David Archibald writes in an email to WUWT:
The AGU Fall meeting has a session entitled “Aspects and consequences of an unusually deep and long solar minimum”. Two hours of video of this session can be accessed: http://eventcg.com/clients/agu/fm09/U34A.html
Two of the papers presented had interesting observations with implications for climate. First of all Solanki came to the conclusion that the Sun is leaving its fifty to sixty year long grand maximum of the second half of the 20th century. He had said previously that the Sun was more active in the second half of the 20th century than in the previous 8,000 years. This is his last slide:
McCracken gave a paper with its title as per this slide:
While he states that it is his opinion alone and not necessarily held by his co-authors, he comes to the conclusion that a repeat of the Dalton Minimum is most likely:
Solar Cycle 24 is now just over a year old and the next event on the solar calendar is the year of maximum, which the green corona brightness tells us will be in 2015.
chili palmer (15:40:24) :
References?
Al Gore going after 22 Senators?
Green groups with trillions?
wws (16:10:54) :
Q: Why did the terrorist call for an armistice?
A: He was out of ammunition.
OT, but, seemingly valid criticism of the IPCCs reporting on hurricanes etc:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/15/hatton_on_hurricanes/
Scandinavia Gate?
http://www.climategate.com/scandinavia-gate-climate-cooling-but-scientists-hide-the-decline
Hottest temperature ever heads science to Big Bang
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor Maggie Fox, Health And Science Editor – Mon Feb 15, 11:23 am ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Scientists have created the hottest temperature ever in the lab — 4 trillion degrees Celsius — hot enough to break matter down into the kind of soup that existed microseconds after the birth of the universe.
more at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100215/sc_nm/us_physics_temperature
Robert (12:35:12) : Not to point out the obvious, but given that the Oughts were the warmest decade on record, and corresponded with an unusually long and deep solar minimum, doesn’t that suggest the presence of a large non-solar forcing which is warming the planet in spite of the slight fall in irradiance?
No, it implies really really bad temperature data collection, archiving, processing, and very dodgy assumptions. Look out the window. See the snow. Think. Snow cold….
If solar forcing had caused the anomalous temps of the 20th century, wouldn’t we have expected a long and deep solar minimum to stop the warming trend?
Only in a simplistic world.
First one has to accept the premise ( “The Sun Did It” ) that is not shown to be true, but accept it for argument we will…
Then you must allow for Time Lags. Big things move very slowly.
Even in temperature movements. So, I’m even going to postulate that the “noughties” were hot (something that I do not agree with generally – they remind me of what my Dad and other “old folks at home” described the ’20s and ’30s as being, though milder and less hot than then.) But lets assume it WAS hot. And lets assume it IS solar driven. And lets assume the sun has reduced it’s output in such a manner as to change heat at the earth (also not shown, though widely surmised).
Now you get to wait a decade or two to suck all the heat stored in the ocean over the last 50 years into the air and radiate it off into space.
You get to do this while taking 2 phase changes in water (water vapor from the ocean condensing to water and freezing to snow) that change the HEAT budget without a TEMPERATURE change at those phase change points. So you really ought to be counting the heat, not the temperature. (Having 2 coins is nice, having two “Dollar Coins” is better than two pennies… but lost if you count the coins not the value in each one…)
So I’d expect to see a long lag time as the “heat in the pipeline” (still looking for that mythical pipeline, BTW) drained through to the oceans (maybe that was the 1996-1999 period?) then a period of flat temperatures as the HEAT redistributed with no temperature change, then after about a decade or so, a drop of temperatures as heat flow finally could pull temperatures down some.
Oh, and I’d expect to see a hot ocean for about 10 to 20 years dumping lots of warmth and moisture into the air that would then move to the poles and flush that heat into space as IR (probably through the Ozone window that opens when UV drops from a sleepy sun at about 9 or 10 micrometers IIRC) and then that FRIGID air would rush south and make a boat load of snow further south than anyone would expect (it having been roughly a lifetime since this happened last if a PDO flip driven or a couple of hundred years if solar minimum driven) as that very cold arctic air hits still warm and moist ocean driven air.
Then all the “warmers” would holler that it was due to WARMTH, completely missing that the warm oceans need a decade to start catching up with the frozen land while everyone else figured out that it was 1950 again and they ought to be ready for cold for the next 30 years or so (more if solar minimum driven). You know, like about 1958? or so when 18 feet of snow buried a train near Donner Pass California and they had to be rescued… (I’ve never seen so much snow in my life as then, and my Dad said it had never snowed that much before in his life… you really need a multi-lifetime view to see these things…) But we’re talking a “hypothetical”…
So in a world with a gazillion tons of ocean, it does not cool off in a year, or two, or three, or 8, or… and the “Lava Lamp” that is our planetary weather would have a ‘hot blob’ off the oceans heading to the poles (leading to all sorts of histrionics about the poles ‘warming’ and ‘melting’ and a ‘loopy jet stream’ as that heat heads to the poles to vent to space) while that air, once suitably cooled to Frigid, would head back south over land (it being the place left cold and cold stuff sinking over prior cold tracks) and freezing the dingles off of places like Siberia, China, Canada, Central USA, … but with the ‘global average temperature’ not showing much from the satellites (as temperature is the wrong measure – we’re looking at how many coins are in our pocket without looking at the denominations… temperature rather than heat… so all that snow “is a warm snow” 😉 in a very real sense. It released a gazillion BTU as the moist air condensed to water then froze. So you took 2 phase changes and not much temperature change) yet the land is frozen and the sea is “hot” so naive folks could continue to fret over the ‘global warmth’… look at all the pennies they have, they MUST be rich…
And in only a couple of decades we would know for sure.
Maybe.
but until you can show me the ‘pipeline’ that all your supposed global warming trend is being stored up inside, I’ll stick with snow in 49 states and it being so cold that it’s Raining Iguanas in Florida as meaning that it’s cold.
Even if it is ‘a warm snow’… 😉
Leif Svalgaard (17:27:47) :
Dr. Svalgaard,
Thanks for all your comments.
Special thanks for putting me on “The Sun from Space” by Lang. Learning a lot from that fine book.
I’d like to know Bobby’s credentials, too. Not that he’d ever misrepresent himself, but it would be interesting to know.
Bobby? Are you there? Are you willing to divulge the basis of your “expertise” as it supports your critiques?
JonesII (12:49:43) wrote: “…it is becoming every day more evident the electrical nature of the universe (plasma universe) then, it is possible the mutual influence between planets and the sun.”
Leif Svalgaard (13:18:12) responded: “AGW is enough voodoo. We don’t need more pseudo-science.”
I appreciate Dr. Svalgaard thinks AGW is voodoo.
Is it possible there is “mutual influence between planets and the sun”?
I don’t know.
But I do know the Sun influences the Earth.
And I do know the Sun is electrical in nature. The Sun is a plasmoid: Plasma – Magnetic – Enity.
And, yes, the Universe is dominated by plasma (99.9% of the observable Universe is plasma) and accordingly the observable Universe is dominated by plasma’s electromagnetic phyiscal relationships.
Nothing “voodoo” about that.
Just the facts.
DirkH (13:34:36) wrote: “AGW is dead. Now we have a real problem.”
I know Dirk is being sarcastic, but in reality with the death of AGW, we have a promising opportunity to better understand what controls & influences the Earth’s climate.
And likely that understanding will partly come by observation & measurement of the Sun – Earth phyiscal relationship:
A plasma physical relationship.
How does ocean water pile up in certain locations as shown in the graph? Are they sure the islands are not sinking as a result of the plate they are on going down?
Land rises and shrinks quite quickly, and certainly faster than the water level at the moment. When judging water rises, no one particular spot can be relied upon.
The Indian plate is sliding northeastwards at about 5 cm a year. That is pushing the Himalayas up, and much of India down. It would seem very likely that islands off Bangladesh are also sinking as a result of this action.
Of course the Dalton minimum is made more profound by the Tambora erruption… and the fact that it followed the maunder minimum (think thermal inertia of the oceans)
James F. Evans (20:15:44) :
And I do know the Sun is electrical in nature.
The dangerous things are the ones you know, but ain’t.
The Sun and the Universe are not electrical in nature. You can, of course, pretend they are and be happy with that. But spare us your pseudo-science.
UK Times: John Graham-Cumming: How I made the Met Office admit its climate-change data was wrong
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7028418.ece
Well let me add to your troubles. The city I lived in and now live near, Toowoomba Australia, used to get (20 years ago) lots of fog, real thick peasoupers -not pollution, all water cloud at ground level. It was so characteristic that you knew the city limits by when you suddenly emerged from fog into clear air. Then the last 20 years, it simply disappeared. And the last year or so it has returned, but you can no longer tell the city limits, the fog overflows many miles into the country all around. Hey, if less fog in SF proves GW, then more fog in Toowoomba must prove GC, surely?
E.M.Smith wrote:
“No, it implies really really bad temperature data collection, archiving, processing, and very dodgy assumptions. Look out the window. See the snow. Think. Snow cold….”
Can’t help you. It’s balmy as hell here (Oregon). So you’re saying that all of the temperature measurements are wrong? Because you see snow outside?
” Now you get to wait a decade or two to suck all the heat stored in the ocean over the last 50 years into the air and radiate it off into space.”
If that were why the world is warming, then we should see a consistent pattern of the sea cooling during solar minimums and warming during solar maximums. As far as I know, there’s no data to support that.
“but until you can show me the ‘pipeline’ that all your supposed global warming trend is being stored up inside, I’ll stick with snow in 49 states and it being so cold that it’s Raining Iguanas in Florida as meaning that it’s cold.”
Warmest January on record. February on pace to be the warmest ever (http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/). It’s not AGW that has a problem explaining the observed data. But go ahead and keep muttering about snow. Delay, obfuscate . . . it’s what you do best.
MikeC (20:29:29) :
Of course the Dalton minimum is made more profound by the Tambora erruption… and the fact that it followed the maunder minimum (think thermal inertia of the oceans)
It also followed the period 1725-1795 where solar activity has even higher than it is today [1950-2000], so the thermal inertia from the maunder minimum must have ‘skipped over’ 1725-1795…
Two topics of discussion that came up on this thread are the carbon trading market and the shorter growing season and crop failures.
As far as the carbon market is concerned, many people have based their carriers and invested much in the trade of carbon credits world wide. These people will not go quietly int the good night. I feel sorry for them but they will go.
“In a sign of the uncertainty over emissions action and ebbed confidence in carbon markets following the Copenhagen climate conference, two firms in the sector have made gloomy stock exchange disclosures in recent days.
Listed carbon offset project developer Tricorona has revised down the valuation of its 2012 Kyoto carbon credit portfolio by 19 per cent, citing uncertainty over the future of the market and ongoing credits approval delays at the UN. The Swedish company, subject of a takeover bid, develops carbon offset projects under Kyoto’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to generate CER credits that developed countries and their emitters can use to comply with emissions caps.”
Carbon assets hit in post-Copenhagen malaise
http://www.carbonpositive.net/viewarticle.aspx?articleID=1892
“SAN FRANCISCO (Dow Jones)–Days after Arizona pulled out of a western cap-and-trade market, Utah lawmakers were considering a proposal Friday to follow suit, potentially weakening the fledgling regional carbon market.
In an executive order signed last week, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, rescinded the state's agreement to participate in the Western Climate Initiative cap-and-trade market, scheduled to start Jan. 1, 2012, citing concerns about the economy and the program's costs. On Friday, a Utah House panel passed a resolution asking the state's governor to do the same thing.
Carbon market participants said Arizona's departure could weaken the WCI's nascent regional cap-and-trade market, though it hasn't had any impact on the existing carbon market.”
Arizona Quits Western Cap-And-Trade Mkt; Utah Mulls Similar Move
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100212-715151.html?mod=WSJ_World_MIDDLEHeadlinesAmericas
The end is near for the carbon(CO2) market. Many useless jobs will be lost.
As far as the coming crop failures we may do a little better but food shortages are predicted for this summer. This may trigger a run on food stocks in combination with an economic failure exacerbating the situation with people hording.
A lively discussion can be found on this recent blog post.
Food Shortage(s) Thread
http://goldismoney.info/forums/archive/index.php/t-439295.html
Others have had good information posted on this topic in the past.
What I am getting at by bringing these topics to the surface is we need to stop playing games. People’s livelihoods are being lost and great disruptions in food supplies have not been anticipated.
We need to quantify with boldness as best we can the effects of the solar cycles with the knowledge we have at hand. It is not a question of a quantitative effect of solar minimum on the climate, it is how much. Lives and livelihoods depend on some group of scientists getting it right and giving decent predictions. The predictions have been politicized to a point of insanity. This has to stop.
My best guess of the output looks like this [red curve]:
http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-LEIF.png
The ups and downs are on the order of 1/1000 of the whole.
Dr.Svalgaard, how do we know that your graph isn’t an attempt to “hide the decline” in TSI during the little ice age?
On a more serious note, I’m not doubting your data or methodology, but it is interesting that your measurements of TSI for the LIA period are significantly higher than Lean’s and Wang’s. People who are hoping to account for observed long-term variations in earth’s temperature by recourse to changes in TSI will be rather disheartened by your findings.
I get it. Whenever Leif Svalgaard says it ain’t science it’s voodoo.
[snip]
The Sun and the Universe are not electrical in nature, Great Leif mouthed.
How are we to respond to that? [snip]
Reply: Please maintain a respectful tone. And Leif, please try and phrase things in a manner not to illicit reactions of said tone. ~ ctm
wws (14:24:29) :
I know exactly what Harriban has got up his sleeve, as do we all. His side, the warmists, are losing badly and they know it! They see it all slipping away and they are desperately trying to negotiate a way out of their final political defeat!
NO ARMISTICE WHEN VICTORY IS AT HAND!!!
What would skeptics have to gain from an “armistice”, anyways? It would just be “you shut up while we stay in power and do whatever we want.” The warmists, after having been proved to be liars and frauds, are now going to promise to talk a little more nicely and cheat a little bit less and that is supposed to make everything hunky dory???
NO!
The IPCC must be DISBANDED it cannot be reformed!!! How about that for an “armistice”???
So you have a viper in a choke hold and it hisses “Just let me go – I promise to play fair from now on…”
Reminds me of the old parable of the scorpion and the frog REF: http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html
The AGW movement is a suicidal movement that will take us all with it – best to keep the pressure up.
Thanx to Dr. Svalgaard and Tallbloke for their graphs and time.
Both point to a bit more energy from the sun from the 50’s to the noughties.
Though it looks like not very much. The journey continues….
TIm Groves (20:50:50) :
your measurements of TSI for the LIA period are significantly higher than Lean’s and Wang’s.
In the last 20 years the various reconstructions have slowly moved towards a common result, namely that the large variation from the Maunder Minimum to now did not take place. Although there are still some details that are being debated, the variation is now recognized to be less than 1 W/m2 [and I think much less, but will give other people the benefit of uncertainty].
People who are hoping to account for observed long-term variations in earth’s temperature by recourse to changes in TSI will be rather disheartened by your findings.
Indeed, and therefore [predictably] there is some resistance to be overcome. Solar physics has its own Hockey Stick [just look at the Figure at the top of this topic].
Leif Svalgaard (15:05:41) :
rbateman (13:28:55) :
“This is what the Mayans were so worried about for 2012: The world isn’t coming to an end, reason is coming to an end.”
Robert has a point there.
But I’d like to dispute it:
To be coming to an end, must not it have begun? Facts not in evidence… 😉
E.M.Smith (21:13:27) :
To be coming to an end, must not it have begun?
Seriously, I think the 18th and 19th centuries to have been ages of reason. This has now been lost.
Alexander Feht (21:05:56) :
[snip]
[snip]
Reply: Please maintain a respectful tone. And Leif, please try and phrase things in a manner not to illicit reactions of said tone. ~ ctm
I think people are themselves responsible for their tone.