What Do We Think About Climate Change

From Richard Mackey at http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/...-evidence-for-clouds-as-the-cause/#more-11194


"Most recently, in a paper published in March this year, Dr. Ichiro Yasuda, Professor, Ocean Research Institute, The University of Tokyo showed that the Luna Nodal Cycle (LNC) drives the PDO.

The citation is: Yasuda, I. (2009), ‘The 18.6-year period moon-tidal cycle in Pacific Decadal Oscillation reconstructed from tree-rings in western North America’, Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L05605, doi:10.1029/2008GL036880.

Here is the Abstract:
“Time-series of Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) reconstructed from tree-rings in Western North America is found to have a statistically significant periodicity of 18.6- year period lunar nodal tidal cycle; negative (positive) PDO tends to occur in the period of strong (weak) diurnal tide. In the 3rd and 5th (10th, 11th and 13rd) year after the maximum diurnal tide, mean-PDO takes significant negative (positive) value, suggesting that the Aleutian Low is weak (strong), western-central North Pacific in 30–50N is warm (cool) and equator-eastern rim of the Pacific is cool (warm). This contributes to climate predictability with a time-table from the astronomical tidal cycle”.

The last LNC maximum happened on September 16, 2006.

According to Prof Yasuda’s finding the PDO should now be taking a significant negative value, as is being found. The climate consequences are therefore as expected.

There is substantial evidence that the LNC is a significant contributor to our planet’s climate dynamics. I include an illustrated explanation of the LNC and review a lot of the published literature about its contribution to climate dynamics in my paper “The Sun’s role in regulating the Earth’s climate dynamics” published in the Journal of Energy and Environment Vol 20 No 1 2009.

Amongst other things I wrote:
“The ocean currents generated by the northward movement of the tidal bulge, in conjunction with the rotation of the Earth through the bulges in the normal manner creating our experience of the tides, brings warmish equatorial water to the Arctic accelerating the warming that had being going on there because of other forms of solar activity as discussed below.
The LNC has maximum effect at higher latitudes, resulting in higher sea levels at these latitudes. It creates tidal currents resulting in diapycnal mixing, bringing the warmer equatorial waters into the Arctic. The LNC is therefore a major determinant of Arctic climate dynamics, influencing long term fluctuations in Arctic ice. As a result, it is a key driver of European climate.”

There is also a very good paper accompanied by useful discussion and web links about the LNC on WUWT here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/...obally-averaged-temperature-trends/#more-7965
(aka http://tinyurl.com/mrjq9e )

The effect of the LNC is amplified by the distinctive geography of the high latitude oceans, e.g. the North Pacific and the Bering and Okhotsk Seas.

Prof Yasuda and his colleagues have been researching the role of the LNC for several years. Their work is meticulous and rigorous. It builds on other published research in this field over the last forty years, which I’ve reviewed in my Journal of Energy and Environment paper.

A little about how the Sun creates the LNC:

The Sun’s gravitational field makes the Moon’s Earthly orbit swivel around in a clockwise manner, over a cycle of 18.6 years, with respect to the plane of the Earth’s orbit, the ecliptic. The Moon moves with respect to the ecliptic up and down a northerly latitude throughout the LNC. This arises because the Earth is titled on it axis and inclined away from the Sun and because the Moon’s orbit is tilted a little relative to the ecliptic. It is as if the Sun strives to pull the plane of the Moon’s orbit into its own plane, the ecliptic. But there is an alternate motion at right angles to the applied force, resulting in a revolution of the pole of the Moon’s orbit around the pole of the ecliptic.

The LNC encodes information about the Moon, Earth, Sun geometry that relates to tidal extremes, at least at high latitudes. It defines how the angle of the Moon’s orbit to the Earth’s equatorial plane combines with, or partially cancels out, the tilt in the Earth’s axis. From the perspective of an observer on the Earth, during the LNC the Moon moves along a northern latitude about ten degrees from a position about 18.5 degrees north of the equator to one that is 28.5 degrees, which it reaches after 18.6 years.

I can send my Journal of Energy and Environment paper to anyone who wants it.

The LNC was first reported by John Bradley in his grandly titled “A Letter to the Right Honourable George Earl of Macclesfield Concerning an
Apparent Motion observed in Some of the Fixed Stars”, published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Vol 45, London, 1748, pps 1 to 45."


Cheers.

 

More from Richard Mackey:

"The lunisolar tides are a consequence of the earth and the moon
orbiting their common barycentre, the perturbing effect of the sun
and the earth and the moon jointly orbiting the solar system’s
barycentre. Tidal effects, including those arising from the variable
rotation of the earth induced by the tides, include variations in
rainfall, including floods and droughts; sea-ice conditions; seasurface
temperature; sea-level; atmospheric pressure; frequency of
thunderstorms; deep ocean currents; tidal flooding; and the speed
of the major ocean currents. Tidal dynamics operate at all levels
of the planet, from the gaseous atmosphere to the earth’s inner
structures: the fluid outer core that surrounds the solid inner core.
MUNK and WUNSCH (1998) and WUNSCH and FERRARI (2004)
have shown that the tides occur throughout the vertical depth of
the oceans, mixing and churning the oceans with profound and
periodic effects on climate. KEELING and WHORF (1997) and
(2000) have presented evidence for the hypothesis that the
lunisolar tidal forces churn the waters of the planet’s oceans.
They hypothesise that there is a long cycle of alternating weak and
strong tides resulting in warming and cooling respectively. They
have published evidence that suggests the weakening of the tides
began in 1975, so that from that time onwards, the oceans began to
warm. As reported in the several papers cited above, Solanki and
co-workers have shown that a continuing increase in solar output
has also warmed the oceans. The combined effect of these two
processes may have resulted in the increased warming that has
occurred since around 1975. Additionally, the moon and the sun
transfer large quantities of energy to earth through the lunisolar
tides. According to BARKIN and FERRANDIZ (2004), the tidal
forces of the sun and moon acting on the earth as a whole produce
elastic energy that resides in the earth’s core and crust that is
significantly greater than the sum of the elastic energies of the
separate pairs of bodies. Some of the elastic energy is dissipated
as heat and contributes, as the periodicities of the tides determine,
to the warming of the earth and the oceans.·

Find the whole thing in his most interesting paper at:
http://www.griffith.edu.au/conference/ics2007/pdf/ICS176.pdf

Cheers.

 

And even more:

"According to sim hypothesis, Sunspot Cycles No 25 and 26 will
be smaller and weaker than Sunspot Cycle No 24, which will be
smaller and weaker that Sunspot Cycle No 23, and the earth will
enter a little ice age. According to this analysis, as the sun enters
Sunspot Cycle No 26, the earth’s climate is expected to be much
the same as it was during the Dalton Minimum cold period from
the 1790s to the 1820s. Subsequent orbits are expected to become
more regular. Solar output will increase once the sun leaves the
chaotic phase of its orbit around the barycentre. Solar activity is
expected to pick up; the warm climate return for the remainder of
the century, from about 2050 onwards. It is to be hoped that in its
next series of publications, the IPCC includes in its modelling of
climate change the consequences of reductions in solar activity
expected during Sunspot Cycles No 24, 25 and 26."

Cheers.

 

Bravo, Guillermo!

 

"The epicenter of the AGW Armageddon is 12 trees from remote Russia......AGW is second only to Global Banking as the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on HumanKind." (A poster at WUWT)

See:
Yamal: A "Divergence" Problem
by Steve McIntyre on September 27th, 2009

From there:

"The ...image below is, in my opinion, one of the most disquieting images ever presented at Climate Audit."
(Steve McIntyre)

Cheers

 

The one single thing that separates those people that still live a primitive existence and all that goes with it (poor health and nutrition, diseases due to lack of clean water, poor or non-existent access to modern healthcare) from the rest of us is electric power. People in the primitive existence still burn wood for all power needs, just as we once did.

So electrification is a really big deal to these people, just as it once was for rural parts of the USA.

So who could possibly be opposed to rural electrification in the poorest regions of the world, like sub-Saharan Africa? Why the green wackos, that's who! And why do they oppose it? On the grounds that only "Clean" energy sources be allowed. But if we can't afford the prices tag of so-called 'clean' energy sources like solar and wind, then how can the poorest countries afford them? Answer: They can't.

So the green wackos advocate a de-facto prohibition on rural electrification in the poorest regions on earth by forbidding them to avail themselves of the energy sources that they can actually afford. The result will be, ironically, more pollution as these people will continue to burn wood for power, which is FAR dirtier than electricity from fossil fuels. This is a perfect example of how these carbon cutting schemes amount to a totally self-defeating fool's errand.

This is happening RIGHT NOW!

Jimbo

 

my latest project

reading back through I notice that no one was able to presented any, let alone a wealth of scientific evidence contrary to the four various methods quoted all agreeing with one another concerning the isotopic signature of the excess co2 as being directly attributable to the burning of fossil fuels.

face it guys
there was never any real scientific debate over global climate change because there were simply no competing theories
for that mater there isn't even a competing hypothesis being kicked around
the science is in and the only debate is a public relations one and that an obvious debacle of misinformation by the deniers obvious to any who care to look, unable to offer any coherent alternatives to the science deniers simply descend to cheap shots and a distinct lack in civility as well as tact in there efforts to keep there heads in the sand
while proponents of meaningful change are constantly trying to stick to the science

the simple reality is that all the insults in the world wont prevent the majority of the people from realizing what the scientific community has been saying all along

as for those few deniers in the crowd

I think Gerry Garcia said it best

have a great day folks

B

 

"The one single thing that separates those people that still live a primitive existence...from the rest of us is electric power" - and the woodwork of Boston!
Beautiful, and thanks for freeing the potential CO2 of those trees!

 

Nice woodwork, Boston. No competing theories? Listen closer, 'cause I hear plenty.

 

Actually, I havn't heard anything from the GW crowd lately. Al Gore got, what, $529 million of our money for his Finnish electric car company the other day. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125383160812639013.html The whole state of affairs lately is pure ****.

 

Obama owns a piece of that action, also, through the California group that has its teeth in the Finnish company.

 

"you aint going to learn
what you dont want to know"

Precisely! Apply that to yourself, Boston.

Cheers.

 

Genius has reached a new level! http://www.reuters.com/article/olympicsNews/idUSLU38985020090930
Zan, Sayonara.

 

"Global warming is getting worse. We have to come up with measures without which Olympic Games could not last long.

"Scientists have said we have passed the point of no return," said Ishihara."

Then why must we "come up with measures"? To what avail?

 

Global Climate Debate
Voice your opinion before the UN Climate Change Conference 2009
www.cop15.dk/blogs

Ahoy the Cool Brigade!