Greenland/Iceland – AMO/PDO/CO2 Distribution

CSS-26 In my recent CSS-23 – Greenland/Iceland – Homogenization post, I looked at homogenization (which is not as bad as most other places around the world, but still a problem) and I also looked at the temperature and the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) relationship. This CSS expands on that relationship, by including the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and allocating the temperature changes back to three key parameters (the AMO, PDO and CO₂). What does the data tell us? CO₂ is obviously not a dominant climate driver in Greenland/Iceland (a significant geographic chunk of the globe) and as I also showed, Antarctica (CSS-13 – A Look at Homogenization). The temperatures in Antarctica have been declining for the last 40 years (culminating in the coldest 6-month period EVER last winter) and the Greenland/Iceland temperatures have been increasing at an anemic ±1 °C/century pace. These must be the only places on the earth where temperatures are not increasing faster than every other place on earth (as per headlines around the world over the last few years). CO₂’s influence (over the 1975 to 2010 temperature increase) appears to range from around 16% (where the AMO completely dominates) to 53% where a consolidated AMO/PDO index was used.

#climatechange #delaythegreen #globalwarming #showusthedata

Those numbers would go down if additional climate drivers were also acting and/or the attributable PDO index was overestimated. Regardless CO₂’s influence on the climate is small and certainly not dangerous. Remember that 53% contribution is for the temperature rise from 1975 to 2010. Prior to 1950, the anthropogenic CO₂ contribution is closer to zero (since 86%+ of human omissions occurred post-1950). When viewed over the entire Modern Temperature Record (MTR, 1850 to the present), CO₂’s contribution to warming drops down to the 25% range (maybe lower). CO₂’s contribution levels are definitely not settled science and this analysis is not in itself definitive. But neither is the IPCC “science” which uses CO₂ Equilibrium Climate Sensitivities (ECS) that range from 1.8 to 5.6 °C (meaning a doubling of CO₂ will increase global temperatures anywhere from 1.8 °C to 5.6 °C). Regardless of what CO₂’s ECS turns out to be (1.8 °C gets the computer models close to observed temperatures), the data in Greenland/Iceland shows that the AMO has a primary role in regulating temperatures. You can also easily see the AMO effect in the global surface temperature data (as per my Open Letter Addendum). The Addendum also shows that the MTR can be reasonably modelled with no CO₂ contribution.

This analysis does not factor in solar activity. Which regardless of the IPCC position plays a significant role (might I say dominant role) in regulating our climate. We are headed for cooler (potentially much colder/dangerous) times. The AMO can drop global temperatures on its own somewhere around 0.5 °C over the next couple of decades. Solar Activity will add another ±1 °C to that temperature drop. Additional intermittent cooling triggers are also poised to contribute over the next few decades (outlined in my recent CSS-24 – Is the Holocene Really a New Epoch? post (CSS-24g specifically)). Any warming CO₂ may provide (the IPCC “science” included) will not be enough to significantly offset the coming colder temperatures. We (as a society) are ignoring the real existential Climate Change threat (cooling over the next couple of decades) to fix a perceived warming problem (a century from now) which only exists in the virtual reality world created by the IPCC computer models. Those computer models that are self admittedly running too hot (OPS-55 – The State of Climate Science). Think about that. Ultimately, climate science (while important) is almost irrelevant. Given our precarious financial situation, we are in no position to fund these ridiculous, unnecessary, uneconomic, socialist driven green initiatives (the Green New Deal, Net Zero, Just Transition, Fertilizer Reduction, etc.) without committing economic suicide. So, if you think the inflation, conflict, energy, food, and supply chain crises are bad now, wait until the full effects of the WEF/UN’s green initiatives really kick in. Make no mistake, regardless of which country you live in, these initiatives are being driven by the WEF/UN et al through your “leaders”. You will own nothing, but you will not be happy.