Although we’ve been covering this quiet sun issue for over a year on WUWT, the light bulb seems to have gone on for mainstream media right about now.
There is growing press coverage about the current state of the sun, most recently from Charles Osgood of CBS News as well as the BBC and other major outlets. While the sun slumbers deeper and has missed its cyclic snooze alarm, our media is finally waking up to the solar somnolence.
Here is a short roundup of news articles on this subject today:
‘Still Sun’ baffling astronomers
Scientists warn sun has dimmed
Sun ‘at its quietest for 100 years’
Has the sun gone in? Earth’s closest star ‘dimmest it’s been for a century’
So the question arises, now that this has been identified, what should we call it?
There have been some good ideas, such as naming it after Jack Eddy, who coined the phrase “Maunder Minimum“. There’s been some discussion of a “Gore Minimum”, but I don’t like the idea of giving Gore credit for something he has nothing to do with, or even likely understands. There’s been suggestion of “The Hansen Minimum” which makes a little more sense, since he’s an astronomer by training. On that note, Leif Svalgaard predicted this, so maybe it should be his honor.
So, I’ve decided to have a poll, and I’ll take suggestions for other names than what I’ve listed.
Ok… if the Grand Maximum just happened… and Leif undoubtedly has called this recent downturn… and I think we can all agree that Leif is a grand person…
And also life is grand… maybe “Leif is Grand Minimum” is OK because it’s not really saying that the minimum is grand…. uhhhh I lost track of what I was saying but I think it’s all in there somewhere….
Unprecedented minimum.
Geoff Sharp (17:54:54) :
“By that definition 1831 was not during the Dalton Minimum…”
It was the tail end. SC5 & SC6 are a product of SC4 and are considered in my book true grand minimum.
But don’t fit your scheme as they are twenty years off. You should then change your Figure to say 1811 instead of 1831.
Geoff Sharp (17:54:54) :
“By that definition 1831 was not during the Dalton Minimum…”
It was the tail end. SC5 & SC6 are a product of SC4 and are considered in my book true grand minimum.
But don’t fit your scheme as they are twenty years off. You should then change your Figure to say 1811 instead of 1831. and 1811+172 = 1983 hmmm, I can now see why you try to slip in 1831 instead of 1811…
I’d offer “Won’t-Get-Fooled-Again Minimum”, but the phrase mocks itself.
Get on the band wagon for…
Mike Bryant (12:46:57) :
The Inconvenient Minimum
I didn’t have time to read every suggestion,so I may be duplicating someone else.
There is only one name for this minimum.
It’s the WATT MINIMUM. Well maybe the Watt’s Up Minimum. With over 7 million hits, you deserve it.
Just start using it.
If it’s named by the alarmists…
“The I Hope This Doesn’t Ruin Our Gravy Train Minimum”
(I tried but I couldn’t make it any shorter)
The Watt’s Down With That Minimum
The Hockey Stick
The GoreBull Maximum
Well since he fiddled while Rome burned (at least that is the popular perception)
Why not
The Nero Minimum
Besides, it kinda goes with
The Wolf Minimum
I vote for:
The Happy Minimum!
because of the undeniable element of glee with which it is being received by climate realists.
/Mr Lynn
Mr. Lynn, Then why not The Optimum Minimum?
I Like the “Concensus Minimum”
Since the world is turning to collectivism…
The Minimum Wage Minimum
Hmmmm I liked The Bare Minimum… The Polar Bear Minimum?
I vote for the Landscheidt-Svalgaard Minimum. Much as I would love to taunt Gore, this will end up being history and I don’t want to create the impression that Gore was a positive figure in all of this.
OT: Neil Cavuto had an AGW type on today on the Fox Cable News channel and did one hell of a job confronting him in focusing on the recent reports re Antarctica ice levels.He was clearly NOT impressed with the guest’s arguments and was essentially dismissive of the points the guy was trying to make. I was VERY impressed with Cavuto’s stance !!!! Anyone else see it ?????
I voted Gore. Science needs more sarcasm.
Without Doubt .. it should be called the Landscheidt Minimum .. as he called it long before any of the pointy headed Ph.D.s in astrophysics who study the sun.
IMO, It would be a flat out injustice to call it anything other than that.
Quoting:
“The Nero Minimum
Besides, it kinda goes with
The Wolf Minimum”
Commenting:
I get it. But I am among the few 😉
I second Varco! It shall be called the WATT minimun.
Not only does this give proper credit to a significant climate researcher who recognised the significance of the event early on, think of the who on first fun we can have with solar deniers. We refer to the Watt minimun, they say “what minimun” we say “exactly”. When they finally admit that the sun can actually have an effect on climate and start blaming the sun for masking the intense warming that’s not happening, we can say “watt solar minimun” they call us deniers all over again.
Leif Svalgaard (18:24:37) :
But don’t fit your scheme as they are twenty years off. You should then change your Figure to say 1811 instead of 1831. and 1811+172 = 1983 hmmm, I can now see why you try to slip in 1831 instead of 1811
This is not hard to understand, you are intelligent and should be able to grasp this, but we seem to be going over it again. At the risk of raising Anthony’s hackles, the 172 year pattern has a centre with usually 3 opportunities for solar downturn. The Wolf, Sporer and Maunder looked to use all 3, the Dalton used one and a bit (the centre is 1831) and this time around we are right in the centre after SC20 didn’t quite make the grade.
NASA is calling it a Deep Solar Minimum,
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm
The warmers want more ice to save the polar bears, and this minimum might be the start of more ice, so why not anagram NASA’s Deep Solar and call it:
The Polar Seed Minimum
I vote for the WATT minimun.
Not only does this recognise Anthony’s significant contribution to climate education and research, it will provide many opportunities for who’s on first fun with solar deniers.
We mention the current solar minimun, they say “what minimun”, we say “exactly”!
I voted for the Svalgaard Minimum, Gore’s name should only be used for new models of Porta Potties, septic tanks and the like.
The Malthus Minimum might be appropriate.
Roger Knights’ “Inconvenient Minimum” is brilliant. Funny, sarcastic, satire at its best. I wish I had thought of it.