the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The Earth's climate lagged, recurrent and non-linear solar and lunar multi-millennial scale responses: An oceanic hypothesis, evidence, verifications and forecasts
Abstract. This work provides a hypothesis of the links between the multi-millennia scale recurrent solar and tidal influences and Earth's climate lagged responses, associated with the oceanic transport mechanisms with a variable modulation. As a part of this hypothesis, empirical and simple, non-linear lagged models are proposed for five of the most representative Earth's climate variables (a continental tropical temperature, an Antarctic temperature [at James Ross Island], the Greenland temperature, the global temperature and the southeast asian monsoon) with multi-millennia records to account for the lagged responses to solar forcing. The proposed models implicitely include a well-known oceanic heat transport mechanism: the Ocean Conveyor Belt. This oceanic mechanism appears to generate a climate modulation through the intensity of the ocean/atmosphere circulation, and a heat and mass transport, with a consequent climate lag of several thousands of years. Tidal forcing is also considered for global temperature modelling and forecast. The consequent millennia-scale global forecasts, after being integrated/verified with an accumulated ocean travelled distance from the tropical East Pacific, and with a double evaluation of the tidal influences based on similarities and on the NASA’s solar system astronomical dynamics, indicates a cooling for the next century, and gentle oscillations over the next millennia. Our preliminary results that strongly suggest that millennial scale changes in solar activity induce circulation and thermal global impacts, also suggest that the Younger Dryas event, may be influenced by the lagged outcomes of solar driven changes in the tropical Pacific, and by tidal influences. The detected Earth's climate delayed responses, that have been working in the past and present climates, and will be working in the future climates, must be, as soon as possible, independently verified and theoretically sustained, before to be fully included in a multi-scale climate models as a scientific theory. A final example for the global temperature record over the last 170 years demonstrates with experimental results for the twenty first century evolution the convenience of a multi-scale climate modelling with contrasting lower values compared with the IPCC global temperature scenarios.
- Preprint
(2100 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on esd-2021-84', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Jan 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC7: 'Reply on RC1', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC7-supplement.pdf
-
AC7: 'Reply on RC1', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
-
AC1: 'Comment on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 18 Jan 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Comment 2 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 11 Mar 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC2-supplement.pdf
- AC3: 'Comment 3 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 11 Mar 2022
-
AC4: 'Comment 4 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 29 Mar 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC4-supplement.pdf
-
AC5: 'Comment 5 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 05 Apr 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC5-supplement.pdf
-
AC6: 'Comment 6 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 15 Apr 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC6-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on esd-2021-84', Anonymous Referee #2, 19 Apr 2022
This manuscript seeks to address an extremely relevant scientific problem to the Earth System Dynamics community. Hence, in terms of placement within the scope of the journal, it would be perfect - provided the research would have been conducted in a thorough comprehensive and fail-proof or at least falsifiable manner.
However, notwithstanding the intellectually fertile ideas and insights as expressed in the conjectures and hypothesis laid out for investigation, formally speaking the study undertaking lacks fundamental scientific grounds to take off as a full-fledged research study. As also already pointed by another reviewer, whose words I fully endorse and hence will not repeat for obvious reasons, there are profound shortcomings and severe hindrances at both technical and scientific levels that make it unfeasible to simply amend in view of a possible publication.
I am aware of the author's keen efforts to further clarify and improve the manuscript. However, while I sympathise with such efforts and persistence, unfortunately I am so sorry to say that the fatal concerns are not yet sufficiently addressed. This study needs to go back to the drawing board and reframed from its very foundations, rather than undergoing amendments over what are unstable principles, assumptions and procedures.
Therefore, to that regard, my recommendation is for the author to take the fertile insights towards producing a clean, sharp, effective study. The present prepring is citeable and holds the proof of the precedence of the raised ideas and insights. But these need to be thoroughly investigated with technically sound methodologies to provide results that can provide a scientifically sound set of results that can give confidence about the proposed contribution. Until that happens, this study conveys a fertile albeit speculative exercise that is not yet sufficiently close to physical consistence to be deemed appropriate for final publication at Earth System Dynamics.
All in all, the problem is not on the hypothesis raised by the author, and which should indeed merit further investigation. It is about how such hypothesis are scientifically worked towards providing a robust contribution to the advancement of knowledge beyond a speculative theoretical exercise grounded on debatable foundations that themselves need to be properly investigated and potentially validated in perhaps a seminal study on its own.
Thank you for your consideration.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-84-RC2 -
AC8: 'Reply on RC2', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC8-supplement.pdf
-
AC8: 'Reply on RC2', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on esd-2021-84', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Jan 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC7: 'Reply on RC1', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC7-supplement.pdf
-
AC7: 'Reply on RC1', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
-
AC1: 'Comment on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 18 Jan 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Comment 2 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 11 Mar 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC2-supplement.pdf
- AC3: 'Comment 3 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 11 Mar 2022
-
AC4: 'Comment 4 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 29 Mar 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC4-supplement.pdf
-
AC5: 'Comment 5 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 05 Apr 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC5-supplement.pdf
-
AC6: 'Comment 6 on esd-2021-84', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 15 Apr 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC6-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on esd-2021-84', Anonymous Referee #2, 19 Apr 2022
This manuscript seeks to address an extremely relevant scientific problem to the Earth System Dynamics community. Hence, in terms of placement within the scope of the journal, it would be perfect - provided the research would have been conducted in a thorough comprehensive and fail-proof or at least falsifiable manner.
However, notwithstanding the intellectually fertile ideas and insights as expressed in the conjectures and hypothesis laid out for investigation, formally speaking the study undertaking lacks fundamental scientific grounds to take off as a full-fledged research study. As also already pointed by another reviewer, whose words I fully endorse and hence will not repeat for obvious reasons, there are profound shortcomings and severe hindrances at both technical and scientific levels that make it unfeasible to simply amend in view of a possible publication.
I am aware of the author's keen efforts to further clarify and improve the manuscript. However, while I sympathise with such efforts and persistence, unfortunately I am so sorry to say that the fatal concerns are not yet sufficiently addressed. This study needs to go back to the drawing board and reframed from its very foundations, rather than undergoing amendments over what are unstable principles, assumptions and procedures.
Therefore, to that regard, my recommendation is for the author to take the fertile insights towards producing a clean, sharp, effective study. The present prepring is citeable and holds the proof of the precedence of the raised ideas and insights. But these need to be thoroughly investigated with technically sound methodologies to provide results that can provide a scientifically sound set of results that can give confidence about the proposed contribution. Until that happens, this study conveys a fertile albeit speculative exercise that is not yet sufficiently close to physical consistence to be deemed appropriate for final publication at Earth System Dynamics.
All in all, the problem is not on the hypothesis raised by the author, and which should indeed merit further investigation. It is about how such hypothesis are scientifically worked towards providing a robust contribution to the advancement of knowledge beyond a speculative theoretical exercise grounded on debatable foundations that themselves need to be properly investigated and potentially validated in perhaps a seminal study on its own.
Thank you for your consideration.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-84-RC2 -
AC8: 'Reply on RC2', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-84/esd-2021-84-AC8-supplement.pdf
-
AC8: 'Reply on RC2', Jorge Sánchez-Sesma, 17 Jun 2022
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1,567 | 366 | 75 | 2,008 | 42 | 51 |
- HTML: 1,567
- PDF: 366
- XML: 75
- Total: 2,008
- BibTeX: 42
- EndNote: 51
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1