Ice core records are rich archives of the climate history during glacial - interglacial
cycles over timescales of up to ~ 800 kyr before the current age.
Not exact matches
Cycles that drive changes in the ocean's chemistry and organisms take place
over hours, days, seasons, years and even decades —
timescales NEPTUNE can track.
But the duration of an SKR
cycle later proved to vary by several minutes
over the years, whereas a planet's rotational speed should remain nearly constant on such short
timescales.
Earth has a carbon - silicate
cycle that acts like a thermostat
over geological
timescales.
For carbon perturbations that take place
over shorter
timescales, the pace of carbon -
cycle changes will not matter; instead, the size or magnitude of the change will determine the likelihood of an extinction event.
We recently extended this record to approximately 120,000 years BP in order to track vegetation change
over a full glacial
cycle at millennial to orbital
timescales.
In a paper published in Science Advances, he proposes that mass extinction occurs if one of two thresholds are crossed: For changes in the carbon
cycle that occur
over long
timescales, extinctions will follow if those changes occur at rates faster than global ecosystems can adapt.
This means that there were large - scale changes in the carbon
cycle over a short geological
timescale of several tens of thousands of years.
Re # 8, any changes in climate
over glacial - interglacial
timescales have to take into account an additional component: the biogeochemical
cycling of atmospheric gases.
Re glacial
cycle CO2 and temp correlation, it is useful to remember that the
timescale of that record is 100's of thousands of years, where as the CO2 rise today has occurred
over ~ 100.
Over very long time periods such that the carbon cycle is in equilibrium with the climate, one gets a sensitivity to global temperature of about 20 ppm CO2 / deg C, or 75 ppb CH4 / deg C. On shorter timescales, the sensitivity for CO2 must be less (since there is no time for the deep ocean to come into balance), and variations over the last 1000 years or so (which are less than 10 ppm), indicate that even if Moberg is correct, the maximum sensitivity is around 15 ppm CO2 / deg C. CH4 reacts faster, but even for short term excursions (such as the 8.2 kyr event) has a similar sensitiv
Over very long time periods such that the carbon
cycle is in equilibrium with the climate, one gets a sensitivity to global temperature of about 20 ppm CO2 / deg C, or 75 ppb CH4 / deg C. On shorter
timescales, the sensitivity for CO2 must be less (since there is no time for the deep ocean to come into balance), and variations
over the last 1000 years or so (which are less than 10 ppm), indicate that even if Moberg is correct, the maximum sensitivity is around 15 ppm CO2 / deg C. CH4 reacts faster, but even for short term excursions (such as the 8.2 kyr event) has a similar sensitiv
over the last 1000 years or so (which are less than 10 ppm), indicate that even if Moberg is correct, the maximum sensitivity is around 15 ppm CO2 / deg C. CH4 reacts faster, but even for short term excursions (such as the 8.2 kyr event) has a similar sensitivity.
However, there do also seem to be lunar and solar
cycles which take place
over longer
timescales, e.g., the 18.6 year lunar
cycle.
Excellent work as usual, Bob, but you won't be surprised that I'm still trying to see how your ENSO material can be worked into the climate
cycling from MWP to LIA to date without some other force altering the relative strengths of El Nino and La Nina
over longer
timescales than the multidecadal.
Scientists were aware tidal energy varied in the distant past, but the new study suggests there is a super-tidal
cycle occurring
over geologic
timescales and linked to tectonic movement.
I wrote to the BBC at the time pointing out that the audience was likely to have been severely misled by this question, that the warming
over the previous 16 years reached a conventional threshold of statistical significance (p < 0.05), and that
over a short
timescale natural causes of variability (ENSO, volcanoes, the solar
cycle) tend to predominate, so the short answer is «15 years is too small a sample to demonstrate statistical significance.»
However, the expectation is that if we average
over a sufficiently long
timescales (decades) that the response will be roughly linear (I'm thinking specifically about temperature change, and changes to the hydrological
cycle).