How Planetary And Solar Oscillations Affect Earth’s Temperature Cycles
The mechanism and even the existence of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) have remained under debate among climate researchers, and the same applies to general temperature oscillations of a 60- to 90-year period.
The recently published study of Ollila and Timonen has found that these oscillations are real and they are related to 60- and 88-year periodicities originating from the planetary and solar activity oscillations.
These oscillations can be observed in the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), the Pacific Multidecadal Oscillation (PMO), and actually in the global surface temperature (GST).
The similarities between the GST, AMO, PMO, and AHR (Astronomical Harmonic Resonances) are obvious in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. The 60-year fluctuations of AMO, PMO, AHR, and temperature trend of HadCRUT5. The AHR trend is from the study of Ollila (2017), and the PMO has been digitized from Figure 5 of Chen et al. (2016) with 2-year steps.
The oscillations are not limited only to temperatures. Researchers have studied oscillations of day lengths, magnetic field magnitudes, sunspot lengths, auroral records, cosmogenic isotopes like 14C and 10Be, Indian moons intensities, sediments of NE Pacific, 14C of tree-rings, and sea carbonates.
The oscillations periods of these studies vary from 60 to 90 years. The most common and prominent periodicity is 88 years and is called the Gleissberg cycle. Named after Wolfgang Gleissberg, who discovered in 1958 that solar cycles weaken and strengthen over about 80 years.
The other main periodicity of the research studies is around 60 years. The researchers normally suggest no origin for this periodicity.
Ermakov, Scafetta, and Ollila have analyzed that the orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn can create temperature variations of 60 years by moving the solar system barycenter, which causes variations in the cosmic dust amount entering the atmosphere. The temperature effect happens through cloudiness variations.
The authors have studied how well the variations of astronomical harmonic resonances (AHR) could explain the 60-year temperature variations, which are based on instrumental records and on the tree-ring data of the supra-long Scots pine tree-ring record for northern Finnish Lapland (subsequently called the Finnish timberline pine chronology (FTPC)), stretching to the year 5634 BC.
The strong feature of the FTPC tree-sing signal is the one-year accuracy of the tree-ring method and therefore it is the most effective form of proxy information on the past climate.
The radial growth of (tree-ring width) is regulated by the average summer temperature in cool areas and precipitation in arid areas. The minimum factor for pine growth in Lapland (the northern part of Finland) is temperature.
The FTPC tree-ring series is the longest tree-type series in the world. The explanation is that so-called pine subfossils once sank into the oxygen-free swamps and the bottom mud of lakes for millennia.
The FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) analysis was carried for finding out the main periods for the FTPC signal, the AHR signal, and the Ljungqvist temperature proxy data, Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) of the tree-ring data (FTPC), AHR, and Ljungqvist temperature proxy data.
These analyses show that the well-known Gleissberg cycle of 80 to 90 years is the dominating cycle caused by the sun’s activity changes but the observed 60-year cycle can be connected to the dominant frequency of the AHR signal.
The authors have combined the AHR signal and the Gleissberg signal. These signals had a common maximum in 1941 which explains the warm period of the 1930s.
These two oscillations may also be in opposite phases or close maximum or minimum phases. In Fig. 3 the combined signal of 60- and the 88-year signal is the blue break line curve and the red curve is the FTPC signal.
Fig. 3. FTPC signal and combined effect of 60- and 88-year signals.
It is easy to see by the naked eye that the ups and downs of these two trends happen close to each other. The FTPC curve is spikier and the authors have identified that the identified volcanic eruptions are the main causes of these deviations.
The IPCC does not recognize non-anthropogenic temperature variations originating from changes in the Sun’s activity or planetary oscillations.
The 60- and 88-year oscillations explain the well-known temperature oscillations for the 1900s and our study shows that these oscillations are a permanent phenomenon affecting the global surface temperature on a millennia scale.
This study utilized detrended temperature data of HadCRUT5 and the purpose was not to find out the long-term (from 100 to 1,000 years) temperature effects of solar activity changes.
The maximum combined temperature effect of AMO and Gleissberg oscillations was in 2020, and now their impact is slowly descending. In addition to these oscillations’ impacts, the Sun’s activity seems to also decrease.
The original study has been published by Wiley Online Library (The Royal Meteorological Society) and it contains more detailed analyses and figures: https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.7912
See more here climatechangedispatch
About the author: Dr. Antero OIlila is the author of 21 climate research articles. His results are not in line with the IPCC science like greenhouse effect specification, climate sensitivity, anthropogenic CO2 amount, and residence time. His website is https://www.climatexam.com.
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.
Koen Vogel
| #
Where to start? I am a huge fan of solar cycles influencing climate change. So much so that I wrote an article about it: https://principia-scientific.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Vogel_PROM_FINAL.pdf
But the data you present is a best ambiguous. Fig. 1 shows 2 possibly 3 peaks of a 60 not 88 year cycle. And even then the AMO an hardly be the cause of temperature variations, as something must be heating the Atlantic at its source, which then somehow has to correlate to cosmic dust influencing regional heating, and I’m missing the link. It seems more likely the AMO temperature fluctuations are an effect and not a cause, as they covary with other indicators and not known solar min/max cycles..
The 60 year solar dust Jupiter barycenter cycle is an interesting one, but its based on models (which the IPCC has shown us can prove just about anything), but has little evidence – or even a physical model – to back it up. And how to explain the correlation between cosmic dust and its temperature variations and the geomagnetic field variations (https://principia-scientific.com/how-continental-drift-is-powered-by-the-geomagnetogenic-process/)
Lastly, the mechanism causing temperatures to vary is missing. The IPCC has demonstrated that shortwave solar radiation was not responsible for the 1900-1944 and 1980-present temperature increases (Fig.1) while Fig. 3 suggests that the 60 and 88 year cycles cannot explain the Little Ice Age nor the Midieval Warm period.
But a highly enjoyable article that that hopefully will generate some discussion in the comments.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers and Koen Vogel,
We can go to Antero Oilila’s website and read his CV. Koen, I would like to compare your CV with his.
Readers, I review what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote in his Sherlock Holmes mysteries for they explanation the problems still involved in the study of weather & climate.
“It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence, it biases the judgment.” And, “The temptation to form premature theories upon insufficient data is the bane of our profession.”
We only began to study the atmospheric jet streams after WWII. And R.C. Sutcliffe in 1966 (Weather & Climate) reviewed for his readers the data which had been measured (observed) by this time and the data which was being measured at that time. And he reviewed the theories which had been formulated wrlll before the jet streams existences had been well established.
Here, I call attention to a website
(https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/salem/97301/weather-radar/330144) about which I only learned about a month, or so, ago. Which I have read since that some weather forecasters had been using for a few decades. About which I comment there is significant difference between meteorologists who attempt to forecast weather and who attempt to understand weather. If one studies the observations of the areas of precipitation events it becomes obvious that a significant majority of these precipitation events are occurring over the oceans and not over the continents where most people live. Relative to Doyles’s comments, do you see the problem.
Now consider the fact that Newton, in The Principlia, wrote about the opportunity that he and other astronomers of that time had to observe two comets which approached the sun very closely. A study of the history of comets led to the conclusion that one of these comets had a period of about a 100 years and the other of 500+ years. We clearly know that the shorter period was that of Halley’s comet. Which we have had the opportunity to observe several times and know that during the last passage it seems to have been vaporized away because of its ‘short’ period. However, we have yet to observe the comet with the much longer period so we have no idea how it might influence the earth’s weather.
And we should not ignore how drastically weather can change from one day to the next as we PRETEND to understand the CIRCULATION of our present ATMOSPHERE with limited data. So I call attention to (https://raws.dri.edu/), project, of the USA, which it seems few beside myself have written about here at PSI.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply