Solar Denialists Face Harsh Times …Flurry of New Studies, CERN, Show Sun’s Massive Impact On Global Climate

Harsh times for the nay-sayers to the sun driving climate, who risk facing academic extinction and joining history’s huge scrap heap of junk science circus performers.

CERN just recently confirmed the sun’s impact, via cosmic radiation, on climate-regulating cloud formation. Scinexx.de here writes here:

Through the influence of ions from cosmic rays, the effect increases even 10 to 100 times.”

Jasper Kirkby calls the link between cloud cover and climate “profound“.

CERN

Cropped from video by CERN.

The UV mechanism

Now Germans Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt present papers on another way the sun impacts climate: UV radiation. Clearly the sun has an entire bag of tricks when it comes to dominating climate on Earth, and we are only at the dawn of understanding.
===================================

Heavenly Teamwork: How UV Radiation Above The Stratosphere Impacts Climate At The Earth’s Surface

By Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(German text translated by P. Gosselin

The sun? It doesn’t have any impact on the climate. At least that’
s what climate alarmism circles believe. A new study from 28 April 2016 appearing in the Geophysical Research Letters once and fore all shakes this view. Scientists have been able to show that changes in solar UV radiation on a scale of months have a clear impact on temperatures at the lower weather atmospheric levels at the tropics. What follows is the paper’s abstract. a paper by L. L. Hood of the Univeristy of Arizona in Tucson:

Lagged response of tropical tropospheric temperature to solar ultraviolet variations on intraseasonal time scales
Correlative and regression analyses of daily ERA-Interim reanalysis data for three separate solar maximum periods confirm the existence of a temperature response to short-term (mainly ∼27 day) solar ultraviolet variations at tropical latitudes in both the lower stratosphere and troposphere. The response, which occurs at a phase lag of 6–10 days after the solar forcing peak, consists of a warming in the lower stratosphere, consistent with relative downwelling and a slowing of the mean meridional (Brewer-Dobson) circulation, and a cooling in the troposphere. The midtropospheric cooling response is most significant in the tropical Pacific, especially under positive El Niño–Southern Oscillation conditions and may be related to a reduction in the number of Madden-Julian oscillation events that propagate eastward into the central Pacific following peaks in short-term solar forcing.”

Thomas et al. even found a solar-regulated temperature in the mesosphere, which he described in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics in November 2015:

Solar-induced 27-day variations of mesospheric temperature and water vapor from the AIM SOFIE experiment: Drivers of polar mesospheric cloud variability
Polar Mesospheric Clouds (PMCs) are known to be influenced by changes in water vapor and temperature in the cold summertime mesopause. Solar variability of these constituents has been held responsible for 11-year and 27-day variability of PMC activity, although the detailed mechanisms are not yet understood. It is also known that the solar influence on PMC variability is a minor contributor to the overall day-to-day variability, which is dominated by effects of gravity waves, planetary waves, and inter-hemispheric coupling. To address this issue, we have analyzed 15 seasons of data taken from the Solar Occultation for Ice Experiment (SOFIE) on the Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM) satellite. The SOFIE data contain precise measurements of water vapor, temperature and ice water content (among other quantities). These high-latitude measurements are made during the PMC season at the terminator, and therefore directly relate to the simultaneous measurements of mesospheric ice. Using a composite data set of Lyman-α irradiance, we correlated the time variation of the atmospheric variables with the 27-day variability of solar ultraviolet irradiance. We used a combination of time-lagged linear regression and Superposed Epoch Analysis to extract the solar contribution as sensitivity values (response/forcing) vs. height. We compare these results to previously published results, and show that the temperature sensitivity is somewhat higher, whereas the water sensitivity is nearly the same as published values. The time lags are shorter than that expected from direct solar heating and photodissociation, suggesting that the responses are due to 27-day variations of vertical winds. An analytic solution for temperature changes forced by solar irradiance variations suggests that if the response is due purely to Lyman-α heating and Newtonian cooling, the response should vary throughout the summertime season and depend primarily upon the height-dependent column density of molecular oxygen.”

Also Ball et al. found a detectable climate impact by solar UV fluctuations in a study appearing in the journal Nature Geoscience of 25 January 2016. Interesting result: The models are unable to reproduce the results. Here’s the abstract:

High solar cycle spectral variations inconsistent with stratospheric ozone observations
Solar variability can influence surface climate, for example by affecting the mid-to-high-latitude surface pressure gradient associated with the North Atlantic Oscillation1. One key mechanism behind such an influence is the absorption of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation by ozone in the tropical stratosphere, a process that modifies temperature and wind patterns and hence wave propagation and atmospheric circulation2, 3, 4, 5. The amplitude of UV variability is uncertain, yet it directly affects the magnitude of the climate response6: observations from the SOlar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) satellite7 show broadband changes up to three times larger than previous measurements8, 9. Here we present estimates of the stratospheric ozone variability during the solar cycle. Specifically, we estimate the photolytic response of stratospheric ozone to changes in spectral solar irradiance by calculating the difference between a reference chemistry–climate model simulation of ozone variability driven only by transport (with no changes in solar irradiance) and observations of ozone concentrations. Subtracting the reference from simulations with time-varying irradiance, we can evaluate different data sets of measured and modelled spectral irradiance. We find that at altitudes above pressure levels of 5 hPa, the ozone response to solar variability simulated using the SORCE spectral solar irradiance data are inconsistent with the observations.”

A long neglected link between the solar fluctuations and climate change at the sea surface, troposphere and stratosphere was described by Yamakawa et al. in March 2016 in the journal Quaternary International:

Relationships between solar activity and variations in SST and atmospheric circulation in the stratosphere and troposphere
Relationships between solar activity and variations in both sea surface temperature (SST) and atmospheric circulation at the time of the solar maximum are presented. The global distribution of correlation coefficients between annual relative sunspot numbers (SSN) and SST from July to December was examined over a 111-year period from 1901 to 2011. Areas with a significant positive correlation accounted for 11.7% of the global sea surface in December, mainly over three regions in the Pacific. The influence of solar activity on global atmospheric pressure variations and circulation in the maximum years was also analyzed from 1979 to 2011. The results indicated that higher geopotential height anomalies tended to appear in the stratosphere and troposphere in the northern hemisphere, centering on around the Hawaiian Islands from November to December, in the second year of the solar maximum. The SST distribution in the Pacific with strong north and south Pacific Highs produced a pattern that resembled teleconnection patterns such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Central-Pacific (CP) El Niño, or El Niño Modoki (ENM). It is suggested that the solar activity had an influence on the troposphere via not only the stratosphere but also the sea surface.”

Another paper by Reichler et al. appearing in Nature Geoscience already back in 2012 follows similar lines:

A stratospheric connection to Atlantic climate variability
The stratosphere is connected to tropospheric weather and climate. In particular, extreme stratospheric circulation events are known to exert a dynamical feedback on the troposphere1. However, it is unclear whether the state of the stratosphere also affects the ocean and its circulation. A co-variability of decadal stratospheric flow variations and conditions in the North Atlantic Ocean has been suggested, but such findings are based on short simulations with only one climate model2. Here we assess ocean reanalysis data and find that, over the previous 30 years, the stratosphere and the Atlantic thermohaline circulation experienced low-frequency variations that were similar to each other. Using climate models, we demonstrate that this similarity is consistent with the hypothesis that variations in the sequence of stratospheric circulation anomalies, combined with the persistence of individual anomalies, significantly affect the North Atlantic Ocean. Our analyses identify a previously unknown source for decadal climate variability and suggest that simulations of deep layers of the atmosphere and the ocean are needed for realistic predictions of climate.”

The University of Utah issued the following press release:

Stratosphere Targets Deep Sea to Shape Climate:
North Atlantic ‘Achilles heel’ lets upper atmosphere affect the abyss

A University of Utah study suggests something amazing: Periodic changes in winds 15 to 30 miles high in the stratosphere influence the seas by striking a vulnerable “Achilles heel” in the North Atlantic and changing mile-deep ocean circulation patterns, which in turn affect Earth’s climate.

‘We found evidence that what happens in the stratosphere matters for the ocean circulation and therefore for climate,’ says Thomas Reichler, senior author of the study published online Sunday, Sept. 23 in the journal Nature Geoscience.

Scientists already knew that events in the stratosphere, 6 miles to 30 miles above Earth, affect what happens below in the troposphere, the part of the atmosphere from Earth’s surface up to 6 miles or about 32,800 feet. Weather occurs in the troposphere.

Researchers also knew that global circulation patterns in the oceans – patterns caused mostly by variations in water temperature and saltiness – affect global climate.

‘It is not new that the stratosphere impacts the troposphere,’ says Reichler, an associate professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Utah. ‘It also is not new that the troposphere impacts the ocean. But now we actually demonstrated an entire link between the stratosphere, the troposphere and the ocean.’

Funded by the University of Utah, Reichler conducted the study with University of Utah atmospheric sciences doctoral student Junsu Kim, and with atmospheric scientist Elisa Manzini and oceanographer Jürgen Kröger, both with the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, Germany.

Stratospheric Winds and Sea Circulation Show Similar Rhythms

Reichler and colleagues used weather observations and 4,000 years worth of supercomputer simulations of weather to show a surprising association between decade-scale, periodic changes in stratospheric wind patterns known as the polar vortex, and similar rhythmic changes in deep-sea circulation patterns. The changes are:

— ‘Stratospheric sudden warming’ events occur when temperatures rise and 80-mph ‘polar vortex’ winds encircling the Artic suddenly weaken or even change direction. These winds extend from 15 miles elevation in the stratosphere up beyond the top of the stratosphere at 30 miles. The changes last for up to 60 days, allowing time for their effects to propagate down through the atmosphere to the ocean.

— Changes in the speed of the Atlantic circulation pattern – known as Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation – that influences the world’s oceans because it acts like a conveyor belt moving water around the planet.

Sometimes, both events happen several years in a row in one decade, and then none occur in the next decade. So incorporating this decade-scale effect of the stratosphere on the sea into supercomputer climate simulations or “models” is important in forecasting decade-to-decade climate changes that are distinct from global warming, Reichler says.

‘If we as humans modify the stratosphere, it may – through the chain of events we demonstrate in this study – also impact the ocean circulation,” he says. “Good examples of how we modify the stratosphere are the ozone hole and also fossil-fuel burning that adds carbon dioxide to the stratosphere. These changes to the stratosphere can alter the ocean, and any change to the ocean is extremely important to global climate.’

A Vulnerable Soft Spot in the North Atlantic

‘The North Atlantic is particularly important for global ocean circulation, and therefore for climate worldwide,’ Reichler says. ‘In a region south of Greenland, which is called the downwelling region, water can get cold and salty enough – and thus dense enough – so the water starts sinking.’

It is Earth’s most important region of seawater downwelling, he adds. That sinking of cold, salty water ‘drives the three-dimensional oceanic conveyor belt circulation. What happens in the Atlantic also affects the other oceans.’

Reichler continues: ‘This area where downwelling occurs is quite susceptible to cooling or warming from the troposphere. If the water is close to becoming heavy enough to sink, then even small additional amounts of heating or cooling from the atmosphere may be imported to the ocean and either trigger downwelling events or delay them.’

Because of that sensitivity, Reichler calls the sea south of Greenland “the Achilles heel of the North Atlantic.”

From Stratosphere to the Sea

In winter, the stratospheric Arctic polar vortex whirls counterclockwise around the North Pole, with the strongest, 80-mph winds at about 60 degrees north latitude. They are stronger than jet stream winds, which are less than 70 mph in the troposphere below. But every two years on average, the stratospheric air suddenly is disrupted and the vortex gets warmer and weaker, and sometimes even shifts direction to clockwise.

‘These are catastrophic rearrangements of circulation in the stratosphere,” and the weaker or reversed polar vortex persists up to two months, Reichler says. “Breakdown of the polar vortex can affect circulation in the troposphere all the way down to the surface.’

Reichler’s study ventured into new territory by asking if changes in stratospheric polar vortex winds impart heat or cold to the sea, and how that affects the sea.

It already was known that that these stratospheric wind changes affect the North Atlantic Oscillation – a pattern of low atmospheric pressure centered over Greenland and high pressure over the Azores to the south. The pattern can reverse or oscillate.

Because the oscillating pressure patterns are located above the ocean downwelling area near Greenland, the question is whether that pattern affects the downwelling and, in turn, the global oceanic circulation conveyor belt.

The study’s computer simulations show a decadal on-off pattern of correlated changes in the polar vortex, atmospheric pressure oscillations over the North Atlantic and changes in sea circulation more than one mile beneath the waves. Observations are consistent with the pattern revealed in computer simulations.

Observations and Simulations of the Stratosphere-to-Sea Link

In the 1980s and 2000s, a series of stratospheric sudden warming events weakened polar vortex winds. During the 1990s, the polar vortex remained strong.

Reichler and colleagues used published worldwide ocean observations from a dozen research groups to reconstruct behavior of the conveyor belt ocean circulation during the same 30-year period.

‘The weakening and strengthening of the stratospheric circulation seems to correspond with changes in ocean circulation in the North Atlantic,’ Reichler says.

To reduce uncertainties about the observations, the researchers used computers to simulate 4,000 years worth of atmosphere and ocean circulation.

‘The computer model showed that when we have a series of these polar vortex changes, the ocean circulation is susceptible to those stratospheric events,’ Reichler says.

To further verify the findings, the researchers combined 18 atmosphere and ocean models into one big simulation, and “we see very similar outcomes.”

The study suggests there is “a significant stratospheric impact on the ocean,” the researchers write. ‘Recurring stratospheric vortex events create long-lived perturbations at the ocean surface, which penetrate into the deeper ocean and trigger multidecadal variability in its circulation. This leads to the remarkable fact that signals that emanate from the stratosphere cross the entire atmosphere-ocean system.'”

 

23 responses to “Solar Denialists Face Harsh Times …Flurry of New Studies, CERN, Show Sun’s Massive Impact On Global Climate”

  1. sod

    Can anyone here name a “nay-sayers of the sun driving climate”?

    Who are those people, who claim that sun does not influence climate?

    1. Eduardo Ferreyra

      There are several hundred of thousands of solar deniers or naysayers among the IPCC followers, a list too long to publish here. Pick any name in the Duckspeakers community and you’ll hit the bullseye. There really is a consensus among AGW suporters that the sun-climate connection is irrelevant.

    2. Patricia Canon

      The many – including Western governments – who insist that climate change is anthropogenic. (I believe that is the word they use. I pay only cursory attention to this issue, given it is outside my field.)

    3. yonason

      “Who are those people, who claim that sun does not influence climate?” – sod

      The IPCC propagandists, and virtually all warmists.
      http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse-science/climate-change/foster2003-5.php
      “They may well accept that the Sun (in conjunction with its planetary system) drove past climate—but then it stopped.”

      And let us not forget how Michael Mann erased the sun-cased Roman and Medieval warm periods, because the sun couldn’t possibly have done THAT!

      It is only we horrible climate change deniers who believe the sun drives climate change, with little to no influence by CO2.
      http://www.troymedia.com/2015/05/25/carbon-dioxide-is-not-the-knob-controlling-climate-change/

      http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/From_Ice_Age_to_Nice_Age.pdf
      “Our science review shows that the sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change.”
      They wouldn’t have to say that explicitly if warmists agreed.

      Now it’s your turn. Name some warmists who give the sun it’s proper due in affecting climate, and give links showing what they say.

  2. DirkH

    Typo: Jasper Kirby – Jasper Kirkby

  3. Anthony Watts

    I don’t think calling people “deniers” in this context serves any purpose except to cause some people not to bother reading it.

  4. AndyG55

    PG, check the spelling of “climate” in the heading for Sebastian’s UV stuff..

  5. ES

    “In winter, the stratospheric Arctic polar vortex whirls counterclockwise around the North Pole, with the strongest, 80-mph winds at about 60 degrees north latitude. They are stronger than jet stream winds, which are less than 70 mph in the troposphere below”

    The jet stream forms at the boundary between troposphere and stratosphere. At 80 MPH speed it is barely considered a jet stream.

    From
    “To be considered a Jet Stream, the accepted minimum speed limit is 60 knots. The speed of the Jet Stream is typically 100 kts (nautical miles per hour) but can reach 200 kts over North America and Europe in the winter. Speeds of 300 kts are not unheard of, particularly over south-east Asia.”

    http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Jet_Stream

    Conversion between Knots and Miles per hour:
    http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/cwwd/msd/publicmarine/misc/windconv.htm

  6. David White

    All the graphs show cycles, but no paricular temperature augment, ie no 20th century global warming trend. It is almost like these papers have nothing to do with global warming, other that for NTZ to insinuate that they do. If the past record of NTZ is anything to go by, this list is just a rhetorical trick to make AGW pseudo-scepticism appear cleverer than it is.

  7. boyfromtottenham

    Hi from Oz. I have 2 comments:
    1. Re Sod’s post (first in of course – must not have much of a life!) – try asking the Australian Bureau of Meteorology about sunspots – this is the answer that you get: ‘The Bureau of Meteorology does not currently track sunspots.’
    2. Re solar activity / UV radiation – water is a polar molecule (look it up), so atmospheric water molecules will be attracted / repelled by electrostatic fields. Solar radiation causes electrostatic charges. Ergo, it seems to follow that the sun will affect atmospheric water vapour = clouds.

  8. TLMango

    “I don’t think calling people “deniers’ in this context
    serves any purpose except to cause some people not to
    bother reading it.”

    Not completely true. If Wattsupwiththat were to lift it’s
    ban on the cyclical nature of the sun, purpose would be served.
    We have the science right and we’re banished.
    That’s the message.

    1. Paul Vaughan

      We never go back.

  9. yonason

    Solar effects aren’t the only reality the German self-appointed elite are in denial about.
    http://motls.blogspot.com/2016/05/german-bishops-ministers-want-mandatory.html

    If Germany were a person, she’d have been a candidate for suicide watch a long time ago.

  10. Paul Vaughan

    The Ring of Fire:
    http://s32.postimg.org/h74rqz4hx/Ring_of_Fire_Volcano_Explosivity_El_Nino_La_Nina.png

    Expect a solar follow-up when the time is politically devastating.

  11. Joe

    Yes the Sun has a massive impact on Earth’s climate, but the impact is delayed. I don’t know even a rough idea in terms of years. We are still living off the fumes of the past 200 years of high solar output, with the oceans storing all that energy. The El Nino we just had was just a small part of total ocean heat being released. It will take a while before the present low solar activity really kicks in on Earth’s climate. The oceans still have lots of heat to lose before we see a significant, long-standing drop in global temperature, not brief downward drops.

    1. Paul Vaughan

      David Archibald has it wrong — very wrong.

      1. Joe

        Sorry – I’ve heard of David Archibald but have not looked at his theories.

        1. yonason

          I’m not sure what Paul Vaughan thinks he gets wrong, but I can’t find it, at least not here.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDX2ExKYyqw

  12. Joe

    Just another note guys – If you want Earth to be colder, El Ninos are actually a good thing. They are the beginning of the bigger cooling process – They are releasing huge amounts of heat from the oceans, into the atmosphere and eventually off into space. Don’t worry, eventually all that heat lost will catch up to us, because there won’t be much heat left in the oceans to release by then. That is when the big & long-standing global temp drops will happen.

  13. frederik Michiels

    what strikes me is that the western pacific, after a season of record tropical storms is now… record quiet not a single tropical storm formed there… that’s “normal seen all the heat released by tropical cyclones last year.