Karoly questions ENSO link to long-term climate change

29 Jul, 2009 03:46 PM
Professor David Karoly
Professor David Karoly

Mainstream climate scientists have attacked the interpretations drawn by a new analysis of the effect of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) on global temperatures, which finds that most of the global warming observed in the past 50 years is due to natural occurrences.

The paper, by climate change contrarians John McLean and Associate Professor Bob Carter of the Australian Climate Science Coalition and New Zealand climate scientist Associate Professor Chris de Freitas, describes a close link between the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) and the temperature of the troposphere, the lower 17-20km of the Earth's atmosphere.

The authors establish that tropospheric temperatures respond to changes in the SOI after a lag of 5-7 months.

They argue that analysis of this link demonstrates that most of the warming—about 70 per cent—observed over the past 50 years can be attributed to the SOI.

"… this study has shown that natural climate forcing associated with ENSO is a major contributor to variability and perhaps recent trends in global temperature, a relationship that is not included in current global climate models," the authors concluded.

The peer-reviewed paper was published on July 23 in the respected Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR).

The paper, and the claims made within and about it, are likely to stir up strong debate in the scientific community, as appears to be the authors' intention.

In a press release issued by the Australian Climate Science Coalition this week, the authors cast aside scientific moderation and take a more direct political line.

"Our paper confirms what many scientists already know: which is that no scientific justification exists for emissions regulation, and that, irrespective of the severity of the cuts proposed, an emissions trading scheme will exert no measurable effect on future climate," said Prof. Carter, one of Australia’s most prominent dissenters against the theory of human-induced global warming.

"The close relationship between the Southern Oscillation and mean global temperature, as described in the paper, suggests future global temperatures will continue to change primarily in response to ENSO cycling, volcanic activity and solar changes."

Scientific responses to the paper will take some time to appear in the JGR, but the preliminary reaction suggests any response will be vigorous.

Professor David Karoly of the University of Melbourne, a lead author on two Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports, said that as far as it goes, the analysis that the paper presents appears sound, but the interpretations the authors have drawn from it are not.

While the analysis describes how the SOI affects short-term year-to-year variations in global mean temperature—a relationship that Prof. Karoly said has been understood in the climate science community since the 1970s—he observes that the paper's notes and press release talk about long-term trends.

"The analysis method used in this paper specifically removes any long-term variations in global mean temperature and in the SOI, and only assesses the year-to-year variations. It then finds that the SOI can explain 70 per cent of the year-to-year variations in global mean temperature after ignoring the effect of volcanoes.

"Using these methods, the paper is unable to make any assessment of the effect of the SOI on long term trends in global mean temperature."

That effect, in Prof. Karoly’s opinion, is "very small".

He also takes exception with the authors' claim that the effects of ENSO are not factored into the global climate models.

"That’s wrong," Prof. Karoly said. "Climate models well represent the relationship between global temperature and SOI, including the lag found in the analysis."

Date: Newest first | Oldest first


29/07/2009 4:22:44 PM

If Karoly works for the IPCC, a political organisation found to be repeatedly at fault for their unscientific research, then it doesn't say much about Karoly.
29/07/2009 5:27:33 PM

Here we go again. Another endless round of ill-informed claptrap from people who have never read a scientific paper yet would have us believe they have the "True Facts". Ho Hum---
Loc Hey
29/07/2009 9:08:27 PM

One would get the distinct impression that this newspaper is not here for country people or truth but is following the same agenda as the rest of the media. You should stop calling it "The Land" and call it the " The Red Star" or " Hammer and Sickle".
30/07/2009 4:01:38 AM

The root of the climate change problem? We're letting the United Nations decide what is best for America. And they're failing us. The premise that CO2 drives global warming is based on United Nations' climate reports that are tainted by politics and an agenda. Plus, there's been many new climate discoveries since the UN's 1997 Kyoto Protocol that are largely omitted from the reports because, I think, they undercut Kyoto. America needs its own scientific assessment of global warming. I live in the US and I am a Democrat who for the past 20 years believed global warming was caused by CO2. But now after reading the UN reports I understand the fix was in. The UN climate reports contain much good science, but in the end, the UN is a political organisation where politics trumps science. We in the United States need our own objective, transparent climate commission to think through global warming...before we burden our economy with expensive energy. - Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA.com
30/07/2009 6:27:40 AM

Karoly would question it as his job is funded by the politically-driven global warming industry. Krudd and Pong will totally ignore it as they want to introduce their new tax and their futures depend on it. The mainstream media will also ignore it as they want to maintain the misinformation as it helps sell stories and newspapers.
30/07/2009 7:47:15 AM

http://climateprogress.org/2009/0 7/29/the-video-that-anthony -watts-does-not-want-you-to-see-t he-sinclair-climate-denial- crock-of-the-week/
30/07/2009 7:50:48 AM

Your headline should read: "Concern that new report could dry up climate funding gravy train".
30/07/2009 7:53:07 AM

Here we go again , the great global conspiracy of all the nasty lying scientists ;-) Gotta love the following vid, the organisation referred to was the one Steve Fielding was using as his "credible source" of information. http://climateprogress.org/2009/0 7/29/the-video-that-anthony -watts-does-not-want-you-to-see-t he-sinclair-climate-denial- crock-of-the-week/ And as a more generic guide to the content of the posts which usually appear on the climate topic... http://climateprogress.org/2009/0 1/05/anthony-watts-up-with- that-anti-science-denier-website- weblog-awards/
Marco Polo
30/07/2009 8:19:48 AM

So, this comments page is where the flat earth society congregates today? For goodness sake!
30/07/2009 9:09:35 AM

Arden, Bob etc. As always, you people only hear what you want to hear and attach yourselves to anything that aligns with your one-eyed, narrow view of the world. Objectivity and and ultra-conservatism appear to be at conflicting poles. I'm sure if you saw that human-induced climate change was going to benefit your personal circumstances you'd be rallying support for it!
1 | 2  |  next >


Screen name *
Email address *
Remember me?
Comment *


light grey arrow
I have lodged whistleblower material with the Head of Dept of Ag, Head of the MLA, and the Ag
light grey arrow
Jacky- there are 100K- cattle producers alone so there is many many more than that when you
light grey arrow
If there are 100,000 farmers then 48.5% of farmers, are holding cash reserves equivalent to 2- 4