Is the planet warming?- truly independent study a resounding YES

[WeatherRusty]

So do you believe the globe is in the process of cooling now.

I know it is cooling. Use channel 5

SEE

[skierinvermont]

There is no mistake there. As average SST rise so will the baseline PDO. Unless you totally deny any externally forced temperature increase.

Actually because it's an EOF analysis which is done after subtracting out the global SST anomaly, it won't (basically a spatial principal component analysis using the global SST anomaly to detrend the data). The AMO will exhibit a long-term upwards trend though because the AMO isn't an EOF analysis and uses simple linear detrending. The AMO is just simple linear detrending and so if the warming accelerates, you'll end up with what is calculated as a consistently positive AMO.

[skierinvermont]

A cursory reading of the links provided by Skier would tend to support a figure of about 0.15C. One study finds 0.8C/decade, another estimates as much as 1/3 of late 20th century warming could be due to multi-decadal oscillations and internal variability.

Right and as I understand it that 1/3 figure is intended to set an upper limit on what is conceivably possible, not what actually happened. And it is also for ALL internal variability combined not just the PDO.

[skierinvermont]

Actually because it's an EOF analysis which is done after subtracting out the global SST anomaly, it won't (basically a spatial principal component analysis using the global SST anomaly to detrend the data). The AMO will exhibit a long-term upwards trend though because the AMO isn't an EOF analysis and uses simple linear detrending. The AMO is just simple linear detrending and so if the warming accelerates, you'll end up with what is calculated as a consistently positive AMO.

Just a visual demonstration of what I'm talking about, here is the PDO vs N Pac SSTAs:

The only way you will get a long-term up trend in the PDO calculation is if N Pac SSTs rise faster than global SSTs.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Just a visual demonstration of what I'm talking about, here is the PDO vs N Pac SSTAs:

The only way you will get a long-term up trend in the PDO calculation is if N Pac SSTs rise faster than global SSTs.

So the PDO like AMO will trend up overtime.

Also the PDO talk is just a distraction from the purpose if this thread.

Mpl

And if folks don't believe AGW. Take the sea ice extent average from 1995-2006 then take 2007-2011 for June July August. Calculate estimated solar indication.

Use 30-40wm2 for ice covered areas and 100-200 wm2 for non. There is added energy even if it's small.

[tacoman25]

So the PDO like AMO will trend up overtime.

Also the PDO talk is just a distraction from the purpose if this thread.

Mpl

And if folks don't believe AGW. Take the sea ice extent average from 1995-2006 then take 2007-2011 for June July August. Calculate estimated solar indication.

Use 30-40wm2 for ice covered areas and 100-200 wm2 for non. There is added energy even if it's small.

No. Look at skiier's previous post. The PDO is calculated using an adjusted baseline to eliminate warming. The AMO is not.

[skierinvermont]

No. Look at skiier's previous post. The PDO is calculated using an adjusted baseline to eliminate warming. The AMO is not.

Well the AMO is too.. but it's a linear trending, so if the warming accelerates it will create an artificial +AMO calculation. So far global warming hasn't shown very much acceleration, so the calculation works just fine thus far.

[gracetoyou]

I know it is cooling. Use channel 5

SEE

Maybe I'm reading what you're saying wrong. Let me put this in the simplest terms I can (for my sake not yours). You're saying that if the PDO turns negative it's because the planet is cooling or if it turns positive it's because the planet is warming. Is that correct? You don't think the planet cools or warms "because" PDO goes into it's 20-30yr negative or positive cycles. You're proposing that the PDO is driven by world temps? You don't think the PDO is a temporary driver of global temps?

Is that correct?

[WeatherRusty]

Maybe I'm reading what you're saying wrong. Let me put this in the simplest terms I can (for my sake not yours). You're saying that if the PDO turns negative it's because the planet is cooling or if it turns positive it's because the planet is warming. Is that correct? You don't think the planet cools or warms "because" PDO goes into it's 20-30yr negative or positive cycles. You're proposing that the PDO is driven by world temps? You don't think the PDO is a temporary driver of global temps?

Is that correct?

First, what is meant when we say the planet is cooling or warming? Most folks tend to associate a warming or cooling with the atmosphere. A true warming or cooling of the whole Earth climate involves the troposphere, the entire ocean to full depth and the total land surface.

We say that the PDO is an example of internal variability rather than a forcing. Internal variability moves heat energy around the system without itself being a source of heat energy. So when warmer water develops at the surface of the ocean, the water can more efficiently transfer heat energy to the atmosphere and the atmosphere warms. In the process however, this removes heat energy more efficiently from the ocean in order to obey the first law of thermodynamics...the conservation of energy. The system has neither gained or lost any heat, although the warmed atmosphere will more efficiently radiate away the heat it absorbs.

An external forcing on the other hand, affects the rate at which incoming solar radiation warms the system. Obviously, this can be due to changes in the Sun itself and also the Earth's orbit and axial tilt. It can be affected by changes in Earth's albedo. It can be affected by how efficiently the atmosphere can radiate away to space the heat it absorbs from the surface.

Anthropogenic global warming is acting on the entire climate system, just as would be the case if the Sun radiated more strongly. The PDO, AMO, ENSO etc. reposition where the heat in the system resides. So when the atmosphere is warmed or cooled by PDO, the oceans necessarily are loosing or gaining energy respectively.

So yes, PDO, ENSO etc. warm and cool the atmosphere periodically but they are not the same as global warming or the whole system gaining thermal energy.

[gracetoyou]

First, what is meant when we say the planet is cooling or warming? Most folks tend to associate a warming or cooling with the atmosphere. A true warming or cooling of the whole Earth climate involves the troposphere, the entire ocean to full depth and the total land surface.

We say that the PDO is an example of internal variability rather than a forcing. Internal variability moves heat energy around the system without itself being a source of heat energy. So when warmer water develops at the surface of the ocean, the water can more efficiently transfer heat energy to the atmosphere and the atmosphere warms. In the process however, this removes heat energy more efficiently from the ocean in order to obey the first law of thermodynamics...the conservation of energy. The system has neither gained or lost any heat, although the warmed atmosphere will more efficiently radiate away the heat it absorbs.

An external forcing on the other hand, affects the rate at which incoming solar radiation warms the system. Obviously, this can be due to changes in the Sun itself and also the Earth's orbit and axial tilt. It can be affected by changes in Earth's albedo. It can be affected by how efficiently the atmosphere can radiate away to space the heat it absorbs from the surface.

Anthropogenic global warming is acting on the entire climate system, just as would be the case if the Sun radiated more strongly. The PDO, AMO, ENSO etc. reposition where the heat in the system resides. So when the atmosphere is warmed or cooled by PDO, the oceans necessarily are loosing or gaining energy respectively.

So yes, PDO, ENSO etc. warm and cool the atmosphere periodically but they are not the same as global warming or the whole system gaining thermal energy.

If the ocean is cooling & the atmosphere is cooling then where is the missing heat? For instance, when the AMO & PDO both to their negative cool phases at the same time, where is all that heat? When both PDO & AMO are in their cool cycles then the cooling over the globe is evident. Simply compare the PDO/AMO cycles with global temps over the last 130 years & it shows. So where does the missing heat go?

[skierinvermont]

If the ocean is cooling & the atmosphere is cooling then where is the missing heat? For instance, when the AMO & PDO both to their negative cool phases at the same time, where is all that heat? When both PDO & AMO are in their cool cycles then the cooling over the globe is evident. Simply compare the PDO/AMO cycles with global temps over the last 130 years & it shows. So where does the missing heat go?

The oceans continue to warm during -PDO and -AMO. Even the atmosphere was warming during the latter portion of the last -AMO, and is warming during the current -PDO.

[gracetoyou]

The oceans continue to warm during -PDO and -AMO. Even the atmosphere was warming during the latter portion of the last -AMO, and is warming during the current -PDO.

Give me some real data on the atmosphere warming.

Also given me some data on the oceans continuing to warm during -PDO & -AMO. That seems crazy since the -PDO & -AMO is a cooling of the waters. Are the warmer waters hidden down deep in the ocean? I'm not saying you are wrong, I just want you to validate what you said for me.

[skierinvermont]

Give me some real data on the atmosphere warming.

Also given me some data on the oceans continuing to warm during -PDO & -AMO. That seems crazy since the -PDO & -AMO is a cooling of the waters. Are the warmer waters hidden down deep in the ocean? I'm not saying you are wrong, I just want you to validate what you said for me.

Regarding atmospheric warming.. we all know it has continued to warm since 1998 when the PDO went from positive to neutral and it has continued to warm since 2007/8 when it went negative (if you use formulas I have presented elsewhere to adjust for ENSO). It was also warming in the 1970s and 1980s when the AMO was negative.

Regarding ocean warming..

Empirical answer: The fact that sea levels have risen consistently throughout the century shows that OHC has risen because sea level is a direct relationship to OHC.

Theoretical answer: Also, there is zero possible way that the AMO or PDO could alter the energy balance of the earth which is determined by the rate of incoming energy, the albedo, and the composition of the atmosphere. So there is zero way theoretically that the AMO or PDO could cause the oceans (overall OHC) to warm or cool. It's a change in internal circulation which cannot create or destroy energy. The energy of the earth can only be changed by altering the energy balance (1. incoming energy 2. albedo 3. composition of atmosphere). Unless you change #1,2, or 3 you can't change the amount of energy, only its location (deep ocean, shallow ocean, atmosphere etc). It's the first law of thermodynamics.

[WeatherRusty]

If the ocean is cooling & the atmosphere is cooling then where is the missing heat? For instance, when the AMO & PDO both to their negative cool phases at the same time, where is all that heat? When both PDO & AMO are in their cool cycles then the cooling over the globe is evident. Simply compare the PDO/AMO cycles with global temps over the last 130 years & it shows. So where does the missing heat go?

The question you ask doesn't only apply to AGW, it is a question which applies to solar forcing as well. The upper layers of the ocean are warmed by the Sun. Wind stress pushes surface water along in the direction of the wind. When the prevailing winds blow stronger, cooler water from the depths up-wells and is blown along the surface. The warm water piles up on the opposite side of the ocean. The warmth is driven to those warm pools by the wind. But it takes time to warm up the water welling up from deep. Eventually the Sun does it's job, the winds slacken and things return to normal.

Sometimes, the water circulation is weak, driven by weaker surface winds and the Sun warms the same water for a longer period and the atmosphere is warmed. This wind stress driven sea surface is why the ocean oscillations are known as coupled atmosphere/ocean oscillations.

So in this regard, there is no missing heat. Heat goes the only places it can. Either radiated to space or pulled down to the depths. The cooler surface waters have not had time to be warmed by the Sun. Trenberth's missing heat is something else altogether having to do with the TOA energy imbalance.

[The_Global_Warmer]

So the PDO is rigged to not go up? But stay static even though it responds to a baseline of SSTs in a region?

I don't understand why they don't just keep the baseline the same and leave the PDO as is. If it never goes Negative now because the ocean is to warm overall during a 150 year period so be it.

How do they keep it static when the waters are warming overall during the period?

[skierinvermont]

So the PDO is rigged to not go up? But stay static even though it responds to a baseline of SSTs in a region?

I don't understand why they don't just keep the baseline the same and leave the PDO as is. If it never goes Negative now because the ocean is to warm overall during a 150 year period so be it.

How do they keep it static when the waters are warming overall during the period?

The PDO really has nothing to do with whether ocean SSTs are warm or cold. In fact, ocean SSTs are warmer during a -PDO.

The PDO is about a particular spatial pattern of ocean SSTs. A -PDO is basically what the north pacific usually looks like during a La Nina, and a +PDO is what the north pacific usually looks like in an El Nino.

[VAwxman]

So the PDO is rigged to not go up? But stay static even though it responds to a baseline of SSTs in a region?

I don't understand why they don't just keep the baseline the same and leave the PDO as is. If it never goes Negative now because the ocean is to warm overall during a 150 year period so be it.

How do they keep it static when the waters are warming overall during the period?

You want to keep the PDO static because it is indicative of pattern types. A -PDO and a +PDO represent certain patterns, so you would not want the PDO to continue rising, or you really would not be able to make a good apples to apples comparison of past events. Even though SSTs are warmer overall, a -PDO as defined with the correction still is a reflection of a certain pattern (call it nina-like, since it is very similar, just on a longer time scale).

[WeatherRusty]

The PDO really has nothing to do with whether ocean SSTs are warm or cold. In fact, ocean SSTs are warmer during a -PDO.

The PDO is about a particular spatial pattern of ocean SSTs. A -PDO is basically what the north pacific usually looks like during a La Nina, and a +PDO is what the north pacific usually looks like in an El Nino.

This can be quit confusing. Look at this:

Warm phase on the left : Cool phase on the right

Source

[VAwxman]

This can be quit confusing. Look at this:

Warm phase on the left : Cool phase on the right

Source

Good that you posted that. It's important to know (and see visually) that the "cold phase" of the PDO refers to colder waters focused in the tropical Pacific, not the Pacific Ocean as a whole.

[WeatherRusty]

Give me some real data on the atmosphere warming.

Also given me some data on the oceans continuing to warm during -PDO & -AMO. That seems crazy since the -PDO & -AMO is a cooling of the waters. Are the warmer waters hidden down deep in the ocean? I'm not saying you are wrong, I just want you to validate what you said for me.

Look at it this way. PDO has been a feature of climate for at least centuries. Successive PDO cycles have not added to the heat content of the world, yet global temperature has risen since the mid 19th century by about 0.9C. Factors other than the PDO have caused that rise in temperature. Also sea surface temperature will have risen during this period because, remember it is predominantly the surface which warms the atmosphere

[tacoman25]

Regarding atmospheric warming.. we all know it has continued to warm since 1998 when the PDO went from positive to neutral and it has continued to warm since 2007/8 when it went negative (if you use formulas I have presented elsewhere to adjust for ENSO). It was also warming in the 1970s and 1980s when the AMO was negative.

But of course, to compare to previous -PDO periods, you would also have to adjust for ENSO. Looking at pure, unadjusted temperature trends, the warming has clearly slowed as we have descended into -PDO phase over the past decade. Of course that is linked to ENSO, just as it was in previous PDO phases.

[tacoman25]

The PDO really has nothing to do with whether ocean SSTs are warm or cold. In fact, ocean SSTs are warmer during a -PDO.

The PDO is about a particular spatial pattern of ocean SSTs. A -PDO is basically what the north pacific usually looks like during a La Nina, and a +PDO is what the north pacific usually looks like in an El Nino.

Overall, no. During a -ENSO/-PDO phase as we are in now, ocean SST are cooler than they would be with the opposite phase. Which of course is a big part of the reason the atmosphere is cooler.

[gracetoyou]

Look at it this way. PDO has been a feature of climate for at least centuries. Successive PDO cycles have not added to the heat content of the world, yet global temperature has risen since the mid 19th century by about 0.9C. Factors other than the PDO have caused that rise in temperature. Also sea surface temperature will have risen during this period because, remember it is predominantly the surface which warms the atmosphere

Then what are these other factors. I know there are other natural occurrences that can affect climate, but what do you suggest. When global temps were were warmer 5,00 yrs ago then what caused them to go up so significantly. It had to be some natural occurrence but what was it.

[skierinvermont]

Overall, no. During a -ENSO/-PDO phase as we are in now, ocean SST are cooler than they would be with the opposite phase. Which of course is a big part of the reason the atmosphere is cooler.

Perhaps globally, but not in the PDO region which is what I was referring to. The PDO region as a whole is warmer in a -PDO.

[The_Global_Warmer]

I understand. So why does the AMO trend up then? Is it just overall Ssts?

Positive PDO would be better for arctic sea ice because colder ssts streaming into the arctic is good for bottom melt.

Negative PDO should have warmer N pacific water.,

This truly is just an auxiliary feature in ice now since solar insolation is king.

Is there any real connections with arctic sea Ice and PDO post 2000?

[skierinvermont]

But of course, to compare to previous -PDO periods, you would also have to adjust for ENSO. Looking at pure, unadjusted temperature trends, the warming has clearly slowed as we have descended into -PDO phase over the past decade. Of course that is linked to ENSO, just as it was in previous PDO phases.

Indeed, but this just shows that the underlying warming trend is unchanged. And it also supports my contention that the PDO doesn't have any cumulative effect it is just a period of high frequency La Ninas the effects of which can be removed by applying the normal linear ONI-temp relationship.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Then what are these other factors. I know there are other natural occurrences that can affect climate, but what do you suggest. When global temps were were warmer 5,00 yrs ago then what caused them to go up so significantly. It had to be some natural occurrence but what was it.

Maybe the suns output increased. Maybe arctic sea ice was low. Wasn't sea ice half of what It was now back then for a short time? if so insolation would have added upwards of 1/wm2 possibly at peak melt.

[skierinvermont]

I understand. So why does the AMO trend up then? Is it just overall Ssts?

It has the potential to trend up because the AMO is only linearly de-trended Atlantic SSTs and the warming has the potential to be somewhat exponential. If you linearly detrend an exponential function it will look like a U.

My guess is that global temps have started to accelerate upwards and that this is just beginning to effect the AMO calculation.

[skierinvermont]

Then what are these other factors. I know there are other natural occurrences that can affect climate, but what do you suggest. When global temps were were warmer 5,00 yrs ago then what caused them to go up so significantly. It had to be some natural occurrence but what was it.

The reason temps were warmer 5000 years ago is because of greater solar energy due to the axial tilt of the earth.

[WeatherRusty]

Then what are these other factors. I know there are other natural occurrences that can affect climate, but what do you suggest. When global temps were were warmer 5,00 yrs ago then what caused them to go up so significantly. It had to be some natural occurrence but what was it.

Milankovitch cycles are Earth's orbital parameters which alter the intensity and angle at which solar radiation reaches the surface. For instance 8 thousand years ago the Earth's northern hemisphere was pointed more towards the Sun at perihelion than is the case today due to the precession of the equinoxes. The Earth has been in a long term cooling trend since then....

Milankovitch Cycles