Climate variability has always been of concern to humankind. After the discovery of 11-year cyclicity of solar activity in the first half of the 19th century, attempts were most often made to link climate fluctuations to cyclical changes in solar activity and to other cosmic factors. Various hypotheses about the mechanisms of influence of cosmic factors on the climate were proposed, but all assumptions remained at the level of hypotheses due to the lack of knowledge. Soon the first hypotheses emerged about the link between climate change and human activity. At the time, this influence on the climate was seen through human alteration of vegetation. In the 19th century, large areas of forest were cleared. Some researchers argued that the clear-cutting of forests made Europe’s climate drier, while others drew very different conclusions from studies of data in the Americas, India and elsewhere. Despite the differences in results, however, the forest was blamed for climate change and had to take the blame. Some studies regarded deforestation as a cause of climate desiccation, while others saw it as the opposite.
In the second half of the twentieth century, it was not deforestation, but the burning of forests and the combustion of every other fuel, that came to be seen as the cause of modern climate change. The anthropogenic hypothesis has survived and gained new supporters.
Many Earth scientists around the world now believe that long-term climate change is caused by both long-term natural processes on a cosmic scale and human activity in recent decades. Space-based factors of climate change are given a prominent role in this regard. Nevertheless, the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) state that the main cause of the current global warming and the increase in climate extremes is the additional greenhouse effect that has occurred in the atmosphere from anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels by mankind. External natural factors (cosmic) are recognised by this group of experts as immaterial. In fact, there is no evidence for the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis, other than estimates from models, the adequacy of which is also unproven. And the reason for unprovenness is the same — lack of knowledge to model both cosmic impacts and to account for the greenhouse effect from humanity’s fuel combustion.
When creating climate models, proponents of the anthropogenic hypothesis around the world did a simple thing. They considered the influence of cosmic factors on climate change (fluctuations) to be insignificant and zeroed them out in the models. One problem has become less. All observed climate changes without any evidence were a priori attributed in the models to anthropogenic greenhouse gases. Lack of quantitative knowledge about anthropogenic influence was replaced in the models by selection of adjustment coefficients and so we got rid of the second problem. Adjustment of each coefficient in the models was made by comparing simulation results with actual observational data on climate change in the twentieth century. The purpose of the adjustment was to try to achieve a steady increase in the modelled global temperature on Earth starting in the mid-1970s, precisely when the era of intense burning of fuel by humanity began. Everything coincided, the adjustment succeeded without scientific justification of the adjustment factors. Increases in greenhouse gases, climate warming and model estimates of warming coincided. But can an a priori given simulation result be considered proof of the anthropogenic hypothesis? Climate models only show what their creators put into them when selecting the coefficients.
Today’s observed climate changes are accompanied by severe adverse effects in climate-dependent economies around the world. They are affecting living conditions and human health, accompanied by extreme weather events with devastating effects on populations in many countries, with many victims due to the increasing frequency of natural disasters. In these circumstances, the precautionary principle adopted in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, according to which — at the risk of irreversible damage to the environment — lack of scientific knowledge of the accompanying phenomena cannot be a reason for postponing effective measures to protect it, has come to be considered the most reasonable. “Common sense” has become more important than the results of scientific research. The scientific basis for the causes of climate change has not kept pace with the pace of decision-making on mitigation.
Hasty apocalyptic warnings have set society against the supposed culprit of natural disasters — carbon dioxide. This struggle is now being reduced to a major restructuring of global industry and economic activity. It has stopped short of acknowledging that the economic consequences of the failure to understand the climate problem are far more dangerous than the adverse impacts of observed and potential future climate change themselves. An intergovernmental battle to reduce greenhouse gas emissions has been waged, and emissions quotas and taxes on carbon dioxide have been introduced. Business has become involved, trade in air has begun, and the scientific side of the unresolved problem has been forgotten.
Long term observations of the climate show that there have always been fluctuations in the climate. A clear example of multi-year fluctuations in temperature is the graph of air temperature variations in central England since 1800 (the series of observations in England is one of the longest. Figure 1).
Fig.1 Winter temperature (T) in Central England, smoothed over 11 years, its trend component (dashed line), the demonstration sinusoid (Sin) and anthropogenic СО₂ emission, expressed in million tonnes of carbon (C).
Image: Sherstyukov B.G. Climate oscillation system, resonances, long-range links, forecasts. Obninsk: All-Russian Research Institute for Hydrometeorological Information — World Data Centre, 2021, 222 pp.
More than two hundred years of observations reveal important features that are inconsistent with the anthropogenic hypothesis. It is generally accepted that global warming and intense human combustion (blue curve in the figure) started in the mid-1970s. Temperatures in central England (red curve) also rose during these years. And in the 1920s and 1930s, temperatures rose in the absence of heavy fuel combustion. How can this be explained with almost zero anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions?
By analysing the 220 years of temperature change visible in the figure, there is no doubt that climate fluctuations (temperature increases and decreases) were repeated three times every 70 years or so. Each new temperature increase occurred at a higher level due to an over-century trend. For comparison, the figure shows a sinusoid with a period of 73 years with an upward trend. The similarity between the repeated fluctuations of the sine wave and the temperature is obvious. It is also clear that the third, modern warming wave is a continuation of the two previous waves of fluctuations from pre-industrial times. Climate fluctuations with a period of about 70 years began long before the industrialisation of mankind and could not be related to the amount of fuel burned. The cause of the over-centurytrend in temperature increase is also not clear, but it, too, began long before the era of supposed human influence on the climate.
The present climate warming, which began in the last quarter of the twentieth century, is just the beginning of another 73-year wave of climate warming. The two previous warmings were followed by lower temperatures. There is no reason to believe that the modern warming will be any different. Each warming was followed by a temperature drop. It will continue regardless of man. But there will not be a complete return to the cold climate of the 1970s because of the continuation of a super secular weak upward trend which is also independent of humans.
An analysis of climate variability, based on observations of the worldwide network of meteorological stations and observations of the climate of the oceans, reveals many features that contradict the anthropogenic hypothesis. The observational data do not confirm any noticeable human influence on the current warming and increasing climate extremes that humanity is so concerned about.
There is currently no basis for blaming humanity for today’s climate woes and no basis for unjustified, costly measures to limit the use of hydrocarbons. In the absence of any proven anthropogenic influence on the climate, the problem of understanding the causes of climate change is entering a new phase of research into natural climate variability.
Fluctuations are a fundamental property of climate. An important basis for the task of studying climate is the understanding that fluctuations in climate, which have existed throughout the Earth’s known history, must have some natural source of cyclically repeated energy inflows. Cyclicity is the basis of many changes in the solar system, from planetary rotation, changes in solar activity, tectonic activity of the Earth, and some changes on other planets. Many of these changes repeat with the same or commensurate frequencies, as if influenced by one common external factor existing in the solar system. The most common underlying mechanism for all cyclical processes in the solar system is the rotation of the planets and the Sun around their common centre of mass (barycentric rotation). The Sun contains over 99% of the total mass of the solar system, but it accounts for less than 2% of the angular momentum, with the remaining 98% of the angular momentum belonging to the planets. Therefore, when looking for the origins of recurrent external impact on the Earth’s climate system, special attention must be paid to the motions of the planets.
The essence of the author’s proposed mechanism to support climate fluctuations is in changes in the circulation of waters of the World Ocean and generation of additional heat fluxes from the ocean to the atmosphere when the Sun’s rotation momentum changes relative to the centre of mass of the Solar System. The rotations of the planets determine the cyclic changes of the solar system’s rotational momentum J. At the same time, the rotational momentum of the Earth and the liquid shell (ocean) on it changes. Global warm and cold ocean currents cyclically receive an additional amount of motion and change the heat transport across the planet. The consequence is multi-year fluctuations in regional and global climate.
Ocean currents are combined into one overall system called the Grand Ocean Conveyor. The Grand Ocean Conveyor slowly transports heat and moisture from one ocean region and layer to another, linking deep and surface waters. The emergence of heat anomalies to the surface of the ocean in different parts may be delayed by several years or decades. Changes in the global heat exchange of the oceans through a large conveyor belt represent the primary physical phenomenon directly responding to variations in astronomical parameters.
Analysis of the relationship between changes in the World Ocean Surface Temperature in the nodes of the geographical grid of both hemispheres of the Earth showed that 32–37 years after changes in the moment of inertia J barycentric rotation of the Solar System, significant changes in the ocean surface temperature appear, but not everywhere on the planet, but mainly in the areas of trajectories of major oceanic currents. The map (Fig. 2) shows in red and blue the fields of positive and negative links between the ocean surface temperature and external cyclical influences of the Solar System. The most extensive close relationships were found in the Pacific Ocean.
Figure 2. Fields of significant asynchronous positive and negative correlation coefficients between moment J and ocean surface temperature with a 32–37 year lag in ocean surface temperature. Gradations of the coefficients on the map are 1) <= −0.70; 2) −0.60 ÷ −0.69; 3) −0.50 ÷ −0.59; 4) −0.40 ÷ −0.49; 5) −0.39 ÷ +0.39; 6) +0.40 ÷ +0.49; 7) +0.50 ÷ +0.59; 8) +0.60 ÷ +0.69; 9) >= +0.70.
Image: Sherstyukov B.G. Climate oscillation system, resonances, long-range relations, forecasts. Obninsk: All-Russian Research Institute for Hydrometeorological Information — World Data Centre, 2021, 222 pp.
Arrows show previously known trajectories of ocean currents. The numbers on the arrows indicate currents: 1 — Antarctic Circumpolar Current; 2 — Peruvian Current; 3 — South Passage Current; 4 — East Australian Current; 5 — California and North Passage Current; 6 — North Pacific Current; 7 — North Atlantic Current; 8 — Norwegian Current.
The map shows that the areas of cyclical external forcing in the ocean coincide with the positions of the main ocean currents. In the Southern Hemisphere, from latitude 45—50°S and further south to Antarctica itself, almost the entire space in the Pacific Ocean from its western to eastern boundary occupies the field of positive correlations on the map. Here, positive correlations cover the area (fragment) of the coldest Antarctic Current on Earth. The lag of TPO changes in the South Pacific is 32–35 years relative to the J-momentum changes. The field of positive correlations with a lag of 35–36 years then extends towards the temperate southern latitudes and along the west coast of South America covers the area of the cold Peru Current, which is a branch of the Antarctic Current. Even closer to the equator, with a lag of 37 years, the field of positive correlations covers the region of the South Passat Current.
In the Northern Hemisphere in the Pacific Ocean, the area of positive correlations coincides with the area of the cold California Current along the west coast of North America pointing southwest, which then transitions to the North Passatian Current. The lag here is 35 years. And the field of negative correlations stretched from the Philippine Sea northeastward along the warm North American Current to the central part of the northern half of the Pacific. The lag here is 35–37 years.
As the moment of inertia of baricentric rotation increases, the surface temperature in the cold currents increases and the temperature in the warm currents decreases, i.e., the export of cold water from the subpolar latitudes of the northern and southern halves of the ocean towards the tropics weakens and the export of warm water from the tropics to the subpolar regions of the northern and southern halves of the Pacific Ocean weakens.
Similar linkages of ocean temperature changes in ocean currents have also been found with changes in geomagnetic and solar activity. Magnetic storms change the magnetic field strength of the Earth, and changes in the magnetic field generate electric currents in all conductive media on Earth, including the ocean. The mechanism for coupling changes in ocean surface temperature to geomagnetic disturbances is not yet understood. Electric currents in the ocean are hypothesised to influence the parameters of ocean currents and to contribute to the vertical and geographic latitude heat transport of currents.
Magnetic storms are caused by charged particles coming from the Sun at times of high solar activity. For a long time it was believed that the energy of solar charged particles arriving at the Earth could not affect the lower atmosphere, because all particles were trapped in the magnetosphere and did not reach the atmosphere. But it was not taken into account that the resulting perturbations of the Earth’s magnetic field can freely transfer their energy to electric currents in the ocean. The extent to which these currents influence ocean heating or the deviation of currents from their normal trajectories remains to be investigated.
There are also other previously developed putative mechanisms of cosmic influences on climate change that are supported by observational data, but their quantitative side is unknown.
The main obstacle to the recognition of cosmic influences on climate variability is the weak energy of external cyclic forcing compared to the energy of those processes on the Earth that manifest themselves as climate variability. But if we consider that the climate system is an oscillatory system, then this obstacle disappears.
Fluctuations are a basic property of a climate system. Fluctuating systems have their own preferred frequencies of oscillation. It is well known that many climate oscillation frequencies coincide with the frequencies of cyclic cosmic forcing. From the theory of oscillation it is known that if repeated external influences of one system are close to or coincide with the frequency of natural oscillations of the other oscillating system, then in the temporal changes of the second system there are beats and resonances with amplitudes many times greater than the amplitude of the primary influence.
It is known from the theory of oscillation that there is no lower limit to the magnitude of an impact that can rock an oscillating system at its resonant natural frequency. Even weak repetitive external influences can be effective. It is very likely that repeated weak variable forcing from cosmic factors on the Earth excites the atmosphere and ocean climate to oscillate at the natural frequencies of the climate system through the mechanism of resonances. The weakness of the external forces is compensated for by their repeated resonance effects. Resonance matching amplifies the oscillations of each component of the climate system at its chosen natural frequencies. The oscillations in the system at other possible frequencies are not supported by anything and are therefore not observed. The inertia of the dynamic processes in the ocean contributes to the long-period fluctuations of heat fluxes into the atmosphere, which are recorded from observations as multi-year fluctuations or climate changes.
The presented summary of one plausible cause of the observed climate variations brings together all of the previously proposed possible mechanisms responsible for the observed climate variations. A more complete description of the results of the study is published in the monograph by B. G. Sherstyukov “The climate oscillation system, resonances, long-range links, predictions”. This and other monographs of the author in electronic form can be found at www.meteo.ru in the section “Publications, staff monographs”.
The crucial role of the natural component in modern climate change has been confirmed by many researchers in Russia and abroad and cannot be denied. In-depth interdisciplinary research into all possible causes of climate change is needed.
New mathematical models of climate are needed, ones that do not contradict observational data. There is also work to be done in this direction.
The question of the causes of climate change is one of the most complex issues in modern science, and there is no reason to reduce it to one anthropogenic greenhouse gas hypothesis without investigating all possible causes. And there is even less reason to make unjustified decisions to restrict the use of hydrocarbons.
The practical conclusion to be drawn from this situation would be to abandon the unjustified, costly battle against carbon dioxide. The main efforts should be redirected to the proactive adaptation of mankind to natural climate change, which has always been and will always be independent of man.
Cover photo: AP / TASS
Comments