Guest Post by David Archibald
NASA’s David Hathaway has adjusted his expectations of Solar Cycle 24 downwards. He is quoted in the New York Times here Specifically, he said:
” Still, something like the Dalton Minimum — two solar cycles in the early 1800s that peaked at about an average of 50 sunspots — lies in the realm of the possible.”
NASA has caught up with my prediction in early 2006 of a Dalton Minimum repeat, so for a brief, shining moment of three years, I have had a better track record in predicting solar activity than NASA.
The graphic above is modified from a paper I published in March, 2006. Even based on our understanding of solar – climate relationship at the time, it was evident the range of Solar Cycle 24 amplitude predictions would result in a 2°C range in temperature. The climate science community was oblivious to this, despite billions being spent. To borrow a term from the leftist lexicon, the predictions above Badalyan are now discredited elements.
Let’s now examine another successful prediction of mine. In March, 2008 at the first Heartland climate conference in New York, I predicted that Solar Cycle 24 would mean that it would not be a good time to be a Canadian wheat farmer. Lo and behold, the Canadian wheat crop is down 20% this year due to a cold spring and dry fields. Story here.
The oceans are losing heat, so the Canadian wheat belt will just get colder and drier as Solar Cycle 24 progresses. As Mark Steyn recently said, anyone under the age of 29 has not experienced global warming. A Dalton Minimum repeat will mean that they will have to wait to the age of 54 odd to experience a warming trend.
Where to now? The F 10.7 flux continues to flatline. All the volatility has gone out of it. In terms of picking the month of minimum for the Solar Cycle 23/24 transition, I think the solar community will put it in the middle of the F 10.7 quiet period due to the lack of sunspots. We won’t know how long that quiet period is until solar activity ramps up again. So picking the month of minimum at the moment may just be guessing.
Dr Hathaway says that we are not in for a Maunder Minimum, and I agree with him. I have been contacted by a gentleman from the lower 48 who has a very good solar activity model. It hindcasts the 20th century almost perfectly, so I have a lot of faith in what it is predicting for the 21st century, which is a couple of very weak cycles and then back to normal as we have known it. I consider his model to be a major advance in solar science.
What I am now examining is the possibility that there will not be a solar magnetic reversal at the Solar Cycle 24 maximum.
Sponsored IT training links:
Achieve guaranteed success using up to date 646-230 dumps and 642-426 study guide prepared by 642-661 certified experts.
Comparison between argo sea temp to 700m and hadcrut3gl gives this
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6243/argovshadcrut3vgl.jpg
In general it looks as if air temp precedes water temp. i.e. water is not pushing air temp.
It looks as if there is a steady rise in sea temp over the same period as air temp.
How would TSI do this when there is little change in TSI over the 1955 to present measuring period?
rephelan (01:25:22) :
Mikko (23:35:45) :
“BTW, your chlorine consumption anecdote is pretty much irrelevant”
What’s the matter Mikko, are you saying that only alarmists are allowed to reference proxies?
I read what D. Archibald writes with some interest. But this post does not help to convince me, as there is very little actual substance presented. The chlorine comment appears very odd, as it appeared to be just one random person being quoted. Maybe his marketing has declined. If you want to compare global temperatures with chlorine sales, you may want to compare with global chlorine sales. And swimming pools are of course not just following the solar cycles….if at all. Our swimming pools are mostly indoors anyway.
In my opinion, an upcoming Dalton-like minimum does indeed seem likely at this stage, based on our observations of solar activity. Chlorine sales somewhere in Australia (?) isn’t a very useful proxy in my opinion.
I would suggest that the downturn of swimming pool chlorine sales in Australia is due to more people converting their pools to salt water. Chlorine contributing to the modern trend of childhood allergies.
I would suggest as Dr. Svalgaard has often mentioned. Solar physics is a field of science where little is known. In short inexact. Dr. Hathaway made predictions – he was wrong. He has revised these predictions – wrong again. It maybe possible that the only predictions that will eventuate correct will be hindsight.
David Archibald has the advantage that his prediction seems to be in line with actual occurrence – but who know what will happen next week, next year or the next decade.
Mikko. That article has been discussed here before. Dr Svalgaard was at that conference. He disagreed with the figure you mentioned. Less of a consensus than the article portrays it to be.
I don’t know about the “Insurance” issue, as our insurance has not changed. But, I can tell you 2 things, I don’t need to use nearly as much chlorine this year while we are well below average temperature, but, I do have to watch the PH level. As the pool temperature rises the PH lowers and I have to add sodium bicarb, as the pool cools, it goes the other way around. Presently, pool temp has been staying right around 80F (chilly) and PH has stayed fairly neutral. Its cheaper to operate a pool when its cool (as far as chemicals), but it is no fun for swimming!
One by one they will all fall, nearly all will be wrong with their predictions, and if you look at their methods most show no understanding of what drives the Sun. I dont need to make any adjustments and I am willing to predict the next 200 years of solar activity.
http://www.landscheidt.info/images/200predsm.jpg
This grand minimum will be less severe than the Dalton.
marks powers (22:20:53) :
Workin’ on it.
bill (02:09:11) :
So how did the heat get in the oceans?
Is this why the temperature has not risen for a number of years – because the heat has been stored in the ocean.
Energy budget is everything – outgoing must eventually incoming else the temperature changes until black body radiation changes to equalise.
Since incoming is prettymuch static any energy stored in the sea must come from the atmosphere – giving static temps if GHGs affecting temp or falling if no GHG effect.
I would say that the sea is generally heated directly by incoming radiation from the sun – rather than the atmosphere. I also don’t think you can assume that the incoming energy is always ‘pretty much static’ due to cloud cover variations, volcanic activity and the longer term changes in the solar output.
The current El Nino conditions are most likely a result of the warm water generated in the far Eastern Pacific (Asian side) when the trade winds increased in the last la nina. This water has now worked its way back to the S American side (through sub-surface currents) and re-surfaced creating the El Nino conditions.
Frequently we might then expect positive feedback to ensue allowing for more solar radiation to be absorbed by the sea surface and a strengthening into a full El Nino event. If this fails to happen, then these El Nino conditions will have a net cooling effect on the ocean heat content.
[emphasis mine] ..
Bill, that is impossible! Heat energy cannot enter the sea from the atmosphere (2nd law of thermodynamics+other binding factors).
Dave,
I think it’s going to get cooler as well….however, people are stopping the use of chlorine in pools and switching to salt water, my brother is doing in FL and he states they are all switching over quickly. Thoughts?
So, if we in a Dalton Minimum, will we be able to grow enough food? Will we have enough energy to heat with?
Interesting times…..we had record cool in July here in Ky, zero days above 90 for July, record! 81 average vs 87, record!
However, when you look at Roy’s amsutemps, July is way up there.
David Archibald:
“There is another way of measuring climate change – pool chlorine sales. I met a bloke recently who has been selling pool chemicals for the last 17 years. Chlorine consumption is directly proportional to heat. His chlorine sales have been falling for the last 12 years.”
This is only true if the number of pools remains constant, which it is not. Pool numbers and usage have been dropping for years because they dont add anywhere near to the value of the house the amount it costs to build and maintain them.
I said this on another thread but it is relevant here:
“There is always a balance between solar shortwave input to the oceans and the release of that energy by the oceans to the air.
I say that both components are variable but as regards the oceans that is news to many and there are those who hold that solar variation is negligible as well. However slight the variability might be the Earth is self evidently sensitive to it according to well documented historical data.
The point of balance is always changing and the only way to establish the current position is to observe whether the air around the globe is warming or cooling.
I have said elsewhere that the first indication we get that a change in temperature trend is in progress is a latitudinal shift in the air circulation systems
Changes in the composition of the air such as extra greenhouse gases cannot change the temperature of the oceans on any meaningful time scale because the air temperature always moves towards the sea surface temperature, never the other way around.
The only source of energy retained in the oceans is solar shortwave. Infra red radiation cannot get past the evaporative process.
This is a common question:
“Surely mixing of ocean surface waters with water below will transport energy downwards?”
Reply:
If the surface waters are disturbed so that some mixing can occur then that is more than offset by the surface area of the water increasing due to the development of waves. That is one reason why increased windiness will also increase the rate of evaporation. The extra energy that may be available at the surface is not made available to the ocean bulk.
However, changes in the internal circulations of the oceans (not mere ocean currents) will alter the rate of energy emission from water to air and thus over time change the equilibrium temperature of the Earth but that is part of the sun/oceanic interaction and nothing to do with changes in the composition of the air alone. Changes in the air alone cannot get energy into the oceans past the evaporative process.
The mere fact that downwelling infra red warms up the topmost molecules of the ocean surface does not imply that the normal rate of energy flow from ocean to air is reduced. All that happens is that the rate of evaporation increases and the ‘normal’ rate of flow is maintained – or someone is going to have to produce convincing evidence to the contrary which I have not so far found.
I was thinking of buying a solar cult hoodie, I recently downgraded to thinking about just a T-shirt. Decisions decisions.
Interesting posting and comments!
On Chlorine Sales which is directly related to pool usage, there may be something there that should be explored. Yes, like crop yields, which many use as an indicator of cooling or warming, there are a load of other factors, but pool usage (unheated outdoors) should be looked at further. Let’s not be too dismissive of those thinking outside the box otherwise we’ll be like the “warm-mongers”.
As to the beginning of Cycle 24 …there were lots of prior predictions that didn’t make it. One I came across is from “the official sunspot counter” – SIDC in Belgium.
in December 2007 in its monthly report (page 5).
http://www.sidc.be/html/SWAPP/monthlybulletin/monthlybull1207.PDF
“This month, solar magnetograms of Dec 13 (2007) indicated one of the first signs of solar cycle 24. The magnetic configuration of bipolar sunspots with leading positive/negative polarity in the northern/southern hemisphere is associated with solar cycle 23.
The big spot in the MDI/magnetogram in Figure 1 of section III is such a typical example of a sunspot of cycle 23 in the southern solar hemisphere: inward magnetic field lines on the right and outward pointing field lines on the left. This spot is also located near the equator as it should according to the butterfly diagrams, which picture the drift of the sunspots to the equator (0°) during a solar cycle. The magnetic flux in the red circle however belongs to cycle 24.”
And let’s not be too hard on those NOAA Solar Scientists who try to make the best predictions based on current knowledge.
Solar Weather is a very important factor in communications and satellite performance and those industries are trying to understand future solar behavior. Like weather predictions, solar predictions will always be made … accurate or not.
Those predicting have admitted that prior predictions were not accurate and future ones should be written “in pencil”. Contrast this attitude to the “warm-mongers” consensus science of “we were right”, “we are right”, “we will always be right” and:
“Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.” (Orwell 1984)
To again quote Einstein on “consensus science”:
The Nazis, who didn’t like “Jewish science”, published the propaganda pamphlet “One Hundred Scientists Against Einstein”.
Einstein replied, “If the theory were really wrong, just one would suffice.”
As mentioned there are many possible reasons for a decline in clorine sales for pools including modern pools use less clorine. However it may be as good of a proxy as tree rings. (-:
Two or three years of warming would certainly not be proof of AGW. The benefits of increased CO2 are far easier to demonstrate then any projected disasterous consequences. The disatourous consequences of cap and trade is easy to demonstrate. The benefit of cap and trade is impossible to demonstrate as India and China (correctly) will not cooperate, and AGW is only a theroy that is loosing ground to observations.
markinaustin (22:15:55) :
i don’t follow the bit about a 2 degree Celsius variation in temperatures. is that based on past stuff that i am not familiar with?
Good question. I’m guessing this comes from one of David’s ‘papers’. David uses the rather loose correlation that appears to exist between Solar Cycle Length and temperature. Not global temperature, as you might think, but temperatures at one or two selected locations that suit David’s hypothesis. One of them is Armagh where DA uses a previous study by Butler & Johnson (though not in the way B&J intended), to conclude that we are about to see a temperaure decline of ~2 deg “over the next few years”. There are so many things wrong with David’s conclusions that it’s not possibe to cover them all in this post. However, the 2 deg decline in temperature relates to 11-year periods which are centred on the solar maximum and solar minimum of the relevant solar cycles. This means we already have at least 5 years data for the current solar min (assuming minimum in 2008/09).
If David’s predictions are correct then we would expect to see the mean temperatures for the period 2003-2013 to be significantly lower than for the period 1991-2001 (SC22 min in 1996). We know what the Armagh mean 1991-2001 temperatures are, and presumably we also know what the mean temperatures for 2003-2008 (if 2008 is min) and for 2004-2008 (if 2009 is min) are, so we should have some idea how the predictions are progressing.
David
I know I’ve asked you this before but didn’t get a reply. So I’ll ask it again. Can you provide us with an update as to how the Armagh predictions are progressing.
On Spaceweather.com, there is an item on sunspot activity, on the left side of the main page. If you click on the “explanation” link at the bottom of that item, you will get a chart showing the bottom ten years during the last century for sunspot activity. The tenth year is 1944, with 159 spotless days. If that information is correct, 2009 has just displaced 1944. Yesterday was the 160th spotless day for the year. Now 2007, 2008 and 2009 are all in the bottom ten years for sunspot activity. Or if you prefer, the “top ten” years for sunspotlessness.
1911, 1912 and 1913 are also in the list, with even less sunspot activity, but we are catching up.
Really enjoy the reading here.
Ciao
Ben
FYI.
this is very typical weather for Portland Oregon the last 2 weeks of July/first week of August.
Warm air in the high deserts (3000′ to 4000′) of eastern Oregon (95 to 105 degrees F) comes west with adiabatic compression as it descends to sea level (or 200′ in Portland). Except for about 2 weeks in January (when compressing -20 degree F air really helps by getting the temp up to 0), the marine influence keeps it really nice. (As a former governor said “be sure to visit, but don’t stay…;_)
According to the NOAA forecast of July 27th”
….NIGHTS WILL REMAIN QUITE UNCOMFORTABLE AWAY FROM THE COAST.
THIS WILL ESPECIALLY BE THE CASE IN DOWNTOWN PORTLAND…WHERE THE
URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT IS WORST. TEMPERATURES IN DOWNTOWN
PORTLAND WILL STRUGGLE TO FALL TO 70 DEGREES TONIGHT..
So, this is very usual weather and, while notable, it is not memorable and those who raise it as an issue are likely newbies (and should go back to California 😉
LOL in Oregon
Any temperature anomaly predictions for the coming months, Mr Archibald?
Regarding the falling chlorine sales over the past 12 years, there’s another possible element in that equation: the availability of information on the Internet. I have owned a modest above-ground pool for five years and I only bought my maintenance chemicals from the expensive pool store during the first summer I owned it. After that, I found several Internet sites (google Trouble-Free Pools to see one) that explain an economical and effective way to keep your pool sanitary without bankrupting yourself, using supermarket products: Clorox, baking soda, and borax, with a little bit of help from pool-store staples such as cyanuric acid. The volume of posts on those sites shows that there are many pool owners who are still swimming but, like me, haven’t been back to the pool store in years.
As to the relationship of swimming pools to climate change, I will say this: my pool’s sparkling clean, but it has stood empty almost every day this summer because, here in the Northeast , it is just too doggoned COLD to swim.
Can the rhetoric on a proxy. I’m not a warmist, but I can easily think of multiple reasons that ONE MAN’S chlorine sales might be a bad proxy…
* Fewer people as a % of poplulation owning pools
* New chlorine-free pools systems (my parents have a more expensive chlorine free system)
* He’s not a good salesman
* The man referenced is in an area with a declining population
* Shifting demographics around the store he works
* Trends toward people using public as opposed to private pools
Then if you want to say, lets take a look at global chlorine sales… I would still say its a bad proxy. The primary use of chlorine is not as a pool chemical but in the productions of industrial chemicals (plastics, solvents, refrigerants, etc…) You wouldn’t be able to seperate out the “pool effect” from the noise of regular chlorine sales.
Even if you could segment out the swimming pool portions you would have to contend with a good number of the reasons mentioned above, still making raw chlorine sales a poor proxy. So if you want to use the swimming pool as a proxy, you then have to look at drivers of what may cause people to use their pools less like…
* rise in popularity of other activities (biking, hiking, skateboarding, surfing, basketball, baseball, soccer, and every other sport imaginable…)
* Local ordinances and neighborhood covenants that make it more expensive to install and own a pool including fence requirements, in-ground requirements (some neighborhoods don’t allow above-ground pools, the much more affordable option)
* Re-sale value of the home. In general, an in-ground pool negatively affects the value of your home. Why? Most people don’t want the hassle or liability.
So before you jump on a comment, calling someone a warmista, AGWer or other term because they disregard one of your own’s proxy, think about whether that proxy would stand up to the same scrutiny you have subjected the AGW proxies to. If it doesn’t, leave it alone.
Relevant ARGO links for those interested. Knowing what to do with the data is another mater 🙂
http://sio-argo.ucsd.edu/
http://www.coriolis.eu.org//cdc/argo_rfc.htm
http://www.argo.net/
http://www.coriolis.eu.org//cdc/argo/Argo_data_guide.pdf
http://www.usgodae.org/ftp/outgoing/argo/
Looks like the spambot nabbed me; another try:
Relevant ARGO links for those interested. Knowing what to do with the data is another matter 🙂
http://
sio-argo.ucsd.edu/
http://www.coriolis.eu.org//cdc/argo_rfc.htm
http://www.argo.net/
http://www.coriolis.eu.org//cdc/argo/Argo_data_guide.pdf
http://www.usgodae.org/ftp/outgoing/argo/
David Archibald: The oceans are not losing heat; the recent low temperatures have been driven entirely by ENSO. It’s easy to account for the immediate effects of ENSO, and I’ve done that in the second image, here:
http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/2009/07/13/swansons-not-so-novel-post-at-realclimate/
There’s no visible reduction of SST outside of ENSO.
Mikko (23:35:45) : So, Mikko, you appear to be one of those people who believe Mother Nature runs per a consensus of humans. Big surprise – She doesn’t care!!
We are looking at July 2009 all time highest temperature ever on UAH. This year will likely be the all time low of Arctic sea ice and June was the all time high SST record, all when solar activity has been at an extended minimum. Maybe we should take the advice we give AGW proponents…. our theories need to be disprovable as well.