A Tale of Two Climatic Changes: Part One

The first of four posts that discuss the differences between the large climatic change that occurred at the end of the last Ice Age and the our current comparably minor ‘climate change’

Key to understanding the posts is Earth’s power balance as presented by Nobel-laureate Dr John Clauser in a video.

Clauser concludes that Earth’s temperature should remain relatively constant thanks to a cloud thermostat that buffers power density changes of up to 18 W/m2, so humankind should not be worried about the relatively minorpower density increases caused by atmospheric CO2 increases.

But he leaves open the question on whatphysical process can disrupt this power balance and cause ‘climate change’.

It’s uncontentious – even among anthropogenic climate change enthusiasts – that for the last 400,000 years (and longer) Earth has cyclically alternated between colder periods, known as glacials, and warmer periods, such as our current interglacial.

That climate & temperature change has happened and will almost certainly happen in future is a well-established and uncontentious scientific fact.

Far more contentious are the proposed mechanisms whereby a relatively stable glacial climate has repeatedly transitioned into a relatively stable interglacial climate (and vice versa) under a relatively stable power balance and an optimally-functioning cloud thermostat. Some physical process(es) must be violently – and cyclically – destabilizing Earth’s steady-state climate.

Historical power balances can be estimated (interpreted) from reconstructions of Earth surface temperature.

A NASA reconstruction (https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth103/node/636) of the Earth’s surface temperature reveals that 21,000 years ago:

1) Most of the Earth, e.g. the tropics and Pacific rim, was only a few ºC cooler

2) The Arctic and North Atlantic rim were substantially colder

3) The Antarctic was locally colder, but also locally showing signs of warming up (yellow ovals).

Note that 21 kyr was after the Last Glacial Maximum (26.5 kyr), and towards the end of a period of “ice sheet stability” (26.5 – 19 kyr) that followed. Also note the post-21 kyr warming followed the same pattern of the 1910-1944 and post-1980.

As reported by the IPCC in AR5:

“the most pronounced warming [occurs] in the Arctic during the cold season, followed by North America during the warm season, the North Atlantic Ocean and the tropics.”

The cause of this regional pattern is the subject of the follow-up posts. The Glacial and Interglacial semi-permanent weather systems So why was the North Atlantic so much colder 21 kyr ago?

The short, obvious and uncontentious answer is that its climate was dominated by a semi-permanent, cold weather system:

This Andersen and Borns map (Andersen, B., Borns, H., 1994, The Ice Age World, Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-8200218104) shows that around 21 kyr:

“the low pressure (L) zone along the atmospheric Polar Front in the Atlantic generated strong westerlies which were periodically very cold, particularly during the winter.

A high pressure (H) over the ice sheet generated very strong, dry, cool to cold katabatic winds and easterly anticyclonic winds. The dominance of the two wind systems alternated.”

This cold semi-permanent weather system was paired to a northwards displacement of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and was therefore also responsible for an increase in precipitation in the Sahara, which around 21 kyr very likely had megalakes, e.g. the African Humid Period, Paleolake Mega-Chad, etc.

At present, Europe’s climate is dominated by the semi-permanent Azores High/Icelandic Low system, which is mainly responsible for Europe’s climate zones. This weather system is for example the reason Scottish and Norwegian tourists can reliably expect to get soaked.

The Azores High. Source: https://alchetron.com/Azores-High

Europe’s climate zones around 21 kyr (Andersen & Borns)

In the paleogeographic reconstruction above, the white area is the European ice sheet, the orange areas are tundra, the yellow areas are open steppe or parkland, and only in the extreme southern areas do trees make an appearance.

The Netherlands, Germany and England were inhospitable, uninhabitable frozen wastelands. Compare the map above to Europe’s current climate zones under the Köppen-Geiger (K-G) Climate Classification system, which uses annual and monthly temperature and precipitation.

Europe’s current climate zones. Source: NASA/SEDAC (https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/maps/gallery/search?facets=region:europe&facets=theme:climate)

It shows that between 21 kyr and present the change in semi-permanent weather systems has shifted the Netherlandish, German and English climate zone from cold, dry Tundra to warm, wet Temperate (K-G: Cfb = lime green area).

This K-G Cfb Temperate Zone includes such diverse vacation destinations as:

Small systemic temperature and precipitation fluctuations of 1 ºC and 100 mm will therefore not cause a Köppen-Geiger (K-G) reclassification, i.e. will not cause ‘climate change’, in much of Europe.

Part 1 Conclusions:

1) There was a major climate change in Europe between 21 kyr and present as is evidenced by a major shift in regional K-G classes

2) This climate change was caused by a systemic change in the semi-permanent offshore-Europe weather systems

3) The 1910-1944 and post-1980 periods of global warming did not cause a major shift in K-G classes, and thus represent a comparably minor climate change.

But what caused this shift in the semi-permanent weather systems? How was the glacial power density balance disrupted?

The answers are in Post 2.

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.

Comments (2)

  • Avatar

    Jerry Krause

    |

    Hi Koen,

    I read to your first graphical figure and I had to ask: Who measured these temperatures thousands of years ago? And I stopped reading.

    Have a good day

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Koen Vogel

      |

      Hi Jerry,
      Don’t be such a cynic. I mention these are “estimates” that are derived from numerous temperature proxies. The presence of large ice sheets for example. You can quibble with the numbers but the point of the figure is that during most warm and cold periods throughout the last several hundred million years the temperatures in the tropics remained fairly constant, the mid-latitudes changed by somewhat, and that the temperature at the poles changed significantly. So read on, because this was just the set-up and it gets better.

      Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via