMO oscillation on your graph uses a detrended AMO and so will not climb with global temp'

Is that how you see it?

I think the idea of de-trending , is to reveal the AMO cycle in its simplicity as a quasi - 60-70 yr cycle

So would need to overlay raw AMO ( untrended) on untrended Global temp data.?

 

As SST 's have risen in the Nth Atlantic up until 2009? , the AMO graph should show that?

 

 

This graph posted by 'sparticel' shows the un-trended AMO  l believe. It shows the AMO increasing as do the global temps' 

 

I agree there is a variable other than AMO which is causing an incline.

 

Some theories

-another cycle with longer wavelength  ( 116 yr, 196 yr ..etc)

- background forcing of base temp by AGW's

-geomagnetic flux increase ( solar)

- planetary/lunar  tidal force

 

or combos of the above

 

--------------

 

you ask if l will be surprised if global temps will not drop statistically significantly

 

According to AMO cycle and how the historical global temp record has responded to the AMO cycle a period of decline similar to past hiatus periods is imminent

and yes l would be very surprised. if the hiatus stopped now.

The past declines were short lived at about half phase of AMO. Around 15 yrs

 

How may years are required for statistical significance?

 

Notice the downward phase has a smaller  rate of decline than the upward trend which had a higher RATE of temp'  increase.

 

The upward phase is stronger than the downward phase. Why?

 

The net effect is warming!!

 

For global temps to reverse and decline , the AMO must stay longer or be stronger in the downward phase of the AMO .

 

According to past patterns of AMO and global temp from the data you provided an hiatus of 15 yrs is due

 

and then intuitively the upward cycle would resume.

 

From the perspective of cycle analysis only. We have reached modern maximum around 1992 -2004 and are on a downward cycle ( 21 yr, 60 yr 196 yr and 200 yr!!)

together.

Constructive interference of at least 4cycles

 

We are at the door of major climate shift from the perspective of cycle analysis

 

Bigger in magnitude than the mid 70's climate shift

 

The theory of AGW will be tested to the max' under these forcing influences

 

I have a personal view and that the 200 yr and other longer cycles are more powerful forcing agents than C02 ppm.

[crikey]

 

Pier Corybn predicts global cooling has commenced and will continue for a number of decades

I expect he is referring to the 200 yr Gleisberg cycle? currently commenced a downward cycle

 

I found this link here

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/suggestions-2/comment-page-1/#comment-55483

 

He explains that jetstreams in the Maunder and Dalton minimum contracted south during these minimums and brought extreme cold spells to the mid altitudes in the Nth hemisphere.

He is not surprised that this jet stream change is happening now. He says it will continue or be predominant.

Edited July 5, 2013 by crikey

[crikey]

Whoops sorry. I meant the De vries cycle

Like many other weather/climate scientists he is predicting much colder NH winters for the next ~20 years. The timing of this change fits very well with the ~200 year de Vries solar quasi-cycle…

1410-1500 cold – Low Solar Activity(LSA?) – (Sporer minimum)1510-1600 warm – High Solar Activity(HSA?)1610-1700 cold – (LSA) (Maunder minimum)1710-1800 warm – (HSA)1810-1900 cold – (LSA) (Dalton minimum)1910-2000 warm – (HSA)2010-2100 (cold???) – (LSA???)

[BornFromTheVoid]

 

Pier Corybn predicts global cooling has commenced and will continue for a number of decades

I expect he is referring to the 200 yr Gleisberg cycle? currently commenced a downward cycle

 

I found this link here

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/suggestions-2/comment-page-1/#comment-55483

 

He explains that jetstreams in the Maunder and Dalton minimum contracted south during these minimums and brought extreme cold spells to the mid altitudes in the Nth hemisphere.

He is not surprised that this jet stream change is happening now. He says it will continue or be predominant.

 

I'm afraid Piers Corbyn ain't rated too highly around here.

 

The jet stream hasn't headed south in recent years. It has slowed, become more meridional, but, is still gradually heading north on average.

 

Northern hemisphere winters haven't become colder, only regional cold spells have gotten more severe, but these are always balanced out by regional warm/mild spells. Which mean that northern hemisphere winters are still gradually warming, so no sign of cooling yet.

[Methuselah]

 

Pier Corybn predicts global cooling has commenced and will continue for a number of decades

I expect he is referring to the 200 yr Gleisberg cycle? currently commenced a downward cycle

 

I found this link here

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/suggestions-2/comment-page-1/#comment-55483

 

He explains that jetstreams in the Maunder and Dalton minimum contracted south during these minimums and brought extreme cold spells to the mid altitudes in the Nth hemisphere.

He is not surprised that this jet stream change is happening now. He says it will continue or be predominant.

Indeed he does...What global cooling is he referring to though? As yet, there hasn't been any...

[Gray-Wolf]

I'd just posted the latest WMO report over on 'manmade' Pete and they do not seem to see any 'cooling/Stalling' in global temps either?

[VillagePlank]

Indeed he does...What global cooling is he referring to though? As yet, there hasn't been any...

 

Quite true; but there has been a reduction in the rate of warming ...

[knocker]

Improved measurements of sun to advance understanding of climate change

Lean's model, which is now adjusted to the new lower absolute TSI values, reproduces with high fidelity the TSI variations that TIM observes and indicates that solar irradiance levels during the recent prolonged solar minimum period were likely comparable to levels in past solar minima. Using this model, Lean estimates that solar variability produces about 0.1o Celsius (0.18o Fahrenheit) global warming during the 11-year solar cycle, but is likely not the main cause of global warming in the past three decades.

 

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-01/uoca-imo011411.php

 

The paper

 

A new, lower value of total solar irradiance: Evidence and climate significance

[1] The most accurate value of total solar irradiance during the 2008 solar minimum period is 1360.8 ± 0.5 W m^−2 according to measurements from the Total Irradiance Monitor (TIM) on NASA's Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) and a series of new radiometric laboratory tests. This value is significantly lower than the canonical value of 1365.4 ± 1.3 W m^−2 established in the 1990s, which energy balance calculations and climate models currently use. Scattered light is a primary cause of the higher irradiance values measured by the earlier generation of solar radiometers in which the precision aperture defining the measured solar beam is located behind a larger, view-limiting aperture. In the TIM, the opposite order of these apertures precludes this spurious signal by limiting the light entering the instrument. We assess the accuracy and stability of irradiance measurements made since 1978 and the implications of instrument uncertainties and instabilities for climate research in comparison with the new TIM data. TIM's lower solar irradiance value is not a change in the Sun's output, whose variations it detects with stability comparable or superior to prior measurements; instead, its significance is in advancing the capability of monitoring solar irradiance variations on climate-relevant time scales and in improving estimates of Earth energy balance, which the Sun initiates

 

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010GL045777/abstract

Edited July 5, 2013 by knocker

[Methuselah]

Quite true; but there has been a reduction in the rate of warming ...

That is, of course also true...But what is Piers trying to achieve (obfuscation apart) by explaining a phenomenon that isn't even there? Is it that old political trick: if someone is seen to put loads and loads of effort into his 'explanations' people will just assume that wherever it is he's 'explaining' is actually happening? 

[crikey]

Re: Jetstream BftV. Do you have some time series data on the Jetstream position. Would love to see that?

Anomaly of latitude position and zonal /meridonal anomaly? Link?

 

Sorry Pier isn't popular.. For me its the paywall problem..to get a look in..a turn off~!

I agree with his analysis of his general downward global trend based on cycle analysis.

 

The down cycle has just started 'G Wolf,' and wouldn't be noted by the WMO as they report decadal trends

 

2008--2018  will be next decadal decline.

 

Does the WMO do a global temperature prediction like the Met office? Could you post that on global temps thread?

 Yes . I did note theWMO  have not mentioned at stall all. But the MET office has mentioned in their forecast?

Posted below is the WMO decadal trend. and global temp'oscillation snap shot

The hiatus period from 40's to 70's stand out.

Is that a cycle or AGW attribute?

I think that is a cycle..?

 

http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_976_en.html

 

 

 

 

KNOCKER

I read an article claiming that the satellite measurement is faulty because they measure

quote

"SORCE is orbiting about 90,000 kilometres below the top of the Earth’s atmosphere."

 

and so may not be a true representation of TSI?

 

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/11/22/tim-cullen-the-problem-with-tsi-total-solar-irradiance/

 

quote

"SORCE is not precisely measuring TSI.

SORCE is precisely measuring Transformed TSI.

 

however maybe this doesn't matter as TSI is not the only variable in question for global warming

UV, Ozone concentration, equatorial stratospheric gradient, stratospheric warmings, downwelling,

tidal forcing both oceanic and atmospheric ,expansion and contraction of stratosphere, Jetstream changes

cosmic rays, geomagnetic influence  etc as some cards on the table

--

 

I am not too familiar with Piers work but he is not alone by a long shot regarding forecast for global cooling and a maunder/Dalton type minimum forecast in play

 

Statistically cycle analysis says it is upon is. Now how this impinges on AGW theory is interesting

 

Minus 0. 3 deg C maximum impact you say from solar downturn.

Is that per decade?.

 

Is that for an 11 yr solar cycle or a 200 yr solar cycle?

 

cheers all

It is currently 10.30pm in Melbourne Australia.

 

Thanks for the interaction all.

. I do have problems with those pay walled studies KNOCKER. You can never read the details or method and are basically useless  for analysis

Glad to seel l am not alone in my belief in the power of cycles' sparticle.'

[knocker]

Crikey I'm afraid you need to tell me what the equatorial stratospheric gradient is.

[jethro]

 

Pier Corybn predicts global cooling has commenced and will continue for a number of decades

I expect he is referring to the 200 yr Gleisberg cycle? currently commenced a downward cycle

 

I found this link here

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/suggestions-2/comment-page-1/#comment-55483

 

He explains that jetstreams in the Maunder and Dalton minimum contracted south during these minimums and brought extreme cold spells to the mid altitudes in the Nth hemisphere.

He is not surprised that this jet stream change is happening now. He says it will continue or be predominant.

 

Try these....

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8615789.stm

 

http://www.met.reading.ac.uk/users/users/1353

 

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/abduss_APR.pdf

 

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.1954v1.pdf

[Gray-Wolf]

Quite true; but there has been a reduction in the rate of warming ...

 

http://www.newsdaily.com/article/920d9727ab22135881f58608d311be26/un-2001-2010-decade-shows-faster-warming-trend

 

Seems the UN are taking issue with you Sparks?