Warm Arctic Is Simply Part Of Natural Cycle
By Paul Homewood
The most iconic symbol of the global warming scare is the “melting Arctic”. But is the Arctic any warmer than back in the 1930’s and 40’s?
Certainly not in places like Akuryri, in Iceland, as GISS show.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040630003&dt=1&ds=1
To get a fuller picture, I have calculated 30 year average temperatures at four stations, using GISS temperature data starting in 1900 (except Jan Mayen, which begins in 1921):
Akureyri – Iceland
Godthab Nuuk – Greenland
Jan Mayen – Norway
Archangel – Russia
All stations are affected by Atlantic influences. I have worked out anomalies for each station, using a baseline of 1981-2010. The results are shown below.
In all cases there is a concerted rise in temperatures from the start of the record, peaking in the 1950’s. This is followed by a steep decline.
Temperatures are now back to, or still below in Nuuk and Akureyri’s case, earlier levels.
Atlantic influences, and in particular the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, not only affect areas fringing the ocean itself, but much further east to Siberia. For instance, Ostrov Dikson shows a similar cyclical pattern:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=222206740006&dt=1&ds=1
The effect that the AMO, shown below, has on Arctic temperatures is unmistakeable.
Based on previous cycles, the AMO maybe has another ten years before it starts its probably rapid decline. When that happens, temperatures across the Eastern Arctic will plummet.
Sources
Temperature data is from the GISS unadjusted dataset
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Well that’s shattered another scaremongers’ story.
What is wrong with these records? They don’t seem to be bent .. Oh, sorry, they might still be bent. And if they are bent and still show .. Oh my! Never mind ..
THE SOLAR WOLF-GLEISSBERG CYCLE AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE
EARTH
Shahinaz M. Yousef
Astronomy &Meteorology Dept.
Faculty of Science -Cairo University
ABSTRACT- The only continuous solar observations that extend over the important
climatic time scale of decades to centuries are those of sunspots, yielding a measure of
magnetic activity. There are evidences for the modulation of the amplitude of the 11
year solar cycle in a period of about 80 years known as Wolf-Gleissberg cycle. The
Cycle seems to be fairly clear in the sunspot record and in its proxy measurements by
cosmogenic isotopes. The cycle appears to show up in many meteorological
parameters, suggesting that there may be an important sun/climate connection over
long periods of time(Hoyt and Schatten 1997).
The Solar Wolf-Gleissberg cycle stimulate solar forcing on terrestrial phenomena’s as
evident from the pattern of Global temperature (both air and ocean temperatures).
Solar Wolf- Gleissberg periodicity is marked in a wide range of terrestrial evidences
since millions of years and is still at work. It is found that climatic fluctuations are
induced at the turning points of such cycles.
In order to solve this problem, it is found that there are three types of solar cycles
occurring on the sun namely, those occurring during Maunder minimum anomalies
that caused the very cold weather in the little ice age (1645-1715), normal sunspots
and low amplitude (weak sunspots of longer duration) occurring in the shallow dip in
between successive Wolf- Gleissberg cycles. The later ones also induce cooling of the
air and sea surface temperatures.
The key in understanding the cause and effect of those types of solar cycles lies in the
fact that those low amplitude intermediate cycles rotate faster than the normal ones
thus . Hoyt and Schatten (1997) argue that any change in solar rotation rate is a very
persuasive indicator that the deeper levels of convection are varying, and hence there
is a corresponding variation in solar luminosity and irradiance. Also there has been
evidence of change of the daily equatorial rates and cycle length at the maximum of
the last Solar Wolf-Gleissberg cycle around cycle 19.
Climate fluctuations are known from, sharp rises or falls of lakes levels, temperature
anomalies, change in the general wind circulation and droughts and flood- Hazards.
Yousef(1995a) predicted the downturn of solar activity in 1997 with the start of weak
low amplitude fast rotation and longer duration sunspot cycle 23. This is evidently
confirmed by the sharp rise of lake Victoria level in 1997-98. Lean (2001) is also
seeing a drop in the solar irradiance which might be the start of a longer term drop.
Since that is the case, then 1997 is a year of climate fluctuation and a drop of global
earth air and sea temperature is predicted soon similar to that happened during similar
circumstances around 1800 and 1900, with increased El Nino and La Nina frequencies
leading to wide spread flood -drought hazards and God knows best.
Thanks, Paul.
Yes, the AMO seems to be well correlated to temperature in the Arctic.
The Earth’s climate is the most complex system we have undertaken to explore.
Reblogged this on Globalcooler's Weblog.
Interesting point there. I kept watching, the last few days, all the commercials made by Greenpeace, with “Save the Arctic” logo and I kept wondering if what they’re saying is 100% true or if it’s also some kind of manipulation…. Then, after searching the Internet, I found a well documented site about Arctic warming, http://www.arctic-warming.com/, and I started to understand all that process and how the ocean influenced climate.
Paul,
Were you able to access the archived data before Hansen and Schmidt ‘fixed’ the data removing ‘suspicious records’ and ‘homogeneity’ adjustments?
Too bad the data isn’t protected under the Geneva Convention.
The old GHCN V2 data is still available here (up to 2011)
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data_v2/
Now you’ve gone and done it. The Ostrov Dikson sta data is now set to be adjusted, as have so many others . . ‘making the 1940’s warming disappear.’
I’d give them a month, or two.