Note: This essay originally appeared last January on The Air Vent. Given our current winter, it as just as prescient now as it was then, so I’m reposting it here. Thanks to Verity Jones and Charles the Moderator for bringing it to my attention – Anthony
Guest post by Tony Brown
Charles Dickens. Victorian winters. A Christmas Carol. Ice fairs on the Frozen Thames. Cold Cold Cold Cold Cold. Dickens has irrevocably moulded the climate views of generations of Anglo Saxon peoples as TV, Films and plays all promote his image of icy winters in that era. Is this view of Dickens winters correct? We take a look at his life through the prism of climate.
Charles Dickens was born in Portsmouth England on Feb 7th 1812.
1812 overall was a very cold year in the UK -the early part of the winter was especially bitter over Europe, marked by Napoleons retreat from Moscow, as illustrated in this painting by Adolph Northen.
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Napoleon’s_invasion_of_Russia
“The air itself,” wrote a French colonel, “was thick with tiny icicles which sparkled in the sun but cut one’s face drawing blood.” Another Frenchman recalled that “it frequently happened that the ice would seal my eyelids shut.” Prince Wilhelm of Baden, one of Napoleon’s commanders, gave the order to march on the morning of Dec. 7, only to discover that “the last drummer boy had frozen to death.”
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44099-2004Aug5.html )
Napoleons’ Grand Armee of 600,000 was reduced to 200,000 by bitter weather and war, in an event of such significance that it inspired Tchaikovsky’s 1812 overture whilst Leo Tolstoy put the 1812 campaign at the heart of his novel War and Peace,
Back in Britain, during 1812 the Dickens Family moved to Hawk Street, Portsmouth. And in 1813 to Southsea (adjacent) 1814: Brother Alfred born and died September.
In 1814 the River Thames froze over and the last ever frost fair was held. This was partly through changing weather conditions, but also because the nature of the river was altered when the old London Bridge was demolished and river flow increased
During that cold February in 1814 London experienced the hardest frost it had known in centuries. Though the fair lasted for only four days it was made memorable by an elephant, which was led across the river below Blackfriars Bridge. The print below shows how raucous some of the festivities became. The winter of 1813/14 was 4th coldest in the Central England Temperature record (which commenced 1660) at 0.43C
http://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/the-last-frost-fair-on-the-thames-river/
The first frost fair was held in 1608. The most famous -lasting several months- was in 1684 (much the coldest year in CET at -1.17C) The link below leads to a promotional poster of that event.
http://www.she-philosopher.com/gallery/frostfair.html
1815: Family move to St Pancras London as John Dickens (father) is posted back by Navy. 1816: Sister Letitia born.
1816 was known as the year without a summer, snow fell very late and the summer never recovered. The winter proceeding it was severe. A volcanic eruption (Tambora: East Indies) disrupted wind patterns and temperatures greatly, affecting depressions, which tracked further south than usual, making the UK very cold and wet for the summer and beyond. In September the Thames had frozen and snow drifts remained on hills until late July.
1817: John Dickens is posted first to Sheerness then Chatham Dockyard in Kent. Family move to Chatham. 1819: Sister Harriet born.
1819-20: Severe winter. -23c was recorded at Tunbridge Wells. This was the 21st coldest winter in CET at 1.43C 1820: Brother Frederick born.
Decadal CET average 1810-1819 8.798C. The coldest decade since 1690-1699. Charles Dickens experienced six white London Christmases in the first nine years of his life. Truly his formative years were especially cold and signified a return to the Little Ice Age conditions which had been somewhat mitigated in previous decades.
1821: Dickens begins school. 1821: Late May saw snow in London, probably the latest snowfall there until 2nd June 1975. 1822: John Dickens recalled to London. Settle at Camden Town.
In his book ‘Climate History and the Modern world’ Hubert Lamb wrote of 1821/2 (and 1845/6) ‘The warm water of the Gulf stream spread itself beyond its usual bounds to the coast of Europe.’ This winter was the 16th warmest in the CET record at 5.80C.
The overall CET for the year was 10.05C the warmest for over 40 years.
1822-23: Severe winter, ice on the Thames by late December. February 8th saw a great snowstorm in Northern England. People had to tunnel through the snow.
1823 27th coldest winter in CET at 1.53C
1823: Family moves to 4 Gower Street North. Mrs. Dickens attempts to start a school without success. 1824: Dickens sent to work at Warren’s Blacking Factory. Father arrested for debt and sent to Marshalsea Debtors Prison where he is joined by wife and younger children. Charles lodges with family friends and spends a terrible year working at Warren’s Blacking, a shoe polish factory.
1825: Father retires from Navy, receives an Admiralty pension and Charles is sent to school-previously he had a very limited formal education
1825: Snow fell in October in London. A very windy time, with gales doing damage.
1826: Another warm year at 10.07C mean average
1827: Family evicted for non-payment of rates. Dickens goes to work at Ellis and Blackmore’s Solicitors then Charles Molloy’s Solicitors. Birth of Brother Augustus.
1828: Father works as a reporter for the “Daily Herald” newspaper.
1828 22nd warmest ever winter at 5.73C and also marked the warmest overall year for 45 years at 10.30C
1829: Family move to 12 Norfolk Street, Fitzroy Square. Dickens works as a freelance reporter at Doctor’s Commons.
1829: A cold year at a mean average of 8.16C. Continuous frost throughout January. The summer was wet, and quite cold. Over an inch of snow fell in early October, although where isn’t certain, most likely to be London. 6 inches fell in London and the South in late November. Northerly and Easterly gales damaged ships.
Decadal CET 1820-29 9.35C-in terms of the UK a comfortable decade
1829-30: Severe winter. Continuous frost from the 23rd to 31st December, 12th to 19th January, and 31st January to 6th February. Ice on the Thames from late December to late January. Some places completely blocked. 25th December 1830 was cold, with -12c recorded in Greenwich. 1.13c was 13th coldest winter in CET.
1830: Admitted as a reader at the British Museum.
1831: Begins work as a reporter for “The Mirror of Parliament” edited by his uncle J.M. Barrow. 1832: Reporter at the “True Sun” newspaper. Illness prevents him attending auditions at Covent Garden.
1834: Becomes reporter on the “Morning Chronicle” and meets Catherine Hogarth. Takes rooms at 13 Furnival’s Inn, Holborn.
Second warmest ever winter at 6.53C which marked the start of the warmest year overall for 100 years at 10.47c
1835/6: Snowy winter in Scotland. Snow lasted well into March, with 8 or 9 feet of snow being reported in parts! This trend continued for a number of winters, with a lot of snow in Scotland. From early winter, December, to late winter, March, snow was a problem. There were considerable accumulations, becoming common throughout the winter. Snow fell widely, but mostly in the North of Scotland, where accumulations were very large, right through until April
1835: Becomes engaged to Catherine Hogarth.
1836-37 was another snowy winter in the series, with heavy falls of snow in January. Blizzards began in late February, and lasted into March. Transport was severely disrupted, and harvest damaged by harsh frosts. This series of winters was severe, and notable, especially for Scotland, but very bad elsewhere also.
October 1836, snow reached depths of 5-6 inches, very unusual.
25th December 1836, roads impassable, snow depths reached a staggering 5-15 feet in many places, and most astonishingly, drifts of 20-50 feet!
1837: Birth of first child Charles, on 6th January. Moves to 48 Doughty Street. Visits France and Belgium.
1837-38: Murphy’s winter. Patrick Murphy won fame and a small fortune from the sale of an almanac in which he predicted the severe frost of January 1838 (a 2 month frosty period set in with a light SE wind & fine day with hoar frost on the 7th (or 8th) January). 20th January saw temperatures as low as -16c in London, accepted as the coldest recorded here of the 19th century. -20 recorded at Blackheath, and -26c at Beckenham, Kent. The temperature at Greenwich was -11c at midday! The Thames froze over. 20th coldest at 1.40c
1838: Second child Mary born.
1838: Snow showers on 13th October, possibly in London and the South.
1839: Resigns editorship of “Bentley’s Miscellany”. Third child Kate born. Moves to 1 Devonshire Place, Regent’s Park.
Decadal 1830-39 9.216C.a very mixed decade with some notably cold winters but also the second warmest ever in CET, illustrating the huge variability in British winters.
1841: Fourth child Walter born. Declines an invitation to be Liberal parliamentary candidate for Reading. Granted the Freedom of the City of Edinburgh on 29th June.
1841 29th coldest winter at 1.60c
1842: Visits America plus Canada. December as a whole was the 7th warmest in CET at 7.2c.
1843 Dickens began A ChristmasCarol in October 1843, and completed the book in six weeks with the final pages written in the beginning of December while suffering from a cold, walking at night in a feverish state through the streets of London and drawing inspiration from all he saw. As the result of a feud with his publisher over the meager earnings on Martin Chuzzlewit, Dickens declined a lump-sum payment for the tale, chose a percentage of the profits in hopes of making more money thereby, and published the work at his own expense. High production costs however brought him a mere £230 rather than the £1,000 he expected – and needed, as his wife was once again pregnant (wikipedia)
Dickens purpose in his characterisation was to bring back the good cheer of traditional Chrismases, a notion which had been fading for decades-in this he was assisted by the enthusiasm for the festivities shown by Queen Victoria and Prince Albert
Dec 1843- the month of publication-exceptionally mild, 5th warmest in the CET record at 7.4C
Dickens would describe Scrooge in the city on a Christmas morning, watching inhabitants “scraping the snow from the pavements in front of their dwellings, and from the tops of their houses: whence it was a mad delight to the boys to see it come plumping down into the road below, and splitting into artificial little snowstorms” Films and Tv adaptations ever since have depicted this bitter weather which ironically didn’t happen during the year of publication!
1844: Fifth child Francis born. Breaks with previous publishers Chapman and Hall and moves to Bradbury and Evans. Lives in Genoa, Italy. 1844/5 26th coldest winter in CET at 1.50c
1845: Visits Rome with Catherine. Sixth child Alfred born. In ‘Climate history and the Modern world’ Lamb wrote of 1845/6 (and 1821/2) ‘the warm water of the Gulf stream spread itself beyond its usual bounds to the coast of Europe’
18th warmest winter in CET at 5.77c
1846: Becomes Editor of the “Daily News”. Resides in Lausanne and then Paris.
1847: Returns to London. Birth of Seventh child Sydney. Travels to Switzerland again
1847 31st coldest winter in CET at 1.70c
1848: Death of Sister Fanny 1849: Eighth child Henry born.
1849: April, great snowstorm hit Southern England. Coaches buried in drifts. Notably late snowfall.
1840-49 Decadal CET 9.03c
1850: Ninth child Dora born. Founds the Guild of Literature and Art with Bulwer-Lytton to help writers and artists who have fallen on hard times.
1851: Catherine ill and is treated at Malvern, Worcestershire where Dickens visits her. Death of Father and baby Dora. Family move to Tavistock House.
1851-53: The first of these winters saw heavy snowfall in Scotland. The North of Scotland saw the first of the heavy snow. The railway from Aberdeen to the South was badly affected, but was kept open. Blizzards caused deaths. The storms stopped near the end of January
1852: Tenth child Edward born.
1852-53 was severe particularly in February. Low temperatures and heavy snowfall lasted well into March.
1853: Holiday in Boulogne. Visits Switzerland with Wilkie Collins.
1855: Joins Administrative Reform Society. Family move to Paris from October
1856: Returns to England to live at Gad Hill Place, Chatham, Kent.
1857: Hans Christian Andersen visits Dickens at Gad’s Hill. The Danish author of fairytales such as The Ugly Duckling first visited England in June 1847. He was a guest of the Countess of Blessington, who attracted the cream of Europe’s intelligentsia to her gatherings. It was at one of these assemblies that Andersen was introduced to Dickens, whom he worshipped, calling him “the greatest writer of our time”. Dickens, who reciprocated the admiration, visited him at his lodgings the following month. Discovering that Andersen was not in, he left him a parcel containing 12 presentation copies of his books. A cordial correspondence developed between the two and Andersen returned to England for a fortnight as Dickens’s guest at Gad’s Hill in the summer of 1857. (one of the warmest in the CET record at 16.53c)
Before his arrival, Andersen had written to Dickens promising: “I shall not inconvenience you too much.” But it was an invitation that Dickens would soon regret. The Danish man of letters, a tall, gaunt and rather ungainly character, extended his visit to five weeks. Dickens dropped polite hints that he should leave, but they were, perhaps, too subtle. After he finally left, Dickens wrote on the mirror in the guestroom: “Hans Andersen slept in this room for five weeks — which seemed to the family AGES!”
Dickens subsequently based Uriah Heep on Andersen-The character is notable for his cloying humility, obsequiousness, and general insincerity.
1858: Separates from his wife. Embarks on a provincial reading tour.
Decadal 1850-59 9.162c
1860: Katey Dickens marries Charles Collins. 1863: Charity readings at the British Embassy in Paris. Death of Walter Dickens in India.
1863 21st warmest winter at 5.73c
1865: 9th June, involved in a serious railway accident at Staplehurst, Kent with Ellen Ternan. 1867: Begins a reading tour of the U.S.A. 1868: Leaves New York for England. 1869: Reading tour broken off because of illness.
1869 /70 saw Britain’s warmest ever winter at 6.77c.
1860-69 9.30C Decadal; the second warmest decade in Dickens life
1870: January, twelve farewell readings in London. 9th March, received by Queen Victoria.
Charles Dickens dies June 9th 1870
Conclusions and Ruminations;
Dickens life demonstrates the extraordinary variability of the British winters during that era, when the coldest and warmest winters in the CET records can be juxtaposed. Generally there are few examples of constant cold winters year after year-the LIA was becoming much more sporadic than it had been several centuries earlier, when bitter cold weather appears to have been the norm. To put this era into perspective mature English people might be surprised to learn they lived through a much colder winter than Dickens ever experienced. 1962/3 at -0.33C was the third coldest in the entire CET record compared to Dickens coldest year 1814 at 0.43c, the fourth coldest in the record. (1962/3 was a bit of a one off-Dickens experienced a greater number of relatively cold winters)
HH Lamb, (in ‘Climate, History and the Modern World’), says: “Indeed, the descriptions of ‘old-fashioned’ winters for which Charles Dickens became famous in his books may owe something to the fact – exceptional for London – that of the first nine Christmases of his life, between 1812 and 1820, six were white with either frost or snow.”
http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/metinfo/snowxmas.htm#G
(As can be seen, a White Christmas in London is a very rare event)
Lamb also points out that the decade from 1810 to 1819 was the coldest in England since the 1690s. The following table was originally published in ‘London Weather’, and updated by booty.org
![]()
http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/metinfo/snowxmas.htm#G
Natural cycles can be clearly seen in operation as the first very cold decade of Dickens’ life was replaced by several decades of relative warmth before the climate deteriorated again after his death in 1870. There was an extraordinarily low point of 7.42C CET overall in 1879 (the third coldest year in the entire record) with the 7th coldest winter at 0.70c, followed by a cold 1880’s decade at 8.87c –the coldest since Dickens birth, signifying a return to LIA conditions.
Curiously this climatic trough in 1880 is the exact point from when GISS commenced their temperature records, a fact which has been commented on in additional articles by Tony Brown (shown in the references at the end of this article)
1870-79 CET 9.08C 1880-89 CET 8.87C
To the surprise of no one -except it appears the IPCC and National Governments- temperatures have subsequently risen from this considerable climatic trough and the 1880/89 decade of cold has not been matched since.
Additional articles on Giss records from 1880.
Three long temperature records in USA. Author: Tony Brown
This article links three long temperature records along the Hudson River in the USA. They illustrate that a start date of 1880 (Giss) misses out on the preceding warm climatic cycles and that UHI is a big factor in the increasingly urbanised temperature data sets from both Giss and Hadley/Cru
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/triplets-on-the-hudson-river/#comment-13064
Three long temperature records from Europe. Author: Tony Brown
In examining these records from Europe the climatic variability prior to the Giss records of 1880 are again shown, demonstrating that no one should be surprised when temperature readings commencing from a trough of the Little Ice Age subsequently rise again in our own era.
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/invisible-elephants/
References used in the Dickens article;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/weather/article5391955.ece
http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/metinfo/snowxmas.htm#G
http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/metinfo/snowxmas.htm
This very readable version of his life
http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/charlesdickens.html
http://www.mantex.co.uk/ou/aa810/dickens-02.htm
(Time line with places he visited)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

![frost-fair-1814[1]](http://noconsensus.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/frost-fair-18141.jpg?w=507&h=382&fit=507%2C382&resize=507%2C382)

![snxmas_6[1]](http://noconsensus.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/snxmas_61.gif?w=521&h=218&fit=521%2C218&resize=521%2C218)

Stephen Wilde says:
December 5, 2010 at 2:42 pm
“”Find what causes more (or less) meridional jet stream positioning and there you have the answer to the question as to how and when the globe shifts from net warming to net cooling.””
Reply; several times I have tried to tell you about the lunar declinational atmospheric tides, and how the 18.6 year Mn period causes the movement of the location of the jet streams. No reply is given, just like the moon was not there at all! How long will it take for people to admit that the moon is locked in a tidal dance with the Earth, and the atmosphere and oceans are being sloshed around. Almost everyone will quote the “regularity of the ocean tides” and how they are predictable years in advance.
The same is true of the atmospheric tides, they produce and maintain the Rossby wave patterns and the jet streams. To not take advantage of these cyclic patterns in assembling long range forecasts of the weather, made no sense to me so I looked at what it would take to generate a natural analog forecast from the historic data base.
http://www.aerology.com/national.aspx
Gives you the daily forecast maps it produces for the last 3 years and the next 3 years, granted it is only for the USA, but it is a start.
http://research.aerology.com/aerology-analog-weather-forecasting-method/
Should give you the background to look at how it all works IMO.
http://research.aerology.com/improving-long-term-forecasting/
The above are my comment on how I think these ideas can be incorporated into the current forecasting methods.
Just a thought, Richard Holle
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 5, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Point is that cool periods are not always times with low solar output e.g. it was colder during 1850-1870
The trend in winter CET graph which is the most important (low EUV having its biggest affect on the winter NAO/AO) very closely follows the sunspot record. The difference from 1870 to now is about 0.5 – 1 deg. As previously stated the PDO being the stronger driver with the AMO also being relevant to the CET record. Solar activity over SC21,22,23 looks slightly higher than the period you mention.
All the factors have to be in place, the PDO, AMO looks to be one of the few oscillation’s that are not sunspot defendant recently, but solar output may be responsible for some modulation.
Winter CET HERE.
SIDC SSN HERE.
Connecting 1880s with cold is just playing the cherry-picking coincidence game.
You call it it cherry picking, I would just say a line of research. PDO reconstructions also show a deep low around 1880. The reconstruction is based on tree rings so I am not convinced, but worth pursuing.
Geoff Sharp says:
December 5, 2010 at 7:42 pm
Solar activity over SC21,22,23 looks slightly higher than the period you mention.
Remember that solar activity after 1945 is ~20% artificially too high…
Mom2girls says:
December 5, 2010 at 6:08 pm
Thanks for the link. The report shows that America experienced a similar temperature trend as London from 1800 to 1900. Interesting that USA summer was hot and dry in the 1816 summer suggesting a strong La Nina perhaps? A similar pattern is observed in Australia with high temp records set in the late 1880’s showing that different parts of the globe can experience extremes during times of low EUV. Russia’s very hot summer showed us how this works this year with a severe blocking high.
Stephen Wilde I hope you continue your quest. You are on to something. You may be wrong in some of the details, but you are on to something nonetheless.
You may have to deal with the Establishment along the way. Doesn’t matter. Keep on.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 5, 2010 at 7:50 pm
Remember that solar activity after 1945 is ~20% artificially too high…
Hence the need for the Layman’s Sunspot Count. (one of the reasons)
Geoff Sharp says:
December 5, 2010 at 8:23 pm
“Remember that solar activity after 1945 is ~20% artificially too high…”
Hence the need for the Layman’s Sunspot Count. (one of the reasons)
The Layman’s count is misconceived and has no calibration [besides eyeballing] and is thus junk.
December 5 2:49
Although MM occurred during the LIA, it may surprise you to know that there is still no widely accepted theory which proves the connection between dimming sunspots and cool climate.
—–
Why would this be a surprise today? The Team has made it acceptable for this lack of honest reflection in the paid climate “scientific” business groups (I hesitate to call it climate science) at havens of high learning, and professional associations, to be ignored, if not vilified. Wake up! You are either being duped (doped) or participating in the duping (doping). Looking at your statement, it appears to be the later.
Further to Bruce Cobb (2:20 pm), Ms Davidson is wrong on two counts:
# She ignores the LIA.
# Whether human fossil fuel use (if that’s what she means by “behaviour of humans”) is now a significant climate driver or not, it could not have influenced the climate before circa 1940.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/graphics/global_ff_1751_2006.jpg
Both facts are acknowledged by both sides of the issue.
Government members in Australia are the same: willfully ignorant (‘..my scientific advisors tell me etc..’), liars or both — the bleedin’ obvious I suppose.
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 5, 2010 at 8:37 pm
The Layman’s count is misconceived and has no calibration [besides eyeballing] and is thus junk.
Incorrect again, The Layman’s Count is calibrated via the pixel counting method. The new SDO 4096 x 4096 images use a 333 pixel threshold to determine if a group is countable. Wolf also used a threshold which is unknown so it is impossible to calibrate exactly to his standard, but we think we are close. The Layman’s Count is currently running about 25% below the SIDC and also reflects the current trends in F10.7 flux better than other counting methods. When comparing Wolf’s reconstruction of the Dalton Minimum the Layman’s count is a much closer fit.
Your problem is that you recognize the modern count is too high but then write off a method which produces a lower count based on Wolf’s principles. Maybe you could come up with a better method?
Environment Minister Jane Davidson, aka “Cancun Jane”, the current “cold snap” is just one more example of “extreme weather” due to “climate change”.
That would make her another loon from Cancun, or a Cancoon.
I wonder if she really believes this? The real Cancoon is David Cameron and his trusty band of huskies, so she may just be selling the Cameroon line. Incidentally, I don’t know if he has noticed, but Cameroon no longer has to go to Scandinavia to play with his huskies.
.
Today is Monday 6 December 2010. The temperature outside at 07:44 GMT is -4C.
We have had sub zero nights here in Milford Haven for three weeks now.
Unprecedented!
I said:
It is generally accepted that the models fail to explain the scale of observed variability on the basis of the current assumptions (which you seem to share).
Leif replied:
“I think I showed you models that had excellent agreement with observations.”
Please remind me of that evidence because elsewhere I read that the jetstream shifting could not be adequately explained by the models yet the jetstream positioning has to be linked to the size of the polar vortices. I don’t see how one can be well modelled but not the other.
Richard Holle said:
“several times I have tried to tell you about the lunar declinational atmospheric tides, and how the 18.6 year Mn period causes the movement of the location of the jet streams. No reply is given, just like the moon was not there at all! How long will it take for people to admit that the moon is locked in a tidal dance with the Earth, and the atmosphere and oceans are being sloshed around. Almost everyone will quote the “regularity of the ocean tides” and how they are predictable years in advance.”
I haven’t ignored those comments, Richard. It’s just that I’m looking at the longer term cycling from MWP to LIA to date and I don’t yet see how the moon could arrange that. On shorter timescales such as 18.6 years the moon may well have a modulating effect on everything else that is going on but just as Bob Tisdale’s ENSO work fails to make the necessary leap to the longer term cycling so does the lunar aspect unless I have missed something.
According to the records that are available only the solar changes match the relevant timescale adequately albeit imperfectly (which is most likely a result of separate internal ocean cycling).
“Leif Svalgaard says:
December 5, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Geoff Sharp says:
December 5, 2010 at 6:15 pm
Doesn’t have to be lower. All 3 periods correspond with cool periods, all periods also low in solar output.
Point is that cool periods are not always times with low solar output e.g. it was colder during 1850-1870 with solar output on par with what is has been the past several cycles. Connecting 1880s with cold is just playing the cherry-picking coincidence game.”
It is necessary to also factor in oceanic behaviour that can either supplement or offset solar effects. The ocean cycles are not always in phase with the solar variations for example highly active solar cycles 18 and 19 were offset by a negative phase of the PDO so that the full effect of the late 20th century high levels of solar activity did not kick in for the tmperature of the troposphere until the PDO also went positive in the mid 70s to supplement cycles 21, 22 and 23.
Additionally it is becoming clearer that low solar activity is also associated with more ‘loopiness’ in the jets as they move more equatorward and swing about more latitudinally. The peaks and troughs of those loops then shift around over seasons and years to sometimes give anomalous warmth and sometimes anomalous cold in the same regions during a period of overall net cooling.
No cherry picking necessary. One just needs an appreciation of how other factors can supplement, offset or disguise (regionally) the background solar induced trends.
Kev
I agree with y0u entirely about figures being used to three decimal places, you might have detected in the article a desire to be meticulous in using ‘official’ figures, combined with a British irony that there is absolutely no way we can that be precise.
In fact that is precisely the theme of a series of articles I am writing. The first is here.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/14/little-ice-age-thermometers-%e2%80%93-history-and-reliability/
The second article is in preparation and looks at the absurd precision we place on data never intended to have that precision-accuracy to around a degree is the most we can hope for.
George said
“… The book is fascinating reading and puts a human face on our ever-changing climate.”
It is that last phrase that I continually write about-our climate has been ever changing to periods around as warm as now and much colder. We should be very thankful it is where it is. Ingrained in the bureaucrats mind however-especially the Met office and IPCC-is this notion that it was relatively constant until we influenced it.
I have a vast database of records and observations that is partly kept here
http://climatereason.com/LittleIceAgeThermometers/
If anyone has access to further ones please let me know either through these pages or direct privately.
Tonyb
Geoff Sharp says:
December 5, 2010 at 7:42 pm
Solar activity over SC21,22,23 looks slightly higher than the period you mention.
Leif replied:
Remember that solar activity after 1945 is ~20% artificially too high…”
I’d like a bit more information on this. It has been accepted for some time that cycles 17 through to 23 taken together constituted a historic high in solar activity. I am aware though that over time Leif has referred us to a number of ‘revisions’ that significantly reduced the amplitude of the variations as against those initially estimated by Lean and others.
I am somewhat concerned about the validity of such revisions and would appreciate a fuller description of the reasons why they were thought to be necessary and/or appropriate.
The Livingston Penn phenomenon of reducing sunspot contrast has also been used in support of a suggestion that in reality solar output continues as normal in the background despite the lack of visible sunspots at times such as during the Maunder Minimum.
The impression I am gaining is of efforts to remove the significance of solar variability in a similar fashion as evidence of the MWP was removed or ignored to create the so called hockey stick.
I would welcome explanations that would dispel such unworthy thoughts.
Slighhtly Ot, but we now know that Cancun is a farce – the Uk has sent John Prescott as a representative.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11888012
For those unaware, Prescott is the most vacuous politician ever given ministerial office. He was a union shop sreward who was given high office because he could bully the unions. He was mainly known for:
Owning two gas guzzling Jaguars
Eating all the pies
Smacking dissenters on the chin with his fist
Sh***ing his secretary
Knowing nothing about his brief (his department)
Mangling the English language to such a degree that there were great debates in the media as who what, exactly, he had just said.
Prescott’s knowledge of climate, science, industry and economics is, well, zippo, nil, nada, nothing. His contribution will be utter confusion and chaos. So in some respects, perhaps he is the perfect choice.
So what happened at Cancun, John? “Well, er, your knows these folks kinda spoken funny anit were diffricult to understood em — but, hey, those pies woz nice….”
.
Richard Holle says:
December 5, 2010 at 7:06 pm
Reply; several times I have tried to tell you about the lunar declinational atmospheric tides, and how the 18.6 year Mn period causes the movement of the location of the jet streams.
Lets explore this Richard. Do you have supporting data that supports your view, I am open to your ideas, but need more. The data should in theory should correlate with the AAO, AO and NAO?
Thanks for this thoroughly informative and fascinating article which chimes for me.
As an antipodean of European extraction with strong cultural and familial roots in the ‘Old Country’, as my parents referrred to the UK despite their own antipodean births, my dad enjoyed reciting Dickens and introduced me to his writing as a small boy. Later in life, awareness of social changes in the recent past made me realise just how important Dickens’ writing was in improving the lot of the very poor in the UK. Growing up in an environment where one had to travel quite a distance to experience snow and then only during the depths of winter, white Christmasses here in England have held a certain Dickensian fascination, particularly in areas where the architecture has remained largley unchanged since those days. The fascination wears off quite quickly as one deals with icy roads, slippery footpaths, extreme cold, non-delivery of essential items and one also becomes very grateful for modern central heating, double glazing, thermal outerwear and an excellent heater/demister in one’s car! Weirdly, even the Brit Minister for Transport has no idea about proper winter auto tyres!
Leif Svalgaard said to Geoff Sharp:
“Your problem is that you recognize the modern count is too high but then write off a method which produces a lower count based on Wolf’s principles. Maybe you could come up with a better method?”
Given the admitted difficulty in establishing exactly how Wolf would have observed recent cycles as compared to those of the Maunder Minimum perhaps we should stop trying to come up with ‘better methods’ because any such ‘better method’ is bound to be biased towards the individual researcher’s preconceptions and preferred outcome and so is unlikely to be any ‘better’ at all and more likely worse.
Just recognise and accept that solar activity was indeed in some significant respects different to that which has been observed recently and that however that variation is measured whether by sunspot numbers or isotope analysis there were indeed associated climate differences too and that those climate differences were also observed at other times when the sun appeared to be less active.
As for the occasions during cool periods when warmth was noted and vice versa I see no problem in accounting for that by proposing a degree of independent oceanic variability and regional variability in the longitudinal positions of the peaks and troughs as the ‘loopier’ jets of a quiet sun period shifted position over time.
The key evidence to me is that in the late 20th century when warming and an active sun was observed the jets were pushed slowly poleward into a narrower less ‘loopy’ band around the poles. Now that the sun is less active the jets are all over the place just as they were in the cooling mid 20th century and presumably also in the LIA, the Dalton and in every other cooling period that ever occurred at a time of less active sun.
Can anyone find evidence of jets up around Greenland for any length of time in the LIA or jets persistently down around Gibraltar in the MWP ?
Viking settlements in Greenland in the MWP clearly show that the jets were introducing warmth up there during the MWP and ships logs during the LIA show the jets frequently far more equatorward than they are now or were during the MWP.
That is good prima facie evidence for the solar link and as yet I see no good evidence that the apparent link is spurious yet there seem to be so many researchers apparently desperate to discredit any such link on the basis of speculation, second guessing past masters such as Wolf and ‘adjusting’ data as they think fit.
All in all, despite a plethora of graphs and figures, scientific postulating and “state-of-the-Art” computer modelling, climate does what it does, does what it’s always done, and will continue to do the same regardless of our theories, religions, beliefs and inevitable stupidity. Sometimes it’s warm, sometimes it’s cold. Whatever it is, chances are sooner or later it’ll be the opposite. What’s the point in all this tomfoolery? It just winds people up, causes resentement, and also causes humanity to do stupid things in the forlorn hope that it’ll change something. It never does, eventually the status quo is recovered, naturally, and we forget what all the fuss was about in the first place. Leave the climate alone, it’s not in need of repair.
Que sera, sera.
Monday 6th Nov at 9 am Southwell Nottinghamshire UK,
Car temp read -13.5C, Sunday was warmer at 0.5C.
@PolicyGuy
> Wake up! You are either being duped (doped) or participating in the
> duping (doping). Looking at your statement, it appears to be the later.
Hey, stifle the rhetoric. I was merely correcting your misconception that LIA and MM were one in the same. The date range for LIA are a bit fuzzy but it’s generally agreed that it spanned from the 15th to the 19th century. There were 3 “grand minima” of sunspot activity during the LIA: Spoerer (1450–1540), Maunder (1645-1715) and Dalton (1790–1820). Were these minima the cause of the coolling or just coincidences? There is still an on-going debate about this.
So, if I’m being duped, please enlighten me. What is the name of the widely accepted theory (or name of the scientist) that explains in scientific terms why climate must cool down during these minima. It must also explain why the LIA was also cool outside of the three grand minima.
Yes, there are many theories floating around to explain this. But the point I was making is that none of these have withstood the rigors of scientific examination and been widely accepted, even among climate skeptics. Forget the warmists.
I suspect there is a connection, but the exact mechanism causing it has not been discovered.
Stephen Wilde says:
December 6, 2010 at 1:45 am
Geoff Sharp says:
December 5, 2010 at 7:42 pm
Solar activity over SC21,22,23 looks slightly higher than the period you mention.
Leif replied:
Remember that solar activity after 1945 is ~20% artificially too high…”
I’d like a bit more information on this. It has been accepted for some time that cycles 17 through to 23 taken together constituted a historic high in solar activity. I am aware though that over time Leif has referred us to a number of ‘revisions’ that significantly reduced the amplitude of the variations as against those initially estimated by Lean and others.
Stephen says:
“I am somewhat concerned about the validity of such revisions and would appreciate a fuller description of the reasons why they were thought to be necessary and/or appropriate.”
You raise some great questions in this post, my research also suggests the modern count is different to past records. I am of the opinion that there is more than one artificial step in the SSN record, there is some controversy and perhaps hidden data in the older records that does not add up. Waldmeier in 1945 does look to add a large step in the record but the reason is not clear. Some say he introduced a new weighting system to the sunspot counting method that radically boosted the numbers, but I have also found evidence that Wolfer introduced this weighting system many years before Waldmeier. Wolfer did not have a Wolf like threshold and counted every speck, I have also had personal communication from a high ranking person in the SIDC stating that Wolfer in the late 1880’s used a telescope with twice the resolution of the original Wolf telescope. So Wolfer has a new counting method and maybe a new telescope, but he introduced the 0.6 scaling factor to bring his figures back to the Wolf standard which he cross checked for about 17 years. Waldmeier in an observatory report over the 3 observatories in operation during 1968 reported 3 150 mm telescopes with no mention of the original 80mm Wolf telescope, he also initiated a new way of classifying sunspot groups that may be responsible for the 20% jump at 1945. I have also set up a Wolf style telescope along with something approaching the modern telescope, and the resolution difference is beyond reproach.
So you can see the Sun is a messy place, but I think there is no doubt we are counting more spots today than what Wolf reconstructed for the Dalton Minimum.
The Livingston Penn phenomenon of reducing sunspot contrast has also been used in support of a suggestion that in reality solar output continues as normal in the background despite the lack of visible sunspots at times such as during the Maunder Minimum.
The Livingston & Penn theory in my opinion is total junk science. It is pseudo-science confirmed by those that should know better. When bad science is used to bolster failed predictions it gets even worse. Lets look at the detail.
L&P have a valid method of recording the magnetic strength of a “sunspot”. But in reality all they have done is measure more specks which drags down the overall magnetic value of the cycle. Everyone is aware we have more speck activity right now, so why bother measuring every speck? I have measured every group of SC24 that makes the grade using a simple contrast measurement not unlike the L&P method, I measure the whole group as a whole and do not measure every pore. The magnetic strength of SC24 has been increasing for the last 12 months and yesterday region 1131 set a new record for magnetic strength. This area is a minefield and could I suggest you read my debunking of the L&P method HERE.
I think we are on the same page, the jet stream changes via low solar activity is certainly worth investigating.
Excellent post, invaluable reference for anyone researching into real climate events.