Solar cycle update for April – sun still slumping

Got a bit sidetracked earlier in the month, this is overdue for an update. Earlier we reported that Hathaway had updated his solar cycle prediction saying “…the predicted size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle in about 100 years. “. April solar index numbers seem to support this prediction.

All three main solar indexes tracked by NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center are down in April.

First the sunspot number, down slightly.

Solar radio flux, down slightly, almost unchanged.

The solar geomagnetic field continues to try to get jump started, down 5 units since March.

About these ads

77 thoughts on “Solar cycle update for April – sun still slumping

  1. Can you remind us where the solar experts were predicting we would be by now, when they made their predictions back in 2007 – 2008-ish?

  2. Predictions are just opinions, and since the sun is ‘a messy place’ (L.S) they are more likely to be wrong than correct.
    Extrapolation of the past is a different matter, the only numerical extrapolation available is still holding strong

    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN.htm

    ‘The experts’ have for number of years made numerous attempts to discredit it, but the up to date results speak clearly for both ‘the experts’ and the extrapolation.

  3. Looking at those graphs, I’m wondering if the curent cycle may not be very short as well.

  4. Not a good thing in several ways. First, colder weather is harder on most living creatures. Second, it gives an out to global warming fanatics who (if this ends up being very low solar cycle) will be able to point to this to keep their belief in the CO2 dominated GCM models alive. They can still say their predictions were correct, there is still warming in the pipeline and now when the sun gets active again, it will be really, really bad. Fewer people will listen, but it may drag it out another 30 years.

  5. The strong correlation between extended solar minima and cooler temperatures will do more to defeat the AGW hypothesis than the army of skeptics. We don’t really have the causal mechanism nailed down. But as things get colder it will be impossible to rationalize global warming is the reason. The solar minima’s cooling effects are our strongest argument.

  6. I’m not remotely an expert on solar activity, but are monthly/weekly/hourly updates useful? It appears to me that short term variability in solar activity is pretty extreme and no man of woman born is likely to be able to do anything meaningful with short term data. Maybe an annual status plus articles when the theorists come up with something new and profound?

    In the meantime, those that get their kicks out of finding trends in noise always have http://www.spaceweather.com (Not disparaging Spaceweather. It’s a great site) to satisfy their needs.

  7. Maybe the Solar Cycle is inversely proportional to the Green movement.

    The bigger they get, the colder the sun gets!!

    Just to piss `em off !

  8. Globe has not been warming for 15 years and with the downturn in solar activity, expect generally cooler temperatures for the next 30 years with some potential for very cold weather overall……
    Get your blankets ready……..According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….

  9. If Warmists point to the low solar activity as the reason we havent seen warming over the last 10 years, then they will also have to admit that the higher than average solar activity over the last century is responsible for the increased warming in the recent past.

  10. I disagree Bill, but only as follows

    Global cooling will falsify the current CAGW dogma. It will demonstrate that natural solar-driven climate variation is much more significant than the impact of atmospheric CO2. it will demonstrate that climate sensitivity to CO2 is low, not high as alleged in CAGW dogma. We could even see a decline in CO2 similar to that observed for several 12-month intervals in 1974 (etc.).

    But then the dogs of CAGW dogma will probably invent another very-scary story, because that is just what they do.

    I agree that significant global cooling will not be kind to humankind or the environment.

  11. Geoff says:

    “According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….”

    Archibald’s prediction was that temperatures during solar cycle 24 would on average be -2.2C below what they were during SC23. SC23 ran from May 1996 and ended in December 2008. SC24 has been running since January 2009.

    Confusion remains as to the spatial extent of Archibald’s prediction. This has variously been interpreted as ‘global”, ‘northern hemisphere land only’ or ‘Hanover in New Hampshire only’.

    Taking NH land only and using UAH as a reference, we can say that average monthly temps during SC23 were +0.18C above the anomaly reference value. During SC24 to date average monthly temps in UAH have been +0.33C above the anomaly reference value.

    Monthly average temps during SC24 have so far been warmer than they were during SC23, according to UAH – this is the opposite of what Archibald predicted based on solar activity. If Archibald was referring to NH land for his SC24 prediction, then so far he is out by 2.35C.

  12. In the last 100,000 years there have been approx. 4,500 complete solar cycles (~ 22 years peak to peak). We’re still here.

  13. Ken Hall says: May 10, 2012 at 3:33 am
    Can you remind us where the solar experts were predicting we would be by now, when they made their predictions back in 2007 – 2008-ish?

    I seem to recall that in that time frame, they were predicting the current cycle to start right then, and be a very strong. And that they had to keep pushing their prediction on the timing of the cycle back every few months.

  14. We have a major problem. If the earth is cooling, mankind needs to develop strategies to cope with it. But with scientists and politicians so thoroughly discredited, who can we trust to come up with a plan that we could accept and get behind?

  15. Ken Hall asks- “Can you remind us where the solar experts were predicting we would be by now, when they made their predictions back in 2007 – 2008-ish?”

    You betcha. Here are Hathaway’s predictions as time progressed.
    The format is:
    Date when made- date of minimum, peak activity, date of maximum

    01/2004- min 1/07, 160 pk
    01/2005- min 1/07, 145 pk 2010
    01/2006- min 1/07, 145 pk, 2010
    01/2007- min 6/07, 145 pk, 2010
    03/2008- min 6/08, 130 pk, 2011.5
    01/2009- min 1/09, 105 pk, 2012
    04/2009- min 4/09, 104 pk, 2013
    05/2009- min 5/09, 90 pk, 2013.5
    11/2009- min 5/09, <50 pk, 20??
    04/2010- min 12/08, 70 pk, 2013.5
    06/2010- min 12/08, 65 pk, 2013.5
    10/2010- min 12/08, 64 pk, 2013.5
    12/2010- min 12/08, 64 pk, 2013.5
    04/2011- min 12/08, 62 pk, 2013.5
    12/2011- min 12/08, 99 pk, 2013.2
    03/2012- min 12/08, 59 pk, 2013.2
    05/2012- min 12/08, 60 pk, 2013.2

  16. I’d have to look up the basis of the Archibald prediction, but, in any case, recently cosmic ray flux has been hovering around +4% on the scale at http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/webform/query.cgi?startdate=1960/01/01&starttime=00:00&enddate=2012/06/09&endtime=00:00&resolution=Automatic%20choice&picture=on .

    That is a value at the moment which overlaps well within the range of prior solar cycles in the past several decades, even though this cycle is weaker than them.

    For perspective, the coldest time of the Maunder Minimum appears to have occurred during what would be roughly around +50% on that scale, way beyond anything experienced in the past century or since then. If a Maunder Minimum repeat comes, the current cycle would have to peak first, and then there would be on the order of a decade or more ramp-up in GCR flux and cooling before fully reaching that level, judged from cosmogenic isotope record data (although far less than that would start to be noticeable, start to overwhelm the usual El Nino / La Nina fluctuation cycle temperature effect).

    Personally, in event of another Grand Minimum, I would expect to see noticeable cooling start around 2014 – 2015, reaching really major cooling by the early 2020s … not yet, though, not right now, as GCR flux isn’t even that unusual at the moment in itself.

  17. >> vukcevic says: May 10, 2012 at 3:57 am
    >> http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN.htm

    Marvelous stuff, Vuk. You are still the master of the wiggly graph with zero explanation.

    If I tied a pen to my cat’s tail, I would probably end up with the same graphs and the same level of explanation.

    .

    P.S. How does one stop the predictive spelling on this site? – it is driving me crazy.

  18. >> Geoff says: May 10, 2012 at 4:36 am
    >>According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will
    >>wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….

    Maybe, but perhaps it will simply relocate to Arizona.

    The north may become colder, but the ITCZ may well move further south, allowing (say) North Africa to become become once more the great grain growing area it was under Roman rule.

    I looked at the Libyan and Tunisian records recently, and they have had much wetter winters than normal. The BBC may wail about drought in the Saheel (south of the Sahara) and moan that ‘Global Climate Warming Change’ is destroying people’s lives there, but what they do not say is that the ITCZ has merely moved south a bit. The Saheel’s loss is North Africa’s gain.

    .

  19. DWR54 says:
    May 10, 2012 at 5:01 am

    Confusion remains as to the spatial extent of Archibald’s prediction. This has variously been interpreted as ‘global”, ‘northern hemisphere land only’ or ‘Hanover in New Hampshire only’.

    Taking NH land only ….

    You’re not doing much to reduce confusion. New Hampshire has nice lakes and rivers too!

    In any post I make that includes New Hampshire I spell out both that and Northern Hemisphere if I mention that too.

    Those papers about the temperature record in Hanover, NH (that’s not ambiguous to US residents) tripped me up a few times before I got the jargon.

  20. To William Abbott: ‘The strong correlation between extended solar minima and cooler temperatures will do more to defeat the AGW hypothesis than the army of skeptics’.

    Yes I agree but only if and when this happens, the CO2 brigade are asked: ‘why didn’t you see this coming and put it in your models’. The fatuous nature of their current analysis will probably be forgotten, a bit like Nixon’s role in the McCarthy era! (I also expect Al Gore will be deified)

  21. Bill @4.05 am. If the climate cools in line with diminished solar activity , the proponents of CAGW will have to explain why it is occurring in the face of ever increasing CO2 levels as for years their mantra has been warming is due only to CO2.

  22. This won’t matter. Game-set-match according to today’s Doctor James Hansen’s opinion piece in the NYT. The sun can turn into a dead smoldering ball of charred carbon and we will still cook because of our sinful emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

  23. Monthly average temps during SC24 have so far been warmer than they were during SC23, according to UAH – this is the opposite of what Archibald predicted based on solar activity. If Archibald was referring to NH land for his SC24 prediction, then so far he is out by 2.35C.

    HYSTERYSIS

  24. @ PRD says:
    May 10, 2012 at 6:42 am
    This won’t matter. Game-set-match according to today’s Doctor James Hansen’s opinion piece in the NYT. The sun can turn into a dead smoldering ball of charred carbon and we will still cook because of our sinful emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

    ——
    CRS reply

    You meant this classy rant? Hansen continues his long, slow slide to dementia….

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-climate.html?_r=1

  25. vukcevic says:
    May 10, 2012 at 3:57 am
    “…’The experts’ have for number of years made numerous attempts to discredit it, but the up to date results speak clearly for both ‘the experts’ and the extrapolation…”
    ______________________________
    You are soooo askin’ for it.
    lol

  26. Silver Ralph says: May 10, 2012 at 5:52 am

    >> Geoff says: May 10, 2012 at 4:36 am
    >>According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will
    >>wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….

    Maybe, but perhaps it will simply relocate to Arizona.
    Try growing grain in sand… I bet it would take at least two generations to turn desert into arable land.

  27. William Abbott says:
    May 10, 2012 at 4:19 am
    The strong correlation between extended solar minima and cooler temperatures will do more to defeat the AGW hypothesis than the army of skeptics.
    =========
    Probably not. From what I’ve read, 1934 was the warmest year in the US, until NASA/GISS “corrected” the data. The models say that 1934 can’t be the warmest, so obviously the thermometer readings from 1934 must have been reading too high. As such, the adjustment was to fix the past mistake.

    Since the models say temperatures must be going up, and the IPCC says this is correct, if the thermometers stop going up then the problem must be in the thermometer readings and they will need further correction. for example, CRUTEM4

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/28/tisdale-a-closer-look-at-crutem4-since-1975/

    The earth’s temperatures have been warming for 300 years since the LIA. AGW rests on the belief that this warming was at first natural, but the natural warming ended, and since then the warming has been a result of humans.

    Without knowing the cause of the LIA, scientists are confident they know when it ended. What is their evidence that the LIA warming ended? They took a vote and all the experts agreed, therefore it must be true.

  28. Ken Hall says: May 10, 2012 at 3:33 am
    Can you remind us where the solar experts were predicting we would be by now, when they made their predictions back in 2007 – 2008-ish?

    You start off with the last cycle peak then adjust it as you go along, and it looks like your prediction is going to be wrong. It’s quite a common practice in weather and climate prediction. Eventually you are spot on!

  29. John Judge says:
    May 10, 2012 at 5:09 am
    We have a major problem. If the earth is cooling, mankind needs to develop strategies to cope with it. But with scientists and politicians so thoroughly discredited, who can we trust to come up with a plan that we could accept and get behind?
    =============================================================
    Do we really need or want politicians to come up with or get behind a plan? Many of them, from the UN to Al Gore to Obama, would simply use any plan as a tool to further their lust for power and/or money.
    It’s been cool before. It’s been warm before. We’ll adapt.
    (I have a picture from when I was a kid in Kentucky of my family in our Easter outfits standing in 6 inches of snow.)

  30. DWR54 says:
    May 10, 2012 at 5:01 am

    Geoff says:

    “According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….”

    Archibald’s prediction was that temperatures during solar cycle 24 would on average be -2.2C below what they were during SC23. SC23 ran from May 1996 and ended in December 2008. SC24 has been running since January 2009.

    Originally David used the Butler & Johnson calculation which used the averages of an 11 year period centred on the solar max and solar min. However this would have meant that the average temperature for the 1991-2001 period was 2.2 degrees warmer than the 2003-2013 period. Realising this was unlikely, he gradually introduced the idea that the temperature decline would be “over the next cycle”. But, as you imply, he has become increasingly vague as to where this decline will occur. In a 2006 paper he was highly complimentary over the “high quality satellite data” but I don’t think he’s actually referred t it since.

  31. Robbie says:
    May 10, 2012 at 5:24 am

    Let’s wait and see what temperatures are going to do the coming months/years. Because it is still too hot outside globally.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2012/05/uah-global-temperature-update-for-april-2012-0-30c/

    .
    While I agree we should closely monitor the coming months/years – What in the world makes you think the planet is “still too hot globally”. The fractional warming has been nothing but beneficial and is responsible for food production increases as well as important greening of major arid regions. Any cooling will remove these benefits, to the chagrin of all Earth’s inhabitants. You are hooked on the any warming is bad meme. GK

  32. vukcevic says:
    May 10, 2012 at 3:57 am
    ‘The experts’ have for number of years made numerous attempts to discredit it, but the up to date results speak clearly for both ‘the experts’ and the extrapolation.

    The earth’s tides are calculated similar to a horoscope, based on matching past observation with the position of the sun and moon, and using this to predict the future with a high degree of accuracy.

    No super computer working from “forcings” and “feedback” can even come close to astrological methods in computing the earth’s tides. Yet time and time again we have supposedly knowledgeable scientists argue that curve fitting can’t predict.

    Curve fitting works because natural system are generally:
    1. too complicated and chaotic to calculate from first principles.
    2. cyclic.
    3. persist due to resonance.

  33. There are good reasons to assume that both the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean have strong solar connections, currently both indicators are on a down slope

    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NA-Aa.htm

    if and how is that translated to the global climate change is a different issue; regretfully no one will ever conclusively prove any of it.

  34. @ Curiousgeorge

    “In the last 100,000 years there have been approx. 4,500 complete solar cycles (~ 22 years peak to peak). We’re still here.”

    I agree, but it is as well to remember that there are well documented climatic episodes where millions died because of too much rain or too little rain sometimes only of a week or so’s duration, early and late frosts and so on. It does cut the other way as well, of course. I recall two Europe wide episodes around the Medieval Warm Period, ‘though the exact dates have long fallen from memory, first where particularly clement weather over a period of decades, long summers and short winters, saw the population triple and the other where the weather changed and it reportedly rained for two years (two years with no summer) and three quarters of the population died, mainly from starvation.

    We don’t live hand to mouth as most did in those days but imagine the problems that would arise if the North American or European harvests failed for two successive years.

  35. Tripod says:
    May 10, 2012 at 4:49 am

    “…they will also have to admit that the higher than average solar activity over the last century is responsible for the increased warming in the recent past.”

    Exactly, To most people with a little common sense a more active sun will mean overall warmer temperatures, more energy reaching the earth equates to a larger “energy budget” so obviously a less active sun will mean overall temperatures will drop, less energy reaching the earth equates to a smaller “energy budget”.

  36. @ Peter C (UK) says:
    May 10, 2012 at 9:39 am

    @ Curiousgeorge

    “In the last 100,000 years there have been approx. 4,500 complete solar cycles (~ 22 years peak to peak). We’re still here.”

    I agree, but it is as well to remember that there are well documented climatic episodes where millions died because of too much rain or too little rain sometimes only of a week or so’s duration, early and late frosts and so on. It does cut the other way as well, of course. I recall two Europe wide episodes around the Medieval Warm Period, ‘though the exact dates have long fallen from memory, first where particularly clement weather over a period of decades, long summers and short winters, saw the population triple and the other where the weather changed and it reportedly rained for two years (two years with no summer) and three quarters of the population died, mainly from starvation.

    We don’t live hand to mouth as most did in those days but imagine the problems that would arise if the North American or European harvests failed for two successive years.
    *************************************************************************************

    We’re on the same page. Except my memory of events only goes back about 62 years. ;) Prior to that is 2nd hand hearsay. :-)

    One other small detail: A great many people do live ‘hand to mouth’ individually in today’s world – even in the 1st world countries. People who are financially comfortable, and with modern amenities, technology, and robust logistical systems, tend to forget that we are the exception, not the rule. Conversely, those who are not so dependent on modern systems would likely fare better than those who are. I’d give a lost tribe in the Amazon a far better chance of survival in your scenario, than the population of NYC, Mexico City, Beijing, London, or any other major population center. The logistics of maintaining life support in a city of any size dictate that they would suffer the most, and would be the first to be impacted from any interruption in supply or waste disposal. In a very real sense, a large city does live from “hand to mouth” as a group.

  37. Stephen Richards says:
    May 10, 2012 at 7:07 am

    Monthly average temps during SC24 have so far been warmer than they were during SC23, according to UAH – this is the opposite of what Archibald predicted based on solar activity. If Archibald was referring to NH land for his SC24 prediction, then so far he is out by 2.35C.

    HYSTERYSIS >

    I’m not sure shouting is going to get your point across. You might be bettrr off providing us with examples of where the temperature drop following a reduction in solar activity has been delayed. You see I have a problem with this because prior to the recent solar minimum solar/climate advocates were adamant that periods like the Dalton minimum were cold because of the weak Dalton cycles. There was never talk of any lag or hysterysis. In fact I made the point that cooling in the CET record appeared to take place BEFORE the Dalton cycles. David Archibald continually blames the weak SC20 which started in 1964 for cooling which kicked in about 2 decades earlier.

    On the evidence I’ve seen it seems that, far from being a lag, global temperature is able to respond to future solar activity.

  38. Kelvin Vaughan says:
    May 10, 2012 at 7:46 am (Responding to)

    Ken Hall says: May 10, 2012 at 3:33 am
    Can you remind us where the solar experts were predicting we would be by now, when they made their predictions back in 2007 – 2008-ish?

    You start off with the last cycle peak then adjust it as you go along, and it looks like your prediction is going to be wrong. It’s quite a common practice in weather and climate prediction. Eventually you are spot on!

    You have, between the two of your responses, nailed the biggest “complaint” (or criticism if Lief will permit the term) of today’s current solar theories.

    That is, we have since 2003/2004/2005/2006/2007/2008 (etc) have read a series of predictions about solar cycles 23, 24, and 25.

    Each prediction obviously has been based on the best available knowledge at the time, and the best “guesstimate” of future solar activity based on the best projections of the best theory each person used at the time. Knowledge progress -> we SHOULD have improved theories and circulation techniques over time.

    So, where are the papers rejecting previous theories, and correcting the previous solar cycle calculations, not just correcting the estimates every 4 months so they match what has been observed. Certainly, Lief, Hathaway, and their brethren are trying their best, but their calculations have failed. So, who has re-written the theories?

    If an earlier projection has proved true – and at least one of Lief’s earlier predictions has been closer than the others – then what was different about that theory, and does this single solar cycle being correct for nbr 24 validate that theory for every future cycle?

    I repeat an earlier comment that “Sun spot count is a “symptom” of solar magnetic field and circulation changes, they are NOT a cause of the any solar circulation or intensity changes with respect to time.

    Further, every sun spot cycles “trendy” analysis needs to be checked very carefully for the solar circulation TIME of the source change. That is, Lief reports that it takes decades for a change in fusion rates to “circulate” up from the fusing depth to the sun’s surface. If so, what time frame represents a potential “delay time” between a change in fusion rate (creation of the energy, or a change in the rate of creation of the energy) to “some up through the photosphere” to the average emitting distance of the sun?

  39. @ RACookPE1978 says:
    May 10, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    …………… So, who has re-written the theories?
    *******************************************************************************
    You posed some excellent questions! I hope someone will provide some answers! :-)

  40. John Finn says:

    May 10, 2012 at 11:18 am
    Stephen Richards says:
    May 10, 2012 at 7:07 am

    Average temps, if there is such a thing, cannot and do change with immediate affect as you are well aware. Ocean heat content as well as ice and snow cover both delay and quicken the transition. The ‘output from the sun’ may well change rapidly (relatively) but the transfer of heat from ocean to air does not and cannot. That is called hysterisis. We may well see a drop in temperature globally or regionally over the next 10years which may well turn out to be a result of activity, or lack of it, on the sun but the jury is still out on definitive proof of any climate connection as it is with CO². It is true to say that there has been a change in seasonal weather type here in SW France over the past 5 years and this change is continuing. Anecdotally, we are approaching a period here similar to the late ’40s. Anecdotal evidence here, among farmers of 80 and 90 years old is far more reliable than anything I’ve seen from Hansen, UKMet Off , Mann or Tenberth and for that matter bugs bunny et al.

  41. To everyone that replied to my question, Thank you very much. I appreciate your answers, and they confirm my hazy recollection that they were projecting that this cycle would peak a lot earlier and a lot higher than has actually been the case.

  42. A couple of things to bear in mind. Firstly, weak cycles tend to be long cycles. Altrock’s green corona emissions diagramme points to Solar Cycle 24 ending in 2026 and thus being 17 years long. Secondly, recent solar minima are associated with a 0.1 degree decline in temperature. So, conditions of continuous solar minima in terms of neutron count, which is what we have at the moment, can be expected to lower temperature at 0.1 degrees per annum. If that goes on for 17 years, the average over that 17 years is 0.85 degrees. That in turn is very close to the estimate of Northern Hemisphere cooling for Solar Cycle 24 by Solheim, Stordahl and Humlum, as described in this WUWT post: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/11/quantifying-the-solar-cycle-24-temperature-decline/

    Everything remains on track. In fact we are heading towards this thing on railroad tracks.

  43. First, thank you for effort of your reply.

    But I disagree with the “railroad track” …. Where are the switches (in the theory, the constants, or the circulation models) that were so clearly incorrectly predicting a very high (highest ever – I remember reading several years ago) solar cycle 24?

    Reality, the measured solar symptoms (sunspots) and outputs (neutrons, etc.), are very different than what was predcited only 3 and 4 years ago. What made those theories and calc’s so incorrect so quickly? Or were the theories actually correct, but only the predictions made using the theory incorrect? 8<)

  44. ferd berple says: May 10, 2012 at 8:03 am
    …………..
    Present day experts have made up their mind, but there is always hope that one or two students were passing their time having a casual look at my graph, and perhaps in 15 or 20 years time when the sun goes blank for a prolong period, may recall the graph from their early academic years.
    Here is extract of selected hits from first 8 hours of today’s log

    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/May10Log.htm

    Day Date, Page Loads, Unique Visits, First Time Visits, Returning Visits
    Thursday 10th May 2012, 535, 489, 327, 162

    Silver Ralph says: May 10, 2012 at 5:44 am
    …………
    If you cat isn’t a ‘CO2 warming’ academic, perhaps we should team-up to write a peer review paper.

    [Should that be "your cat"? Robt]

  45. Does anyone have all of the SC24 predictions and the ability to display on top of each other or as a changing graft. I know chris y has the info written out but it would be easier to see it visually displayed.

  46. [Should that be "your cat"? Robt]

    Thanks Robt
    Yes indeed, I was referring to Silver Ralph’s cat: If I tied a pen to my cat’s tail, I would probably end up with the same graphs…..

  47. Robbie says:
    May 10, 2012 at 5:24 am

    Let’s wait and see what temperatures are going to do the coming months/years. Because it is still too hot outside globally.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2012/05/uah-global-temperature-update-for-april-2012-0-30c/

    ___________________________
    You are certainly no farmer. It is cold snaps that kill.

    2010: Extended Period of Cold Raises Fears for Florida Crops

    2010 Florida Freeze Results in 30% Crop Loss

    Feb 2011 Thirty-five zoo animals freeze to death in Mexico’s coldest weather for 60 years

    Feb 2012 Death count rises as big freeze shuts down eastern Europe

    2012 More than 220 dead as Europe freezes

    2009 in southwestern Tibet… a devastating rainstorm and snow disaster this May. A total of 9,816 head of livestock in the county were frozen to death.

    2008 Tibet’s ‘worst snowstorm ever’, 7 killed

    Nov 2008144,400 yaks and sheep die after record snowfall in Tibet 1,892 people evacuated

    January 2011 Mass evacuations as China’s south battles ‘big freeze’

    Feb 2012 China braces for big freeze

    Jan 2008 CHINA: Millions shiver in big freeze…The snowy and cold weather, the worst in a decade in many places, has also left homes collapsed, power blackouts and crops destroyed.

    July 2010 Freezing temperatures in the highlands of Peru have killed at least 400… government has declared a state of emergency as temperatures plummeted as low as -24C.

    2012 Snow falls in Rome for the first time in 26 YEARS as -36c temperatures across eastern Europe send death toll to 150 (lots of neat photos from throughout Europe)

    2012 Australia: Cold snap sets new record low temperatures

    2010NZ: An extreme cold snap has broken temperature records

    And that is just a minor sampling.

  48. Henry Clark says: @ May 10, 2012 at 5:29 am

    ….I would expect to see noticeable cooling start around 2014 – 2015, reaching really major cooling by the early 2020s … not yet, though, not right now, as GCR flux isn’t even that unusual at the moment in itself.
    ____________________________
    I doubt if you would see major cooling even then. We have that great big hot water bottle called the oceans that do wonders at moderating the weather. (Thank goodness) However I would expect a gradual cooling and more “loopyness” in the jet streams. We are already seeing that with blocking highs. Just watch the jets over the USA for a while and you can see what I mean. They are no longer straight out of the west as they were a few years ago. http://classic.wunderground.com/US/Region/US/2xpxJetStream.html

  49. Geoff says: May 10, 2012 at 4:36 am
    According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will
    wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….
    —————————-
    Silver Ralph says: May 10, 2012 at 5:52 am
    Maybe, but perhaps it will simply relocate to Arizona.
    —————————
    Steve Keohane says: @ May 10, 2012 at 7:17 am
    Try growing grain in sand… I bet it would take at least two generations to turn desert into arable land.
    ————————–
    The super market predators really do have a problem understanding exactly what it takes to grow food.

  50. Peter C (UK) says: @ May 10, 2012 at 9:39 am

    …We don’t live hand to mouth as most did in those days but imagine the problems that would arise if the North American or European harvests failed for two successive years.
    _______________________
    Do not bet on that. The rule of thumb is that world grain reserves should not drop below 70 days of consumption… is moving uncomfortably close to the 64 day.. The grain traders decided grain/food reserves mucked up their profits and got rid of the grain reserves starting in 1996 with the “Freedom to Farm Act” written by the VP of cargill Dan Amstutz. Then the Bio-fuel laws hit and by 2008 the USDA announced the cupboard is bare.

  51. This paper seems to have a baring on the discussion.
    On the relationship between global, hemispheric and latitudinal averaged air surface temperature (GISS time series) and solar activity.

    ABSTRACT
    In this work the surface temperature anomaly (dTG) and sunspot number (Rz) time series in the period 1880–2000 are studied with wavelet multi-resolution analysis. We found a very low correlation of 0.11 between dTG and Rz in the 11-yr-solar cycle band. A higher correlation of 0.66 is found in the ∼22-yr-band with zero lag correlation coefficient between dTG and Rz. Furthermore, the long-term trend is markedly different between dTG and Rz. This might occurs because of the long-term warming on the last century, which is attributed mainly to anthropogenic effects.

  52. Gail Combs, May 10, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    Steve and Gail, you see this homestead? Now zoom out one click at a time or take a look at this. Doesn’t take generations, not all desert is sand.

  53. @ Gail Combs says:
    May 10, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    Geoff says: May 10, 2012 at 4:36 am
    According to Archibald a 2 deg C drop in temps will
    wipe out the Canadian grain basket…….
    —————————-
    Silver Ralph says: May 10, 2012 at 5:52 am
    Maybe, but perhaps it will simply relocate to Arizona.
    —————————
    Steve Keohane says: @ May 10, 2012 at 7:17 am
    Try growing grain in sand… I bet it would take at least two generations to turn desert into arable land.
    ————————–
    The super market predators really do have a problem understanding exactly what it takes to grow food.
    **************************************************************************
    Indeed. It’s a good deal different than a back yard garden plot, as you know. N from natgas, P and K from mines. Plus other essential nutrients such as sulfer, etc. Can’t feed the world on manure anymore. Millions of tons of industrial NPK, etc. are needed every year for food, animal feed, and ethanol. This totally escapes the greenies consciousness.

    An interesting bit of info:

    “In 2007, at the current rate of consumption, the supply of phosphorus was estimated to run out in 345 years. However, some scientists now believe that a “peak phosphorus” will occur in 30 years and that at “current rates, reserves will be depleted in the next 50 to 100 years.”

  54. Disaster unfolds. It is nothing dramatic. No explosions, no high energy impacts, nothing obvious to most of the herd. But quietly, the parameters of a vast disaster settle into place. The seeds of mass starvation are sowed. Most of the sowing is self inflicted and driven by idiotic belief in the AGW bogeyman.

  55. chris y says:
    May 10, 2012 at 5:12 am

    Ken Hall asks- “Can you remind us where the solar experts were predicting we would be by now, when they made their predictions back in 2007 – 2008-ish?”

    You betcha. Here are Hathaway’s predictions as time progressed.
    The format is:
    Date when made- date of minimum, peak activity, date of maximum

    01/2004- min 1/07, 160 pk
    01/2005- min 1/07, 145 pk 2010
    01/2006- min 1/07, 145 pk, 2010
    01/2007- min 6/07, 145 pk, 2010
    03/2008- min 6/08, 130 pk, 2011.5
    01/2009- min 1/09, 105 pk, 2012
    04/2009- min 4/09, 104 pk, 2013
    05/2009- min 5/09, 90 pk, 2013.5
    11/2009- min 5/09, <50 pk, 20??
    04/2010- min 12/08, 70 pk, 2013.5
    06/2010- min 12/08, 65 pk, 2013.5
    10/2010- min 12/08, 64 pk, 2013.5
    12/2010- min 12/08, 64 pk, 2013.5
    04/2011- min 12/08, 62 pk, 2013.5
    12/2011- min 12/08, 99 pk, 2013.2
    03/2012- min 12/08, 59 pk, 2013.2
    05/2012- min 12/08, 60 pk, 2013.2

    Chris, here’s a wee formatting trick for that kind of table: use the <pre> tags (means pre-formatted). It keeps spaces as entered (avoid tabs, tho’):

    Date when made date of minimum peak activity date of maximum
    
      01/2004                     1/07               160 
      01/2005                     1/07               145                   2010
      01/2006                     1/07               145                   2010
      01/2007                     6/07               145                   2010
      03/2008                     6/08               130                   2011.5
      01/2009                     1/09               105                   2012
      04/2009                     4/09               104                   2013
      05/2009                     5/09                 90                   2013.5
      11/2009                     5/09               <50                   20??
      04/2010                   12/08                 70                   2013.5
      06/2010                   12/08                 65                   2013.5
      10/2010                   12/08                 64                   2013.5
      12/2010                   12/08                 64                   2013.5
      04/2011                   12/08                 62                   2013.5
      12/2011                   12/08                 99                   2013.2
      03/2012                   12/08                 59                   2013.2
      05/2012                   12/08                 60                   2013.2

    Enjoy!

  56. Oops, looks like I should have fiddled it more:

        Date              date of        peak       date of
        made              minimum       activity    maximum
     01/2004            1/07          160
     01/2005            1/07          145        2010
     01/2006            1/07          145        2010
     01/2007            6/07          145        2010
     03/2008            6/08          130        2011.5
     01/2009            1/09          105        2012
     04/2009            4/09          104        2013
     05/2009            5/09           90        2013.5
     11/2009            5/09           50        20??
     04/2010           12/08           70        2013.5
     06/2010           12/08           65        2013.5
     10/2010           12/08           64        2013.5
     12/2010           12/08           64        2013.5
     04/2011           12/08           62        2013.5
     12/2011           12/08           99        2013.2
     03/2012           12/08           59        2013.2
     05/2012           12/08           60        2013.2 
    

    That’s better.

  57. Though the title spacing still needs correction. Different fonts, different strokes …

  58. Gail Combs says:
    May 10, 2012 at 4:42 pm
    I doubt if you would see major cooling even then. We have that great big hot water bottle called the oceans that do wonders at moderating the weather. (Thank goodness)

    Such as a hypothetical future Maunder Minimum repeat would be major cooling as far as I define it (ramping up over a decade or so superimposed upon shorter-term oscillations like El Ninos versus La Ninas), as in the historical record, although you may be expecting rather more like just a Dalton Minimum, or a return to higher levels of solar activity, or almost anything else. Although there are always an assortment of predictions, nobody seems to know conclusively exactly how future solar activity will go after the next several years, or, at least, if anybody does, it would be hard to tell that they really do.

    Gail Combs says:
    May 10, 2012 at 4:42 pm
    However I would expect a gradual cooling and more “loopyness” in the jet streams. We are already seeing that with blocking highs. Just watch the jets over the USA for a while and you can see what I mean. They are no longer straight out of the west as they were a few years ago. http://classic.wunderground.com/US/Region/US/2xpxJetStream.html

    It could be interesting to see how that goes in the future, if there is a Grand Minimum; the last one was so far before modern instrumental data.

  59. Curiousgeorge says:
    May 10, 2012 at 6:28 pm

    Indeed. It’s a good deal different than a back yard garden plot, as you know. N from natgas, P and K from mines. Plus other essential nutrients such as sulfer, etc. Can’t feed the world on manure anymore. Millions of tons of industrial NPK, etc. are needed every year for food, animal feed, and ethanol. This totally escapes the greenies consciousness.

    An interesting bit of info:
    “In 2007, at the current rate of consumption, the supply of phosphorus was estimated to run out in 345 years. However, some scientists now believe that a “peak phosphorus” will occur in 30 years and that at “current rates, reserves will be depleted in the next 50 to 100 years.”

    The first paragraph is all true. However, regarding the bottom quote, “scientists” in it really means some environmentalists pushing a general anti-growth agenda (of which CAGW claims are another symptom of the overall movement), where some make inaccurate claims like that about everything, even iron. The quote sounded like it came from Wikipedia, and sure enough it did, so I edited Wikipedia now (in appropriate language superficially unbiased and more fitting an encyclopedia than this), fixing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphate with additional info and references.

    More casually speaking, beyond the 71 billion tons of reserves counted by the USGS (for mining at near exactly present market prices with no technological change over time), there are a vast amount of intermediate ores between such and roughly on the order of 3 million billion tons of phosphorus in Earth’s 3 * 10^19 ton crust. Although even the average rock has phosphorus at 0.1% concentration, never would it be necessary to mine literally just random rocks to meet the 0.2 billion tons/year world phosphorus production requirements of today as there are always intermediate-concentration ores cheaper to mine. We won’t run out of phosphorus: not in 100 years, in 1000 years, or essentially ever within the foreseeable future.

  60. Henry Clark says:
    May 12, 2012 at 6:37 am
    Everyone seems to forget matter is neither created or destroyed unless it is nuclear fission/fusion. If worse comes to worse we mine garbage heaps and the ocean.

    On temperatures, someone (I think up thread) said the effects of the sun are seen about two to four years later. In looking at the local temperature in central North Carolina a couple years after the solar max of cycle 23 and the solar min (2008) for the month of May.
    2010 (~ 2 yrs after min)….. 2004(~ 2 yrs after solar max)
    4day – 91F…………………..6 days – 91F
    …………………………………..6 days – 93F
    …………………………………. 2 days – 95F
    ………………………………….1 days – 96F

    We had one day at 91F, 12 days under 80F and the five day forecast is also for max temps in the seventies. Not exactly the heat wave of 2004 so far. It is now a chilly 62F. I am not complaining it is nice to actually have a spring instead of a quick jump straight into summer.

    Of course we are following the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Nearest big city Fayetteville NC.

  61. Gail Combs says:
    May 12, 2012 at 7:26 am
    On temperatures, someone (I think up thread) said the effects of the sun are seen about two to four years later. In looking at the local temperature in central North Carolina a couple years after the solar max of cycle 23 and the solar min (2008) for the month of May.

    2 to 4 years lag time would fit roughly around the most typical cycle length of the Southern Oscillation Index. Perhaps effective lag times may vary from sometimes an internal cycle neutralizing the effect of variation in external radiative input temporarily, yet other times reinforcing, like superimposing two waveforms which sometimes interfere constructively and sometimes destructively.

    With that said, I am certainly aware there is ocean thermal inertia influencing lag on top of that even aside from the oscillations.

    I’d actually love to see someone truly combine modeling ocean oscillations (from short ones like the SOI to longer ones like indeed the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation you mentioned) with solar variation, as generally any single article seems to focus on one or the other but not all combined. No doubt the difficulty is in trying to pick out what part of ocean variation is relatively independent and which is dependent; for instance, the multivariate ENSO index apparently includes cloud cover as a factor, but that would be influenced by current cosmic ray variation and not purely the ocean oscillation “itself” alone, although the SOI may be more a single variable index somewhat reducing complications perhaps.

    Gail Combs says:
    May 12, 2012 at 7:26 am
    We had one day at 91F, 12 days under 80F and the five day forecast is also for max temps in the seventies. Not exactly the heat wave of 2004 so far. It is now a chilly 62F. I am not complaining it is nice to actually have a spring instead of a quick jump straight into summer.

    You must be a long-term resident of North Carolina to have gotten used to thinking of that as relatively chilly. ;) But I agree.

    Gail Combs says:
    May 12, 2012 at 7:26 am
    Of course we are following the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Nearest big city Fayetteville NC.

    That’s a good graph of the AMO.

    I wonder how much would be the relatively intrinsic temperature effect of the AMO index aside from other influences. For instance, the 1940s were warmer than the 1910s, while the AMO index is seen to be around +0.2 versus -0.2 in that graph, yet a big question to me is how much quantitatively was due to the AMO (and the other near-60-year cycle, the PDO) intrinsically versus how much from the rise in solar activity over that time, e.g. what multiplier would convert from an AMO index value to a temperature value if superimposed on top of other factors like solar input…

  62. Vukcevik says
    Predictions are just opinions, and since the sun is ‘a messy place’ (L.S) they are more likely to be wrong than correct.

    Henry says
    Personally I think we are on this curve:

    which came from here:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/25/predictions-of-global-mean-temperatures-ipcc-projections/

    One of Orssengo’s predictions is that global cooling and warming phases alternate with each other and that we are now in a cooling phase. …
    Currently my own investigations

    http://letterdash.com/henryp/global-cooling-is-here

    for the period indicated by him, actually confirm this.
    Both him and myself are pointing to around 1994 or 1995.

    What do you think about that?
    In your crystal (sun) bowl do you see 1994 or 1995 as a significant turning point?

  63. vukcevic says

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/10/solar-cycle-update-for-april-sun-still-slumping/#comment-984124

    Henry says
    a change in magnetic field strength from one area to the other could have a significant influence on weather and weather patterns,
    and past 1996 is certainly where we see a general decline in global temps.
    However, in that case, if maxima were dropping due to “more” weather (i.e. more clouds)
    one would expect to find increasing humidity, not a global decrease of the %RH.
    I have to think about this a bit.

Comments are closed.