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.
“I heard on NPR how some islands off Bangledash were going under water because of Global Warming and sea level rise.”
Islands associated with river deltas have many different forces working on them. It may be overly simplistic to claim that they are disappearing due to a rise/change in sea level.
“How about the land getting very deeply saturated and heavy with precipitation. The added weight pushing down on the plates causing pressures to go up leading to more quakes/volcanoes?”
On the coast of Ecuador they have relatively mild earthquakes associated with the transition from dry to wet to dry seasons. The locals feel it is simple cause and effect, but I haven’t found “expert” confirmation.
Michael (20:48:06) :
“As far as the coming crop failures we may do a little better but food shortages are predicted for this summer”
This summer looks ok for India and China; sub-Saharan Africa looks touch and go as do some of the Pacific Rim Eastern countries, Europe and Western Asia looks ok too. Next summer, 201,1 may be a different story altogether, North America may be trading loaves of bread for EU carbon credits 1:1. Brazil may be asking for 2 credits per bag of sugar and India may no be exporting any rice. Yes, it could be really bad, depending on the weather, not the climate.
The famers need real honest information from their governments, and they need it now.
While the TSI has changed very little (only ~0.01% between the SC22-SC23 minimum to the current SC23-SC24 minimum) the effect on cosmic ray flux has been much more dramatic, with a 4% increase noted between the two minimums. Assuming the “Svensmark theory” is correct & data showing ~linear relationships between cosmic ray flux and cloud cover, and ~inverse linear relationship between global cloud cover and global temperature, seems that there is potentially compelling evidence that small changes in TSI can be “amplified” to much larger changes in radiative forcing.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/02/cosmic-rays-v-inverse-solar-magnetic.html
I am not disheartened. so let’s assume Leif’s 1 w/m2 is right. Pretty small. OK, the earth is round and it spins, so effective is even smaller, say 0.25 watts.
Now IPCC is claiming CO2 doubling = +3.7 watts/m2. But SO FAR it has only gone up 38%. Now its not a linear relationship, but for easy figuring let’s say that it’s about 1.4 watts. But we didnt just jump up from zero straight to 38%, we grew there. Again, not linear, but for rough figuring let’s say the average over time has been a contribution from CO2 since about 1920 to now of 0.7 watts.
Now I have a certain amount of faith in Leif’s conclusions about TSI variance, and a lot less (ok almost none) in the IPCC’s conclusions about CO2 contribution, but the point is that both numbers are in the same order of magnitude. But Leif’s Sun can penetreate up to 300 meters of ocean while the IPCC’s longwave from CO2 gets only two or three millimeters in and most likely gets picked up right away by evaporation into the atmosphere. So we’re talking about two very different energy transports with very different time constants that we don’t know for certain how to correlate. But don’t for a second believe that “only 1 watt” variance from TSI is insignificant in the long term.
Peter of Sydney (16:24:52) : Depending on what I read, a solar minimum coincides with lower than average temperatures or higher than average temperatures. Which is it?
I can answer that. The answer is “Yes”.
(It depends on what assumptions you make about things like time delays, solar / volcanic coupling, etc. In other words: “Given these conclusions what assumptions can we draw?” )
Robert (17:03:34) : It’s an extremely weak forcing, and it doesn’t last long (the typical cycle in 11 years or so.)
Robert, please tell me: What are the S.I. units for “Forcing”?
I keep trying to find out what physical units a “forcing” is in, but have failed horridly. If it’s not S.I., I’m ok with Imperial or even American Traditional units. (I just find it easier to understand the physics if I can figure out if the units are ‘degree-seconds/ton’ or ‘watt-newtons/cm’ or even ‘furlongs / fortnight’ … but lacking any units for “forcing” I can’t figure out what it is or what physics it represents or if it’s just a made up farcical unit… )
Thanks!
Mark Sawusch (21:35:02) :
the effect on cosmic ray flux has been much more dramatic, with a 4% increase noted between the two minimums.
For well-understood reasons [drift of cosmic rays in opposite polarity magnetic fields] there is a systematic difference between minima, with every second minimum being a bit lower than the ones on either side. In the long run, there has been no trend in cosmic ray intensity as far back as we have good direct measurements [to ~1950]. See slides 7 and 8 of http://www.leif.org/research/Historical%20Solar%20Cycle%20Context.pdf
davidmhoffer (21:41:57) :
But don’t for a second believe that “only 1 watt” variance from TSI is insignificant in the long term.
A 1 Watt difference in TSI would indeed raise the temperature a very significant 0.05K.
E.M.Smith (20:08:02) :
“…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…”
I remember that. Too funny. BTW, your write up made a lot more sense to me that the AGU Fall 2009 video.
Thanks.
Robert (20:38:10) : (To E. M. Smith) … Delay, obfuscate . . . it’s what you do best.
Whereas your particular skill seems to be sophistry, Robert; and well honed, too. As I read your comments my conscious mind is nodding “Yes, yes!” whilst my subconscious mind is flagging, in red, “Caution! Caution! You’re being had.“
Roger Carr (19:17:26) : However, when I look at this quote from the article you linked to I feel despair:
“Present-day scientists do their studies by measurements and experiments. [Australian] Aboriginal people are just as good scientists, but they use observation and experience,” Bodkin, a botanist at Sydney’s Mount Annan Botanical gardens, told Reuters.
Why on earth would that cause you despair?
“Experience” is just observation of experiments done by the planet all around you all the time. Like Darwin observing the different birds et. al. of the Galapagos or the drug industry looking at native wisdom that chewing willow bark relieved pain (aspirin) or that a South American tree relieved malaria symptoms (quinine) or that foxglove was useful for heart problems (digitalis). ( or a few thousand others…)
ANYONE can know more than you do about the thing they observe most.
Sidebar: I once observed “The Law of Mutual Superiority” up close and personal one day at Armadillo Willies BBQ shop. Buddy and I order the same thing, but he drinks diet coke and I drink full sugar. Order is called. We walk up. Harried minimum wage guy behind the counter points at food for pickup. I ask “Which is the DIET coke?”. He gets the “Oh God a Question” look. Looks at glasses. Fingers one. “That One”. Not believing it, I ask “How do you know?”. He says: “Foam is gone. Foam lasts longer on regular coke.”
So here was someone who was an Expert at serving Coke. He had observed a (reasonable in retrospect) property to which I had been oblivious. He was my Master when it came to Coke foam. We are all superior to each other in something…
So take a people with a 50,000 year oral tradition (and a language and culture that lends itself well to preservation of oral tradition in a place where if you don’t know what frog is full of water 2 feet under the desert you die when the once every lifetime drouth hits…) and I’m quite comfortable with the notion that they just might know more than I do about that thing they have spent several thousand years observing very very closely…
Just like a several hundred year (at least) oral tradition was passed on to me by my Dad when he showed me how to judge tempering of iron / steel by color temperature after a quench… That Smith thing… and the other Smiths who figured out that a quench in urine gave a very hard edge (nitriding the surface) or the Jungle Smiths from somewhere (Papua?) who had an edge hardening technique from sinking a blade into a melon. The edge quenches fast and hard (stays sharp) while the spine stays softer from a slow quench thanks to the mellon being far away giving a blade that does not break easily.
Science is NOT about lab coats and Ph.D. exams, nor even Mr. Popper. It is about open eyes, open minds, keen observation, and never letting your prejudice prevent you from seeing what the data (observations) have to say. Then not forgetting it.
The first Smith to pee on a blade and observe that the hardness and temper was better than anything he had made before is just as good and just as valid a scientist as any other. And an Aboriginal observer of flower patterns as weather predictors is a better scientist than the folks doing climate computer fantasy games, IMHO.
They are certainly more accurate and make better predictions of future outcomes. And their theories are falsifiable …
E.M.Smith (21:53:36) : “What are the S.I. units for “Forcing”?
Watts per meter squared
Leif Svalgaard (20:47:20) :
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)
Leif Svalgaard (20:47:20) :
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…
Hi Leif
I looked at the solar activity for this period of time and it appears that you exagerrated your point because only one or two of the cycles may have reached that strength for 70 year period you suggested, so I certainly would wonder about thermal inertia of the oceans. Given the small change in TSI between minimum and maximum I’m not sure if the oceans would warm up that much in such a short period of time… over several cycles, yes, possibly.
Have you or anyone you know calculated how much heat the oceans absorb or release (or what the equalibrium would be) at different points in the solar cycle or its phases? I recall Foukal left this open in 2006.
wws: “What would skeptics have to gain from an “armistice”, anyways?”
A place at the table, perhaps.
Interestingly, Harribin ends his article by mentioning uncertainty and risk in relation to calculations about climate. These considerations could also apply to his armistice offer.
Keeping with the war metaphor, if the AGW fortress is corrupt and rotten to the core, and the inhabitants demoralised by an acute sense of guilt and wrongdoing, the strategy would be to keep pushing at the breach until there’s a decisive breakthrough followed by a satisfying slaughter.
On the other hand, if the edifice is basically sound and battle-proof, and the inhabitants, although somewhat shaken, are steeled by a consciousness of injured virtue, a breakthrough would be much less likely, and the besiegers would face a war of attrition.
These uncertainties and risks would be magnified by the attitude of supporters. An armistice might be viewed as a betrayal by some, an opportunity by others.
Whichever way it goes, we are living through what historians call a “watershed” moment. It won’t last for long, though, or at least not at this intensity.
Watts per square meter.
Oh, I’m sorry, did you think that question didn’t have an answer? How embarrassing.
Leif Svalgaard (20:31:49) presented Evans statement (20:15:44): “And I do know the Sun is electrical in nature.”
Dr. Svalgaard responded: “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.”
The scientific evidence of the Sun’s electrical nature is significant based on the scientifically observed & measured plasma dynamics of the Sun. What causes that electrical nature of the Sun is subject to discussion & debate.
Of course, Dr. Svalgaard offers no scientific evidence or rational. All Dr. Svalgaard offers is personal characterization which readers are supposed to accept based on his presumed authority.
That kind of response has no scientific merit.
This answer does have scientific merit because it relies on observation & measurement as reported in scientific papers.
Here are some papers that suggest at least part of the “community” understand that the Sun is a plasmoid — Plasma-Magnetic-Enity:
“Generation of large scale electric fields in coronal flare circuits”
Submission August 6, 2009
“A large number of energetic electrons are generated during solar flares. They carry a substantial part of the flare released energy but how these electrons are created is not fully understood yet. This paper suggests that plasma motion in an active region in the photosphere is the source of large electric currents. These currents can be described by macroscopic circuits. Under special circumstances currents can establish in the corona along magnetic field lines. The energy released by these currents when moderate assumptions for the local conditions are made, is found be comparable to the flare energy.”
http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0813
To highlight:
“This paper suggests that plasma motion in an active region in the photosphere is the source of large electric currents.”
And another scientific paper:
“Driving Currents for Flux Rope Coronal Mass Ejections”
Submitted on 23 Oct 2008
“We present a method for measuring electrical currents enclosed by flux rope structures that are ejected within solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs). Such currents are responsible for providing the Lorentz self-force that propels CMEs. Our estimates for the driving current are based on measurements of the propelling force obtained using data from the LASCO coronagraphs aboard the SOHO satellite. We find that upper limits on the currents enclosed by CMEs are typically around $10^{10}$ Amperes. We estimate that the magnetic flux enclosed by the CMEs in the LASCO field of view is a few $\times 10^{21}$ Mx.”
http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.4210
To highlight:
“We present a method for measuring electrical currents enclosed by flux rope structures that are ejected within solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs).”
And further, as reported in this NOAA press release:
“NOAA Scientist Finds Clue to Predicting Solar Flares
January 19, 2010”
“The long-sought clue to prediction lies in changes in twisting magnetic fields beneath the surface of the sun in the days leading up to a flare, according to the authors. The findings will be published in Astrophysical Journal Letters next month.”
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100119_solarflare.html
“…twisting magnetic fields…” is consistent with the filamentation and flow of electrical currents as discussed in the two previous scientific papers reporting observations & measurements of coronal mass ejections (CME’s).
And is consistent with this report of the shape of CME’s:
As reported by NASA: The Surprising Shape of Solar Storms:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/14apr_3dcme.htm
“April 14, 2009: This just in: The Sun is blasting the solar system with croissants.”
“Researchers studying data from NASA’s twin STEREO probes have found that ferocious solar storms called CMEs (coronal mass ejections) are shaped like a French pastry. The elegance and simplicity of the new ‘croissant model’ is expected to dramatically improve forecasts of severe space weather.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/14apr_3dcme.htm
NASA goes on:
“Vourlidas says he is not surprised that CMEs resemble French pastries. ‘I have suspected this all along. The croissant shape is a natural result of twisted magnetic fields on the sun…'”
The same magnetic fields as was identified as electrical current in the two above linked scientific paper abstracts.
And NASA goes further:
“That’s how CMEs get started—as twisted ropes of solar magnetism. When the energy in the twist reaches some threshold, there is an explosion which expels the CME away from the sun. It looks like a croissant because the twisted ropes are fat in the middle and thin on the ends.”
“Twisted magnetic flux ropes” is how Birkeland currents are described and Birkeland currents are electrical currents.
Charles Bruce, an electrical engineer and astronomer, identified cosmic jets, solar flares, magnetic fields and high temperatures in space as electrical discharge phenomena.
“And even if one regards the electric fields as merely another postulate, it has the great advantage that it is the one postulate which, in my view, renders all the others unnecessary.” — C. E. R Bruce, Electric Fields in Space, Penguin Science, 1968
Now, read what NASA has to say:
“The sun,” explains Guhathakurta, “is a variable star.”
And:
“SDO is going to revolutionize our view of the sun.” — Lika Guhathakurta of NASA headquarters in Washington DC
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2010/05feb_sdo.htm
And NASA goes on to state:
“‘Solar constant’ is an oxymoron,” says Judith Lean of the Naval Research Lab. “Satellite data show that the sun’s total irradiance rises and falls with the sunspot cycle by a significant amount.”
“At solar maximum, the sun is about 0.1% brighter than it is at solar minimum. That may not sound like much, but consider the following: A 0.1% change in 1361 W/m2 equals 1.4 Watts/m2. Averaging this number over the spherical Earth and correcting for Earth’s reflectivity yields 0.24 Watts for every square meter of our planet.”
“Add it all up and you get a lot of energy,” says Lean. “How this might affect weather and climate is a matter of—at times passionate—debate.”
Yes, indeed.
There is plenty of scientific evidence which suggests the Sun is a plasmoid: Plasma – Magnetic – Enity.
And, the Sun is electrical in nature.
Re Leif Svalgaard (13:40:17)
:geo (13:08:57) :
Someone remind me why we believe we know sunspot records in detail further than a few hundred years back?
Leif :”Solar activity influences the amount of cosmic rays reaching the Earth. The cosmic rays produce radioactive nuclei that we can measure the concentration of in old trees and in deep ice cores in Greenland and Antarctica”
I know pathetically little about cosmic rays, but have a few questions I hope are not over silly. What else affects the cosmic rays on earth, the earth’s variable magnetism? : releatively more and less dense flows of background cosmic rays due to our galatic location?, etc, and do we know the relative strgenth and timing of the ebb and flow of these other factors that may influence the amount of cosmic rays reaching the earth accurately, so that we may quantify the relatively short solar cycle against these other factors?
Thanks in advance, PS, asking Leif a question is like talking to Dr Laura, probably masochistic. (-:
Robert (20:38:10) :
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).
Ah, near the big Pacific Ocean, so near the warm blob headed north in our Lava Lamp world. So you expect the world to be Oregon. Fine. I don’t expect it to be California… WE are near the warm headed north. Lucky us.
So you’re saying that all of the temperature measurements are wrong? Because you see snow outside?
Well, no. I’m in the warm bubble too. But I can see a bigger world than the warm bubble on the west coast of north America.
Yet still, two things you conflate.
1) The hypothetical world; where I to your question responded.
2) The real world where our temperature recording stations are very poorly sited and a bad environment exists http://www.surfacestations.org documents nicely this effect. Further, the NCDC GHCN is badly run and the models made from it such as GIStemp and CRUT are poor in the extreme.
” 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.
Patience grasshopper. Did you not the “decades” word see? In 2020 a cooling sea will you see in our hypothetical world. And our sea has warmed, per the warmers, during our now past 50 year warming sun. So wait you must, for decades to pass. In fact, the model presented would suggest that, though the world stopped warming in 1998, it will take longer for the ocean to ‘catch up’ to the land (the now cold and snow covered land…) So lag times you must consider, and boats in 1500 did not so many thermometers carry…
“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
Clearly you did not understand words I have spoken… It is the “warmest ever” yet raining Iguanas in Florida, freezing children in Peru, trains buried in snow in China, snow in the mountains of Australia in the summer, snow on the coast – the Mediterranean coast – of France, ALL 49 continental states of the USA with snowfall, UK covered in snow, Russia frozen, Canada Frozen, China FROZEN, snow in Southern Brazil… Let me say it again for your clarity to grasp:
“No, it implies really really bad temperature data collection, archiving, processing, and very dodgy assumptions. ”
Perhaps even to thinking that warm ocean might cover more AREA yet still have net HEAT loss to space since TEMPERATURE is the WRONG measure. You are counting your pennies yet not seeing the dollars…
Delay, obfuscate . . . it’s what you do best.
I delay nothing. I obfuscate nothing.
I open my eyes and see.
I ask “What is?”
AGW is not.
Cold is.
E.M.Smith (22:37:54) : (to me) Why on earth would that cause you despair?
Because, Michael, they are not scientists, they are everyday man observing “chewing willow bark relieved pain (aspirin)“. To claim they are just as good scientists is to demean them, and, by extension, demean scientists.
That sentence I quoted is simply the noble savage myth of PC. Once we were all savages. As many of us today observe and wonder as we did in the past.
It is the promotion of noble savage man as the true fountain of knowledge still today which causes my despair; and much of the considerable damage to civilisation inflicted by the green religion.
Leif,
I think you will agree with this quote:
See article of James Marusek (14 February 2010) on website ICECAP:
This solar minimum is rather unusual. If we define a period of quiet sun as those months that produced an Ap index of 6 or less and compare the total number of quiet months within each solar minimum, then the results would be:
Minimum Preceding Solar Cycle Number of Months with Ap Index of 6 or less
SC17 11 months
SC18 2 months
SC19 2 months
SC20 5 months
SC21 0 months
SC22 0 months
SC23 3 months
SC24 25 months and counting
His statement is that when the sun gets extremely quiet, the world experiences great cold periods referred to as the Little Ice Ages. I should only answer: “Wait and see!”
“Ah, near the big Pacific Ocean, so near the warm blob headed north in our Lava Lamp world. So you expect the world to be Oregon. Fine. I don’t expect it to be California… WE are near the warm headed north. Lucky us.”
That is what the psychologists call “projection.” You are elevating anecdote above thousands and thousands of standardized temperature measures and two sets of satellite data. You asked me what the weather was here, and I told you. Sorry it doesn’t fit your fantasy of a cold world.
You continue on with your patronizing nonsense, managing only to convey that you really don’t understand the science, but believe in the power of your blind faith over objective reality (“AGW is not.”) Sorry, the data says otherwise. There’s not really that much more to say. Let me know when you get a church and a pastor for your religion; I’ll light a candle and say a prayer for your neglected critical thinking skills.
Michael (20:48:06) : 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.
“Carbon Trading” is toast. It isn’t even a mention on trader show, boards, etc. It was (briefly) a ‘maybe future thing’ topic, now it’s not even ‘dead air’.
At this point I’d short carbon futures, except they are already so close to zero that even a short trade is pointless. Not only has it been shorted into oblivion, but the shorts have covered and gone home!
At this point it is rather like a bankrupt company trading for $0.0001 / share. The folks buying are the bond holders who want to assure enough votes at the bankruptcy hearing for “liquidate to the bond holders”…
The end is near for the carbon(CO2) market. Many useless jobs will be lost.
It’s already dead, Jim…
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.
As I’ve pointed out before…
We live in incredibly affluent times. NOT eating a pound of beef means you have 10 pounds of corn and soybeans to eat. The beef is “wet” and the grain is “dry”, so that 10 pounds of grain becomes about 30 pounds after you hydrate it in cooking (conservative estimate… really it’s 1 cup to 2 cups ratio but the 1 cup is whole grains so about 1/2 the density of the 2 cups of water liquid… in reality there is a 1:60 mass ratio but even that is a bit conservative…)
So the losers will be the cows and pigs and chickens in any natural disaster. We will eat them and then we will eat their feed…
It isn’t a production problem, it’s a distribution problem. I will not skip the 1/4 pounder with cheese at lunch so that somebody in Sudan can have 2.5 pounds of grain and live for a week. (Nor would their government let the food reach them if I did skip the burger…) So I’m not particularly worried about ‘food shortage’ globally.
But with that said, it is also prudent to have food set aside. I grew up in a Mormon town and they had a cultural experience with famine. They also remembered the Biblical admonition to prepare for 7 years of famine. It is still good advice. (I’ve used my ‘food storage system’ several times. From job loss to earthquakes to just being too lazy to go to the store. It is a Very Good Idea. No matter who you are and no matter what you believe.) If you want to know a trivial way to “be prepared” see here:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/food-storage-systems/
And even if you are a “warmer” please be prepared. I’d like someone to argue with after The Bad Thing happens 😉 be it too hot or too cold…
I’ve put far more attention on that topic than it deserves. So you can know that when I say things like “this survived a 7.2 quake” or “lentils will store for 16 years but peas are too hard to eat after 2 years” I’ve actually done it.
Oh, and if there is any interest in ‘recipes for stored food’ just drop a comment on my blog and I’ll start a thread. I’m something of a ‘foodie” and I’ve got several good recipes for ‘storage food’. Just because it’s a disaster, that doesn’t mean you can’t eat well 😉
Sidebar: After the Loma Prieta 7.2 quake in California I was running a cheese and wine ‘affair’ at my place with 2 generators on standby and satellite TV coverage from out of the area (local stations were down). I guess it’s a California Thing… but it just didn’t seem right to call it “survival” when we could do “Brie, Cheddar and Zinfandel” instead 😉
Yes, we had a “Quake Party!!”.. Friends from several miles away came over until we could figure out what was going to happen next and who would have power. (Though power came back before we could start the BBQ… talk about your buzz kill..)
Hey, I did have the day off after I sent everyone home and said don’t come back for 3 days minimum, wait until aftershocks are done. No kidding.
Really. Look, we just don’t “DO” disaster in California. Yah know? No, honest. Really. I was most worried because I couldn’t keep the whites chilled unless I started up the big generator and it made too much noise…
I’m not making this any better, am I?…
People’s livelihoods are being lost and great disruptions in food supplies have not been anticipated.
OK, back to “buzz kill” land. Yes, the biggest issue I see is that we’ve gone to “just in time” inventory for grains world wide. This means that we have about 3 months of food “in the pipeline” and then nothing. We have NO preparation for a ‘bad year”. The implicit assumption is that a ‘crop failure’ is a local weather event in Australia or Ukraine. And that’s fine, unless we have a global weather driven event.
EXACTLY the same thing that did in the Maya and the Romans and the …
So it really really is a good thing to go buy $10 of rice and $20 of lentils and put it in jars. And do that again next month. And the month after that.
You will get good at making “Lentil Chili” and “Fried Rice with Spam” over the years. (don’t laugh! fried rice made with Spam is actually quite good… ask the Hawaiians!)
And if what happened a dozen times before happens, you will not perish. And if it does not happen, you will eat well and comfortably and have “no worries” during some local regional “Aw Shit” that happens… even if it is just a job loss.
Graeme From Melbourne (21:06:10) : 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?
Oddly enough, there is a parallel with the Profit Mohammed and a ‘truce’. He called a truce when losing, so that his side could regroup, restock, and re-arm. Remember this lesson. A “truce” is so that the loser can regroup… so they can win later…
The AGW movement is a suicidal movement that will take us all with it – best to keep the pressure up.
I prefer to be an Aikido stylist if possible. If your opponent is suicidal, do not oppose them. Ask how you can help?… Join with their flow, then you can direct it. At that moment, step aside and let them go as they wish…
The “problem” is that they have determined to hold us all by the throat as they leap off the cliff… so we must break that grasp while offering encouragement to their end…
Could someone explain to me & anyone else who may feel likewise, why is there a tendency for some to think that if something happens on the Sun, there is an instantaneous reaction down here on Earth? (Flares excepted). I would suspect there is a delay of months & even years before anything happened on Earth, & direct effects even impossible to detect as yet.
Re: Ron House (Feb 15 20:35),
Careful Ron, you and Toowoomba could end up getting reparation demands from San Fransico – you got their fog!
Leif Svalgaard (21:20:34) : edit
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.
Oh, OK, if you must be ‘serious’ then yes, I too believe that the 18th and 19th centuries beat us all to (self snip!) as ages of reason. But I don’t know how to fix it other than banning TV (that will not happen). So, we are all doomed to ignorance… or at least bound to it… (no, no smiley… on this Leif and I unfortunately agree… ) as time progresses and we ‘evolve’ into mediocrity…
There must be a better answer..