"This result supports the hypothesis that the 18.6-year tidal cycle influences long-term variability in climate; thus, knowledge of this cycle could contribute towards improving decadal predictions of climate." [which IPCC climate models do not incorporate]The approximately 60-year long Pacific Decadal Oscillation [PDO] in-turn profoundly affects global climate and interacts with other ocean and atmospheric oscillations. A very simple climate model based solely upon the sum of the sunspot integral, Pacific Decadal Oscillation [PDO], and Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation [AMO] explains 96% of climate change over the 20th century:
The paper joins others finding a significant influence of lunar gravitational (and to a lesser extent solar gravitational) effects upon long-term ocean oscillations, and that lunar-tidal cycles could explain a significant portion of the 20th century global temperature variation.
 |
| At a major lunar standstill, which takes place every 18.6 years, the range of the declination of the Moon reaches a maximum |
The IPCC climate models do not incorporate any such lunar tidal effects or solar amplification effects, and cannot even simulate the major ocean oscillations [or clouds, convection, gravity waves, etc. etc]. Nonetheless, the IPCC conveniently rules out such natural influences on climate by hiding behind unskillful and wholly inadequate climate models which are incapable of simulating true natural variability.
Role of the oceanic bridge in linking the 18.6-year modulation of tidal mixing and long-term SST change in the North Pacific
S. Osafune, S. Masuda and N. Sugiura
The impact of the 18.6-year modulation of tidal mixing on sea surface temperature (SST) in the North Pacific is investigated in a comparative study using an ocean data synthesis system. We show that remote impact through a slow ocean response can make a significant contribution to the observed bidecadal variation in wintertime SST near the center of action of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation in the eastern Pacific. A comparative data synthesis experiment showed that the modified SST variation is amplified by bidecadal variation in the westerly wind. This relationship between SST and wind variations is consistent with an observed air–sea coupled mode in the extratropics, which suggests that a midlatitude air–sea interaction plays an important role in enhancing the climate signal of the 18.6-year modulation. This result supports the hypothesis that the 18.6-year tidal cycle influences long-term variability in climate; thus, knowledge of this cycle could contribute towards improving decadal predictions of climate.
New paper finds lunar-tidal cycles influence climate
New paper finds lunar-tidal cycles explain much of the 20th century global temperature change
Ian Wilson: 18.6 year lunar cycle in high rainfall years in Victoria
Why Weather has a 60 year Lunar beat
Don't forget - an 18.6/2 = 9.3 year lunar induced nutation cycle modulating an 11 year solar cycle produces a 9.3*11/(11-9.3) = 60 year component. - Bart
ReplyDeleteVery interesting
DeleteClive Best doesn't think this drives the 60 year climate cycle
http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=2295
Well, yeah. 18.6*11/(18.6-11) = 27 years. That doesn't do it. It is the 9.3 year cycle in amplitude that I have invoked. - Bart
DeleteThanks again Bart, very interesting
DeleteIf Pacific Decadal Oscillation [PDO], and Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation [AMO] explains 96% of climate change over the 20th century, it may be time to ask why the most pronounced changes conjured with the two World Wars 1914-18 and 1940-45? And what is a “lunar-tidal cycle” in a water body 1000 times bigger than all aerial vapors, but is by mean only 4°C warm.IPCC climate models do not incorporate little to nothing of such basics. The problem of IPCC is that they do not define climate a scientific reasonable manner, as suggested at: http://www.whatisclimate.com/ : “Climate is the continuation of the ocean by other means”.
ReplyDeleteI've made two comments, neither posted. This is only to see if a different post (reply, not comment) works. A test.
DeleteIf comments are closed, please make a banner or something.
DeleteIt is very exciting to see such a paper, perhaps even more exciting than my own nascent research into the issue of the barycenter of the Earth-Moon gravity field, since S. Osafune, S. Masuda, N. Sugiura found an effect I only suspected, and found that it had an 18-year cycle basis that I did not imagine. My sincere congratulations to Osafune-san and his coauthors.
ReplyDeleteMy sincere congratulations to Osafune-san and his co-authors on this ground-breaking paper! I would be interested to learn of the actual energetics of the interaction around the barycenter, although it's sensible to work with apportioning what is clearly and fundamentally the sun's work, as was done. Still, we observe a fragment of the process in daily tides in water and the energetics of that process are calculable in principle, leaving a 600 lb gorilla waiting in the earth.
ReplyDeleteSince I don't see another way to do it, I'm taking the chance that the moderator will read this and remove it (as OT to this thread). My last comment was made last night and I expected to see it this AM but did not. Can you please email me at my easier access email (xaxx@basicisp.net) and let me know what happened to it? Thanks, and please DO take this out
ReplyDelete