Feb 12 2010
It’s Not The CO2, It’s The Magma
For years I have never bought off on the idea the El Nino’s were caused by the Sun or atmosphere – there is just too damn much water to heat or cool in a year for this phenomena to be driven by climate. I have felt for a long time that this effect was actually coming from inside the Earth, where there is available heat (in the magma) to heat up that large bowl of water that is the Eastern Pacific Ocean (white area in the image below, click to enlarge).
Jeff Id at Air Vent has an excellent post up by some researchers who have started to demonstrate this is in fact the source of three major climate engines on Earth, research snuffed out the by elitist snobs who support the AGW nonsense:
In gist, Smoot and Leybourne noted that each high pressure (HP) and low pressure (LP) cells of the three global oscillation systems that control the world weather are underlain by typical geological structures with vortex geometry and with other typical geomorphological and geophysical characteristics. (Surge Tectonics had already recognized these vortex structures as something not explicable by the mainstream geodynamic concept, the plate tectonics.) Thus, the best studied Southern Oscillation, with which El Niňo is associated, has its HP cell hovering over Easter and Juan Fernandez Islands (two adjacent islands on the East Pacific Rise) and LP cell over the Banda Sea (Indonesia) in the western Pacific Ocean. North Pacific Oscillation (NPO) controlling North American weather patterns, and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) controlling European and Siberian weather patterns have a similar underlying geology. In the background of then existing observations by seismologist Daniel Walker — pointing to increased tectonic activity (seismicity, magma upwelling and hydrothermal venting) along portions of the East Pacific Rise preceding by up to six months each El Niňo event studied from 1964 to 1997-98 (thus termed “Predictors of El Niñoâ€) — the observations of Smoot and Bruce made an interesting connection for us. We made an attempt to explore this connection with the study of the European heat wave of 2003, and found some apparent confirmation. We argued for deepening the frontier of climate research to see if sun’s magnetic field via Earth’s Core-mantle boundary processes is somehow linked to climate modulation. However, several proposals for funding by Bruce to explore this link didn’t succeed get us pass through the climate establishment camp guards.
The studies are linked by Jeff in the post. This makes a lot more sense if you understand the power required to heat water even by fractions of degrees. And it means that solar system wide dynamics which play out as features in the planet’s mantle are probably the engine behind warming and cooling, ice ages and warm periods, than anything humankind can impact on this massive planet.
It makes sense, since all the warming and cooling cycles are linked to the oscillation currents in the oceans (which dwarf the land masses 3-1, of which we humans only inhabit a portion of that). It has been shown over and over that tracking the oscillation patterns can indicate what the climate will do for years ahead (unlike IPCC predictions which are 100% wrong all the time). And it makes sense that these oscillations are driven by something much larger and subtle and slower than humans are used to grasping.
Now this is science! And it is a crime this work is being silenced by the cult of IPCC/Al Gore.
As a climate skeptic and a Geologist, I have wondered about the effects of underwater volcanoes on:
1) Ocean temperatures, more on a local basis than a worldwide basis.
2) Ocean chemistry, i.e., gas content and how that might affect atmospheric chemistry, as well as pH and trace element chemistry. Every volcano, in fact every eruption, has its own chemical signature.
on-the-rocks,
But you do agree it makes sense that these huge ocean circulations could be driven more from below and impact the atmosphere instead of the reverse – right?
Also speaking as a geologist, I have to say this hypothesis makes sense. There already has been some discussion of arctic melt attributable to volcanic activity at the pole.
This intriguing theory will get funded, I’m sure, but probably not through the increasingly apparent pseudo science of climatology (sorry to real climate researchers out there, but we just don’t hear your voices).
Yes, it does take a lot of heat to warm the oceans. Geothermal heat may very well explain oceanic flow and heat patterns. If true, this could do for oceanography and atmospheric science what plate tectonics did for geology. Anyway, I anxiously await future research in this area.
As a further thought, could the great mid Atlantic oceanic ridge system be the driver for the Gulf stream? That oceanic ridge is an active fault system exuding magma (and heat). Part of the system is in Iceland, where the ridge emerges to the surface.
It would be interesting to see how much energy that system is injecting into the ocean. How does it compare with solar heat energy from the tropics (thought to be the main heat input into the system)? Could the Medieval warm period be correlated with cessation of the Gulf Current? Was there a cessation of the Gulf Current? So many questions.
So the folks on MSNBC were almost right. The tectonic events weren’t caused by Global Warming but the weather patterns may be caused by tectonic events
Wow!
This is incredible stuff. As a life-long geology “buff” this information makes a heck of a lot of sense, a heck of a lot.
I wonder if the “current” spat of ring of fire seismic activity has anything to do with an El Nino event – it is all tied to plate tectonics.
As to the comment by Granitroc:
History may help answer his Medieval warm period question. The period of the early Roman Empire was also quite warm. There was a very serious cooling phase that is almost in conjunction with the “fall of Rome” c. 467. Actually the cooling period happened about 25 yrs later. Recently a major asteroid/meteor event has been recognized off the Australian coast – same time frame.
David Key has a wonderful book called “Catastrophe: An Investigation into the Origins of Modern Civilization”. In it he details a catastrophic climate event that changed the course of civilization.
There was some sort of an “event” in northern England at the same time. It was so remarkable, the venerable St. Patrick paddled one of those little boats from Ireland to England to investigate it. What fascinates me is the time frame coincides with the Mort d’ Arthur and the rise of the Grail stories as his knights trekked through the wastelands of northern England.
This brings me to the medieval warming period. I suspect it was a continuation of the warming period of the Roman era, interrupted by some sort of an “event” caused by that asteroid or meteor. The implications are it would take something massive to screw up the natural ebb and flow of the plate tectonics.
When you think about it, one of the contributing factors to “cooling” are massive volcanic events. Does that not go right back to the geologic?
SJR
The Pink Flamingo
I, too, am a dilettante. Sometimes not being involved with minutia can lead to a little free thinking.
The solar wind was discovered by the Russian “Luna” mission in 1967. It is essentially a direct current of considerable magnitude. The iron/nickel (ferromagnetic) core of the earth is a sphere rotating every 24 hours. From my memories of 6th grade science class (1954) this is a classic electrical generator. This would generate currents in that core. Heat. Geothermal and volcanic activity.
The thermal inertia of the core is a natural mechanical integrator (mathematical sense). This might account for long term variations in climate. The “Little Ice Age” is associated with the Maunder Minimum of sunspots. Might provide insight into the time frames involved.
In all the discussions and papers that I have read I have never seen mention of this internal heat taken into account. The accepted mean contribution of the “greenhouse effect” is 33 degrees centipede (I know, I know). That is the “energy budget” as calculated for mno atmosphere. Again, no accounting for internal heat.
Is something being overlooked?
Makes sense. What has more effect putting the burner under the pot or putting the burner on top of it?
Here is an author that one may want to read on this subject:
Robert Felix. His website is http://www.iceagenow.com/
[www.iceagenow.com/] and is worth a look.
Felix has written two books:
1) Not by Fire But by Ice (2nd Edition)
and ,
2) Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps
Dan Kurt