Human-driven climate change is literally making Earth ‘wobble’

NASA JPL press release:
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=7240

NASA JPL polar motion simulation (based on following studies):
https://vesl.jpl.nasa.gov/sea-level/polar-motion/

"Climate-driven polar motion: 2003–2015" study:
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/4/e1501693

Abstract
Earth’s spin axis has been wandering along the Greenwich meridian since about 2000, representing a 75° eastward shift from its long-term drift direction. The past 115 years have seen unequivocal evidence for a quasi-decadal periodicity, and these motions persist throughout the recent record of pole position, in spite of the new drift direction. We analyze space geodetic and satellite gravimetric data for the period 2003–2015 to show that all of the main features of polar motion are explained by global-scale continent-ocean mass transport. The changes in terrestrial water storage (TWS) and global cryosphere together explain nearly the entire amplitude (83 ± 23%) and mean directional shift (within 5.9° ± 7.6°) of the observed motion. We also find that the TWS variability fully explains the decadal-like changes in polar motion observed during the study period, thus offering a clue to resolving the long-standing quest for determining the origins of decadal oscillations. This newly discovered link between polar motion and global-scale TWS variability has broad implications for the study of past and future climate.

"What drives 20th century polar motion?" study ($ paywalled $):
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X18305314

Highlights
• Earth's spin axis drifted along ∼74°W at a speed of ∼10.5 cm/yr during the 20th century.
• Glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) explains 33% ± 18% of the observed polar motion.
• Environmental processes plus GIA cannot fully reconcile the observation.
• Contribution from mantle convection (MC) is essential to close the budget.
• Polar motion based joint GIA/MC inversion may help constrain lower mantle viscosity.

Abstract
Astrometric and geodetic measurements show that the mean position of Earth's spin axis drifted through the solid crust toward Labrador, Canada at an average speed of 10.5 ± 0.9 cm/yr during the 20th century. Understanding the origins of this secular polar motion (SPM) has significance for modeling the global climate, as it provides a link to ice mass balance and sea-level rise. A perplexing issue, however, is that while glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) models satisfactorily explain the direction of SPM, the associated prediction of the amplitude is insufficient. Our Bayesian GIA analysis, with constraints from relative sea-level and vertical land motion data, reveals that this process only accounts for 33 ± 18% of the observed SPM amplitude. This shortfall motivates a more broadly scoped reassessment of SPM drivers. To address this, we assemble a complete reconstruction of Earth's surface mass transport derived from recent advancements in modeling the global 20th century cryospheric, hydrologic, oceanic, and seismogenic mass exchange. The summed signals, nonetheless, cannot fully reconcile the observed SPM, even when considering the error statistics of each driver. We investigate an additional excitation source: changes in Earth's inertia tensor caused by mantle convection. Sophisticated models have recently been advanced in tectonic plate reconstructions, in conjunction with geoid and seismic tomographic models. Here we use these models to compute new estimates of SPM. While the convection-driven SPM has considerable uncertainty, the average direction of 283 recent models aligns with the residual SPM (within 2.7° ± 14.8°), significantly reducing the gap between observation and prediction. We assert that one key mechanism for driving 20th century SPM is long-term mass movement due to mantle convection.

I'm not a climate change denier, but it's apparent that the article took research into the earth's 'wobble' and spun it into a rather one-sided assertion that science proves human action is responsible.

Look, I understand that the ice caps and glaciers are melting. I understand that any human contribution to the earth's warming needs to be diminished. What I don't think solves anything is hijacking legitimate science to produce an article that quite frankly will mainly appeal to one side of the aisle and further create anger and resistance on the other side.

Until cooler heads prevail, and someone respected by both factions says "Look, the ice caps are melting! Sea levels are rising! Is this a potential threat, and if so is there something we can do about it?" debate will rule the day and action will not be forthcoming.

We have some precedent. It appears that the globe is beginning to take threats from meteors seriously. In my opinion, articles like this one have the opposite effect.

Why not try linking the actual study itself rather than an article written by Vice, of all sources? It seems to me like linking clickbait articles written by half-baked Web journalists who aren't experts in the field they're covering is not conducive to the quality of ~ as a whole.

Of course, "What Drives 20th Century polar motion" ( https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X18305314?via%3Dihub) doesn't have the same lowest-common-denominator appeal as "human climate change is LITERALLY making Earth wobble."