{"id":1378,"date":"2024-02-17T09:05:31","date_gmt":"2024-02-17T09:05:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/arcticwatch.info\/index.php\/2024\/02\/17\/will-the-amo-save-arctic-sea-ice\/"},"modified":"2024-04-14T23:10:34","modified_gmt":"2024-04-14T23:10:34","slug":"will-the-amo-save-arctic-sea-ice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/arcticwatch.info\/index.php\/2024\/02\/17\/will-the-amo-save-arctic-sea-ice\/","title":{"rendered":"Can We Quickly Save Arctic Sea Ice?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

According to Michael Mann he coined the name<\/a> \u201cAtlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation\u201d:<\/p>\n

Two decades ago,\u00a0in an interview<\/a>\u00a0with science journalist Richard Kerr for the journal\u00a0Science<\/em>, I coined the term the \u201cAtlantic Multidecadal Oscillation\u201d (the \u201cAMO\u201d for short) to describe an internal oscillation in the climate system resulting from interactions between North Atlantic ocean currents and wind patterns. These interactions were thought to lead to alternating decades-long intervals of warming and cooling centered in the extratropical North Atlantic that play out on 40-60 year timescales (hence the name). Think of the purported AMO as a much slower relative of the El Nino\/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), with a longer timescale of oscillation (multidecadal rather than interannual) and centered in a different region (the North Atlantic rather than the tropical Pacific).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

More recently Mann et al.<\/a> claimed that in actual fact the AMO does not exist.<\/p>\n

For several decades the existence of interdecadal and multidecadal internal climate oscillations has been asserted by numerous studies based on analyses of historical observations, paleoclimatic data and climate model simulations. Here we use a combination of observational data and state-of-the-art forced and control climate model simulations to demonstrate the absence of consistent evidence for decadal or longer-term internal oscillatory signals that are distinguishable from climatic noise. Only variability in the interannual range associated with the El Ni\u00f1o\/Southern Oscillation is found to be distinguishable from the noise background.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

More recently still I discovered the source of Matt\u2019s optimistic, AMO based prediction of Arctic sea ice recovery. Here is the latest edition, courtesy of Roger \u201cTallbloke\u201d Tattersall:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n

During my conversation with Roger on his blog yesterday he made an at least vaguely testable prediction:<\/p>\n

Well at least we don\u2019t need you to cease prevaricating to see what the correlation coefficients for the two trendlines says about it. We\u2019ll see how the differential changes in the coming months. AMO sine wave approximation wins by 2.9% at the moment.<\/p>\n

\u201cNow answer mine. In what way is your green line related to \u2018the physics of the sea ice annual melt\/freeze cycle?\u2019?<\/em><\/p>\n

In the same way the IPCC\u2019s linear projection is. They are both hypotheses, supported by theory and observations. (one of which will be proved incorrect by 2028).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

When I enquired further, Rog helpfully elucidated:<\/p>\n

\u201cIt may be similarly obvious to you, but where does your green line come from in the second image?<\/em>\u201c<\/p>\n

It\u2019s just a 65yr sine wave in phase with the AMO, scaled to best fit the PIOMAS data.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I don\u2019t yet know if these things come in threes, but \u201cEli the Pit Bull\u201d made a similar \u201cprediction\u201d on XTwitter:<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

The AMO cycle has peaked. It will now start going the other way.
\nBook mark this tweet<\/p>\n

\u2014 Eli the American Pit Bull Terrier (@EliThePitBull) February 15, 2024<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n