I’m on my way back to the USA from my Australian speaking tour. I’ll be offline a couple of days. There are many, many, people who I owe a debt of gratitude to, for kindnesses big and small, but, there is one person to who I owe a debt that is much more prominent.
That person is Mr. David Archibald of Perth.
David has been my constant companion throughout the grueling continent crisscrossing pace of the tour, sorting out and correcting details, making sure I was where I needed to be when I needed to be, fighting some idiotic travel battles we faced, and most importantly, helping me hear. This was critical in Q&A after the lectures.
Without him, I would have been lost. He’s a gentleman, a scholar, and I count him as a friend. David, I cannot thank you enough.
That said, there’s something WUWT readers can do that can show gratitude on my behalf, while learning something in the process.
David spoke right along side me at each stop, and created an excellent presentation from the work he has done on his just printed book The Past and Future of Climate.
I’ll review this book in a future post, I’ve read a personal copy he gave me and it reads very well. Like WUWT, this book is heavy on illustrations. There’s not only some very interesting solar research, but some points on climate as well.
For example this illustration (from his slide show) is very interesting:
On my recommendation, if you wish, you can download an order form here:
The Past and Future of Climate – order form
He offers the book for $30AU post paid, and advises that he’ll also ship internationally as well. You can also visit his website at http://davidarchibald.info/
When I do my review, he’ll have an order form that can be used via PayPal, until then, direct by postal mail or PayPal via email contact are the only options.
Again my sincere thanks to David for his unfailing help, good cheer, and pathfinding. I hope WUWT readers can express thanks also.
anna v says:
July 3, 2010 at 7:08 am
I expect he will come in strongly with a link to his global plot that even shows the opposite effect.
Even better. Simply plot 11-yr mean Armagh temps versus min-to-min solar lengths:
http://www.leif.org/research/DavidA19.png
SC23 is not quite complete for Armargh [so is marked by a pink square].
Data from: [Length http://www.stat.psu.edu/reports/2005/tr0504.pdf
Temps http://badc.nerc.ac.uk/browse/badc/armagh/data/air_temperature/mean_annual_temp/tm-an-maxmin-dtr.dat ]
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 3, 2010 at 7:00 am
For example this illustration (from his slide show) is very interesting
You can always count on D.A. to do sloppy, misleading work. Figure 5 strongly suggest that during SC22 the temperature was 9.6C and during SC23 it was 8.2. In actual fact the numbers were: SC22: 9.50, SC23: 9.97.
But Leif, isn’t the point that the temperature ploted for the length of 22 is the temperature of cycle 23, and the 8.2 is the prediction for the cycle 24 temperature from the length of cycle 23?
Maybe it needs a label (22,23) (length, temperature), instead of just “22 “(23,24) instead of “23”.
anna v says:
July 3, 2010 at 7:47 am
But Leif, isn’t the point that the temperature plotted for the length of 22 is the temperature of cycle 23, and the 8.2 is the prediction for the cycle 24 temperature from the length of cycle 23?
That is not what the labels say [but with Archibald, you never know 🙂 ]. If you shift the data by one solar cycle, you get 8.97 degrees for the next 11 years, not 8.2. It just doesn’t add up [as expected]. It doesn’t matter that the book is printed on high-quality paper, when its contents is of low quality.
Leif Svalgaard:
You can always count on D.A. to do sloppy, misleading work. Figure 5 strongly suggest that during SC22 the temperature was 9.6C and during SC23 it was 8.2. In actual fact the numbers were: SC22: 9.50, SC23: 9.97.
I think the temperature is meant to suggest what the temperature will be after the cycle, and we have to wait ten years or so to know that. If there was a correlation between SC length and the temperature during it, it would be pretty useless for making a temperature prediction, wouldn’t it, unless we can precisely predict the cycle length in advence. My understanding of the argument is that since SC22 was unusually short and SC23 was unusually long, we should be going from some unusually warm years to some unusually cold ones (during SC24).
vukcevic says:
July 3, 2010 at 5:40 am
In my view the UK summer months are more likely to respond directly to the solar activity then the rest of the year when the Gulf Stream is predominant. http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CETm.htm
In tropics response to the sun is probably more or less constant throughout the year, the higher latitudes would depend on the rate the Gulf Stream is pumping warm water…..
_____________________________________________________
Thanks for the response.You seem to have the correct idea. Instead of looking at Global climate change look at regions. My state (North Carolina) is certainly dominated by the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation
North to south through the middle of the state
North – Raleigh NC
Middle – Fayetteville NC
South – Lumberton NC
Unless of course the weather station is sitting at an airport.
href=”http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=425723080040&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1″>Norfolk City and Norfolk International Airport
Sorry, I goofed on the HTML tags
Norfolk City
Norfolk International Airport
Leif Svalgaard says: July 3, 2010 at 7:38 am
anna v says: July 3, 2010 at 7:08 am
………………
The 300 year monthly CETs show that there is some response to solar cycle (usually in summer months, (when the sun is at its highest above horizon) but not always; occasionally it is totally reverse.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CETm.htm
Inconclusive !
see also:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CETlmt.htm
Gail Comb says:
July 3, 2010 at 5:43 am
“….. This and the take over of our food supply by the international cartels has been giving me nightmares for half a decade. ……”
————————-
well few days back I stumbled over a short article at website run by Credit Suisse with the title
“The Hunt for Land Has Already Started”
that set some red lights blinking in my brain, I do not rally know what to make of it but it appears appears to me as the big players with money surplus money on hand , be it countries or corporations , are out to use that money to grab possession of all of the worlds farmland ( arable land ) they can get their hands on either through direct buy or long term lease arrangements. (And the bankers drooling to get a part of the action as facilitators. ) . So perhaps there is good reason to have nightmares.
Link to the page is below
http://emagazine.credit-suisse.com/app/article/index.cfm?fuseaction=OpenArticle&aoid=284894&coid=162&lang=EN
Given the “chaotic” nature of complex dynamic systems [Lorenz, 1960 – ’64], juxtaposing planetary atmospheric-ocean temperatures with sunspot cycles regardless of cloud cover and other significant variables provides a valid qualitative rather than quantitative correspondence, indicative rather than definitive of future circumstance.
Over extended time-frames, all linear and sinusoidal projections inevitably exhibit fallacies of “inferred precision” and “persistence”. In nature, crude and vulgar estimates trump 3-digit derivations every time, while the notion that “natura non saltis fecit” (Nature makes no sudden leaps) ignores “punctuated equilibrium” in terms of historically abrupt and dramatic climate shifts. Over some 2.6-million years, Pleistocene ice ages interspersed with median 12,250-year “Long Summers” such as our current Holocene Interglacial Epoch have been quite well-defined.
Whatever drives these swings, the fact is that if not for the 1,500-year Younger Dryas “cold shock” ending c. BC 7300, Earth would likely have reverted to miles-deep continental glaciations about AD 450, coincident with the Fall of Rome.
Given a pending 70-year “dead sun” Maunder Minimum similar to that of 1645 – 1715, odds are that Planet Earth is overdue for a cyclical chill-phase lasting some 102,000 years.
Vuk, the relationship in question is cycle length vs temp, not sunspot number vs temp.
Leif, Vuk, why has no one plotted rate of change vs temp instead of cycle length. Probably one would have to look at both ascending and descending rates of change. It seems to me that the rate of change might be a better indicator of solar activity than either cycle length or sunspot number. Murray
Murray Duffin says:
July 3, 2010 at 8:47 am
why has no one plotted rate of change vs temp instead of cycle length.
You mean dT/dt vs. T? And no sunspot number whatsoever?
The game is not to keep trying this and trying that, until by chance you get something you like [you know, people trying 20 things and finding one relation that is significant at the 95% level – which is what chance would give you with 20 things].
Steinar Midtskogen says:
July 3, 2010 at 8:11 am
My understanding of the argument is that since SC22 was unusually short and SC23 was unusually long, we should be going from some unusually warm years to some unusually cold ones (during SC24).
See, how D.A. has misled you. What he has been saying is that since he [following what blows in the wind] predicts Sc24 to be very low [and hence longer than even SC23] that we are in for a severe cooling. This is based on a flawed Figure.
Murray Duffin says: July 3, 2010 at 8:47 am
Vuk, the relationship in question is cycle length vs temp, not sunspot number vs temp.
I think cycle length has only meaning if you assume energy integration. A short powerful cycle like SC 19 input far more energy into the ‘climate system’ than slightly longer but much weaker once, such as SC 13 &14.
I am sure Dr. S. could give you more scientific answer.
Gail Combs says: July 3, 2010 at 8:12 am
You seem to have the correct idea. Instead of looking at Global climate change look at regions.
The graphs relate to the CET (Central England temperatures), for which accuratelog term data are available. This is the area enclosed by triangle Lancashire, London and Bristol.
Global averaging temperatures are a bit of nonsense.
The real value to Archibald’s work is his willingness to stand up against a caterwaul of catastrophism, to speak out against international hoaxes, and to engage people in debate that would otherwise be stifled.
You can nit-pick his science, but you cannot fault his courage and dedication to the common good. When others equivocated, David Archibald shone like a lighthouse. His struggle is our struggle. He is a hero to mankind.
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 3, 2010 at 7:00 am
For example this illustration (from his slide show) is very interesting
You can always count on D.A. to do sloppy, misleading work. Figure 5 strongly suggest that during SC22 the temperature was 9.6C and during SC23 it was 8.2. In actual fact the numbers were: SC22: 9.50, SC23: 9.97.
You’re right, leif. But if you challenge David on this he moves the goalposts. He claims that the temperature decline will happne over then next solar cycle (SC24). However this is not the way Butler & Johnson have presented the analysis since they clearly state that the data points are the 11 year mean temperatures centred on the maximum and minimum of the solar cycle (see legend).
In any case if David’s ‘method’ was correct we should have seen a drop in temperatures over solar cycle 21, since that followed SC20 (the ‘long’ cycle). David Archibald’s work is full of holes. I’m surprised Anthony promotes it so readily.
Stephan says:
July 3, 2010 at 12:51 am
Unfortunately for some good o’l DA has been the only one that got nearly all the predictions right (except the 0.4c temp drop ). The solar SSN is on course to max ~40. The temps anomaly will likely fall more than 0.4C in coming months see R spencer SST
In ~2006 David has also predicted a 2 deg decline in temperatures over “the next few years”.
Björn says:
July 3, 2010 at 8:31 am
Gail Comb says:
July 3, 2010 at 5:43 am
“….. This and the take over of our food supply by the international cartels has been giving me nightmares for half a decade. ……”
————————-
well few days back I stumbled over a short article at website run by Credit Suisse with the title
“The Hunt for Land Has Already Started”
that set some red lights blinking in my brain, I do not rally know what to make of it but it appears appears to me as the big players with money surplus money on hand , be it countries or corporations , are out to use that money to grab possession of all of the worlds farmland ( arable land ) they can get their hands on either through direct buy or long term lease arrangements. (And the bankers drooling to get a part of the action as facilitators. ) . So perhaps there is good reason to have nightmares.
_________________________________________________________________
Thanks for the link.
I and a bunch of other farmers worldwide have been following this issue for several years. Believe me there is a very good reason to have nightmares. Here are a few:
Thanks to NAFTA “According to a study by Jose Romero and Alicia Puyana carried out for the federal government of Mexico, between 1992 and 2002, the number of agricultural households fell an astounding 75% – from 2.3 million to 575, 000“ click (Well that accounts for a few million illegals in the USA.)
A Farmer is Committing Suicide Every 32 Minutes
“Now the full toll—surely among the largest sustained waves of suicides in human history—is becoming apparent. And as Sainath emphasizes, these numbers still underestimate the disaster, since women farmers are excluded from the official statistics… It is important that the figure of 150,000 farm suicides is a bottom line estimate…. As Professor Nagaraj puts it: “There is likely to be a serious underestimation of suicides…what has driven the huge increase in farm suicides, particularly in the Big Four or ’Suicide SEZ’ States? “Overall,” says Professor Nagaraj, “there exists since the mid-90s, an acute agrarian crisis. That’s across the country. In the Big Four and some other states, specific factors compound the problem…. Cultivation costs have shot up in these high input zones, with some inputs seeing cost hikes of several hundred per cent… Meanwhile, prices have crashed, as in the case of cotton, due to massive U.S.-EU subsidies to their growers. All due to price rigging with the tightening grip of large corporations over the trade in agricultural commodities.” click
Europe is also targeted as well as the other western countries.
“After clearing her throat and leaning slowly forward, the chair-lady said: “I don’t think you understand what EU policy is. ….. To do this it will be necessary to shift around one million farmers off the land…
There in a nutshell you have the whole tragic story of the clinically instigated demise of European farming over the past three decades. We protested that with unemployment running at 20 percent how would one provide jobs for another million farmers dumped on the streets of Warsaw? This was greeted with a stony silence, eventually broken by a lady from Portugal, who rather quietly remarked that since Portugal joined the European Union, 60 percent of small farmers had already left the land. “The European Union is simply not interested in small farms,” she said.” click
“Today I resigned from the staff of the International Monetary Fund after over 12 years, and after 1000 days of official fund work in the field, hawking your medicine and your bag of tricks to governments and to peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean and Africa. To me, resignation is a priceless liberation, for with it I have taken the first big step to that place where I may hope to wash my hands of what in my mind’s eye is the blood of millions of poor and starving peoples. Mr. Camdessus, the blood is so much, you know, it runs in rivers. It dries up too; it cakes all over me; sometimes I feel that there is not enough soap in the whole world to cleanse me from the things that I did do in your name and in the name of your predecessors, and under your official seal. ”
With those words, Davison Budhoo, a senior economist with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for more than 12 years, publicly resigned in May, 1988….” click
The World bank/IMF Structural Adjustment Programs are what Mr. Budhoo is talking about click
“SAPs often result in deep cuts in programmes like education, health and social care, and the removal of subsidies designed to control the price of basics such as food and milk. So SAPs hurt the poor most, because they depend heavily on these services and subsidies.
SAPs encourage countries to focus on the production and export of primary commodities such as cocoa and coffee to earn foreign exchange. But these commodities have notoriously erratic prices subject to the whims of global markets which can depress prices just when countries have invested in these so-called ‘cash crops’.
By devaluing the currency and simultaneously removing price controls, the immediate effect of a SAP is generally to hike prices up three or four times, increasing poverty to such an extent that riots are a frequent result. “
Mike D. says:
July 3, 2010 at 10:04 am
You can nit-pick his science, but you cannot fault his courage and dedication to the common good. When others equivocated, David Archibald shone like a lighthouse. His struggle is our struggle. He is a hero to mankind.
As Stephen Schneider famously said “its OK to lie a bit to get your message across”.
Steinar Midtskogen says:
July 3, 2010 at 8:11 am
I think the temperature is meant to suggest what the temperature will be after the cycle, and we have to wait ten years or so to know that.
That’s not what the graph says – and it’s not the way B&J did the original regression analysis. David Archibald just makes it up as he goes along.
Mike D. says:
July 3, 2010 at 10:04 am
His struggle is our struggle.
And his lie is our lie.
Leif Svalgaard says:
See, how D.A. has misled you. What he has been saying is that since he [following what blows in the wind] predicts Sc24 to be very low [and hence longer than even SC23] that we are in for a severe cooling. This is based on a flawed Figure.
Well, my attention was on statements like “Solar Cycle 22 was 9.5 years long. On the basis that Solar Cycle 23 is thirteen years long, there will be a 2.2 degree celcius decline in temperature in Hanover, New Hampshire over the next decade”. He may be, probably is, wrong about the physics determining solar activity and climate changes, but that doesn’t prove that there can’t be some (unexplained) correlation between the length of a cycle and temperatures during the next (locally or globally). Which is what caught my attention.
Steinar Midtskogen says:
July 3, 2010 at 12:00 pm
He may be, probably is, wrong about the physics
He is wrong in Figure 5 as presented here. I see blue and green lines marking blue [SC22] (9.6,9.6) and green [SC23] (12.5,8.2). Neither of these values are correct (as I said). This is bad ‘science’, bad for WUWT, bad for skeptics, bad for everybody. And should be bad for D.A., too.
Leif Svalgaard says:
He is wrong in Figure 5 as presented here. […] This is bad ‘science’
The Y-axis simply states “mean temperature”, not for which period. I agree that it could be clearer, but I don’t think it makes it bad science (or ‘science’) for that reason, to require the reader to read the text as well (which also could be more explicit). I’d rather say it’s poorly communicated. Many years at university and exams have taught me that also real scientists may lack writing skills though their understanding of the science is impeccable.
Anyway, even if D.A. did everything wrong, that hasn’t convinced me that there is no correlation between cycle length and temperature during the next cycle.
Steinar Midtskogen says:
July 3, 2010 at 1:04 pm
The Y-axis simply states “mean temperature”, not for which period.
The caption underneath the Figure states: “The mean temperature at Armagh for 11 year intervals, centred on years of sunspot maximum…”
may lack writing skills though their understanding of the science is impeccable.
D.A. does not lack in writing skills, but in understanding of the science
Anyway, even if D.A. did everything wrong, that hasn’t convinced me that there is no correlation between cycle length and temperature during the next cycle.
And what convinces you that there is?
Dear Anthony, with Dr.Archibald´s constant company, check if you are not already in free fall around the barycenter. ☺