Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. – Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, Head of the Russian/Ukrainian joint project Astrometria – has a few things to say about solar activity and climate. Thanks to Russ Steele of NCWatch
Key Excerpts:
Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global, and very prolonged, temperature drop.
[…] Over the past decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop.
[…] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural warming.
[…] We should fear a deep temperature drop — not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis.
Full Study is here. (PDF patience, takes a bit to load)
I’m puzzled by the use of the PMOD solar irradiance composite. Leif believes that the recent rapid decline, highlighted in the paper, is erroneous, and the ACRIM team claims that the PMOD composite is erroneous during the ACRIM gap.
Hmmm, maybe sunspots cool and faculae warm.
============================
As I understand it, the peak temperature was in ’98 but the graph shows Solar Irradiance peaking shortly later. Why would the peak in temperature precede the peak in Irradiance?
I’m just asking the question I know will be directed at me.
At long last, there’s something for a Russian to be proud of…
Wait a minute. “Habibullo Abdussamatov” is a pure Tatar name, not a Russian one! It’s a Muslim conspiracy against the global warming! “Beck” also sounds a lot like a Muslim last name. Glenn Beck must be a member of the same conspiracy. Everything is clear now! I shall immediately inform George Soros of this insidious attack by Saudi-financed enemies of the Obama Climate Change.
Meanwhile, it’s snowing hard in New Mexico. Merry Christmas.
I’ve been wondering when one of these studies was going to be ‘widely released’.
This is proof that the reach [and money] of Gore and Strong doesn’t extend everywhere.
For many, this is a ‘peek’ at what may be driving the Kremlin’s energy and foreign policy, and this is by no means the only Russian ‘climate study’ that’s been generated.
For obvious reasons, the Russians research efforts [and their viewpoints] aren’t getting a whole lotta airplay.
Question: is this Russia’s pre-Copenhagen position?
Very interesting contribution.
Curious to find out what the warmists are going to say against it.
Wait, is he a dedicated climate scientist?
Oops, is it peer-reviewed?
I’m loving it.
a well written, thoughtful and compelling essay.
it will have no effect on global warming alarmists.
in a related note, as I’m trying to put pieces together the thought occurs: is it possible that planetary position (yes, the “barycenter” theory) would have an impact on the internal fusion rate and/or convection rate and/or raduis of the sun as described?
timetochooseagain (07:43:19) :
There is a bitter discussion on that issue, but the 200 years oscillation appears also in Prof. Leif Svalgaard graphs, as we have seen in the discussion held here in WUWT in another thread.
@ur momisugly servius
The paper states that TSI peaked in “the early ’90’s.” I think the peak of cycle 22, which was larger than 23, was in 1991.
Congratulations Anthony!, this one will be the longest threads ever.
Prof.Abdusamatov also points out that Mars and other planets had its 1997-98 El Nino warming!
@ur momisugly Servius:
The 1998 peak is usually attributed to PDO cycles – namely, a strong El Nino. The difficulty in the proving-or-disproving of AGW is that we have many layers of environmental effects building on one another. You could also argue, for example, that the very-regular sunspot cycle bears little resemblance to global average temperatures.
Anyways, the proof is in the pudding. I’ve been telling any of my friends that will listen since 2005 that the world is going to cool for at least the next 10 years. I expect this year to be quite cold. They’re starting to believe me.
Habibullo Abdussamatov, Arctic ice, Richard Lindzen, Copenhagen’s reassessment, Roger A. Pielke Sr., How not to measure temperature part 91, sun spot, the Vikings and Greenland, Bob Carter, 350 PPM of CO2, October temps, Roy Spencer, Ocean Heat Content diverge from GISS projections, with some fun to boot—and that’s just on the front page, from only the last four days no less.
How is WattsUpWithThat not 2009 Science Blog of the Year??
p.s. I understand the magnitude of the Yamal story at ClimateAudit. That would be the single most important science story of the year! (so far) But this blog is best for the overall year. There is not even a close second! Look at all the science here!
PMOD vs. ACRIM. Prof.Abdusamatov refers to:
Scafetta N. and West B. J. Is Climate Sensitive to Solar Variability? // Physics Today, 2008, #3, Vol. 61
Its surprising the quality of work Russian scientists can still produce on their diet of borscht and potatos. Perhaps ours of unrefined sugar and red meat is a great evil.
Servius: As I understand it, the peak temperature was in ‘98 but the graph shows Solar Irradiance peaking shortly later.
Servius, the 1998 anomaly was caused by strong El Nino and Atlantic oscillation positive anomalies. Changes between maxima and minima of solar cycles are hardly detectable in the climate, only their cumulative effect in span of years to decades.
jaypan (08:03:44) :
Very interesting contribution.
Curious to find out what the warmists are going to say against it.
Wait, is he a dedicated climate scientist?
Oops, is it peer-reviewed?
I’m loving it.
He runs the Astrometry project on the Russian half of the International Space Station too. He’s not on a soap box on the street, or teaching in an obscure community college. I think you’d love that too.
Astrometry project — the Russian and Ukrainian space agencies joint project to determine the time and extent of the global cooling at mid-century
….Earth has hit its temperature ceiling. Solar irradiance has begun to fall, ushering in a protracted cooling period beginning in 2012 to 2015. The depth of the decline in solar irradiance reaching Earth will occur around 2040….Dr. Abdussamatov’s space team will be conducting a regular survey of the sun.
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=edae9952-3c3e-47ba-913f-7359a5c7f723&k=0
gary gulrud (08:30:05) :
Its surprising the quality of work Russian scientists
They beat the USA with Sputnik. Now they’re beating the USA in study of the sun.
(I am also aware of the many science disasters in Russia. The US has had far less of them. That in itself is a wonderful victory for the US.)
The fundamental conclusion of the paper is based on the top panel of their Figure 3 which shows TSI reconstructions the last 400 years. This plot is WAY out of date and its use basically invalidates the rest of the paper.
It is instruction to look at a recent poster [Froehlich is a co-author]:
ftp://ftp.pmodwrc.ch/pub/Claus/IAMAS-2009/iamas-poster_SABF.pdf
The last Figure shows how the TSI reconstructions have moved with time from the large variation to almost flat. They are nicely approaching my graph here: http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-LEIF.png
The PMOD data had bad calibration and instrument degradation and there is no dramatic decrease this minimum as suggested by Figure 1, and the ACRIM problem seems to have been resolved http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL040707.pdf [there is no significant difference between the minima]
All in all, this paper cannot be taken seriously. There is a ~100 year ‘cycle’ in activity, and we are nearing a minimum. Perhaps a 200-yr as well. These ‘cycles’ have been found to be nearly random in occurrence.
I expect Leif taking a day off just to spend it here…
What will the warmists say against it? They will say that nothing state-supported (and everything is) from Russia can be trusted because they are a major oil exporter. Ditto for Canada. Nothing from Indonesia because they are a major coal producer. Nothing from China and India because they have to have major emissions increases to grow their economies into superpowers over the next 50 years.
No one, no one, no one is to be trusted if they are a skeptic. All skeptics clearly have evil and selfish motives driving their true agenda.
That’s what they’ll say.
In the 1970s, we only had very coarse measurement methods. Those methods would have tended to behave as a de facto low pass filter. The methods that came on line at the end of the 1970s gave us a finer level of discrimination and vastly increased the ability to discern higher frequencies. These statements apply to both EM energy and to temperature. The earlier coarser measurements hinted at long, long term cooling and the 1970s Ice Age scare was a result. Later, with the finer measurements, we started to get tricked by the little wiggles of ENSO, PDO, as well as the shorter period signals in terms of solar and cosmic EM and photonic energy. This led to the AGW scare, given the timing of the finer abilities coming on line just as we lapsed from a negative to positive PDO, from a negative to postive ENSO, and, a mere couple years after that, a rising solar activity level. We need to take a step back and proactively apply a low pass filter to everything. We may be quite disturbed by the result.
Guys, this is drivel, everyone who is not a denialist can see the warming happening. Didn’t NASA just record the highest ever SSTs for July? Didn’t GISS just report that temperatures are back up to record highs.
Sure NASA used just one flawed dataset, and GISS has “lost” all of the unadjusted data, and the Briffa and Mann and the rest of the team are spending a lot of time polishing a few sticks, but you have to believe these guys, ummm because their intentions are a pure as wind driven snow. Now thats just a saying, everybody knows it doesn’t snow anymore.
Leif … I would be more than interested in the views of Dr. Abdussamatov regarding your comments. Do you converse with him at all?
Jon
I have been waiting a very long time for an update from Habibullo Abdussamatov. Thanks very much for the article.
It is Interesting to note that their SC 24 prediction sunspot max of just under 75 is similar to Leif’s prediction.