” it is plain that 20thC temperature is not a linear trend and a structural break approach [ie a step-up] is statistically verified.”
I like that wording. A structural break approach. A step-up. Thats the sort of wording I need to use when I’m trying to explain next time how I think the Holocene maximum was sustained so long. The Holocene optimum defies alarmist models. But this step-up, structural break-talk…………
Thats the way to describe it when I bring my idea of viscosity into it. The simplified model is where the equilibrium imbedded joules is reliant mostly on resistance to circulation. Resistance to mixing. But then warmer water has lower viscosity and so less resistance to circulation. Hence if you have other things going for you. If you have other causes that can keep your momentum going, the viscosity factor might lead to this structural break. This step-up.
I saw this article by Goddard I think, about the holocene optimum. You know the attitude;
“It didn’t happen. We know all about it. It was only in the Northern hemisphere. And even then only in Summer. The computer has spoken. You weren’t there. You cannot know. I work for NASA and you don’t….”
You know how they are. They ignore the evidential record and go with whatever their computer says.
But it stands to reason. It went from 8000-5000 years ago I think in traditional estimates. It turns out that proxy evidence gives 8000 years ago as being when there was a burst of even more powerful solar action than the twentieth century. I’ve heard 6000 years ago being thought of as the most optimal from a Milankovitch point of view. And the holocene optimum stood for another thousand years after that.
It all seems to hang together as far as I can see. I don’t see it necessary to do anything else but follow the evidence. But Goddard seems to see things differently.
As far as I know I’m the first person to bring up the factor of viscosity changes due to water temperature. And I think I was the first person to deal with stefan-boltzmanns insofar as what that means when you dissaggregate into different areas of territory. Although I think Lubos went into this but no-one seems to have worked with this all that much. They waste so much money but they don’t tell you what you need to know. Also the idea that Stefan-Boltzmanns leads to some measure of “resistance-to-circulation” being the best determinant of how many joules will be imbedded in some implied equilibrium.
But IF it was ONLY Stefan-Boltzmanns, that would be a pretty powerful equilibrating mechanism in my view. If it was only Stefan Boltzmanns the planet would be like a pretty good thermostat.
But you throw in regional serendipity and VISCOSITY EFFECTS you have the potential I think, for this structural break you are talking about. This step up. This step down. This step up and step down and stay down effect. I think VISCOSITY plays a part here.
And I think its going to be a case of step-down and stay down a long time. And I think this sort of thing will be happening pretty soon.