Posted in Uncategorized
Judith Curry raises the part to the sociology of
climate science only. The oceans are what matters most.
Post July 25th, 2018
Talking about the difference between ocean circulation and climate more generally is per se a strong massage that there is a strong correlation. Back in 1984 Carl Wunsch discussed the matter already lengthy in: ”The Global Climate”, ed. John T. Houghton, Cambridge p.189-203). He raises a number of topics, saying for example: “The role of the ocean in climate and climate change is unlikely to be demonstrated and understood until observations become meaningful in terms of physics being tested” (p.189); and “There is no substitute for adequate data”, (p.200).
More recently Carl Wunsch published the paper “Towards Understanding the Paleocean” (Quaternary Science Review, 2010, p. 1960-1967). Almost a decade late the paper surfaced due to Prof. Judith Curry while doing a literature survey for a paper on Climate Uncertainty and Risk. As she regarded the paper by the esteemed oceanographer for a fascinating perspective on paleo-oceanography and paleoclimatology, she used it for a post on her blog Climate Etc.; titled: ”The perils of ‘near-tabloid science’” on July 22, 2018. Unfortunately she chooses a one-sided approach by selecting only excerpts of relevance to the sociology of climate science. The oceanic part is completely neglected, although the Wunsch paper expresses the view understanding the dynamics and physics of the ocean is a perquisite for predicting future climate. Merely concentration on the sociology of climate science indicates to the fundamental problems in the climate change debate is distracting from the core issue of climate: the oceans. One need only to read the comments to Curry’s post at Climate Etc. & WUWT. The ocean issue is not discussed.
Carl Wunsch has raised the need for ocean observation throughout his career as oceanographer (see above). In his essay of 2010 he mention inter alias:
__ Myriad hypotheses have been put forward as rationalizing some elements of the oceanic role in
influencing climate–ranging over essentially all possible time scales out to the age of the ocean. One cannot begin to discuss all of these, and so I will here take as a not-untypical example, the hypothesis that the North Atlantic circulation largely controls the climate system, and in particular, the notion that the surface salinity is the determining influence.
___ As with future climate, where no data exist at all, the models promise descriptions of climate change –past and future– without the painful necessity of obtaining supporting observations.
___ The study of paleoclimate encompasses such a huge range of problems, methods, regions, phenomena, time and space scales, that no one has mastered it all. With that complexity, any science runs the risk of becoming so abstract, or so devoted to particular stories, or both, that they lose relevance to the physical world.
In his previous essay “OBSERVATIONAL NETWORK DESIGN FOR CLIMATE”, 2009, the list of requirements is even more detailed (excerpts):
(1) The problems of climate are global: understanding of the nature of the mean ocean, and its variability cannot ultimately be isolated from even remote regions. Dependence on distant regions is only weakly a function of the space-time scale of any particular disturbance —in many cases, signals of change are transmitted globally extremely rapidly, but with final equilibrium requiring decades to thousands of years.
(2) Any true global observing system will be an amalgam of disparate elements such as altimeters, drifters, gliders, floats, and moorings.
(3) True understanding of the climate system can be claimed only if all the observations are considered (….).
(4) True understanding of the climate system requires a synthesis of the disparate data types with the dynamics believed to govern the system. (5) ….
(6) Quantitative use of data and models cannot be done without adequate knowledge of the likely errors of both. (7…; 8….)
(9) Any useful ocean observation system must be open ended in time—there is no low-frequency cut-off to the time scales over which the system is capable of change, and new physics always enters as the time scale increases. Much of what we see today may well be the result of changes and forces acting in the distant past. Design considerations must thus include the ability to sustain a high quality system indefinitely so that those long times are ultimately observed.
Carl Wunsch’s message is explicit. Without an in-depth, profound and long lasting ocean observing system the climate change debate remains an unsolved and shaky debate.
While working on this post Ron Clutz referred to a report in May 2015 The Atlantic is entering a cool phase that will change the world’s weather by Gerald McCarthy and Evan Haigh of the RAPID Atlantic monitoring project.
The oceans are what matters most.
Posted in Uncategorized
To explain Younger Dryas cooling look at what modern ocean uses
is contributing to climate change
About 13,000 years ago, the warming out of the last ice age temporarily reversed course around the North Atlantic. This cold “Younger Dryas” period lasted almost 2,000 years. Fig. 1. Like most climate events that primarily affect the North Atlantic region, ocean circulation is the prime suspect, starts a recent article by I.D. Keigwin et al. (Nature Geoscience). Indeed, any huge input of water in the ocean wills inevitable change the temperature, salinity and subsequently the horizontal and vertical current. A high volume influx of meltwater can jam regional or global ocean circulation. The consequence is a climatic change, for example the Younger Dryas cooling. That is what the paper is talking about (summarized HERE) .
Discussing big climate changes in a similar context is by far not new, with little avail. Too remote is overriding influence of the ocean on any change taken into account. Due to its cheer size low average temperature of mere +4°C, and variation in salinity, its relevance in the climatic system is 1’000 times bigger than of the atmosphere. A comparable very small water body of meltwater, cold and salt free, can easily trigger a very substantial drop of air temperature and an ice age. If the mentioned research concludes that melting water was “most probably the trigger” for the Younger Dryas cooling, it avoids discussing the ocean issue. Why? Is it a too big issue? Are too little data available? What could be done to overcome this problem?
A number of similar papers show the same short comings. In 2010 Andres E. Carlson discussed “What caused the Younger Dryas cold event?” , respectively Xu Zhang, 2014 “Has the puzzle of rapid climate change in the last ice age been solved?” Both mention remotely a slowing of Atlantic circulation, but remain far away from linking the periods of ice ages to the overriding structure of the oceans that can easily be triggered by numerous causes climatic changes, for example: meltwater, earthquakes, meteorites and so on. That is difficulty to assess after ten thousand, several hundred thousand or millions years, as ocean circulation is changing, leaving no direct record.
Does that prevent progress on understanding the impact of the ocean structure on climate change? It does not! Science need not more to do than investigate the impact of ocean activities at and in the sea. Shipping, fishing, off-shore industry, and other activities have an immediate profound effect on the temperature and salinity structure in the upper sea surface level. Those are not peanuts if one has to talk about many 100 Millions of nautical miles per day. Down to 10 meters the sea surface is mixed, leaving a wake that changed the temperature and salinity structure. Science does not even see that this is a serious contribution to global warming over the last century.
While general sea activities alter the ocean structure very slowly, mankind has shown that it is able to act also very forcefully over a short period of time. It did so during the two World Wars 1914-18 and 1939-45. In both cases the global climate changed course over few decades. Science needs only to pick up the challenge to explain the global warming after WWI and the global cooling from about 1940 to the mid-1970s. (more HERE) That research would enable science for better understanding historical drastic temperature jumps, but also understand urgently that
Industrial and leisure activities at sea is a serious contributor to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW),
How easily man can influence weather and climate, and
The most dramatic threat to men is global cooling from the vastness and depth of the oceans, which can come quickly and with ice age temperatures the current civilization can hardly cope with.
Excerpts from: https://www.iceagenow.com/Looming_Threat_of_Global_Cooling.htm
__Post 25. May 2010 – “Dr. Don Easterbrook, Professor of Geology at Western Washington University in Bellingham, WA.
_About 12,800 years ago we plunged into the Younger Dryas, said Easterbrook. When we came out of the Younger Dryas, temperatures again shot upward, rising 15 degrees in just 40 years.
_”Expect global cooling for the next 2-3 decades that will be far more damaging than global warming would have been,” says Easterbrook. “Twice as many people are killed by extreme cold than by extreme heat.”
A dangerous thesis: “Forget human influence.
Cooling and warming are both natural” – Dr. Don Easterbrook
READ Letter | Published: : E. Maier et al,
North Pacific freshwater events linked to changes in glacial ocean circulation, Nature (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0276-y