Posted on 03/04/2012 7:59:04 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Key Points
Emphatic Blow To CO2 Warmists – New Study Shows A Clear Millennial Solar Impact Throughout Holocene
By Pierre Gosselin (reposted from No Tricks Zone with permission)
A new paper titled High-resolution sea surface reconstructions off Cape Hatteras over the last 10 ka appearing just recently in the AGU Paleoceanography Journal authored by Caroline Cléroux et al provides further, clear evidence of a major solar impact on climate during the Holocene. Hat/tip: http://kaltesonne.de/.
According to the paper’s abstract, the study presents high-resolution foraminiferal-based sea surface temperature, sea surface salinity and upper water column stratification reconstructions off Cape Hatteras, a region sensitive to atmospheric and thermohaline circulation changes associated with the Gulf Stream.
Now if I recall correctly, this was the region that Stefan Rahmstorf deemed not long ago as good enough to be used to represent sea level trend for the whole world.
The above authors focused on the last 10,000 years to study the surface hydrology changes under our current climate conditions and looked at centennial to millennial time scale variability. To do this, a seabed core was extracted off the coast of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina at a water depth of 620 m.
They observed opposite evolutions between the conditions off Cape Hatteras and those south of Iceland, known today for the North Atlantic Oscillation pattern. Around 8.3 ka and 5.2–3.5 ka, they reconstructed positive salinity anomalies off Cape Hatteras. For the 5.2–3.5 ka period they demonstrated that the salinity increase was caused by the cessation of the low salinity surface flow coming from the north.
What’s behind the anomalies? They found that variations were in sync with total solar irradiance. The abstract states (emphasis added):
Wavelet transform analysis revealed a 1000-year period pacing the d18O signal over the early Holocene. This 1000-year frequency band is significantly coherent with the 1000-year frequency band of Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) between 9.5 ka and 7 ka and both signals are in phase over the rest of the studied period.”
The paper’s introduction has a few sentences that the IPCC really needs to take note of (emphasis added):
The last decade of paleoclimate research has shown that the Holocene is not the stable, climatic event-free period as previously thought: both external and internal (oceanic) forcings have caused major climatic changes. [...] On a shorter time scale, observations over about the last 50 years show interannual and decadal climate change. These fluctuations probably persisted throughout the Holocene, together with centennial to millennial variability.”
Dr. Sebastian Lüning writes at the Die kalte Sonne site:
The new findings once again clearly underscore that the last several thousands of years are characterized by natural temperature cycles that are controlled by fluctuations in solar activity (see p. 68-75 in ‘Die kalte Sonne’). The logical continuation of these natural cycles through today shows that an important part of the warming of the last 150 years has to be attributed to the increase in solar activity. It is not a mere coincidence that the last decades have been the most solar active of the last 10,000 years.
The climate models used by the IPCC are not able to reproduce these millennial cycles because they assign only a very small climate impact to the sun. Also the recently introduced new climate model from the Max Planck Institute in Hamburg suffers from the same deficiency, and thus the results of that model are essentially unrealistic.”
In layman’s terms: crap in, crap out.
Once again yet another study that emphatically shows that climate changed in the recent past (while CO2 was stable), and that these changes were in sync with solar activity.
Just posting this,....still reading but seems big,
Sounds like it could be a tad more scientific than Dr. Mann’s tree rings.
For several years I’ve PSed many emails to leftist friends and relatives with: It’s the sun.
If we rename the Sun ‘George Bush’ then maybe we can the libs to come around.
The problem is easily solved. Just label the authors “deniers”, intimate that they got their funding from oil companies, and punish the journal that published the article.
Then, in the next IPCC report, totally ignore this paper.
Is this in English?
I'm 65 so school was somewhat different back then.
Excellent!
I also think this is the Society that Blieck was the Ethics Committee Chair....
How about that.
****************************EXCERPT***************************************
Myrrh says:
John says:
March 4, 2012 at 1:13 am
Secondly, whatever one’s viewpoint on the importance of CO2, the last sentence of the Abstract of the Nature article in the last link above (“solar active of last 10,000 years”) says this:
“Although the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot numbers may indicate that the Sun has contributed to the unusual climate change during the twentieth century, we point out that solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades.”
Yes, maybe the authors felt that they had to say this to get published, and they don’t really believe it. But let’s see if there is confirmation of these findings before getting on a bandwagon. Getting on bandwagons too early is part of why we are in such a dismal place in science right now. Let’s take the high road and wait for more conclusive evidence.
I think that’s pretty much standard practice from those still trying to do real science exploration, I see it all the time. What I find gratifying is that such research is still being done, compare with the many deliberately biased studies which produce the logic fail results; the examples too numerous but like http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/29/hansens-sea-shell-game/ and http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/18/the-500-year-fud-about-sea-levels/
This relevant guest post by Alec Rawls a must read:
“Omitted variable fraud: vast evidence for solar climate driver rates one oblique sentence in AR5
“Expert review” of the First Order Draft of AR5 closed on the 10th. Here is the first paragraph of my submitted critique:
“My training is in economics where we are very familiar with what statisticians call “the omitted variable problem” (or when it is intentional, “omitted variable fraud”). Whenever an explanatory variable is omitted from a statistical analysis, its explanatory power gets misattributed to any correlated variables that are included. This problem is manifest at the very highest level of AR5, and is built into each step of its analysis.”
“Given what I found—systematic fraud—”
“The empirical evidence in favor of the solar explanation is overwhelming. Dozens of peer-reviewed studies have found a very high degree of correlation (.5 to .8) between solar-magnetic activity and global temperature going back many thousands of years (Bond 2001, Neff 2001, Shaviv 2003, Usoskin 2005, and many others listed below). In other words, solar activity “explains,” in the statistical sense, 50 to 80% of past temperature change.”
“A person reading AR5 from cover to cover would come away with not even a hint that for more than ten years a veritable flood of studies have been finding solar activity to explain something on the order of half of all past temperature variation. The omission is virtually complete.
“As a result, AR5 misattributes virtually all of the explanatory power of solar-magnetic activity to the correlated CO2 variable. This misattribution can be found both in AR5′s analytical discussions and in its statistical estimations and projections, and the error could not be more consequential.”
“Nothing could be more perverse in such a circumstance than to unplug the modern world in a misbegotten jihad against CO2. The IPCC’s omitted variable fraud must stop. AR5′s misattribution of 20th century warming to CO2 must stop. The evidence overwhelmingly supports the solar-magnetic warming theory. ”
I was hard pressed to keep the extract this short.. :)
Perhaps this subject deserves its own link on WUWT?
*****************************************************
I also think this is the Society that Glieck was the Ethics Committee Chair....
************************************EXCERPT****************************************
Mike McMillan says:
Interesting that the Max Planck model underweights the sun, because Sami Solanki was one of the scientists who determined that “the last decades have been the most solar active of the last 10,000 years.”
I copied this from Aviation Week a number of years ago
http://i39.tinypic.com/iqf0a9.jpg
**********************************EXCERPT***************************************
Lars P. says:
John says: March 4, 2012 at 1:13 am
“Although the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot numbers may indicate that the Sun has contributed to the unusual climate change during the twentieth century, we point out that solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades.”
Yes, maybe the authors felt that they had to say this to get published, and they don’t really believe it.
————————————————————————————————–
the sun’s influence would rather be over longer – centennial periods, where we have additional local decadal variations partially controlled by other mechanisms like ocean circulations or other.
I think you are right we should wait for more but it is encouraging to see science advancing.
*********************************EXCERPT*******************************************
Peter Kovachev says:
This is a travesty. If the Sun were to be shown that it drives climate, how can we then blame people and extract taxes from them to save our world?
A citizen’s brainstormig is in order. I will contribute with my hypothesis that rising levels of CO2 cause increases in UFO activity, chem-trails and HAARP-like long waves which clearly change the direction and amplification of the teluric currents, causing impossible-to-measure but accurately computer-modelled spiritual energies which shoot up through the poles (explaining the auroras and migraines) to bombard the Sun, which understandably responds by…spotting, of course. In conclusion, it’s worse than we thought.
There, just as good as the current UN-IPCC hypothesis which has been taking a beating lately due to the embarrassing pecccadilloes of its proponents. I just need some funding to get a Playstation which can regurgitate a new model, to draw up some cool charts and to rush textbook changes for the kiddies in time for the new school year next September.
I think they're pretty slick ~ using AGW's own language against AGW.
Kind of boxes AGW in to the period covered by Mann's "hockey stick" !
It is beyond funny!
Being of "Heavenly origin" he, The Sun, is supposed to be perfect, unchanging and unblemished.
So, the director of the UN-IPCC directed that the reports on the Sun's variability be "adjusted" to reflect his theology.
It's times like that you get the feeling the Moslems are on to something when they go into screaming rages over whatever it is the Hindus are up to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
