It's the Ocean not the Atmosphere, dummy!

[Crick]

The ocean influences weather and climate by storing solar radiation, distributing heat and moisture around the globe, and driving weather systems.

This does NOT say that the ocean triggers or drives or causes the glacial-interglacial cycle.

 

[ding]

This does NOT say that the ocean triggers or drives or causes the glacial-interglacial cycle.

Your own post convicts you.

Here is one paper investigating the possibility that they are due to the collapse of thermohaline circulation (THC) known in the Atlantic Ocean as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). High salinity water in North Atlantic cools and as it approaches maximum density (4C) it sinks several kilometers. A slow bottom flow then proceeds south and at the equator runs into a mirror image current coming from the southern pole. The two rise, bringing large amounts of dissolved nutrients to the surface at the equator. Warmed water slowly flows north (and south) to close the two loops. There is very little of such flow in the Pacific due to the low salinity of the water in the North Pacific. Even cooled to maximum density, it is not driven to sink. The difference between the behavior of the two basins has been recreated in a wide range of models. But there are strong indications that the current situation in the Atlantic is unstable and that it could be stopped altogether by a large input of fresh water, from melting ice in the Arctic and Greenland. Since this flow is responsible for the moderate temperature in Europe, the result would be catastrophic cooling there. That info is from the paper's abstract. Visit the link if you want more.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.97.4.1347 [PNAS = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences]

Here is another paper that reports on an spontaneous abrupt cooling that took place in a high resolution model with sensitive sea-ice modelling. The cooling lasted approximately one century and stopped as abruptly as it had started. I'll let them explain: "The event was simulated in the preindustrial control run of a high-resolution climate model, without imposing external perturbations. Initial cooling started with a period of enhanced atmospheric blocking over the eastern subpolar gyre. In response, a southward progression of the sea-ice margin occurred, and the sea-level pressure anomaly was locked to the sea-ice margin through thermal forcing. The cold-core high steered more cold air to the area, reinforcing the sea-ice concentration anomaly east of Greenland. The sea-ice surplus was carried southward by ocean currents around the tip of Greenland. South of 70°N, sea ice already started melting and the associated freshwater anomaly was carried to the Labrador Sea, shutting off deep convection. There, surface waters were exposed longer to atmospheric cooling and sea surface temperature dropped, causing an even larger thermally forced high above the Labrador Sea. In consequence, east of Greenland, anomalous winds changed from north to south, terminating the event with similar abruptness to its onset" https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1304912110
Here is a third paper that points out that "complex environmental systems are never in equilibrium" being constantly driven by oscillating inputs such as seasonal cycles, Milankovitch forcing and internal climate oscillations (ENSO, PDO, etc). This is a broader discussion than just the interglacial cycle but it does point out that under non-equilibrium conditions it is possible to have multiple alternative pseudo-stable states under identical forcing conditions between which a system can be "tipped" by small changes in external forcing. Abrupt Climate Change in an Oscillating World - Scientific Reports [Nature magazine]

 

[Crick]

Your own post convicts you.

You need help.

 

[ding]

You need help.

Remind me again why you said the collapse of the AMOC would lead to CATASTROPHIC COOLING.

 

[Crick]

Remind me again why you said the collapse of the AMOC would lead to CATASTROPHIC COOLING.

In Europe, not globally.

 

[ding]

In Europe, not globally.

It starts in the Arctic.

You are arguing against the science of northern hemisphere glaciation which has occurred over 30 times in the last 3 million years. You do realize those were global events that began in the Arctic, right?

How ignorant are you about these climate events? For someone who claims to believe the planet's climate is important, you are woefully ignorant about it if you think this only affects Europe.

 

[Crick]

It starts in the Arctic.

The mass flow data says it does not. Far more of the Gulf Streams heat hits the coast of northern and western Europe.

You are arguing against the science of northern hemisphere glaciation

Am I? As practiced by a Northern Hemisphere Glaciologist

which has occurred over 30 times in the last 3 million years.

I hate to tell you this, but Antarctica went through some changes as well.

AI Overview​

Learn more…Opens in new tab​

​

Antarctica has undergone many changes during glacial-interglacial cycles, including changes to ice sheets, sea levels, and oceanic conditions:​

• Ice sheets​
  During some interglacials, the Antarctic ice sheets were smaller than they are today, by 6–9 meters sea level equivalent (SLE) of ice volume. Geological evidence suggests that the West Antarctic ice sheet (WAIS) partially collapsed multiple times during the Quaternary. Warmer conditions during interglacials may have encouraged this collapse, along with reduced sea ice.​
• Sea levels​
  A smaller or absent WAIS during the last interglacial may have contributed to higher sea levels globally.​
• Oceanic conditions​
  During the last interglacial period, Marine Isotope Stage 5e, there is evidence of reduced Antarctic Bottom Water (AABW) formation. This is thought to be due to increased density stratification in the Southern Ocean, caused by surface water freshening from Antarctic ice melt. Reduced AABW formation can have important implications for global climate, as AABW plays a vital role in the ocean's carbon cycling.​

You do realize those were global events that began in the Arctic, right?

No. They were triggered by changes in insolation due to Milankovitch orbital cycles.

How ignorant are you about these climate events? For someone who claims to believe the planet's climate is important, you are woefully ignorant about it if you think this only affects Europe.

You haven't the science background to argue with a quick-witted ninth grader.

 

[ding]

The mass flow data says it does not.

Of course you'll have a hard time explaining glacial cycles without it.

 

[ding]

Am I? As practiced by a Northern Hemisphere Glaciologist

No, the mainstream science on NH glaciation. Not to mention, the 30 or so glacial cycles of the past 3 million years which all start with NH glaciation.

 

[ding]

I hate to tell you this, but Antarctica went through some changes as well.

OMG, how stupid are you? The south pole has been glaciated for 30 million years or so. It's the NH which oscillates between glacial and interglacial periods. Those colder temps in the south, correspond with NH glaciation events. You really don't know shit about this. OMG. You're a joke.

 

[ding]

No. They were triggered by changes in insolation due to Milankovitch orbital cycles.

Nope. AMOC switch off. Actual empirical evidence. You have none.

There is strong evidence that the circulation of the deep Atlantic during the peak of the last Ice Age, or the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM; ~22,000 to 19,000 years ago) was different from the modern circulation (Boyle & Keigwin 1987, Duplessy et al. 1988, Marchal & Curry 2008). Compilations of deepwater δ13C and CdW for the LGM (Figure 5) show several features that contrast with their modern distributions. Whereas much of the modern deep western Atlantic has similar δ13C values because it is filled with NADW, during the LGM, the range of δ13C values was larger than today, with higher values in NADW and lower values in AABW. The main core of high-δ13C, low-CdW NADW was at least 1000 meters shallower than today, probably because the density difference between surface waters and deep water was reduced — surface salinity may have decreased as a result of less evaporation due to colder glacial temperatures, and as a result of input of freshwater from glaciers surrounding the North Atlantic (Boyle & Keigwin 1987). In the western Atlantic, depths below ~2 km were filled with AABW. Radiocarbon data suggest that deepwater was older (Keigwin & Schlegel 2002), consistent with less NADW and more AABW as indicated by the δ13C and CdW of benthic foraminifera. Glacial δ13C data from the eastern Atlantic suggest that the boundary between glacial AABW and glacial NADW may have been shallower than in the western Atlantic (Sarnthein et al. 1994), although the difference may be the result of local effects caused by increased glacial productivity and higher rates of remineralization of low-δ13C organic carbon in the eastern basin. Inferences using other kinds of proxy data of deep Atlantic circulation are consistent with the changes inferred from δ13C, Cd/Ca and 14C of benthic foraminifera (Lynch-Steiglitz et al. 2007).

Deep Atlantic Circulation During the Last Glacial Maximum and Deglaciation​

 

[ding]

You haven't the science background to argue with a quick-witted ninth grader.

Maybe but I have scientific papers which are based upon empirical physical evidence and a narrative so well understood and well known that Dave Borlace did a video on it.

 

[EMH]

hat the hurricane data is more fundamental then the temperature data

Your side FUDGED temperature data. Hurricane strikes on US coasts = can't fudge that.


Hurricanes are completely correlated with ocean temps. BUSTED LYING AGAIN!!!

 

[EMH]

Measured temperatures say otherwise.

Wrong. The actual ocean data has never shown any warming. What you called "measured temperatures" is 100% FUDGED FRAUD.


and THAT is why there is NO BREAKOUT IN CANE ACTIVITY, because if oceans were actually warming, there would be a breakout.

 

[ding]

Wrong. The actual ocean data has never shown any warming. What you called "measured temperatures" is 100% FUDGED FRAUD.


and THAT is why there is NO BREAKOUT IN CANE ACTIVITY, because if oceans were actually warming, there would be a breakout.

I know it's hard for you to accept but the ocean currents do control the climate of the planet.

 

[Crick]

Observations and models agree that the oceans are warming faster

This is a re-post from Carbon Brief. Dr Lijing Cheng is an associate professor at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics in China; Prof John Abraham is a professor in the School of Engineering at the University of St. Thomas; Zeke Hausfather is the US analyst for Carbon Brief; and Dr Kevin...

skepticalscience.com

If greenhouse warming did not cause this increase in ocean heat content, what did?

 

[ding]

View attachment 988458

Observations and models agree that the oceans are warming faster

This is a re-post from Carbon Brief. Dr Lijing Cheng is an associate professor at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics in China; Prof John Abraham is a professor in the School of Engineering at the University of St. Thomas; Zeke Hausfather is the US analyst for Carbon Brief; and Dr Kevin...

skepticalscience.com

View attachment 988463
If greenhouse warming did not cause this increase in ocean heat content, what did?

The sun, dummy. The sun.

 

[Crick]

The sun, dummy. The sun.

View attachment 988469

What CHANGE do you believe has caused the oceans to ADD 350 zetajoules of thermal energy in the last 60 years?

 

[ding]

What CHANGE do you believe has caused the oceans to ADD 350 zetajoules of thermal energy in the last 60 years?

Are you assuming no heat has been added prior to the last 60 years? What are you basing the need for a change on?

How much heat has been added since the last glacial maximum? Do you suppose it's more than the last interglacial that had 26ft higher seas than today?

 

[Crick]

Are you assuming no heat has been added prior to the last 60 years? What are you basing the need for a change on?

How much heat has been added since the last glacial maximum? Do you suppose it's more than the last interglacial that had 26ft higher seas than today?

View attachment 988789

Okay, two questions: 1) Where has it been hiding up till 60 years ago and 2) What brought it out of hiding?