The Sun Defines the Climate – an essay from Russia

Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. – Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, Head of the Russian/Ukrainian joint project Astrometria – has a few things to say about solar activity and climate. Thanks to Russ Steele of NCWatch

Russ1__550x348

Total Solar Irradiance over time in watts per square Variation in the TSI during the period 1978 to 2008 (heavy line) and its bicentennial component (dash line), revealed by us. Distinct short-term upward excursions are caused by the passage of faculae on the solar disk, and downward excursions by the passage of sunspot groups.

Key Excerpts:

Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global, and very prolonged, temperature drop.

[…] Over the past decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop.

[…] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural warming.

[…] We should fear a deep temperature drop — not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis.

Full Study is here. (PDF patience, takes a bit to load)

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
timetochooseagain

I’m puzzled by the use of the PMOD solar irradiance composite. Leif believes that the recent rapid decline, highlighted in the paper, is erroneous, and the ACRIM team claims that the PMOD composite is erroneous during the ACRIM gap.

kim

Hmmm, maybe sunspots cool and faculae warm.
============================

Servius

As I understand it, the peak temperature was in ’98 but the graph shows Solar Irradiance peaking shortly later. Why would the peak in temperature precede the peak in Irradiance?
I’m just asking the question I know will be directed at me.

At long last, there’s something for a Russian to be proud of…
Wait a minute. “Habibullo Abdussamatov” is a pure Tatar name, not a Russian one! It’s a Muslim conspiracy against the global warming! “Beck” also sounds a lot like a Muslim last name. Glenn Beck must be a member of the same conspiracy. Everything is clear now! I shall immediately inform George Soros of this insidious attack by Saudi-financed enemies of the Obama Climate Change.
Meanwhile, it’s snowing hard in New Mexico. Merry Christmas.

CPT. Charles

I’ve been wondering when one of these studies was going to be ‘widely released’.
This is proof that the reach [and money] of Gore and Strong doesn’t extend everywhere.
For many, this is a ‘peek’ at what may be driving the Kremlin’s energy and foreign policy, and this is by no means the only Russian ‘climate study’ that’s been generated.
For obvious reasons, the Russians research efforts [and their viewpoints] aren’t getting a whole lotta airplay.
Question: is this Russia’s pre-Copenhagen position?

jaypan

Very interesting contribution.
Curious to find out what the warmists are going to say against it.
Wait, is he a dedicated climate scientist?
Oops, is it peer-reviewed?
I’m loving it.

Mark Wagner

a well written, thoughtful and compelling essay.
it will have no effect on global warming alarmists.
in a related note, as I’m trying to put pieces together the thought occurs: is it possible that planetary position (yes, the “barycenter” theory) would have an impact on the internal fusion rate and/or convection rate and/or raduis of the sun as described?

timetochooseagain (07:43:19) :
There is a bitter discussion on that issue, but the 200 years oscillation appears also in Prof. Leif Svalgaard graphs, as we have seen in the discussion held here in WUWT in another thread.

Mark Wagner

@ servius
The paper states that TSI peaked in “the early ’90’s.” I think the peak of cycle 22, which was larger than 23, was in 1991.

Congratulations Anthony!, this one will be the longest threads ever.
Prof.Abdusamatov also points out that Mars and other planets had its 1997-98 El Nino warming!

altoids

@ Servius:
The 1998 peak is usually attributed to PDO cycles – namely, a strong El Nino. The difficulty in the proving-or-disproving of AGW is that we have many layers of environmental effects building on one another. You could also argue, for example, that the very-regular sunspot cycle bears little resemblance to global average temperatures.
Anyways, the proof is in the pudding. I’ve been telling any of my friends that will listen since 2005 that the world is going to cool for at least the next 10 years. I expect this year to be quite cold. They’re starting to believe me.

Gene Nemetz

Habibullo Abdussamatov, Arctic ice, Richard Lindzen, Copenhagen’s reassessment, Roger A. Pielke Sr., How not to measure temperature part 91, sun spot, the Vikings and Greenland, Bob Carter, 350 PPM of CO2, October temps, Roy Spencer, Ocean Heat Content diverge from GISS projections, with some fun to boot—and that’s just on the front page, from only the last four days no less.
How is WattsUpWithThat not 2009 Science Blog of the Year??
p.s. I understand the magnitude of the Yamal story at ClimateAudit. That would be the single most important science story of the year! (so far) But this blog is best for the overall year. There is not even a close second! Look at all the science here!

PMOD vs. ACRIM. Prof.Abdusamatov refers to:
Scafetta N. and West B. J. Is Climate Sensitive to Solar Variability? // Physics Today, 2008, #3, Vol. 61

gary gulrud

Its surprising the quality of work Russian scientists can still produce on their diet of borscht and potatos. Perhaps ours of unrefined sugar and red meat is a great evil.

Servius: As I understand it, the peak temperature was in ‘98 but the graph shows Solar Irradiance peaking shortly later.
Servius, the 1998 anomaly was caused by strong El Nino and Atlantic oscillation positive anomalies. Changes between maxima and minima of solar cycles are hardly detectable in the climate, only their cumulative effect in span of years to decades.

Gene Nemetz

jaypan (08:03:44) :
Very interesting contribution.
Curious to find out what the warmists are going to say against it.
Wait, is he a dedicated climate scientist?
Oops, is it peer-reviewed?
I’m loving it.

He runs the Astrometry project on the Russian half of the International Space Station too. He’s not on a soap box on the street, or teaching in an obscure community college. I think you’d love that too.

Gene Nemetz

Astrometry project — the Russian and Ukrainian space agencies joint project to determine the time and extent of the global cooling at mid-century
….Earth has hit its temperature ceiling. Solar irradiance has begun to fall, ushering in a protracted cooling period beginning in 2012 to 2015. The depth of the decline in solar irradiance reaching Earth will occur around 2040….Dr. Abdussamatov’s space team will be conducting a regular survey of the sun.
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=edae9952-3c3e-47ba-913f-7359a5c7f723&k=0

Gene Nemetz

gary gulrud (08:30:05) :
Its surprising the quality of work Russian scientists
They beat the USA with Sputnik. Now they’re beating the USA in study of the sun.
(I am also aware of the many science disasters in Russia. The US has had far less of them. That in itself is a wonderful victory for the US.)

The fundamental conclusion of the paper is based on the top panel of their Figure 3 which shows TSI reconstructions the last 400 years. This plot is WAY out of date and its use basically invalidates the rest of the paper.
It is instruction to look at a recent poster [Froehlich is a co-author]:
ftp://ftp.pmodwrc.ch/pub/Claus/IAMAS-2009/iamas-poster_SABF.pdf
The last Figure shows how the TSI reconstructions have moved with time from the large variation to almost flat. They are nicely approaching my graph here: http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-LEIF.png
The PMOD data had bad calibration and instrument degradation and there is no dramatic decrease this minimum as suggested by Figure 1, and the ACRIM problem seems to have been resolved http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL040707.pdf [there is no significant difference between the minima]
All in all, this paper cannot be taken seriously. There is a ~100 year ‘cycle’ in activity, and we are nearing a minimum. Perhaps a 200-yr as well. These ‘cycles’ have been found to be nearly random in occurrence.

the_Butcher

I expect Leif taking a day off just to spend it here…

geo

What will the warmists say against it? They will say that nothing state-supported (and everything is) from Russia can be trusted because they are a major oil exporter. Ditto for Canada. Nothing from Indonesia because they are a major coal producer. Nothing from China and India because they have to have major emissions increases to grow their economies into superpowers over the next 50 years.
No one, no one, no one is to be trusted if they are a skeptic. All skeptics clearly have evil and selfish motives driving their true agenda.
That’s what they’ll say.

SteveSadlov

In the 1970s, we only had very coarse measurement methods. Those methods would have tended to behave as a de facto low pass filter. The methods that came on line at the end of the 1970s gave us a finer level of discrimination and vastly increased the ability to discern higher frequencies. These statements apply to both EM energy and to temperature. The earlier coarser measurements hinted at long, long term cooling and the 1970s Ice Age scare was a result. Later, with the finer measurements, we started to get tricked by the little wiggles of ENSO, PDO, as well as the shorter period signals in terms of solar and cosmic EM and photonic energy. This led to the AGW scare, given the timing of the finer abilities coming on line just as we lapsed from a negative to positive PDO, from a negative to postive ENSO, and, a mere couple years after that, a rising solar activity level. We need to take a step back and proactively apply a low pass filter to everything. We may be quite disturbed by the result.

Robert M.

Guys, this is drivel, everyone who is not a denialist can see the warming happening. Didn’t NASA just record the highest ever SSTs for July? Didn’t GISS just report that temperatures are back up to record highs.
Sure NASA used just one flawed dataset, and GISS has “lost” all of the unadjusted data, and the Briffa and Mann and the rest of the team are spending a lot of time polishing a few sticks, but you have to believe these guys, ummm because their intentions are a pure as wind driven snow. Now thats just a saying, everybody knows it doesn’t snow anymore.

Jon

Leif … I would be more than interested in the views of Dr. Abdussamatov regarding your comments. Do you converse with him at all?
Jon

Mr. Alex

I have been waiting a very long time for an update from Habibullo Abdussamatov. Thanks very much for the article.
It is Interesting to note that their SC 24 prediction sunspot max of just under 75 is similar to Leif’s prediction.

Will

Russian science is policy driven. Kind of like Western science.

Jon (10:12:07) :
Leif … I would be more than interested in the views of Dr. Abdussamatov regarding your comments. Do you converse with him at all?
No. He is welcome to weigh in on this blog. See if you can find his email address and invite him to join.

Yarmy

Seems a bit all over the place to me.
Does anyone have the a link to the referenced Borisenkov paper? What method does he use to determine that a 200 year cycle exists?
What’s the justification for the following statement?
The data on changing solar intensity that we will collect over about six years will enable an extrapolation to past and future periods and development of a more precise scenario of future climate change.

Yarmy

Mr. Alex (10:17:41) :
I have been waiting a very long time for an update from Habibullo Abdussamatov. Thanks very much for the article.
The essay was written a year ago.

Will (10:18:10) :
Russian science is policy driven. Kind of like Western science.
Likely. Abdussamatov may be their Anti-Hansen. Because Russia and the US disagree on climate change, any paper that disagrees with US policy [AGW] is good science by Russian standards.

rbateman

kim (07:52:38) :
Hmmm, maybe sunspots cool and faculae warm.
============================

Hmmm, indeed. They quit measuring the faculae in 1977, estimating instead. Then they stopped estimating in 1982.
So, who’s interested in measuring (they are measured, not counted) faculae?
Calcium II K-line is on the kludge side of things, being that it is actually the Faculae + network that is imaged.

As for cooling, or getting very cold, we are having some of it right now. Southern California’s crops will freeze tonight after an Arctic blast that brought 50 mile per hour cold winds with gusts to 80.
Meanwhile, CO2 continues to increase.
One can only imagine how cold it would be if not for all that Global Warming.

Vincent

“Russian science is policy driven. Kind of like Western science.
Likely. Abdussamatov may be their Anti-Hansen. Because Russia and the US disagree on climate change, any paper that disagrees with US policy [AGW] is good science by Russian standards.”
As the Russians will be practically exempt from emissions targets, I would have thought it would be in their own interests to support the Copenhagen targets. At least that way they can watch the death by a thousand cuts of the USA.

jack mosevich

I e-mailed Abdussamatov and invited him to join this discussion. Hope he does

maksimovich

Is there a trend in TSI,it seems Froehlich thinks so.
Evidence of a long-term trend in total solar irradiance
C. Froehlich
ABSTRACT
Aims. During the solar minimum of 2008, the value of total solar irradiance at 1AU (TSI) was more than 0.2Wm−2 lower than during the last minimum in 1996, indicating for the first time a directly observed long-term change. On the other hand, chromospheric indices and hence solar UV irradiance do not exhibit a similar change
.
Methods. Comparison of TSI with other activity parameters indicates that only the open solar magnetic field, BR, observed from satellites at 1AU show a similar long-term behaviour. The values at the minima correlate well and the linear fit provides a direct physical relationship between TSI and BR during the minimum times.
Results. This correlation allows an unambiguous reconstruction of TSI back in time, provided the open solar magnetic field can be determined from e.g. geomagnetic indices or cosmogenic radionucleides. Since the solar UV irradiance has no long-term trend, the mechanism for the secular change of TSI must differ from the effect of surface magnetism, as manifested by sunspots, faculae, and network which indeed explain well the intra-cycle variability of both total and spectral irradiance.
Conclusions. The long-term trend of TSI is most probably caused by a global temperature change of the Sun that does not influence the UV irradiance in the same way as the surface magnetic fields

R Shearer

Enjoy global warming while it lasts. A Winter storm has forced the Boulder area schools and the University of Colorado to close today. NOAA is open but allowing employees to take leave. The snow is expected to continue for another 24 hours. We’re in for a white Halloween.

LarryOldtimer

Quote from the article: ” a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis”
A reliable forecast is precisely what can not possibly be done, any more that I, working as a hydraulics engineer, could possibly forecast or predict when the next 50 year frequency storm would occur.
Old adage: “Save your money for a rainy day.” Good advice. Wastefully spending money and using other resources in an attempt to prevent which can’t be prevented assures that there won’t be money or resources available to alleviate the bad effects of what will happen, and the last, alleviating the bad effects, is entirely possible.

Forget about average global temperatures. Forget about ice caps melting and Polar Bears floating across the Atlantic on ice cubes. Forget about rising sea levels, droughts, increased hurricanes, floods and on and on. Also forget about sunspot cycles or El-Nino and La-Nina, or whatever the hell else has been thrown into the mix as a distraction because none of it matters, none of it is relevant. All we have to do is drill down and focus on one thing only.
That one thing is CO2.
It is claimed that humans are responsible for Climate Change because of our CO2 emissions and that we need to have limits imposed because we need to reduce our emissions of CO2.
So first simply ask yourself this:
Can CO2 trap in heat?
Answer: NO, nothing traps in heat, substances can only absorb and re-emit heat but they cannot trap heat.
Next question, does CO2 absorb heat more strongly than the other gasses in the atmosphere?
Answer: NO, CO2 is only 0.03811% of the atmosphere and remains as solid ice up to a temperature of 194.65 K
Nitrogen and Oxygen which make up 99% of the atmosphere on the other hand, begin to melt at temperatures as low as 50-60 K and so are much stronger absorbers of heat and at the same time, make up most of the atmospheric gasses.
This puts the effect of CO2 into context. CO2 cannot trap heat as no gasses in the atmosphere can. CO2 is a tiny proportion of the gasses in the atmosphere, so tiny in fact that compared to Oxygen and Nitrogen it is barely noticeable. The effect of such tiny amounts of CO2 being a much weaker absorber of heat than Nitrogen and Oxygen, also show that the warming effect of CO2 is insignificant.
So the final question is, are we responsible for Climate Change through our CO2 emissions?
Answer: NO WE MOST DEFINITELY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE.
Take that to Copenhagen!
If you would like to know more about the AGW fraud and carbon tax, download this free .pdf book
[snip – self promotion ]

rbateman

Leif Svalgaard (10:47:57) :
Somebody has to get in the face of AGW, else thier polyscience wins by default.
Some of the things I like about what they(Russian studies) are doing would be:
1.) Looking off-planet (Mars, etc.)
2.) Looking back over the past and identifying a need to explain coincidental solar activity to climactical value.
One thing is very certain: There will be no advance in understanding in a vacuum.
Too complicated and impossible-to-understand are guantlets thown down.
‘What else can it be’ and ‘the science is settled’ runs contrary to the human need to know.
Chicken-little has declared the sky to be rising/burning from a soap box.
Are we going to let him get away with it?
Chicken-little, for his part, gets the point that over time, the climate does change and does make for significant pressures on civilization.
Chicken-little does not seem to grasp that man is along for the ride, and deliberate monkeying with things that look too good to be true on paper are just that: Invitations to disasters due to the law of unintended consequences.

Gene Nemetz

Alexander Feht (07:57:35) :
Meanwhile, it’s snowing hard in New Mexico.
Ahh, that usually happens in October. Global cooling is a straw man. 😉

Gene Nemetz

Speaking of the sun and climate
Piers Corbyn is speaking in London today at the Imperial College London. He’s revealing some of his techniques there.

Adam from Kansas

It may just be me, but I get the impression Lief sells himself as the one true credible solar scientist?
It’s just an impression, just my opinion, but does Lief himself believe in other credible solar scientists?

Gene Nemetz

The Met, UK, predicts winter 2009-10 in the UK near or above average temps, with 1 in 7 chance of a cold winter.
Piers Corbyn, using the sun as the leading component for making forecasts, says 85% chance of a cold winter in the UK with some very cold spells.
He is revealing more details of his winter forecast at Imperial College London today :

anna v

So here we come to the value of a good peer review, because for us who are not competent solar scientists the questions are too many to be able to resolve: methods of measuring past solar irradiance and error bars on the measurements, why such large changes etc are too esoteric for a blog like this.
Maybe we would gain in understanding if Leif and dr Abdussamatov had an interchange here, and maybe not.
At least the Russians are proposing a direct measurement to test their hypothesis about the size of the sun, and do not rely just in reanalyzing old data.

chillybean

Leif Svalgaard.
This plot is WAY out of date and its use basically invalidates the rest of the paper.
I think most people would agree that the older it is, the less chance there is of it having been distorted by alarmists. Therefore I would say that the exact opposite is closer to the truth. The use of plots ‘created’ recently invalidates the bulk of the warmist papers.

Waiting for the “heavy weights” to come in.

hotrod

R Shearer (11:37:15) :
Enjoy global warming while it lasts. A Winter storm has forced the Boulder area schools and the University of Colorado to close today. NOAA is open but allowing employees to take leave. The snow is expected to continue for another 24 hours. We’re in for a white Halloween.

I recall a snow storm much like this in Oct 1971 or 72 I where it dropped 9″ of snow on haloween night (little kids stopped showing up at the door about 8:00). The ground was not free of snow here in the Denver area until about April, and we had a bitter cold winter.
It will be interesting to watch this develop and see if we flop into that same sort of pattern where we get almost weekly polar fronts coming down the front range.
They had so much snow that the City of Denver ran out of room to stack it and could not put any more into the Platte river, so there was a berm of snow about 3-4 ft tall down the entire length of Broadway, and travel in the city got real ugly as the warm man hole covers (from municipal steam) kept melted clean and the road had 4-5 inches of hard pack snow and ice on it. The resulting ice pot holes made the tire and suspension repair shops very happy. I think that was also the year that resulted in the local city governments getting in lots of trouble with the public over lack of snow plows.
Larry

Temperatures should be progressive upward to be accepted, as far as they remain conservatively at the same level or being un-progressively downwards they are surely politically biased.

Phillip Bratby

OT, but the Science Museum count has suddenly gone to :
* 778 counted in so far
* 5317 counted out so far
Have they removed multiple entries?

maksimovich (11:25:10) :
Is there a trend in TSI,it seems Froehlich thinks so.
“Conclusions. The long-term trend of TSI is most probably caused by a global temperature change of the Sun that does not influence the UV irradiance in the same way as the surface magnetic fields”
He is not quite ready to throw in the towel. He is in the process of recalibrating his composite. PMOD has been drifting down compared to SORCE [which has the best calibration]. If you scale the two so that they match around 2008.0, you can see how PMOD is still drifting downwards: http://www.leif.org/research/Comparison%20SORCE%20PMOD%20since%202008.png the drift in a year-and-a-half being about 0.1 W/m2. This has to be resolve, before any conclusions can be drawn.
Bill Livingston has carefully measured the global temperature of the Sun and showed that it has no solar cycle variation and that it has been constant the past 35+ years.
rbateman (12:00:08) :
Chicken-little has declared the sky to be …
The West and Russia’s Chicken-littles declare opposite disasters…