Not exact matches
The natural variations consist mainly of short term fluctuations (less than a decade) due to ENSO and other chaotic elements, plus longer term climate «oscillations» — mainly the AMO and
PDO, with total «
cycle»
lengths in the neighborhood of about 60 years.
Now forced to explain the warming hiatus, Trenberth has flipped flopped about the
PDO's importance writing «One of the things emerging from several lines is that the IPCC has not paid enough attention to natural variability, on several time scales,» «especially El Niños and La Niñas, the Pacific Ocean phenomena that are not yet captured by climate models, and the longer term Pacific Decadal Oscillation (
PDO) and Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) which have
cycle lengths of about 60 years.»
Granted, the «great climate shift» of 76 - 77 occurred as well about this time, and many would say that warm period of the
PDO is really the caused of the warming in the late 20th century, but it would be interesting to hear your rationale for choosing the early 1950's as the beginning of your measurement period for looking for anthropogenic effects, as from 1950 to about 1980, we have no need of an anthropogenic explanation, as the
length of the solar
cycle can fit the temperature curve quite well.
Other
cycles are
PDO, NAO,... with
lengths of 70 - 90 years, Roman WP — dark ages — MWP - LIA - CurrentWP with
length of ~ 1000 years.