Met Office study discusses invisible Gulf Stream climate signal?

Posted: March 20, 2022 by oldbrew in MET office, modelling, Natural Variation, Ocean dynamics, research, Uncertainty
Tags:


The signal that wasn’t found could be ‘masked’, researchers suggest. They expected ‘ongoing climate change’ to do something, but maybe it just wasn’t there? Cue more research.
– – –
A new Met Office-led study – reviewing evidence from previous scientific papers and climate models – reveals natural patterns of weakening and strengthening of ocean currents which influence the UK’s weather and climate.

In the North Atlantic lies one of the world’s largest climate mechanisms: a system of currents transporting relatively warm water from the tropics to the poles, with return currents at depth transporting colder, denser water further south.

The transport of heat to the North Atlantic keeps the UK’s climate warmer than other locations at our latitude, says the Met Office.

The so-called Gulf Stream is part of the wider circulation, known by climate scientists as AMOC: the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation.

The study – published in Nature Reviews Earth and Environment today – shows that the AMOC doesn’t remain at the same strength and the authors highlight recent variability in the strength over time and also along its path, with sub-polar and sub-tropical stretches operating on independent cycles.

The Met Office’s Dr Laura Jackson is the paper’s lead author. She said: “It is expected that ongoing climate change will weaken the AMOC. Although our study didn’t detect a signal for long-term weakening, it is plausible that any change currently underway could be masked by the large variation between years and between decades. Any significant change would have a substantial effect on Europe’s weather and climate.”

The authors are calling for more research to improve monitoring of the AMOC and better distinguish ongoing changes from variations over years and decades.

Full article here.

Comments
  1. watersider says:

    Is ‘cobblerrs’ appropriate

  2. Gamecock says:

    “The researchers are calling for more research”

    Fixed it.

    So, if the data doesn’t match the theory, the data is wrong/being covered up.

  3. JB says:

    “It is expected”
    “our study didn’t detect”
    “it is plausible”
    “could be masked”

    “improve monitoring of the AMOC”

    People get handouts from the public trough for this?

  4. oldbrew says:

    What to believe – the data or the models?

  5. […] Met Office study discusses invisible Gulf Stream climate signal? […]

  6. […] Met Office study discusses invisible Gulf Stream climate signal? […]

  7. tallbloke says:

    “variability in the strength over time and also along its path, with sub-polar and sub-tropical stretches operating on independent cycles.”

    But these cycles don’t show up in the models, because the models are crap, and the data is bent.

  8. oldbrew says:

    Study reveals natural patterns of weakening and strengthening of ocean currents which influence the UK’s weather and climate.
    – – –
    No trace gases involved. Research won’t find something that isn’t there, except by pretending to have found it on computer models.

  9. Phoenix44 says:

    So natural variability in the AMOC is so great you can’t see any climate change signal but climate change can’t be due to natural variation?

    What am I missing?

  10. Gamecock says:

    Phoenix, it is difficult for the sane to comprehend the motivations and comprehension of the abnormal. It appears to me they wanted to see how much “climate change,” whatever that means, was affecting the Gulf Stream/AMOC. When they determined that there was too much variability to pin anything on climate change (sic), they restated their theory, a classic begging the question fallacy.

    That Nature Reviews Earth and Environment thought this publishable is hilarious.