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)
Here is detailed look at the seasonal CE temperatures.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-D.htm
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 5, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Stephen Wilde says:
December 5, 2010 at 1:53 pm
………………
You are partially correct
Mr. Wild is correct in that ionised ozone in the polar vortex is a very important factor.
Dr. Svalgaard is correct in that the size of the polar vortex is determined by the atmospheric circulation at mid- (and not lower!) latitudes.
There are two more factors, ignored by ‘the experts’, one affecting ionised ozone the other the atmospheric circulation at mid-latitudes.
I am attempting to put all four together into a more complex system, which might explain why one winter is partially different to another.
Winters are the key, the summers are relatively flat affair if you exclude two 20 year periods: 1680-1700 and 1990- 2010.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET3.htm
A very interesting read.
Geoff Sharp says:
December 5, 2010 at 11:19 pm
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.
What is missing is the justification of just that particular value. This is called a calibration.
Wolf also used a threshold which is unknown so it is impossible to calibrate exactly to his standard, but we think we are close.
“think we are close”. Based on what? Furthermore, everybody starting with Wolfer up to today agree that Wolf’s counting is wanting and that there should be no threshold.
When comparing Wolf’s reconstruction of the Dalton Minimum the Layman’s count is a much closer fit.
Wolf [and the ‘Layman”] did not observe during the Dalton minimum and the sunspot number back then is uncertain by at least a factor of two, so the statement is nonsense.
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?
Wolf’s principles are no good. All spots must be counted. Wolfer came up with the better method in ~1880.
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.”
http://www.leif.org/research/SIDC-Seminar-14Sept.pdf
Geoff Sharp says:
December 6, 2010 at 3:58 am
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
The reason is very clear, he introduced the weighting scheme.
but I have also found evidence that Wolfer introduced this weighting system many years before Waldmeier.
There is no such independent evidence, on the contrary there is direct evidence that Wolfer did not use the weighting scheme: we simply go back to check on drawings made at Mount Wilson what the size of the spots were on days where Wolfer and Brunner record that precisely one group with one spot was counted. From this one can see that the count [of one spot] was made regardless of the size of the spot – e.g. on November 21, 1920.
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.
One must count everything. Wolfer repeatedly states that he always used the original Wolf telescope [which still exists and is being used the continue the sunspot series by RWG in Switzerland. Wolf himself stopped using that telescope [because he was often on travel] and in the later years used a smaller handheld telescope. To compensate for the lower resolution of the smaller scope, Wolf multiplied all his counts by 1.50.
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.
The Wolf standard refers to when Wolf used the standard telescope. Wolf when using the smaller telescope multiplied his counts by 1.5 to match the values to the original standard.
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
The other telescopes were used for other observations and the original 64x telescope was used by Wolfer, Brunner, and Waldmeier for the sole purpose of counting the sunspot number. Waldmeier states in the observatory reports that “in der >i>althergebrachten Art wurden an dem Fraunhoferschen Fernrohr von 8 cm Oefnnung bei 64facher Vergroesserung the taeglichen Anzahlen von Fleckengruppen und der einzelnen Flecken gezaehlt.” [as in the previous way the daily number of spot groups and single spots were counted with the Fraunhofer telescope having 8 cm aperture and 64 times magnification – i.e. the original telescope].
I think there is no doubt we are counting more spots today than what Wolf reconstructed for the Dalton Minimum.
Because the modern counts are aligned with Waldmeier’s scale [both use the same reference station – Locarno], the modern counts are 20% to higher up to about the year 2000. Since then SIDC is running about 12% lower than what Waldmeier would have counter. We know this latter fact because Waldmeier’s assistent [H. Keller, who actually did most of the counting] is still with us and is still counting, still using the original telescope. In addition, the fit made by Wolfer to the original Wolf scale is faulty and all Wolf’s numbers before 1882 but be increased by another 20%. We can cross-check all this by using the effect sunspots have on the amplitude of the diurnal variation of the direction of the compass needle. The bottom line is that the official sunspot number before 1882 should be increased by 40%, between 1882 and 1945 by 20%, and after 2000 reduced by 12%. I’m giving a talk on this at the forthcoming AGU meeting [Dec.17th]. [*sigh* what a guy]
BTW, Rudolf Wolf died this day [Dec. 6th] 117 years ago in 1893. He continued observing [with his handheld telescope] from his room window until the end of October, 1893.
Leif Svalgaard said to Geoff Sharp:
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.
Forget about 1958 onwards, what caused the warming and cooling prior to that date.
vukcevic says:
December 6, 2010 at 5:14 am
Winters are the key, the summers are relatively flat affair if you exclude two 20 year periods: 1680-1700 and 1990- 2010.
You should not just exclude things that don’t fit. They are usually signs that you are wrong to begin with.
Robuk says:
December 6, 2010 at 5:53 am
You call it it cherry picking, I would just say a line of research. PDO reconstructions also show a deep low around 1880.
[sigh] temperatures around 1880 were higher than before and after.
Thank you Leif and Geoff for a lot of background information on sunspot counting.
However as I see it all the debate as to numbers skirts around the essential issue which is simply that SSNs do wax and wane over time in tune with variations in the sun’s output and although TSI varies little there are larger variations in the mix of particles and wavelengths.
The precise degree of waxing and waning may well be unimportant if the climate system is sufficiently sensitive to the waxing and waning that does occur.
Thus we do have spells when the sun is less active and cooler Earth climates pop up during such times more often than they are likely to do from chance just as when the sun is more active warmer Earth climates pop up more more often than would be expected from chance alone.
So, in the end, there is no point in a debate akin to ascertaining the number of angels that could fit on the head of a pin.
The reality seems to be that some aspect of solar variability does have an effect on the size of the polar vortices and consequently on the latitudinal positioning of the jets and that aspect of solar variability is sometimes offset by and sometimes supplemented by oceanic behaviour.
So the behaviour of the jets reflects the balance between top down solar effects and bottom up oceanic effects at any given moment.
The importance of that is that the behaviour of the jets also dictates total cloudiness, global albedo and the amount of solar energy that can penetrate the oceans to result in climate effects at a later date.
All observed climate changes are simply a function of the change of position of a particular region in relation to the ever shifting air circulation systems above.
The system smooths out and eventually eliminates global temperature changes so as to maintain an equilibrium between sea surface and surface air temperature.
The primary natural response to any attempt at temperature disruption is always negative and sufficiently scaleable to have dealt with all but the most violent natural disruptions and even then over time the effects of such disruptions are eventually dissipated.
More CO2 just results in a miniscule unmeasurable adjustment to the natural climate system. Natural swings are far far greater than anything CO2 could ever achieve.
Anyway, the 1880s do seem to have been on the cool side:
1880s 13.73 56.71
1890s 13.75 56.74
1900s 13.74 56.73
1910s 13.72 56.70
1920s 13.83 56.89
1930s 13.96 57.12
1940s 14.04 57.26
1950s 13.98 57.16
1960s 13.99 57.18
1970s 14.00 57.20
1980s 14.18 57.52
1990s 14.31 57.76
2000s 14.51 58.12
Stephen Wilde says:
December 6, 2010 at 7:10 am
The reality seems to be that some aspect of solar variability does have an effect on the size of the polar vortices and consequently on the latitudinal positioning of the jets and that aspect of solar variability is sometimes offset by and sometimes supplemented by oceanic behaviour.
“reality” and “seems” hardly belong together. You have provided no evidence for your “reality”. Lots of repetitive claims, but no ‘reality’.
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 6, 2010 at 6:09 am
……………
You never read properly. I was referring to the stratospheric ozone and planetary wave, these are just two factors among number of others of which most decisive and important is NAP as in here:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NAP.htm
You have provided no evidence for your “reality”.
There is lots of ‘evidence’ but of a persuasive nature rather than definitive proof due to the inadequacy of past data collections.
It won’t be long, though, before the position becomes clear. Modern data collection methods just need a little longer to acquire what we need.
Do you think it is just coincidence that the jets began to loop about more just as the sun changed its behaviour ?
And that they looped about more in the mid 20th century, and during the LIA ?
And that each time they loop about more we see a more negative AO ?
Such observations are as valid as detailed data collections because they give a clue to inter relationships between different features of the climate system. They tell us where to look for more detailed data.
vukcevic says:
December 6, 2010 at 8:22 am
most decisive and important is NAP
Which is undocumented, unsubstantiated, and physically implausible, so just yet another of hundreds of claims.
Stephen Wilde says:
December 6, 2010 at 8:29 am
Modern data collection methods just need a little longer to acquire what we need.
Do you think it is just coincidence that the jets began to loop about more just as the sun changed its behaviour?
“what we need” sounds like you are fishing with some confirmation bias. And ‘Absolutely’ coincidences. BTW, You evaded my question as the the falsification of your claims.
While Dickens’ childhood Christmases may have helped shape his story, I think he simply found the bitterly cold, bleak London Christmas Eve was much more effective in conveying Scrooge’s, well, scroogeihsness, and the Cratchetts’ spirit than a warm, 45 degree (F) Christmas. The opening scene with Cratchett toiling over the books with the sinlge lump of coal weakly smoldering in the stove is one of English Literature’s most evocative passages. Similarly, the cold and dark bed chamber of Scrooge is obviously metaphorical, wouldn’t work nearly as well if it were warm and stuffy.
Geoff Sharp says:
December 6, 2010 at 1:48 am
“”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?””
The best way I have come up with to show the relationship is the use of visual satellite movies, I do not at this time have the assets to do the job, but the idea is to overlay the position of the moon on the surface of the Earth for each frame of the satellite movie so as to show the relative movement of the center of the tidal effect with the response of the atmosphere.
http://agora.ex.nii.ac.jp/digital-typhoon/archive/monthly/
If you could view movies like these for the entire globe with the position of the moon imposed upon the surface where it was overhead, the effects would be viewable.
In the Pacific basin the flow patterns are spread wide due to the topographical effects of the Himalayan mountains.
When the westerly flow crosses the Andes and Rockies the lunar atmospheric declinational tidal effects are enhanced on the lee side, and it affects the heat distribution of the North Atlantic, enhances the precipitation of both North and South America, most noticeably in the Amazon rain forests. In the North Atlantic the much wilder turbulence (than seen in the Pacific basin) gives the zonal flow patterns or the alternating much more looping meridional flow enhanced patterns as the four fold pattern of declinational modulation goes through its phases.
The problems then with forecasting the UK weather and Northern Europe is a result of the overlapping of the turbulent folds in the atmosphere, that give pulses of the still unmixed various surges of warmth, wet, cold, dry air masses that are in the process of mixing as they cross the coastline. If I (or some one with access were to look) had access to satellite photos in an animated format like the above linked, mentioned movies, for the European areas and the North Atlantic, the 30 year long run of photos with the superimposed lunar positions could be seen clearly in phase with the NAO.
Just as the 18 year Saros cycle can be seen to repeat in the pacific movies, they would be more easily seen in the North Atlantic because of the enhanced effects by the long string of both mountain chains, allowing the enhanced deflection of the resultant tidal patterns.
I have had this dream of getting the visualization of these effects for some time now. I am retired and time is available, but lack of funds do not allow me to be able to do this yet. As a result I have hoped to find a way to effectively “get er done” by finding someone already at work in this field with the resources to do this project. Stuck on a slow dial up connection (16 to 19kbps noisy connection at the farm) the transfer of large data sets is impossible for me at this time.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
If you look at the peaks in the temperatures here after September 2010, you will see how they match the lunar declinational culminations (stronger for primary Northern declinational bulges, and weaker for secondary tidal bulges at Southern culminations) response to the surges of warmer air mass coming in from the North Atlantic deflected up along the coast of Greenland.
Max North September 2
South September 15
North September 30
South October 12
North October 27
South November 9
North November 23
South December 6
North December 21
Sorry for not being able to make graphic comparisons for you on short notice, as it should be my responsibility to show my own proof of my assertions. Tallbloke has a lot of Representative graphics on his web site that could be used to show the longer term relationships more clearly.
Thanks TonyB for the fine post, and comprehensive references. The poet and writer J.W.von Goethe (1749-1832), who was interested in atmospheric processes, called the early 1800s the “Cold Epoche”.
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 6, 2010 at 8:52 am
Which is undocumented, unsubstantiated, and physically implausible, so just yet another of hundreds of claims.
Undocumented?
Smithsonian Institution has all what is need to know.
I spent lot of time digging it out, so I am not going to splash it all over the place until whole work is completed, and I am in no hurry.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NAP.htm
Unsubstantiated, and physically implausible?
Bernoulli’s Hydrodynamique is still valid, unless you know otherwise.
Hundreds?
It is more like thousands, if you include all those ‘peer review’ papers, most of which will be if they are not already long forgotten.
Dosvidaniya.
vukcevic says:
December 6, 2010 at 10:25 am
I spent lot of time digging it out, so I am not going to splash it all over the place until whole work is completed, and I am in no hurry.
Then you keep quiet until then [as is normal, decent scientific practice]
Bernoulli’s Hydrodynamique is still valid, unless you know otherwise.
But has nothing to do with the magnetic ‘effect’.
val majkus says:
December 5, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Quadrant Online has a couple of interesting articles:
Sceptics losing clarity
by Peter Smith
There should be another article entitled :
Peter Smith losing clarity 🙂
There are a lot of climate and economic inferences that can be gleaned by taking a close look at the popular 19th century prints produced by Currier and Ives. (see for example: http://currierandives.net/).
I notice winter scenes showing people ice skating where today the ice is not normally thick enough and farmers with teams of horses pulling a sleigh where today the snow cover is not sufficient to justify that expense. I also notice the number of chimneys in the larger homes, implying just how many fireplaces had to be used for heating.
I said:
“My contention can be falsified if the observed rise in ozone quantities above 45km between 2004 and 2007 fails to be sustained after 2007.”
Leif Svalgaard asked:
“Not precise enough. E.g. for how long? thru 2008, 2009, 2010, 2030?”
I reply:
If the increasing ozone trend above 45km during the period of quiet sun fails to be maintained whilst the sun remains relatively quiet then I would be looking at the issue in more detail. The peaks and troughs of individual solar cycles could confuse the signal so ideally I would like to see a couple of complete solar cycles and see whether the trend is maintained. After all, the cooling of the mesosphere when the sun was more active lasted for several solar cycles so we are looking for multidecadal trends not short term spikes and troughs.
However we should get a good indication of ozone sensitivity above 45km if we can compare ozone quantities in that region between the recent cycle minimum and the forthcoming cycle 24 peak. I’m sure lots of people will be watching it closely without my encouragement.
The Buck Wheat
Thanks for the link. Some of the prints seem ‘idealistic’ in much the same way as ‘pull my finger’ at 9.44 observes that A Christmas Carol works better as a metaphor for the bleakness of Scrooges soul than the greater reality of depicting London in mild wet weather.
I also wonder how many of the images were fired by the undoubtedly very cold first few decades of the 19th Century.
An intriguing archive which I will look through in more detail, thank you.
tonyb
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 6, 2010 at 10:36 am
…….
But I am not your ‘normal common garden scientist’, come to think of it, I am not a scientist at all. I post it as insurance, just in case I fall under No.11 bus.
I never said that NAP is magnetic, GMF is the Arctic’s stratosphere ‘boyo’. This is the CET, on this line gmf is not the train driver, only a passenger.
Stephen Wilde says:
December 6, 2010 at 11:08 am
If the increasing ozone trend above 45km during the period of quiet sun fails to be maintained whilst the sun remains relatively quiet then I would be looking at the issue in more detail.
Is different from being ‘falsified’.
The peaks and troughs of individual solar cycles could confuse the signal so ideally I would like to see a couple of complete solar cycles and see whether the trend is maintained. After all, the cooling of the mesosphere when the sun was more active lasted for several solar cycles so we are looking for multidecadal trends not short term spikes and troughs.
Would put falsification some 20 years in the future… And I thought the solar cycle response was the signal. The mesosphere does not have a memory of several cycles, only a few months at best.
However we should get a good indication of ozone sensitivity above 45km if we can compare ozone quantities in that region between the recent cycle minimum and the forthcoming cycle 24 peak.
And what should we look for, precisely?
vukcevic says:
December 6, 2010 at 11:28 am
I post it as insurance, just in case I fall under No.11 bus.
I never said that NAP is magnetic, GMF is the Arctic’s stratosphere ‘boyo’. This is the CET, on this line gmf is not the train driver, only a passenger.
The person who gets the honor of a discovery is not the one that makes the discovery, but the one who convinces the garden scientists of it. So far you have done nothing in that regard.