The sun is still in a funk: sunspot numbers are dropping when they should be rising

This graph says it all. SC24 tracking lower than SC5.
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/images/sc5_sc24.png

It must be due to CO2 caused by man

Vuk, it’s not a wrong direction, the smoothed value is in the right direction. It’s hesitating a bit and that’s exactly what makes it a long cycle. Your formula is not right – the SC24 is long. Your formula puts the reversal in 2012 and it will likely be in 2014/15.

Love the WSO Polar Field graph. Betcha the lines cross over on 21 Dec 2012. But don’t anyone tell Bill McGuire at the Guardian or we’ll get more we’re-all-going-to-drown-in-lava pieces from him.

I love this stuff.
Lief, Re WSO polar fields. I presume that this is related to the slowing of the circulation velocities? Does a field reversal have a precedent in documented science? Is is speculated that one or more of the minimums may have yielded a field flip, with the funk?
The earth too is undergoing a field change. Is the sun inducing any magnetic response by the earth? Evidently, the terrestrial field flip, though long overdue, will not pose any catastrophic effects to life. What then of the sun?
I am buying insulation while my neighbors are planting orange trees.

I contend in my book that a new Space Race between Russia and the U.S., this one regarding solar variability’s effects on Earth’s ocean-atmosphere system, is taking place largely out of public view. Here’s a paragraph from the chapter “The Quiet Sun”:
In 1990, James Hansen wrote that “comparisons of available data show that solar variability will not counteract greenhouse warming.” Conversely, in 2009, he wrote, “it is likely that the sun is an important factor in climate variability.” As Hansen moved toward this shift in perspective, a Russian space program scientist had come out swinging, boldly predicting that Hansen’s forecasted warming during the next half-century would simply not come to pass.
More here: Kindle … paperback

90 percent

Peter Miller writes “Oh well, how could we have known the Sun was going to cool down like this?”
Luckily, not quite true. The IPCC has painted itself into a corner. If it agrees that something other than CO2 is driving climate, then the certainly that it wrote about in the TAR and AR4, is shown to be just plain wrong. If the sun is having a huge effect, then it cannot be “very likely” that CO2 caused the changes observed at the end of the 20th century.

Today we have a plethora of solar monitoring instruments and so know a bit more about this our nearest star. It would seem that the sun has decided to have a bit of a rest probably as an answer to alarmist claims that the sun has little to do with climate.
Interesting post with more to follow I am sure.

@Peter Miller says:
March 2, 2012 at 2:17 am
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
If at the end of the day, it turns out that climate change is driven primarily by natural variations and that CO2 has little if any driving force, I do not see that scientists will be able to hide behind the sun, and claim that it was not foreseeable that the sun could have any significant input in driving climate variations. A claim of how were they to know, to the layman does not sound compelling.
The reason why at the end game, there will be a blame game is due to the stance that politicians took to address the cAGW threat. When the end game pans out, citizens in the West are going to wake up in a very different world. The price paid will be stark to the citizens of the West and regrettably it will be a price that will be paid for decades to come. It is already too late to roll back the clock and unpick the damage done.
The politicians will have left the West significantly de-industrialised and with high energy costs pushing millions to the brink of fuel poverty. The high energy costs will leave whatever small amount of industry that is left in the West at a significant competitive disadvantage. This will result in long term unemployment issues. Politically, the balance of power which was anyway shifting from the West to China has been greatly hastened and widened. There will be the USA and the BRICS. The UK and Europe will be demoted to sweeping the crumbs dropped from the high table and the USA will find itself marginalised since initially the BRICS collectively but then later China alone will run the show.
Given this backdrop, the citizens of the West will demand answers. It will not be a pretty sight, since the political response was so obviously devoid of merit (it should have been limited adaption only as and when absolutely necessary with no wasteful attempts at mitigation) and the science, when viewed with the benefit of hindsight as will inevitably be the case when judging past events, will appear so flakey and devoid of rigorous scrutiny that severe damage will have been done to science generally and the reputation of scientists. The media because of its own complicity in this affair will attempt to keep a lid on matters but given the diminishing importance of MSM, that will ultimately prove unsuccessful.

One downblip doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to end up with a lower max; previous cycles have similar downstrokes at similar phases. What’s definitely clear from the graph is that cycle 24 is slower and later than previous cycles.

What scares me most, is that mankind can deal with a little bit of global warming (mostly beneficial, increased rainfall and new crop growing areas), but it will be very difficult to deal with some global cooling (mostly harmful, reduced rainfall and reduced crop growing areas).
Damn skippy.
rgb

There are several other cycles that had huge up and down swings like this. This is not that abnormal.

SC24 has peaked. You heard it here first.

It looks like it is following Leif’s prediction pretty well:
http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png

If total energy is the sum of sunspots plus some factor times squared mag field, the sun ihas been in a real slump for the past decade!
(In a harmonic oscillator like a weight bouncing on the end of a spring, total energy is the sum of potential energy (determined by position of the weight) and kinetic energy (from the velocity of the weight). Here sunspot numbers – or their square root times an unobserved sign – and mag field seem to be playing these two sinusoidal roles.)

So, the alarmists were right, after all … in the 70’s, when they were calling for the next ice age. They should have stuck with their original story. A lesson all crooks and grifters eventually learn the hard way.
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

Where have all the flowers gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the flowers gone?
Long time ago…………….

Being in Northern Vermont, I was cheering on the gradual warming of our hemisphere, but I’ll adapt to whatever comes along. Dr. Jerry Pournelle has been a rational and reasoned skeptic for many years and has recently taken up the topic again with his readers.
His questions and assertions are worth reading at Chaos Manor.

Has anyone looked at monthly Sun Spot Numbers for November and December and compared them with minimum temperatures for the following months January and February?
There is a good match between minimum Sun Spot Numbers and minimum NH temperatures going right back through the data records.
Sun spot numbers are matching individual temperature records from the northern hemisphere during winters, I would guess that the input from the sun was driving temperatures.
Did someone really say that the Sun has no effect on the Earth? it sounds to me like they may have been took out of context, because I don’t believe someone could make such an idiotic comment and actually mean what it infers.

When I see the low SSN during the 1800-1820 period and the low SSN before 1890, what jumped out at me are September 1815 and August 1883. It caught my eye as soon as I saw the graph. Coincidence? If there is a major volcanic eruption during this lower than normal Sun activity, I’ll laugh my buttocks off. Just saying!?!

This is totally Bush’s fault.

All this illustrates is how ignorant we really are. We would all be better off if everyone admitted to their common ignorance and got on with correcting that situation. This all harkens back to Plato’s dialogue Theætetus.

Dennis Nikols, P. Geo. says:
March 2, 2012 at 7:27 am
All this illustrates is how ignorant we really are.
I too believe we are ignorant of the Sun. My “DC offset” theory simply goes back something Anthony talked about on the Ides of March in 2008 as a “step function (or discontinuity) in 2005”.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/03/15/sun-still-blank-no-sign-of-cycle-24/

The cosmic ray count is a more useful proxy for solar – earth climate relationships than sunspot numbers – ( check the Calder post following this one)
The cosmic ray max follows the SSN minimum by about a year. The late 2009 GCR max was the highest since 1964 .To comare the 23 – 24 cycles check
http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/webform/query.cgi?tartdate=1998/02/15&starttime=00:00&enddate=2012/03/01&endtime=20:14&resolution=Automatic choice&picture=on
This shpws clearly that the GCR count is about 8-9% greater now than at the same time in the 23 cycle. with probable increase in cloudiness lowering temps.cf 22-23.GCR max (SSN min)
There has been no net SST temperature rise since 1997 with CO2 up 7.9%

The Science is settled.
One is tempted to quote from “The Captive Mind” by Czeslaw Milosz:
When someone is honestly 55% right that is very good and there is no wrangling. And if someone is 60% right, it is wonderful, it is great luck and let him thank God. But what’s to be said about 75% right? Wise people say this is suspicious. Well, and what about 100% right? Whoever says he’s 100% right is a fanatic, a thug, and the worst kind of rascal.
(An Old Jew of Galicia)

The link to Oulu I posted above doesnt work too well .
Go to http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/#database
and generate a chart with start date 1998/02/15

Dr Svalgarrd,
Sorry, maybe [someone] has asked this before, but why-oh-why in the 21st century do you use “decimal years” on the x-axis? Converting to dates is easy. No matter what system you use, there are a plethora of scripts/methods/macros to calculate the date.

During the big freeze last year here in Ireland,a professor of geography was interviewed on national radio and asked about possible links between sunspots and earth’s climate. His unchallenged response went something like this, ‘we think about 20% of the current climate change is due to low solar output ( his words) but anthropogenic global warming is still happening in the background’.His 20% is interesting (wherever he got it), as it could be the beginning of a slippery slope for the warmists.

My hat is off to Leif and The Solar Cycle 24 Prediction Panel which reached a consensus decision on the prediction that is proving to be true. The recent drop is meaningless until we hit the projected top and start to turn down. They don’t adjust their projection like the other agencies who predict.
Time will tell but so far an amazing prediction.

@ richard verney says:
March 2, 2012 at 4:11 am
WW-III.
The worst ever. And to boot, the war will exacerbate the cooling!

srvdisciple says: March 2, 2012 at 8:37 am
[Sorry, maybe [someone] has asked this before, but why-oh-why in the 21st century do you use “decimal years” on the x-axis?]
A ‘Calendar Date’ is subject to the whims of political and religous leaders;
Solstice and Eqinox are not. Data should be recorded in an umabigous way.
Also today is the 13th of Esfand 1390 (the 14th century) in the Persian world.
In Europe in 1752, this was ‘September’
September 1752
S M Tu W Th F S
1 2 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

John from CA;
[They don’t adjust their projection like the other agencies who predict.]
Wot! They DO adjust their assesment with new information, studies and measurements, unlike the other agencies who ‘project/forecast/indicate/any word other than predict’
Solar Cycle 24 Prediction Update released May 8, 2009
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif
May 2009 Solar Cycle 24 Prediction Update
First Solar Cycle 24 Prediction April 2007
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/SC24/index.html
CONSENSUS STATEMENT OF THE SOLAR CYCLE 24 PREDICTION PANEL
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/SC24/Statement_01.html
News from the Solar Cycle 24 Prediction Panel October 13, 2006
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/SC24/Oct_2006.html
The May 24, 2007 List shows the predictions considered.
Table 1: Predictions of Solar Cycle 24
Author and Date, Predicted maximum ,Category and Summary
Svalgaard, et al. 2005, 70 ± 2, — P Polar magnetic field strength
at solar minima
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/SC24/May_24_2007_table.pdf

Andrew30 says:
March 2, 2012 at 11:34 am
==========
Very interesting but my point was that they don’t change their projections like some do routinely at NASA.
They, as a body, stand by their science and predictions and thus far are absolutely amazing!!!

Probably worth pointing out, the “Solar Cycle 24 Prediction Panel is organized and chaired by NOAA and funded by NASA” so no dis to NASA intended.

SteveSadlov says:
March 2, 2012 at 9:55 am
The data from the Maunder Minimum start says we are not guaranteed a second, or even multiple peaks.
To date, only 1 is in the bank.

@ MAVukcevic says:
March 2, 2012 at 1:21 pm
Lucky you that you were not born then. Could you imagine WHO would have been your Inquisition judge? LOL!
You would have sent to the stake! I can hear your prosecutor crying: “Correlation is not causation!”

@ AdolfoGiurfa
> Just waiting for the “Watts Effect”
http://www.solarham.com
SOLAR FLARE ALERT: A moderate solar flare reaching M3.3 took place at 17:46 UTC Friday afternoon. The flare was centered around a new active region on the Eastern Limb. Stay Tuned to SolarHam.com for the latest information.

Bennett Dawson says:
March 2, 2012 at 6:25 am
Being in Northern Vermont, I was cheering on the gradual warming of our hemisphere, but I’ll adapt to whatever comes along. Dr. Jerry Pournelle has been a rational and reasoned skeptic for many years and has recently taken up the topic again with his readers.
His questions and assertions are worth reading at Chaos Manor.

Fabulous site. Followed it for years, then had to swear off. There weren’t enough hours in the day/week to obsessively track both it and WUWT and Climate Etc. and a sprinkling of others. I’m not sure I dare click on your link …

It would seem that the time is ripe for those that can to invest in coal,gas and oil futures and sit tight. The CAGW thing does not seem to have long to live, the plebs are awakening faster than the sun is declining and the coming years will see a paradigm shift in public and political sentiment.
Real facts and truth have always come to the surface, eventually in all facits of life. That we are heading into a cooling cycle regardless of CO2, will eventually dawn on all the pundits.
That the sun was due for a holiday was pointed out by some clever people that actually do science, they were pooh poohed by the consensus as the sun apparently has nothing to do with our climate.
I have just spent an idyllic two weeks flying around the tropic zones watching Willis’s cooling towers in action, hard to put a number on the quantity of them but myriad would be close.
We are but fleas on this planet, an annoyance but no way are we killing the planet, fly over Asia a densely populated area, and what do you see, forests and farm land, green green green.
It is time I feel that all people belittled and defamed by the consensus mob stood up to be counted and openly decried the infamy that is CAGW.

John Day says:
March 2, 2012 at 5:15 pm
Exactly. There are more active regions now. The collective wise-crackers posting here seem to get in a lather whenever there is a peak or a trough of solar activity. Good grief. Look at the past cycles. The 30 day averages are not the same as the 13 month averages.

Liberty At’Stake says:
March 2, 2012 at 5:39 am
“So, the alarmists were right, after all … in the 70′s, when they were calling for the next ice age. They should have stuck with their original story. A lesson all crooks and grifters eventually learn the hard way.”
Those alarmists were the same people who later became Global Warming alarmists; Schneider and Hansen among them.Their defining characteristic is that they use EVERY possible scare to run the same kind of racket. The crooks and grifters, including the MSM, will switch effortlessly.
Der Spiegel for instance, always on the forefront of CAGW and sustainability and everything green, now decries the de-industrialization caused by extremely expensive and unreliable electricity. They operate without memory – they just produce a new narrative when the time is ripe. They do coordinate behind the scenes; google Journolist for an example, a now-defunct insider mailing list where leftist US journalists coordinated their narratives.

I have no idea what any of this means, but It is among the most interesting of recent scientific observations. It gives one cause to get out of bed in the mornings; just to see where it is all leading.
And hopefully Dr Svalgaard will from time to time enlighten us on what it is all about (or appears to be).
Yes interesting times indeed.

The correlation of Low Sunspot Activity (and low solar activity) to colder climate does not necessarily mean that the Sun is the prime or lone source of causation.
After all, at the Galactic level, it is not yet known for certain why this Spiral Galaxy we call home is still in one piece. And that holds true for all the Spirals we have rotational gradient data for.
In both cases, we only know that it is so.
This proposed Dark Matter, and it’s counterpart Dark Energy, if that’s what it is that holds the Spirals together, might just be of a nature that it affects stellar activity as well. As in waves.
We cannot see or measure what holds the Milky Way together. Why should we presume to be able to see that which is affecting the Sun?

LIef Svalgaard: Your link above is not loading. Perhaps it is incorrect. Ahh : that is why – – try http://www.leif.org/research/AaN-AaS-FFT.png Simple mis-spelling
By the way, you I believe that you have been far too kind to Hathaway and NASA about their horrid SunSpot Number Predictions … If it had not been for you and a precious few others sitting on the panel there, their predictions may have been over 200 due to their total misreading http://www.physorg.com/news86010302.html and they would likely have maintained that prediction for much longer than they did : In Nov 2008, Hathaway et al changed their scaling http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/08/more-revisions-to-the-nasa-solar-cycle-prediction/ in an attempt to obfuscate the sudden revision from a 150 max to more like 100, and they have continually revised their prediction down since then.
Also, you have been too modest, I believe you made separate predictions.
I don’t recall exactly what your 2007 or so prediction was for this cycle, but I probably have it somewhere… possibly in the 90 area. I know the ~2007 predictions had bimodal distribution – some in the 150+, and other hump in the 80 range – using different prediction methods – I have a table of those saved somewhere but won’t look for it now. .The NASA group was absolutely wrong, and honestly, all their analysis now is not very convincing as a result. The prediction based on the planetary cycles is intriguingly good.
Of course – this whole post is based on a yet to be proven future – and that the maximum proves to be below 100 for Cycle24 – we’ll see.
@John from CA
@Andrew30 — this post may interest you both.

Ahh- Just found paper- Lief, Cliver and Kamide (2004) predicted SC24 to be max SSN of 75 +/- 8 in 2011. Significant miss (probably) in year due to the unexpectedly long SC23.

The heliosphere is being compressed. An energized Fluff is reducing the area of the heliosphere and this makes the scarce gases more abundant. This is the key to researchers on E finding answers to long sought missing parts of solutions. The problem is that there is only 10 months left to discover all the answers. And of course, when the MW capacitor overloads and discharges, the heliosphere goes back to ‘normal’ and nothing of the solutions will work. One assumes that the hope is that some form of energy will be found that will allow this massive compression that revealed our secrets to be maintained. Probably not.
And once the return to normal, the hotter than Hell gas giants will be presenting an entirely new condition to Sol which is why NASA says much weather disturbance ahead.
The enlivening of Fluff is of course due to neutrino bombardment, and that is from G1.9
Course, I could be wrong.

NASA seem to have changed their tune on solar forcing :
R.F. Hirsch :March 5, 2012 at 6:24 pm (in Tips and Notes)
quoted NASA http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2011/
“…. because the combined effect of all forcings is less than that of greenhouse gases alone, and much of the greenhouse gas forcing has been “used up” in causing the warming of the past century. It is apparent that the solar forcing is not negligible in comparison with the net climate forcing.….”