I pointed Richard Betts to the Charles D. Keeling (Yes, that Charles D. Keeling) and Timothy Whorf paper on lunar tidal cycles and their connection with rapid climate change ‘The 1,800-year oceanic tidal cycle: A possible cause of rapid climate change.’
Here’s what happened:
Basically, Betts ran away. He’s a natural climate change denier. His job is to ‘do outreach’ promoting the Carbon Dioxide causes climate change hypothesis, but maintain plausible deniability that anyone ever showed him what a crock of crap it is compared to more likely explanations.
Keeling and Whorf found an 1800 year Lunar tidal cycle which is what Betts is referring to with “millennial timescaless”. If he actually read the paper he would also find this nugget:
“A cause for such greater regularity in tidal forcing might be resonances of other bodies of the solar system, especially the outer planets. We are struck by the close correspondence of the average period of the 180-year tidal cycle of 179.5 years (1/10 of that of the 1,800-year cycle) and the period of the sun’s rotation about the center of mass of the solar system of 179.2 years, the latter a manifestation of planetary resonances”
Which is why Ian Wilson found a Lunar resonance between the alignment of its lines of Apsides and Nodes and El Nino events, and I found a similar resonance between the solar cycle and ENSO: The Moon’s orbit and the Solar cycle period are shaped by the same forces generated by the rest of the solar system. Note that ~180 years is in a 1:3 ratio with ~60 years – the periodicity of the major oceanic oscillations. El Nino dominates one half of that ~60 year period, La Nina the other. Short term changes add up to bigger long term changes. Richard is being thick for a Bett.
The Moon and Sun are the two bodies with the biggest tidal and angular momentum/vector effects on the Earth’s oceans. Additionally, rhythmic changes in the Sun’s output as seen in red in the above plot vary the input of energy to Earth’s oceans, provoking the peaking outputs that are El Nino events when there is a lull in solar activity.
Away from the ~60 year cycles found in tropical oceans, the north Atlantic exhibits a ~72 to ~74 year cycle. That’s in a 3:1 ratio with the ~208 year De Vries cycle, just like the ~60 year cycle is in a 3:1 ratio with the ~180 year Jose cycle. But here’s the kicker that proves the resonance theory: The beat period of 72 and 60 years is
72×60/(72-60)=360 years. That period is 6×60 years and 5×72 years. The tropical and extra-tropical oceans are in a 6:5 resonance with each other.
Moreover, the ~230 to ~240 year cycle of lunar declination mentioned by James Goodman’s twitter comment above in reference to the work of David Dilley is in a near 3:2 resonance with the same 360 year period. 216 years is in a 5:3 ratio with 360 years and has also been mooted as a De Vries cycle period. It also ties in with solar grand minima event periods.
Rhodes Fairbridge noted long ago that Alaskan and Siberian beach ridges expressed a bigger amplitude periodicity at ~360 years. Here we have the physical evidence supporting our theory. Evidence which Willis and the WUWTians avert their eyes from as it undermines their childish ‘cyclomania’ label that they schtick on we students of solar system dynamics. There are three occasions I’ve asked Anthony Watts to comment on the regularity of the beach ridges, and he’s done a Betts every time.
We will eventually drag the CO2 gasbag theorists and their lukewarm apologists into 21st century science.