Excerpts printed below, see full story here (h/t to David Archibald)
Anne Minard for National Geographic News
May 4, 2009 A prolonged lull in solar activity has astrophysicists glued to their telescopes waiting to see what the sun will do next—and how Earth’s climate might respond.
The sun is the least active it’s been in decades and the dimmest in a hundred years. The lull is causing some scientists to recall the Little Ice Age, an unusual cold spell in Europe and North America, which lasted from about 1300 to 1850.
…
But researchers are on guard against their concerns about a new cold snap being misinterpreted.
“[Global warming] skeptics tend to leap forward,” said Mike Lockwood, a solar terrestrial physicist at the University of Southampton in the U.K.
He and other researchers are therefore engaged in what they call “preemptive denial” of a solar minimum leading to global cooling.
…
Even if the current solar lull is the beginning of a prolonged quiet, the scientists say, the star’s effects on climate will pale in contrast with the influence of human-made greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2).
“I think you have to bear in mind that the CO2 is a good 50 to 60 percent higher than normal, whereas the decline in solar output is a few hundredths of one percent down,” Lockwood said. “I think that helps keep it in perspective.”
…
Changes in the sun’s activity can affect Earth in other ways, too.
For example, ultraviolet (UV) light from the sun is not bottoming out the same way it did during the past few visual minima.
“The visible light doesn’t vary that much, but UV varies 20 percent, [and] x-rays can vary by a factor of ten,” Hall said. “What we don’t understand so well is the impact of that differing spectral irradiance.”
Solar UV light, for example, affects mostly the upper layers of Earth’s atmosphere, where the effects are not as noticeable to humans. But some researchers suspect those effects could trickle down into the lower layers, where weather happens
In the meantime, we’ve been in a deep solar minimum for almost 1 year and the global temperatures went up, the Arctic sea ice extent in 2008 was the second lowest on record, and we recently switched from la Nina (cold) to neutral conditions in the pacific. The way 2009 started should place it in the top 10 hottest years. So where is the little ice age in all this stuff?
BTW, we have a good big spot coming our way rightnow
http://www.spaceweather.com/images2009/05may09/20090505_081530_n7euB_195.jpg?PHPSESSID=6d5pf1m4b54smi539anikqot10
It’s on the eastern limb of the sun, meaning we can’t see it today but should be visible in a few days. It’s a member of cycle 24.
“Also, the periods of glaciation in this ice age have generally been getting longer and colder. Interglacials have also been getting cooler. This interglacial is cooler than then last one was, for example, though it has been a little longer.”
Earth has been gradually shifting to an Ice House climate for a few reasons:
a) since Antarctica separated from South America 22Mya, the circumpolar currents have grown in mass/velocity. These currents insulate Antarctica from the rest of the planet.
b) since the Straits of Panama closed 3Mya Ice Ages have become more solidly entrenched.
c) the growth of corals has increasingly sequestered more and more CO2 more securely as limestone. Within a few million years, Earth will no longer have interglacials of any intensity because any warming due to Milankovitch cycles will not warm the planet up enough to get us out of Ice Age conditions. If humanity is still around our civilization will be restricted to equatorial and tropical regions.
The long term conversion of CO2 into Limestone bedrock has been a long term process that began with the birth of life on Earth. Earth once had 52 times more atmosphere than it currently has, mostly CO2 and Sulphuric Oxides in a reducing atmosphere. Life sequestered most of the atmosphere as limestone. Some was sequestered as oil but most became limestone, and limestone is over a long time the increasing share of the sequestered CO2. The only secure long term sequestration method has been conversion into limestone via corals. When you burn fossil fuels, you give corals a new chance to resequester that CO2 as limestone.
Jim Papsdorf (09:59:11) :
ER Smith
Assuming you meant E. M. Smith
I am having trouble verifying your contention that ozone blocks IR [I do not see it in Wckipedia], could you please give me a source ?
I have a great graph, who’s link I’ve lost… but here are a couple of others:
http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/climatechange1/02_3.shtml
In the sidebar at the bottom:
“Carbon dioxide absorbs at wavelengths centered on 15 microns, ozone at wavelengths of 10 microns, and water vapor over broad ranges of wavelengths.”
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1932PhRv…42..622G
“Of the seven known infrared absorption bands of ozone, four (4.7μ, 7.39μ, 9.6μ, and 11.38μ) have been investigated for the first time with a grating spectrometer. The band at 4.7μ shows three branches, not very sharply defined, while the one at 7.39μ shows only a single peak. The strongest band, at 9.6μ, has been resolved into two main branches which probably belong to two different vibrations. The band at 11.38μ has been tentatively ascribed to nitrogen pentoxide, which often occurs as an impurity in ozone.”
http://www.iitap.iastate.edu/gccourse/chem/evol/temp.html
“Energy from the earth, on the other hand, radiates over a range of wavelengths centered on about 10 microns, which, according to the absorption graph, is a region where energy is absorbed strongly by water vapor (H2O) and carbon dioxide CO2 and, at certain wavelengths, by methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), oxygen (O2) and ozone (O3). The graph at the bottom of the figure gives the aggregate absorptivity for all gases in the atmosphere.”
http://www.iitap.iastate.edu/gccourse/chem/evol/images/image6.gif
Which, when you look at the graph, shows that a 9.6 ish near 10 microns both water and CO2 have little absorption and it’s almost all the Ozone spike… That’s where I think the ozone impact is located. In most other parts of the spectrum there are multiple absorptive gases. But here, just about on the peak of our earthly emissivity, is a window closed by only ozone… that is modulated by the sun.
Many thanks.
You’re welcome. BTW a Google of “Ozone IR absorption graph micron” and similar phrases turns up lots of information…
Pamela Gray (07:13:35) :
Leif Svalgaard (17:23:55) :
Piers Corbyn’s success is differing with you.
Unless I am missing some nuance in what both of you are saying.
anna v (12:41:15) :
jeremyj5000 (09:43:27) :
“Also: anyone who has lived in the same area long enough to have seen the climate change and still does not believe that it is doing so “[…]
Today, May 5th, in Athens Greece, my apartment building turned on the heat tonight. It is the first time in my lifetime this has happened, and I am 69 yrs old. Heating is stopped the first week of April usually.
And here in the south end of the S.F. Bay Area, California, where I’ve lived for about 30+ years (having moved here from 200 miles away where I lived the prior 25) I’m running the heater (though in fairness today was warmer than the past week). Normally it would be the fan. Today I was dampened in my back yard by a sprinkle of rain. This is about the 5th time in 5 days. That is almost unheard of here in May. Early April, maybe but not always.
This chart:
http://camastergardeners.ucdavis.edu/files/64180.pdf
gives the 50% last frost date for San Jose (near me) as JANUARY and the mostly all clear (only 10% chance) as FEBRUARY. Normally March is almost 100% safe and by early April you’re on the late side for starting tomatoes. I lost a tomato to frost the first week in April … (I know, I’m griping about ONLY having a 9 month garden season instead of 11 or 12 😉
May is usually warm with the early tomatoes (put in at last frost, about 15 March at worst, as gallons but you can sometimes sneak them in as early as 1 March….) the 45 day types giving a few nice ripe ones. This year I have one pale orange Stupice waiting to turn red (a cold type tomato from Czech Rep.) and three plants of more normal temp needs, that have yet to flower or set fruit (even if not ripe, I’d at least have lots of green fruit set… but tomatoes are very sensitive to cold for fruit set. It has been consistently colder as proven by the lack of fruit set; a very accurate averaging thermometer… (the pollen tube must grow into the ovum within a couple of days and it’s rate gets too slow when cold; so the pollen dies before fruit set).
Oh, and it’s been rainy, overcast, cold, and drizzly for about a week straight now. Today I saw the sun for about an hour, near late afternoon, and finally got a little warmth from it. This is what you would expect in San Francisco, not down here in Silicon Gulch… (In August it can be 105F here and 55F in S.F. 50 miles north…) From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Jose,_California
We get that typical May rainfall is 1 cm. Well, I’m pretty sure it’s been more than that already this month… and we are sometimes up to 100F but usually high 70’s F. No where near that the last few days. I’d say we’re running about 10F low (but the month is young, I’m sure we’ll eventually warm up).
So to quote Anna V.:
“How is this for anecdotal?”
I’ll believe it’s warm when I’m eating a fresh tomato from my garden. Until then, it’s cold… and computer fantasy anomaly maps can go pound sand. Computer fantasies don’t feed people, crops do, and the crops know what the real temperatures are. No, that is not subject to argument, negotiation, dispute, complaint, etc. etc. No heat, no ‘matters. Period.
Mike Lorrey (16:32:16) : BTW: it is claimed the drop in oil prices is due to drops in consumption due to the poor global economy. If so, then the CO2 concentrations should not have continued increasing. Can we get a comparison between fossil fuel consumption over the past 20 yrs vs CO2 concentrations?
Try:
http://timeforchange.org/prediction-of-energy-consumption
for a rough cut on energy consumption (but it includes pointers to where it got the data so you can probably get more precision and greater duration…)
Question for Leif ?
Why are we only seeing new SC24 sunspots on the suns northern hemisphere ?
I would expect a more even distribution across both hemispheres.
Carsten Arnholm, Norway:-))
Well done you! That’s the one ok! I hope you see my point about the last speaker’s rudeness/discourteousness toward the previous speaker.
Svensmark was good, as was Bob Carter, now I think he’s a Kiwi, & the guy next to him Barrett? was an Auzzie I believe, so there was no love-loss there! I thought it was intersting to hear the guy next to the Minister, Dr Janssen was it? who worked at the IPCC, saying something quite different to what has previously been described about the workings of the IPCC.
AtB
savethesharks (20:31:51) :
“Yes, as not every complex system is chaotic. The climate may be, but plate tectonics [to mention one example] may not be.”
Plate tectonics may NOT be???
That something has a randomness element to it is not chaotic, it is stochastic. Plate tectonics has a fairly regular and bounded set of behaviours that exhibit stochastic (and some stochastic resonance) natures. But it does not seem to be chaotic. (We have regular earthquakes and volcanos around the “ring of fire”; with a certain randomness as to when… but we don’t suddenly just stop all activity for 10000 years nor do we suddenly have a new spreading zone pop up in the middle of the ocean. Likewise, the “plume” under Hawaii doesn’t suddenly take off at 100 mph toward SF…)
Chaotic systems have solutions that become more divergent over time, often radically so. Stochastic systems have regular behaviours, you just can not say exactly when or exactly now strong. But the San Andreas Fault has been and will be the same for 10,000 years and there will be a great quake about every 400 years *IF I RECALL CORRECTLY!* but it could be 300 years, then 500, and only center on the 400 year point. Random, but bound to be near an island of stability…
Basically, predictable would be a Bach Fugue.
Stochastic would be a Jazz Riff, a bit bent but with recognized history.
Chaotic would be dropping a piano on the orchestra pit…
E.M.Smith (01:04:54) :
Got several inches here in Nw. Ca myself. It just poured all day long yesterday. Looked more like a February Monsoon, El Nino style. More coming tomorrow. It’s not warm here, either. About 10F off from last year, and last year wasn’t exaclty a cooker either. The plants in the greenhouse are now molding, so have to go out and dry them off with a hairdryer. Sheesh.
Fred Souder (20:17:22) :
“crosspatch (16:48:52) : Just before the last period of glaciation, temperatures went from the coldest of the entire glacial period to the warmest of the Holocene … in a VERY short period of time. Orbital changes are gradual. Changes from glaciation to interglacial is fast, often within the span of a single human lifetime. The switch back to glacial conditions is even faster, within a period of a decade or two.”
What is your source on this “decade or two” period for re-glaciation? Faster than the interglacial warm-up? This seems very unlikely to me. I would like to read the source and see how it jives with the principals of thermodynamics.
Part of the problem with looking to thermodynamics is defining the thermodynamics of “what”. One of the theories about the demise of the Clovis People and the rapid fluctuations in temperatures about 13,000 years ago has a large rock from space hitting smack into the ice age glacial sheet over North America. Now you get to speculate as to how big, how fast and how deep into how much ice…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event
Another theory has a gigantic glacial melt lake breaking an ice dam and flooding the ocean with a fresh water pulse disrupting the normal currents and setting off a climate wobble until the currents reform.
Now you get to speculate about how ocean currents impact climate and how an ill defined giant Canada sized lake could change an ill defined ocean…
For extra credit to you get to mix these two scenarios together and season with some volcanos induced by the shock wave of the meteor impact focused on the other side of the earth …
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation35.html
so, for example, the bickering over the dinosaurs with “meteor” vs “volcanic flood basalt” may be just one event. Meteor on one side causing crustal fractures and basalt flows on the other…
Have fun working out the thermodynamics of that puppy…
So Milankovitch sets the stage, but the actors are doing improvisational theatre… (and sometimes knock the piano toward the orchestra pit…)
Candidate for Quote of the Day:
E.M.Smith (01:04:54)
“[…] computer fantasy anomaly maps can go pound sand. Computer fantasies don’t feed people, crops do […]”
Flanagan (23:44:00) : In the meantime, we’ve been in a deep solar minimum for almost 1 year and the global temperatures went up,
Leaving aside the question of “went up using who’s broken simulated anomaly maps based on lousy biased data?”… Ya think maybe a system as large as the earth might take just a wee bit longer than few months to change direction? Sheesh.
And please remember that the hottest dates will be near the top, coming and going; it’s the direction of the peaks that matters, not the hight. We’re leaving “higher highs” and entering “lower highs with lower lows” Basically, it’s the derivative of the average temperature slope that matters (Dslope / dt) not the absolute value (since we know that a ball tossed in the air is at it’s highest just before it starts coming back down fast…)
It’s cold. It’s getting colder. We’ve had and are having lots of extra snow fall all over the globe. Cities ran out of road salt. Ski seasons are extended. Crops are going in late and not ripening as expected. etc. etc. I’ll take that non-fudge-able evidence any day over the trash that I’ve seen in the GIStemp code.
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/gistemp/
It’s still a very open question if this is just a return to normal or something worse. The sun being at a dead halt is worrying, but it will take a decade to know if it’s a Big Deal or just a modest surprise. (We have to see how 24 shapes up, then 25 may have a chance to be LIA redux… perhaps if we get a volcano tossed in in the next 20 years…) And it would be nice to have a big sun spot, but I’ll believe it when it gets here and has a number.
For now, though, it’s not hot and in case you didn’t notice, it’s been getting cooler for the last decade or so. Arctic and Antarctic ice is way higher than it has been in quite a while and it’s not melting. (Hard to melt at below 0 C ) and along with that, the PDO is in the cold phase.
If you can’t see what these things mean, well, might I suggest that you move to sunny warm Fairbanks, Alaska… The AGW will be making it a vacation paradise…
Leif,
Are you attending this conference?
http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/sns/2009/sns_apr_2009.pdf
At the site there is information about the 2009 SORCE Science Meeting – July 19-29, Montreal, Canada
There will be a special 2-day session called “The Impact of Solar Variability on Earth” on Monday-Tuesday, July 27-28.
The session will address all aspects of the impact of solar variations on the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans. These include:
• Variability of the solar irradiance (TSI and SSI measurements and modelling)
• Variability of energetic particle precipitation
• Solar signal in the thermosphere, mesosphere, and stratosphere (observations, modelling, mechanisms)
• Solar signal in the troposphere (observations and modelling, processes, climate relevance)
• Solar signal in the oceans and the role of atmosphereocean coupling
• Solar impact on centennial to millennial timescales
The symposium invited contributions on identifying the solar signal from ground-based and satellite observational datasets ranging from the upper atmosphere (thermosphere, mesosphere) to the troposphere, the Earth’s surface and the oceans. Papers on the solar irradiance and particle flux on Earth were encouraged as well as contributions on physical and chemical processes and mechanisms leading to the observed solar signal, and especially simulations with mechanistic, general circulation and chemistry climate models. Studies could include solar variations on different time scales ranging from the 27-day rotation period over the 11-year solar cycle to centennial and millennial variations including the Maunder Minimum.
Session M03 invited speakers who have accepted and their tentative talk title/subject are:
􀂃 Ulrich Cubasch, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
Solar Impact on Earth‘s Climate at Centennial and Millennial Timescales
􀂃 Wolfgang Finsterle, PMOD/World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland
The TSI measurements of PMOD/WRC
􀂃 Bernd Funke, Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía, Granada, Spain
Odd Nitrogen Variabiltiy Caused by Energetic Particle Precipitation: What Have We Learned from MIPAS?
􀂃 Lesley Gray, Reading University, UK
The 11-Year Solar Cycle in the Stratosphere
􀂃 Kunihiko Kodera, Meteorological Research Inst.,Tsukuba, Japan
Conceptual Model for the Solar Influence from the Stratosphere
􀂃 Greg Kopp, LASP, Univ. of Colorado, Boulder
Total Solar Irradiance Measurements from the Total Irradiance Monitor
􀂃 Katja Matthes, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
Solar-QBO Interactions in the Middle Atmosphere: An Overview
􀂃 Raimund Muscheler, Lund University, Sweden
Reconstructing Solar Variability with Cosmogenic Radionuclides and the Sun-Climate Link on Centennial to Millennial Time Scales
􀂃 David Rind, NASA GISS, New York, NY
The Role of SSTs for the Decadal Atmospheric Solar Signal in Model Studies
􀂃 Hauke Schmidt, Max Planck Inst. for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany
Solar Signal in Temperature and Chemistry of the Mesosphere and Lower Thermosphere
􀂃 Kirill Semeniuk, York Univ., Toronto, Canada
Impact of Ionizing Particle Precipitation on the Middle Atmosphere
􀂃 Gerard Thuillier, Service d’Aéronomie du CNRS, France
The Solar Spectrum: Methods of Measurements Calibration, and Recent Results
􀂃 Yvonne Unruh, Imperial College, London, UK
Solar Spectral Irradiance Modeling: Rotational to Solar-cycle Timescales
􀂃 Warren White, Univ. of California at San Diego, Scripps Inst. of Oceanography, La Jolla
Non-Linear Alignment of El Niño to the 11-Year Solar Cycle in Observations and Models
M. Smith, here are the “broken” anomalies I’m referring to
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2008/plot/gistemp/from:2008/plot/uah/from:2008/plot/rss/from:2008
Is there any evidence, I mean any scientific measure, that supports this idea that the earth is and will be cooling? Because every model in the world predicts stages of flat or decreasing temperatures over one or two decades, nevertheless leading to a long-term positive trend.
BTW, the solar activity has been going down since the 50ies. During this time, temperatures have been going up.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/sidc-ssn/mean:120/from:1950/normalise/plot/hadcrut3vgl/mean:120/from:1950/normalise
60 years of anticorrelation, in my sense, is a sign that the sun is not driving this warming. And thus will not counterbalance the greenhouse effect.
“The position in the sky that each conjunction occurs shifts each time over a 960 year period. The last time a Jupiter/Saturn conjunction occurred in this particular location (RE the 2000 conjunction) was therefore in 1040 AD, which was the beginning of the Oort Minimum.”
Now that is interesting. Likewise the progression in glaciation tendencies due to ocean circulation changes.
E.M. Smith
Part of the problem with looking to thermodynamics is defining the thermodynamics of “what”. One of the theories about the demise of the Clovis People and the rapid fluctuations in temperatures about 13,000 years ago has a large rock from space hitting smack into the ice age glacial sheet over North America. Now you get to speculate as to how big, how fast and how deep into how much ice…
I am not talking about specialized events within the interglacial, such as the dryass, I am talking about the glacial advances at the onset of the next glaciation. These should happen very slowly, not in a period of a couple decades. I would bet the Earth behaves like every other system in the universe: it heats up faster than it cools down, not the reverse. I was hoping to see where crosspatch came up with the two decades for the return to glaciation. Perhaps he was referring to the lesser dryass.
I’m probably repeating dozens of previous posts, but I just want to preserve for posterity these revealing statements (comments in CAPS):
*******************
But researchers are on guard against their concerns about a new cold snap being misinterpreted.
“[Global warming] skeptics tend to leap forward,” said Mike Lockwood, a solar terrestrial physicist at the University of Southampton in the U.K.
He and other researchers are therefore engaged in what they call “preemptive denial” of a solar minimum leading to global cooling. [THIS IS POLITICS MIKE, NOT SCIENCE. WHAT IS YOUR SKILL SET? WHAT IS YOUR JOB?]
…
Even if the current solar lull is the beginning of a prolonged quiet, the scientists say, the star’s effects on climate will pale in contrast with the influence of human-made greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2).
[FALSE, IMO THERE IS ADEQUATE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY AT THIS TIME, AT THE MACRO SCALE – E.G. THE MAUNDER AND DALTON MINIMUMS. ]
“I think you have to bear in mind that the CO2 is a good 50 to 60 percent higher than normal [WHAT IS NORMAL? EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE IS CLEARLY CO2 DEFICIENT IN THE GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE, AND PLANTS ARE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED. BTW, 50-60% IS WRONG TOO.], whereas the decline in solar output is a few hundredths of one percent down,” Lockwood said. “I think that helps keep it in perspective.” [MISLEADING – IF CO2 IS THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF GLOBAL WARMING, WHY HAS THERE BEEN NO NET WARMING SINCE 1940, DESPITE A ~800% INCREASE IN HUMANMADE CO2 EMISSIONS?]
********************
Since Professor Lockwood is just across the water (the Solent, not the Atlantic) from me, I thought a quick email was in order:
I was surprised to read on Anthony Watts’s blog that you feel that the current ‘quiet sun’ is not connected with the climate or recent cooling trend. I’m sure you’re a busy man, but the debate arising from this is interesting, and it would be good to read a response from you. Unlike most AGW-supporting blogs, Anthony’s is level headed and (mostly) respectful of dissenting opinion.
I won’t hold my breath, but you never know…
Re: E.M.Smith (02:57:39) :
There is further evidence supporting the Clovis extinction impact theory found in the remains of large land mammals (that also went extinct in North America at the same time). Tusks and bones showed signs of being hit with “buckshot”. Only this buckshot had to be traveling at least 3 times the velocity of what would come out of a shotgun. The meteor (or comet?) may have air-burst, showing the continent with rocks, a fireball, and a giant shock wave. There is a layer of carbon and ash found in digs that also support the theory.
As time goes on, it appears that major changes in evolution have been driven my massive impact events. I guess besides the sun, we should be looking more towards the rest of the heavens in case something big is headed our way.
I also finished a book recently on how Europe weathered the Little Ice Age (it was written by someone who supports the theory of man-made global warming.. but focuses the book on the effects of the ice age.. not politics): Europe went from pretty stable climate to devastating swings in temperature and rainfall. One year would be so wet that crops rotted in flooded fields. The next year was so cold rivers such as the Thames froze solid. A few years later, it was back to rain and mud. The effects were devastating: Starvation, revolution, disease. The climate did not stabilize until after the Dalton minimum had finished.
http://www.amazon.com/Little-Ice-Age-Climate-1300-1850/dp/0465022723/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241611267&sr=1-1
OT: Lobbyists are helping to write the Trade and Cap bill !!!!
How is THAT for hypocrisy !!
EXCLUSIVE: Lobbyists help Dems draft climate change bill
Democratic lawmakers who spent much of the Bush administration blasting officials for letting energy lobbyists write national policy have turned to a coalition of business and environmental groups to help draft their own sweeping climate bill.
And one little-noticed provision of the draft bill would give one of the coalition’s co-founders a lucrative exemption on a coal-fired project it is building.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/04/green-lobby-guides-democrats-on-climate-bill/
Richard deSousa (23:57:24) : “wonder what excuse he’ll give when the sun’s quietness continues for several decades and the temperature continues to decline as CO2 continues to climb. In fact, I’d bet CO2 will start to decline as the oceans, being colder, will sequester more CO2.”
More prudently would be to phrase it: ” In fact, I’d bet THE RATE OF CO2 increase will start to decline as the oceans, being colder, will sequester more CO2.” I doubt that the uptake by the oceans in a cooling climate will nullify human’s input.
You are treating the subject of global warming like a political question that is open to personal apreciation. The proven fact of global warming will not change due to such blogs.
This kind of information only tries to confuse the public. What is the idea behind denying an abvious fact that has been admitted by the overwhelming majority of scientists, laymen and politicians ?
Chris Schoneveld (03:01:04) :
Leif, Are you attending this conference?
No. I have been an invited speaker at earlier SORCE conferences, but a conflict with other work makes it impossible for me to attend the 2009 conference.
Ozzie John (01:36:50) :
Why are we only seeing new SC24 sunspots on the suns northern hemisphere ?
I would expect a more even distribution across both hemispheres.
It is quite normal to have such asymmetry for a while. With time it will even out, as you can see here: http://sidc.oma.be/html/wnosuf.html