Permanent "El Niño" claims questioned

It's a boy/girl thing

From “The Science is Settled” Department. Another of the alarmists’ claims is that increasing temperatures will see the natural El Niño/La Niña cycles disappear in favour of a “permanent” and damaging El Niño, which may, amongst other things, lead to more long-term severe droughts in Australia.

However, new research into ancient clam shells appears to show otherwise:

Ancient fossilized clams that lived off the coast of Antarctica some 50 million years ago have a story to tell about El Niño, according to Syracuse University researcher Linda Ivany. Their story calls into question contemporary theories that predict global warming could result in a permanent El Niño state of affairs.

The El Niño phenomenon, which occurs every two to seven years, is characterized by unusually warm ocean temperatures in the eastern Equatorial Pacific. El Niño can cause torrential rainfall in Peru, devastating drought in Australia, and generally wreak havoc on global weather. El Niño is the warm phase of a large oscillation in which the surface temperature of the tropical Pacific varies, causing changes in the winds and rainfall patterns. The complete phenomenon is known as the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO). The prevailing theory predicts that rising global temperatures could cause the ENSO to collapse, resulting in permanent El Niño conditions, which could have a major impact on socioeconomic and ecological systems worldwide.

“The good news is that despite the very warm temperatures during the Eocene, the evidence from the clams and tree rings shows that the ENSO system was still active, oscillating between normal and El Niño years. That suggests that the same will be true in our future as the planet warms up again.”



  1. Richard Seale via Facebook says:
    • I wish he wouldn’t link AGW scepticism with evolutionary scepticism… They are completely different.

  2. There is nothing constant except change.

  3. Once again it’s the Nostradamus Brigade that predicts catastrophic consequences of global warming. That fact is, there is no direct evidence to link changes in El Niño/La Niña cycles with climate change.

    It is all hypothetical maybe’s, could, might, perhaps, possibly but as usual, no defining evidence. Maybe is not a scientific option – you either prove a theory correct and if not, then it just remains a theory, not a fact.

  4. permanent el nino ??? that means our stateside friends would be locked in to a permanent el nina . i find this a fair stretch as the phenomenon is caused by the warming of ocean currents as the axis of the earth tilts in relation to the seasons

%d bloggers like this: