Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC)

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

The 10 warmest years, in the historical record, have all occurred in the past decade [2014-2023].

Despite 2021 and 2022 not ranking among the five warmest years [they’re among the 10 warmest], on record, the global annual temperature increased, at an average rate of 0.06°C [0.11°F], per decade, since 1850, and more than three times that rate [0.20°C / 0.36°F], since 1982.
Unlike 2021 and 2022, which were in a cold phase El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) episode [AKA: La Niña]; 2023 quickly moved into ENSO neutral territory, transitioning to a warm phase episode, El Niño, by June.

2023 was the warmest year, since global records began, in 1850, by a wide margin.
2023 was 2.12 °F [1.18 °C] above the 20th-century average of 57.0°F [13.9°C].
It was 2.43 °F [1.35 °C] above the pre-industrial average (1850-1900).
You say "it's cooling; but admit it's warming.


The 10 warmest years, in the historical record, have all occurred in the past decade [2014-2023].

Despite 2021 and 2022 not ranking among the five warmest years [they’re among the 10 warmest], on record, the global annual temperature increased, at an average rate of 0.06°C [0.11°F], per decade, since 1850, and more than three times that rate [0.20°C / 0.36°F], since 1982.
Unlike 2021 and 2022, which were in a cold phase El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) episode [AKA: La Niña]; 2023 quickly moved into ENSO neutral territory, transitioning to a warm phase episode, El Niño, by June.

2023 was the warmest year, since global records began, in 1850, by a wide margin.
2023 was 2.12 °F [1.18 °C] above the 20th-century average of 57.0°F [13.9°C].
It was 2.43 °F [1.35 °C] above the pre-industrial average [1850-1900].



This year [2024] is almost certain, surpass 2023, as the warmest year on record. This is true, even if the last six months, in 2024, are below the records, set in 2023.
The first six months of 2024 have each set new temperature records, extending an already remarkable streak of 13 consecutive record-breaking months dating back to 2023.
On 22 July, the world experienced its highest absolute global daily temperature on record, reaching a scorching 17.15C.
However, with El Niño fading, and modest La Niña conditions [potentially] developing, later this year, it is unlikely that the extreme monthly temperature records, set in the second half of 2023, will be surpassed in 2024.


So, NO - it's not cooling.

Do you understand physics?
For the rate of warming to slow the overall has to be cooling . Now list the years and the actual temperature difference from year to year? Then correlate with the ENSO and the MJO .
Now explain the fact of the world temperature being currently 14.41°C
https://temperature.global/

[Viking Sailor]

Originally Posted by grantmc

Which god?

Inappropriate request! lol

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by grantmc

Which god?

For me it's Njord.
The God of the sea

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Do you understand physics?
For the rate of warming to slow the overall has to be cooling ...

NO: It's still warming, though PERHAPS, not as quickly, as previously.

I understand you to be saying that, because [you say] the rate of warming is slowing [decelerating], that the climate is cooling [the magnitude is declining].
That’s logically inconsistent/false.
The recent change, in the rate of change is, also, too little, over too short a period of time, to be statistically significant.

I’m NOT a physicist; but, I think I understand the basic concepts of [and differences between] rate, magnitude, and direction, of change.

The Rate of Change is the speed, at which a variable changes, over a specific period of time.
Rate can have direction: It can be positive/accelerating, or negative/decelerating, or static/unchanging, and may further be significant, or not. Positive and negative naming of the directions do not indicate whether the rate is good or bad.

Scalar Magnitude refers to “how much”, the size, quantities, amount, or extent of something.
Vector Quantities are those, that have both magnitude, and direction [pos or neg].

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

NO: It's still warming, though PERHAPS, not as quickly, as previously.

I understand you to be saying that, because [you say] the rate of warming is slowing [decelerating], that the climate is cooling [the magnitude is declining].
That’s logically inconsistent/false.
The recent change, in the rate of change is, also, too little, over too short a period of time, to be statistically significant.

I’m NOT a physicist; but, I think I understand the basic concepts of [and differences between] rate, magnitude, and direction, of change.

The Rate of Change is the speed, at which a variable changes, over a specific period of time.
Rate can have direction: It can be positive/accelerating, or negative/decelerating, or static/unchanging, and may further be significant, or not. Positive and negative naming of the directions do not indicate whether the rate is good or bad.

Scalar Magnitude refers to “how much”, the size, quantities, amount, or extent of something.
Vector Quantities are those, that have both magnitude, and direction [pos or neg].

The ocean is a huge dynamic heat sinc and takes time to bleed off all the latent heat it collected during the 1950s and 1960's during the modern grand maximum period.

[GordMay]

“NASA-MIT study [1] evaluates efficiency of oceans as heat sink, atmospheric gases sponge”
About [NASA Press Release] ➥ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/clima...-gases-sponge/

Video ➥ https://youtu.be/iiKYEgdwlKA

“... New NASA research [1] is one of the first studies to estimate how much and how quickly the ocean absorbs atmospheric gases and contrast it with the efficiency of heat absorption. Using two computer models that simulate the ocean, NASA and MIT scientists found that gases are more easily absorbed over time than heat energy. In addition, they found that in scenarios where the ocean current slows down due to the addition of heat, the ocean absorbs less of both atmospheric gases and heat, though its ability to absorb heat is more greatly reduced...”

[1] “Role of the ocean's AMOC in setting the uptake efficiency of transient tracers” ~ by Romanou et al
➥ https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....2/2017GL072972

“... Key Points:
The AMOC controls the depth and the strength of the ocean uptake of transient, passive tracers
Quantitatively, the rate and vertical extent of tracer sequestration scale linearly with the AMOC
Uptake efficiency for temperature is substantially less than that for a passive tracer
...”

See also:

“Solar influences on Climate” ~ by Joanna Haigh
➥ https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...ntham-BP-5.pdf
‘quote] “... Over the next several decades, there may be an overall, temporary, decline in solar activity, but at this stage, this is somewhat speculative.
Even if solar activity were to reach the record low levels, seen in the 17th century Maunder Minimum [implying a reduction in the solar radiation absorbed, averaged over the globe, of 0.2-0.6 Wm-2], it would only partially offset the increased climate warming, projected through the uncontrolled anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases [equivalent to a trapping of heat energy of around 4 Wm-2, over the next
century] ...” [/quote]

“Possible impacts of a future grand solar minimum on climate: Stratospheric and global circulation changes” ~ by AC Maycock, et al
➥ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4758621/

“... Key Points
A future decline in solar activity would not offset projected global warming
A future decline in solar activity could have larger regional effects in winter
Top down mechanism contributes to Northern Hemisphere regional response ...

... The results in this section show that evolving into a grand solar minimum over the 21st century has the potential to enhance stratospheric cooling trends due to increasing carbon dioxide concentrations, but as has been highlighted in other recent studies [Jones et al., 2011; Meehl et al., 2013], such a decline would have only a small impact on any anthropogenic global warming trend...

... The key conclusions of the study for projections of global mean climate are as follows:

1. A return to MM like levels of solar activity would enhance the anticipated stratospheric cooling trend due to increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. The maximum cooling at the stratopause is ∼1.2 K, which can be compared to the projected cooling due to climate change in the RCP8.5 scenario of ∼18 K.

2. The change in global mean near surface temperature over the second half of the 21st century is O(0.1 K), confirming the findings of earlier studies which have shown that a large decrease in solar activity would do little to offset the projected anthropogenic global warming trend [cf. Feulner and Rahmstorf, 2010, Jones et al., 2011, Meehl et al., 2013, Anet et al., 2013]...”

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

“NASA-MIT study [1] evaluates efficiency of oceans as heat sink, atmospheric gases sponge”
About [NASA Press Release] ➥ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/clima...-gases-sponge/

Video ➥ https://youtu.be/iiKYEgdwlKA

[1] “Role of the ocean's AMOC in setting the uptake efficiency of transient tracers” ~ by Romanou et al
➥ https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....2/2017GL072972



See also:

“Solar influences on Climate” ~ by Joanna Haigh
➥ https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...ntham-BP-5.pdf
‘quote] “... Over the next several decades, there may be an overall, temporary, decline in solar activity, but at this stage, this is somewhat speculative.
Even if solar activity were to reach the record low levels, seen in the 17th century Maunder Minimum [implying a reduction in the solar radiation absorbed, averaged over the globe, of 0.2-0.6 Wm-2], it would only partially offset the increased climate warming, projected through the uncontrolled anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases [equivalent to a trapping of heat energy of around 4 Wm-2, over the next
century] ...”

“Possible impacts of a future grand solar minimum on climate: Stratospheric and global circulation changes” ~ by AC Maycock, et al
➥ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4758621/[/QUOTE]

Here's something a bit more current. On the subject.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals...3.1165386/full

Evidence from observations and geologic proxies indicates that solar forcing is among the key natural driving forces affecting decadal/multidecadal climate variation (Eddy, 1976; Haigh, 1996; Wang et al., 2005; Liu et al., 2013; Gray et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2019; Kuroda et al., 2022). Although various linking mechanisms have been proposed, such as the “top-down” regime (stratospheric ozone ultraviolet radiation effect) or “bottom-up” regime (total radiation irradiance effect) (Haigh, 1994; Gray et al., 2009; Mann et al., 2009), recent studies based on climate models or reconstructed long-term reanalysis data have challenged the certainty of this linkage. A robust solar signal on decadal climate change was lacking in the long-term reanalysis or modeling data. Previous studies occasionally observed this linkage (Sjolte et al., 2018). Instead of solar forcing, volcanic eruptions or internal driving forces could also induce decadal climate variations (Mann et al., 2021). Consequently, the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR6) suggested that there exists great uncertainty regarding the influence of solar activity on decadal/multidecadal climate changes (Masson-Delmotte, 2021). The key to addressing this contradiction is to establish robust linking mechanisms between solar activity and climate systems.

There are several more .
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2023GL103284

[jeanathon]

Originally Posted by GordMay

jeanathon is an optimist.
An optimist says, “the glass is half full.”
A pessimist says, “the glass is half empty.”
An optometrist says, “you both need glasses.”

Gord,
When I see a glass half full. I drink it. Then it is empty. So I get another. I guess it's really a cycle.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

The ocean is a huge dynamic heat sinc and takes time to bleed off all the latent heat it collected during the 1950s and 1960's during the modern grand maximum period.

You're right, that "The ocean is a huge dynamic heat sink".
This is more of a 'symptom' of climgte change [warming], than a 'cause'.

With 50 times as much carbon, 1,000 times the heat capacity, and 100,000 times as much water, as the atmosphere, the ocean clearly plays a central role, in the climate of our planet.
Over the last 50 years, it has taken up over 89% of the excess energy, due to greenhouse warming; and since the early 1990s, the rate of ocean sensible warming [& latent heat content] has likely doubled.
All this, while the solar incidence has slightly diminished, since the end of the grand maximum, circa 1959/60.


“Heat stored in the Earth system: where does the energy go?” ~ by Karina von Schuckmann et al
➥ https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/12/2013/2020/

[barnakiel]

I would imagine that things are changing is something 100% regular. Now if a change is "on verge of" or otherwise is the question of who, and why, defined that verge.



Continuous change is the only fixed thing in the universe as we know it.


Too bad we are given to live in times when glaciers collapse, criminals became politicians (or the other way round perhaps) and we have outgrown our species niche (aka planet Earth).


It will be painful for us, and twice as painful for each next generation (hey, any kids running around ?) But at least it is not boring, is it.


Do not worry though. Zs will fix it. They have their smartphones and AIs and will make robots that will fix mother nature. Unless they get distracted again. Which is bloody certain. Given their adhds and aspergers.



b.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I would imagine that things are changing is something 100% regular. Now if a change is "on verge of" or otherwise is the question of who, and why, defined that verge.



Continuous change is the only fixed thing in the universe as we know it.


Too bad we are given to live in times when glaciers collapse, criminals became politicians (or the other way round perhaps) and we have outgrown our species niche (aka planet Earth).


It will be painful for us, and twice as painful for each next generation (hey, any kids running around ?) But at least it is not boring, is it.


Do not worry though. Zs will fix it. They have their smartphones and AIs and will make robots that will fix mother nature. Unless they get distracted again. Which is bloody certain. Given their adhds and aspergers.



b.

Hard times are coming . It is a fact of human nature
Hard times create strong people strong people create easy times ( we are there now ) easy times make for weak people . That makes for hard times. It's a cycle
It's like that arab speaking to the reporter about life .

My grandfather rode a camel my dad drove a Range Rover I drive a Mercedes my son drives a Mercedes my grandson will drive a Range Rover my great grandson will ride a camel .

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I would imagine that things are changing is something 100% regular...

Speaking of change:
I’m about to turn 76 y/o, and there is still no change in my eyesight.
When can I expect to get my adult supervision?

[sinnerman]

What amazes me is that some scientists think that it is humans that are creating these issues. They forget that once-upon-a time on the planet, there were practically no ice caps. It was all lush vegetation.

The world is constantly evolving /changing and we humans have only been along for the ride for a short part of the earth's life. We are "fleas on a dog".

my two cents..

[derfy]

When I was growing up, we were taught and believed..

1) We live in a great country

2) The future is bright

...so we went out there, had a bunch of kids, and lived a long and beautiful life. Some of us discovered sailing.


=======

Today we insist that...

1) We live in a terrible and evil country, and

2) The future is bleak, and getting worse all the time.

... so we stop having kids (why would you?), take drugs, sit on our butts in cyberspace while eating potato chips, commit suicide, and wonder what the hell is wrong with everybody.

===========
So when are we going to wise up about the all of the phony data from these doomsday scientists whose paychecks come from Big Climate, Big Food, Big Pharma? Do you really think they can measure these currents, and after a few years know the trends over 10's of thousands of years? Really? You want me to believe this BS?

[newhaul]

https://youtu.be/gst8TSVnV-s?si=K60_hZIPDYs59dSu