From Andy May
My last post about the AMO and Hadcrut5 aroused a certain interest and some criticism. As I explained, there are two common methods for calculating the AMO index. One is to fit a line of the smallest squares to the AMO SSTS (sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic) and use the line to deactivate the AMO, creating an index. This was the original methodology, as from Enfield et al. and Gray et al. It is the method I prefer because it does not make any assumptions about the origin of the increasing SSTs in the North Atlantic.
The other method recommended by Trenberth & Shea is to subtract the GMST (global medium -sized surface temperature anomaly) from the amo temperature anomaly. They believe that this is better because GMST heating is due to “anthropogenic changes” that mask the natural amo oscillation. Therefore, they assume that global warming is completely produced by humans and the AMO can “repair” by subtracting it. After subtracting the GMST there is still a vibration, but the amplitude is reduced (Trenberth & Shea, 2006).
Trenberth and Shea continue to criticize the original AMO index as no physical importance. This is true, but it is also impartial and not spoiled with unjustified assumptions about the cause of global warming. In this article we will show that the long-term trend, which can be seen in the raw north-wing-sea of surface, can also be removed with the well-documented bray solar cycle. The long -term signal, observed since the end of the small ice age in 1850, can at least partially be attributed to increasing solar activity. I do not say that the Bray sun cycle is the cause of long-term warming in the SST data of the raw amo region, I only say that this could be the case. This invalidates the assumption of Trenberth and Shea that human activities are the cause. It is your assumption that is questionable.
In May & Crok (download the final version here) we used the common Noaa/Kaplan -AMO region before rejection. Figure 1 shows the raw and unimaginated V5 data for the Amo North Atlantic region (equator up to 70 N), the only data set for the AMO region is similar to the NOAA/Kaplan data record. The Hadst 4.1 is different because it is not braided and has gaps that jump around over time (see Figure 3 here).
Figure 1. Only V5 SST for the North Atlantic (0-70N). The thin-dotted line is the least squares of the first data, and the orange line is the Bray Solar Cycle Trend for 1850-2030. They are similar. The only amo is in grade C and the Bray trend is dimensionless.
James Bray described the Bray Climate Cycle in a classic paper in nature in 1968. More information about the Bray climate and the sun cycle can be found here and here. He used fossil evidence of progress and retreat around the world to show that there was a clear pattern of changes that have been for about 2500 years. Based on sun spots and auroral records, he speculated that there was a suitable sun cycle. Much later, Ilya Usoskin built the Hallstatt or Bray sun cycle using 14c and 10be cosmogenic isotope recordings that reflect solar activity. Uskin found that the most likely low Bray cycle -depth time around 1510AD and 810 BC. Were centered. We used this data and a cosine function to create the Bray trend shown in Figure 1. A diagram that shows both “bray low” cold periods and more of the Bray sun cycle is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 is very matched. Figure 2 offers details here.
Figure 2. The Bray -Sonnen cycle oriented with Ilya Usoskin's two youngest Bray lows. This illustration is considerably simplified to see further details here.
The calculated trend meets its low points near Usoskin's data (± 20 years) and is arbitrary from -1 to 1. We do not say that all climate trends in several century are due to the Bray cycle or that it alone has a long -term climate change (see here). This article simply denies the anthropogenic acceptance of Trenberth and Shea and offers a simple but plausible alternative. Trenberth and Shea did not consider that changes in the sun may have contributed to the latest warming.
In Figure 3 we show the light blue dotted V5 amo region SSTS shown in Figure 1, which were rejected with the light blue dotted line of the smallest squares.
Figure 3. The only V5 SSTS from the AMO area, which were best adapted with the least squares shown in Figure 1.
In Figure 4, we rejected the SSSTs of ERSST V5 AMO region with the Bray sun cycle shown in orange in Figure 1. The result is very similar to those shown in Figure 3. They are not exactly the same and part of the differences between the two possibly on human activities or emissions, but the main point is that the reason is caused by global warming, which is 100% caused by human. Changes to solar activity, which were documented by James Bray and Ilya Usoskin and their colleagues, could have caused some of the long-term warming, which can be seen in the raw artist STS shown in Figure 1.
Figure 4. The SSSTs of ERSSST V5 AMO region, which is led with the Bray Solar Cycle Trend.
The Bray solar cycle trend shown is dimensionless and not a suitable trend for rejection of the AMO region. In the depths of the small ice age or in 810 BC. The main point is that the bray climate and sun cycles are well established and a natural long-term warming trend is expected today. There are other long sun cycles, such as the 1,000-year vertebral cycle (see the yellow beams in Figures 1, 2 and 5 here), but the bray cycle is the strongest. The vertebral cycle is currently also increasing and can be a factor for the current long -term warming.
The assumption of Trenberth & Shea that today's global warming is caused by people and should be removed from the AMO index is unfounded. It is also likely that part of the long -term warming trend is natural and due to the increasing solar activity. Sun radiation can penetrate the surface of the sea and heat the Atlantic up to a depth of 100 meters or more. Greenhouse gas radiation cannot penetrate the surface of the sea and consequently causes much less heating of the sea surface. Therefore, the solar radiation per watt is more effective by 4 to 7 times more effective, according to Judith Lean to heat the North Atlantic, a point that is often overlooked by the climate “consensus”.
Bray, JR (1968). Dowlights and solar activity since the fifth century BC. BC and in the sun cycle. Nature, 220. Referred to https://www.nature.com/articles/220672A0
D. Enfield, D. Mestas-Nunez, Am & Trimble, P. (2001). The Atlantic multidecadal oscillation and its relationship with precipitation and river flows in the continental US geophysical research letters, 28 (10). Care for https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/1029/2000gl012745
Gray, St, Great, LJ, Betancourt, JL & Pederson, GT (2004). A reconstruction of the Atlantic multidecadal vibration based on Baumring since 1567 AD. Res. Lett., 31. DOI: 10.1029/2004Gl019932
May, A. & Crok, M. (2024, May 29). Carbon dioxide and a warming climate are not problems. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 1-15. DOI: 10.1111/AJES.12579
Trenberth, K. & Shea, D. (2006). Atlantic hurricanes and natural variability in 2005. Geophysical Research Letters, 33rd Https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/1029/2006894
Usoskin, IG, Gallet, Y., Lopes, F., Kovaltsov, GA & Hulot, G. (2016). Sun activity during the Holocene: the Hallstatt cycle and its episode for Grand Minima and Maxima. Astronomy and astrophysics, 587. DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527295
Like this:
Load…
Related
Do you discover more from watts?
Subscribe to the latest posts to your e -mail.
