A Dalton Minimum Repeat is Shaping Up

The sun went spotless yesterday, the first time in quite awhile. It seems like a good time to present this analysis from my friend David Archibald. For those not familiar with the Dalton Minimum, here’s some background info from Wiki:

The Dalton Minimum was a period of low solar activity, named after the English meteorologist John Dalton, lasting from about 1790 to 1830.[1] Like the Maunder Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Dalton Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average global temperatures. The Oberlach Station in Germany, for example, experienced a 2.0°C decline over 20 years.[2] The Year Without a Summer, in 1816, also occurred during the Dalton Minimum. Solar cycles 5 and 6, as shown below, were greatly reduced in amplitude. – Anthony

The Dalton minimum in the 400 year history of sunspot numbers

Guest post by David Archibald

James Marusek emailed me to ask if I could update a particular graph. Now that it is a full two years since the month of solar minimum, this was a good opportunity to update a lot of graphs of solar activity.

Figure 1: Solar Polar Magnetic Field Strength

The Sun’s current low level of activity starts from the low level of solar polar magnetic field strength at the 23/24 minimum. This was half the level at the previous minimum, and Solar Cycle 24 is expected to be just under half the amplitude of Solar Cycle 23.

Figure 2: Heliospheric Current Sheet Tilt Angle

It is said that solar minimum isn’t reached until the heliospheric current sheet tilt angle has flattened. While the month of minimum for the 23/24 transition is considered to be December 2008, the heliospheric current sheet didn’t flatten until June 2009.

Figure 3: Interplanetary Magnetic Field

The Interplanetary Magnetic Field remains very weak. It is almost back to the levels reached in previous solar minima.

Figure 4: Ap Index 1932 – 2010

The Ap Index remains under the levels of previous solar minima.

Figure 5: F10.7 Flux 1948 – 2010

The F10.7 Flux is a more accurate indicator of solar activity than the sunspot number. It remains low.

Figure 6: F10.7 Flux aligned on solar minima

In this figure, the F10.7 flux of the last six solar minima are aligned on the month of minimum, with the two years of decline to the minimum and three years of subsequent rise. The Solar Cycle 24 trajectory is much lower and flatter than the rises of the five previous cycles.

Figure 7: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 – 210

A weaker interplanetary magnetic field means more cosmic rays reach the inner planets of the solar system. The neutron count was higher this minimum than in the previous record. Thanks to the correlation between the F10.7 Flux and the neutron count in Figure 8 following, we now have a target for the Oulu neutron count at Solar Cycle 24 maximum in late 2014 of 6,150.

Figure 8: Oulu Neutron Flux plotted against lagged F10.7 flux

Neutron count tends to peak one year after solar minimum. Figure 8 was created by plotting Oulu neutron count against the F10.7 flux lagged by one year. The relationship demonstrated by this graph indicates that the most likely value for the Oulu neutron count at the Solar Cycle 24 maximum expected to be a F10.7 flux value of 100 in late 2014 will be 6,150.

Figure 9: Solar Cycle 24 compared to Solar Cycle 5

I predicted in a paper published in March 2006 that Solar Cycles 24 and 25 would repeat the experience of the Dalton Minimum. With two years of Solar Cycle 24 data in hand, the trajectory established is repeating the rise of Solar Cycle 5, the first half of the Dalton Minimum. The prediction is confirmed. Like Solar Cycles 5 and 6, Solar Cycle 24 is expected to be 12 years long. Solar maximum will be in late 2014/early 2015.

Figure 10: North America Snow Cover Ex-Greenland

The northern hemisphere is experiencing its fourth consecutive cold winter. The current winter is one of the coldest for a hundred years or more. For cold winters to provide positive feedback, snow cover has to survive from one winter to the next so that snow’s higher albedo relative to bare rock will reflect sunlight into space, causing cooler summers. The month of snow cover minimum is most often August, sometimes July. We have to wait another eight months to find out how this winter went in terms of retained snow cover. The 1970s cooling period had much higher snow cover minima than the last thirty years. Despite the last few cold winters, there was no increase in the snow cover minima. The snow cover minimum may have to get to over two million square kilometres before it starts having a significant effect.

David Archibald

December 2010

The Dalton Minimum was a period of low solar activity, named after the English meteorologist John Dalton, lasting from about 1790 to 1830.[1] Like the Maunder Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Dalton Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average global temperatures. The Oberlach Station in Germany, for example, experienced a 2.0°C decline over 20 years.[2] The Year Without a Summer, in 1816, also occurred during the Dalton Minimum.
Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
crosspatch

“I predicted in a paper published in March 2006 that Solar Cycles 24 and 25 would repeat the experience of the Dalton Minimum.”
Why do you believe it will last two cycles or be limited to two cycles? What gives you the impression that it will mimic exactly the Dalton minimum? My gut says “past performance does not indicate future results”. We might be in for one or three weak cycles, I don’t think we quite know. We might be in for 1000 years of weaker activity for all we know. Do we have, other than the Dalton, any documented previous two cycle weak periods?

Casper

It is quite probably that we’ll be seeing a new Dalton Minimum. A global cooling? I’ll bet the man is responsible for it! lol

Pops

The sun has probably been spotless on several occasions recently but those doing the counting have been using a large magnifying glass to count every pixel in a desperate attempt to pump-up the numbers. Some would even like to change the system and use the STEREO Behind / STEREO Ahead satellites to count sunspots out of sight of earth; to bump-up the numbers even more.

John Edmondson

Figure 10 is the key. Winter snow is to be expected. The problems begin if it doesn’t melt in the summer, then we are in for trouble.

Robert M

Well, it is a good article, and your arguments appear sound….
And, at least as far as the repeat of the Dalton Minimum, I agree with your conclusions. However, I sincerely hope that you are wrong about a 2c drop for a few decades, the links between global cooling and grand solar minimums are a bit more tenuous and I am holding out hope that the cooling observed was coincidence or not as severe as what we have in our future. Or maybe CAGW might save us. (That would be funny!)
I believe if there is a 2c drop it could be disaster for humanity especially if the warmies and watermelons get what they want and world governments are blindsided by the cold.

Excellent overview of the status of our warming star. If these relations hold we are in for some “cool”surprises. See various descriptions of winters in the 1790 – 1830 period.

R. de Haan
Bill Jamison

Well we’re having a cold FALL, winter is yet to be determined! Thanks for the update, I was wondering when we’d see a new “prediction” from NASA updating their incorrect one. So far David Archibald’s predictions have been MUCH more accurate than almost everyone else’s. Pretty impressive so far but the jury is still out and it will be many years before we know for sure that he really nailed it.

RR Kampen

So 2009 and 2010 should have been half a degree C colder than it was around 1970. But they aren’t. How come?

Regular updated polar fields here:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC6.htm
The past and future projection:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC2.htm

Michael Larkin

After the obligatory nod to AGW, in his last para, Boris says:
“The question is whether anthropogenic global warming is the exclusive or dominant fact that determines our climate, or whether Corbyn is also right to insist on the role of the Sun. Is it possible that everything we do is dwarfed by the moods of the star that gives life to the world? The Sun is incomparably vaster and more powerful than any work of man. We are forged from a few clods of solar dust. The Sun powers every plant and form of life, and one day the Sun will turn into a red giant and engulf us all. Then it will burn out. Then it will get very nippy indeed.”
Methinks that Boris’ true leanings are more accurately conveyed in this para than the one with the nod.

Dalton minimum winters (according to CETs) were not too bad. There was occasionally colder one, last winter was on par or even worse then those of 1805 -1810.
Detailed seasons CETs 1659-2010 (reference 1950) available here:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-D.htm

David, UK

Robert M says:
December 20, 2010 at 12:46 am
I believe if there is a 2c drop it could be disaster for humanity especially if the warmies and watermelons get what they want and world governments are blindsided by the cold.

I am of the mind that we need to start seeing a significant drop in temperatures for the sake of humanity. For all the damage this would do (crops would suffer, millions would die of starvation and cold-related deaths) it would pale besides the damage our corrupt leaders and the UN would inflict on us. We have already seen deaths from starvation due to tax-subsidised farmers growing biofuel instead of food (pushing food prices through the roof). We have already seen masses of jobs lost as once-free businesses fail to compete with the tax-funded green industry. We have already seen energy bills sky-rocket. We have already seen an entire section of the population – i.e. those who know that scepticism in science is an essential element – stigmatised by our own political representatives as “climate deniers” (Gordon Brown used the term on many occasions during his short, unelected period in office, as does Obama, as do most of the unelected EU, as do most of the unelected UN). We have already seen Government-produced propaganda targeted towards children, designed to scare them and if necessary to turn them against their sceptical parents. This is showing no signs of stopping, despite the complete failure of alarmists to prove their corrupt hypothesis. If anything, the more evidence that mounts against them (i.e. that the recent warming is part of a natural cycle, and is nothing remotely unusual), the more totalitarian they become.
So again, I say bring on the cold.

Archonix

RR Kampen says:
December 20, 2010 at 1:08 am
So 2009 and 2010 should have been half a degree C colder than it was around 1970. But they aren’t. How come?

There are two questions to be answered before that one can be: What other effects are in play, and how reliable is the temperature record? The latter has to be answered before we can begin to assess the former. Given that the temperature record has been repeatedly proven unreliable, we can’t answer for sure. We can’t say whether the 70s were colder because we have no reliable record to demonstrate that they were, in fact colder. The implication is that we cannot then ask what is causing now to be warmer, as we have no actual knowledge that it is, in fact, warmer.
If your data is unreliable, any comparisons you make are invalid.

J.Gommers

The prediction is not consistent with the Livingston/Penn forecast. Four years from now the sunspotnumber will be around 10 and cycle 25 will be substantially weaker than cycle 24. Looks much different, more like a Maunder minimum.
But in medio 2011 there will be certainty.

So for now, the projection is a Dalton minimum type, not Maundeer minimum, which has a worse and longer cooling than Dalton. David Archibald’s analysis is similar to Svensmark’s right? And which Leif Svalgaard, Willie Soon, others do not really agree with?

wayne

“J.Gommers says:
December 20, 2010 at 2:02 am
The prediction is not consistent with the Livingston/Penn forecast. Four years from now the sunspotnumber will be around 10 and cycle 25 will be substantially weaker than cycle 24. Looks much different, more like a Maunder minimum.
But in medio 2011 there will be certainty.”
Got to agree with you. I don’t think we are looking far enough back for comparisons. Even during the Maunder there were periods of a flurry of activity just to soon fall apart and go quiet again. This was in the period ~1640-1695. That’s the signature we should watch for if this is truly a more severe minimum.

I think Anthony needs to make a “Sun Page” rather like the “ice page” and start gathering a bunch of solar graphs and status pages in it.
Somehow I think it’s going to become a very “hot” topic for the next decade or so…
FWIW, here in California, I’ve been getting drenched all day. Common 40 years ago, not very common the last decade or two. There’s something to this cycles stuff.
Along the way, I started playing with StormPredator to look at the clouds, then discovered it has a ‘total rain this storm’ option (and a lot more). The bottom line is that I had a great time playing with it and looking at what was sitting on top of me all day…
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/19/rain-radar-now/
And if you know anyone interested in weather or the storms from this present cooling cycle (at least if they are in the USA where this covers) it would make a decent stocking stuffer.
Just one guys opinion. But you can look at the pictures of what I was looking at today, and think how much more comfy it is to do that from the warm inside rather than going out into it to figure out just how bad it really is…
I think I’m going to be using that kind of picture, from StormPredator, in several postings to come as “things happen” during this increasingly cold and snowy decade…

This link was just sent to me… it’s from 2009 and related to Copenhagen failure:
http://benjaminfulford.net/2009/12/21/secret-financial-maneuvers-fail-to-save-copenhagen-climate-summit/

kim

We are cooling, folks; for how long even kim doesn’t know.
===============

Roger Carr

E.M.Smith said (December 20, 2010 at 2:31 am): But you can look at the pictures of what I was looking at today, and think how much more comfy it is to do that from the warm inside rather than going out into it to figure out just how bad it really is…
Is this a message, E, M,?

Bryan Farmer

I think one of the things you have to remember is the oceans hold allot of heat and solar cycle 22 & 23 were much higher than were seeing now, it takes time for some of that latent heat to be removed from the oceans. I think it will be the gradual step down over the next 10 or 20 years for the ocean’s to return to temps seen during the Dalton Min. We get to watch the great climate machine work through its natural pace, irrespective of what man’s little influence is to or climate.

Sense Seeker

Thank you David, that is interesting work and it sounds plausible. But earlier on this blog I got blamed for appealing to authority and was encouraged to think for myself, so let’s try some logic on this. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Given that solar activity has been low in recent years and knowing that this gives a cooling effect, but that high average global temperatures have nonetheless been observed (with each subsequent decade being warmer than the previous for the past several decades), can we conclude that carbon-induced global warming has so far been stronger than the cooling effect of low solar activity?
And assuming that solar activity has inadequately been accounted for in climate models, does this imply that the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide on world average temperature may have been underestimated?

kim

Global Confidential, eh, JB?
===========

Dr T G Watkins

David Archibald presents the data and makes cautious predictions and I suspect that, like any good scientist, he can’t wait for the next few years to pass to see if his predictions are valid. If not, he’ll change his interpretation . Well done David, as usual.
I agree with DavidUK that our scientifically illiterate politicians and their completely mad fixation with energy policies, which will potentially destroy economies, are far more of a threat than any climate variation.
Check out the windmill electricity contribution at NETA.

kim

SS, so tell me this mechanism by which low solar activity recently has acted on the climate. Your timeline should follow, right?
========

HR

So any lags in global temperature associated with this?
Because where ever you think 2010 global temp is going to finish it’s going to take a stretch to describe it as cool no matter how many personnel reports of it being cold outside. Certainly the UAH satellite data doesn’t seem to have it cool.

Baa Humbug

Sense Seeker says:
December 20, 2010 at 3:10 am

Given that solar activity has been low in recent years and knowing that this gives a cooling effect, but that high average global temperatures have nonetheless been observed (with each subsequent decade being warmer than the previous for the past several decades), can we conclude that carbon-induced global warming has so far been stronger than the cooling effect of low solar activity?

Errr no we can’t, not until the full effects of ocean lag times is taken into consideration.
You know it makes sense.

HR

Just out of curiosity where does the data from Oberlach Station come from? A google search just keeps coming up with quotes from Wiki. I see the Wiki article refers to Archibald. Any help?

Patrick Davis

“Sense Seeker says:
December 20, 2010 at 3:10 am
And assuming that solar activity has inadequately been accounted for in climate models, does this imply that the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide on world average temperature may have been underestimated?”
One first needs to MEASURE world (I assume you also mean “global”?) average temperatures. So far, climatologists aren’t doing a terribly good job at that. Which makes everything they say totally meaningless.

Roger Carr

Question to David Archibald: is there any area of weather and/or climate where you and Indigo Jones have insights, observations, knowledge or predictions in common?

Solar output is ‘modulated’ (possibly initiated ) by the rest of the solar system mainly 2-3 planets with the largest magnetospheres. Unlike solar iradiance (TSI) which is coming from sun, a single source and is radially distributed, there are 4-5 sources of strong magnetic fields. There is probability that these interact through electric current loop within the heliosphere (existence of which solar experts deny). Only recently NASA has recognised existence of ‘magnetic ropes’ , which in reality is no more than a electric current loop.
The evidence of these magnetic interactions can be seen in the correlation of the Arctic magnetic field and solar activity.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC9.htm
when I discovered this correlation, certain scientist vehemently denied it, I was called charlatan, danger to society and worse, to be eventually banned from the SC24 blog.
This is the reality that science never bothered with.
Formulae that give a close approximation of solar activity
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC11.htm
and solar polar fields
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC2.htm
are all based on assumptions that there are close interactions within solar system.
Since purely mechanical connection has been dissected in very fine detail and no evidence could be found, the electro-magnetic coupling is the only possible alternative.
Solar physics is still glued to the Parker’s models, frozen magnetic field in plasma (which is a contradiction in itself), in denial of electric current’s half of the equation (magnetic field and electric currents are inseparable!), despite daily discoveries coming out of NASA, always proclaiming unexpected.
Era of the false idea of ‘frozen magnetic field’ in solar science is belatedly coming to an end, and finally true physics of Faraday, Lorentz and Maxwell will flourish.

Patrick Davis

Interesting the Sun had a really big “cough/sneeze” last week, and now seems to have gone back to sleep. Maybe Al Gore can take some chook soup up there to wake it up a bit? This climate disruption is getting cold, even for a POME in an Australian summer. Max 22c today (I don’t mind this actually, the bugs are kept at bay. And I had a Huntsman spider on the INSIDE of the windscreen of my car the other day – sheet).

stephan

So far DA has been 100% correct with his prediction (except delayed drop in temps which are occurring now BTW). So far as I can tell D hathaway and L Svalgard way off in nearly all solar statements and analysis…. good on you DA!

HR

David I found you’re paper.
http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse-science/solar-cycles/Archibald.pdf
You say compared to 2003 you predicted/expect a drop of 1.5oC by 2020. It’s 2010 now, 7 years after 2003 and 10 years to 2020. How do you think your prediction is holding up?

Sense Seeker

Baa, a lag effect of the oceans is not a very plausible explanation (not to say humbug). Solar activity has at best been essentially flat since at least 1980, so the oceans should have caught up by now. You can see that the ‘1970s cooling period’ followed a period of low solar activity with a lag time of 10 years at the very most.
Also, since 1980 temperature has gone up by about 0.5 degrees Celsius, you’d need a very impressive lag effect to explain that, given flat solar activity.
There’s gotta be something else that explains this temperature pattern. (And the rest of the world knows what it is. You know it makes sense.)

richard verney

I endorse the suggestion that Anthony should start a sun page.
As I see matters, we have a lot of data but no one really knows what it means and the extent of its implications. I think that we may have to wait more until 2013/4 to really be sure how the cycles are panning out.
My gut tells me that the sun has a much more influential role on climate than does a trace gas. The power of the sun is truly remarkable and its size and power difficult to comprehend. I can easily accept that there may be behavoiral issues of the sun which we presently do not know about and/or do not understand, especially since the data snap shot is over such a small period. In matters such as this, one has to consider geological time and it is crazy to seek to extrapolate too much from just a 100 years or even a 1000 years of (questionable) data. To add to the problems, it appears that the instrument record has been allowed to become so corrupted that it is patently unreliable such that we do not know for sure what the global temperatures (and how I dislike that concept) were during the last 70 years.
I endorse the comment about the role of the oceans and the importance of their heat reservoir. I have for years been suggesting that we should disregard land temperature details (too unreliable because of urban spread) and simply look at ocean temps. The oceans cover approx 70% of the Earth and unlike land act as heat reservoirs. If the Earth is cooling due to less sun activity, it will take time for the oceans to dumpo their heat and before we feel the full extent of the cooling.
I have never understood why we should be so worried about a 2 deg C increase in temperature. I think that it would be benefical. For the UK it would be wonderful since we would become more like Southern France and perhaps we could replace the Spannish Costas as a tourist destination; heaven knows that the UK needs something to replace all the lost industry over the course of the last 30 years. On the other hand, I consider that a 2 deg C drop in temperature would be a significant problem for the Northern Hemishpere and accross the food basket area of the globe. Man would obviously survive, but it would no doubt result in millions of deaths. I for one would be emigrating from the UK if it were to get colder.
I think that we are living in interesting times and the next 10 years will establish whether there is any merit in the AGW conjecture. I doubt that there is. My concern is that the politicians are rushing around like headless chickens rushing full steam ahead beating the AGW drum and the need to decarbonize the western economies such that untold damage will be done in these next 10 years. What a shame, if only there was a way to hold them personally accountable for the damage they inflict and to reimburse the ordinary citizen for any increased taxes/subsidies levied upon the ordinary citizen.

Chris Wright

Dr T G Watkins says:
December 20, 2010 at 3:16 am
“…….I agree with DavidUK that our scientifically illiterate politicians and their completely mad fixation with energy policies, which will potentially destroy economies, are far more of a threat than any climate variation.
Check out the windmill electricity contribution at NETA.”
I check the temperature every morning here in the UK. Today’s (tied with two days ago) is the lowest so far this winter, and it’s %%%!!!*** freezing!
Right now NETA gives 0.2% both for the last thirty minutes and twenty four hours. Just when we need all the energy we can get, these pointless monsters that disfigure our countryside are currently supplying just one fifth of one percent of our needs. A recent headline in the Daily Telegraph stated that this nonsense will add £500 to our energy bills.
Complete and utter madness.
Chris

Ron Hongsermeier

I’m also interested in the source of the “Oberlach Station in Germany”. I don’t live in Oberlach, but do live in Germany and couldn’t find any reference by internet searching, despite setting the language to German and using different engines. Also, the Wikipedia article doesn’t even have the reference for Dave A’s work, which it references, only a couple of page numbers from it– very confusing.
In general though, thanks for this blog post: very interesting!

AusieDan

Sense Seeker
It’s been raining all over Australia, when it should be summertime dry.
And it’s been cold in Sydney when it should be hot, but there a chill in the air and snow in the hills.
I can’t remember this type of weather since the late 1940’s, which led to an extended period of cooler, wetter conditions, following the long drought of the 1930’s and early 1940’s.
At best, the 60 year cycle has turned and we’re in for 30 years of cooler weather.
At worst, the whole series of cycles is ending and we’re in for a much bleaker time. That will take a few years more before we can see which pattern prevails.
You speak of the influence of CO2.
Once you remove the true influence of UHI from the global indexes you will find no evidence of CO2 heating in the past 150 years of measured temperatures.
Watch and learn – either the temperature is about to accelerate according to the IPCC 4th report, or it is about to decline.
time will tell.
We live in interesting times.

Well, if you really want to compare with the Dalton minimum, isn’t it really essential to use data from that period? And compare that data set with the current one? Yet Archibald ends with data sets ranging from 1976, 1966,1930,2006 and then tries to connect it to 1776-1820 ish. Without using and raw data from 1776-1820 other than sunspot observations. Am I the only one who thinks this a bit strange?
What’s needed is a flux measure for those dates in the Dalton or at worst a proxy from ice core data.Then you can compare.
Go back to the data and try again before making predictions based on what at best could be described as a dodgy data set.
This kind of science really gets me because I think that Archibald may have a valid point but it’s rather blunted because the scientific argument isn’t cutting enough, if you’ll excuse the mixed metaphore.
Look at this data set, it goes back 11,000 years, until 50 years before now.
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/climate_forcing/solar_variability/solanki2004-ssn.txt
Then add the observations made from 1955 until 2010 (using raw data )and then , perhaps then you’ll get an interesting graph. Perhaps one could comment that proxies aren’t as reliable as the 10,7 flux raw data, but it’s the best we’ve got.And that mixing the two data sets is also dodgy. But hey,lets do it any way.
look here
http://cc.oulu.fi/%7Eusoskin/personal/nature02995.pdf
or here
http://www.mps.mpg.de/dokumente/publikationen/solanki/j215.pdf
Run the data through PAST http://www.nhm.uio.no/norges/past/download.html
and paste your graph and hey presto, then, perhaps then you’ve got data you can compare. Then you could look for similarities with the rider ‘the past doesn’t guarantee the present’
Basically the current argument runs like ‘its a Dalton rerun because I say so, because I predicted it'( based on data you can’t take seriously), and that’s just not good enough.
You also forget that most of the Dalton cooling was volcanic, go check the sulphate core records (http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/IVI2/) and compare them for the time span you want to consider . It’s not enough to wag your finger and say ‘Ah but solar minimum causes volcanic eruptions because there is a correlation’. Go prove it.Correlation doesn’t mean cause.
I spend my days telling students how important it is to respect the scientific method, but sometimes when I see this kind of argument, it just looks like pseudoscience. Intreresting, though provoking, bloggable ,but ultimatly dismissable because it lacks vigour.
There’s no null hypothesis, no paper, no findings, no evidence, no method.
Depressingly ,everything here can and will be dismissed, and really that’s a shame because we really need to keep an open mind.

Frosty

vukcevic says:
December 20, 2010 at 1:41 am
Dalton minimum winters (according to CETs) were not too bad.”
I just picked a few examples starting at 1850, from this fascinating document….
A Chronological Listing of Early Weather Events – James A. Marusek
http://www.breadandbutterscience.com/Weather.pdf
1850 A.D. In Ireland in April, there were great floods in County Kerry
1851 A.D. In Ireland, there were great and destructive floods alike in spring and autumn
The summer of 1852 was remarkably hot in Russia, England, Holland, Belgium and France (two farmers died of heat in Netherlands)
1853 A.D. In the United States in 1853, the Mississippi River froze solid enough to walk 200 miles from St Louis, Missouri to La Claire, Iowa – Floods is Wales and Ireland
Winter of 1853 / 1854 A.D. severe France & Germany many rivers frozen, mild in UK.
The winter of 1854-55 was quite severe in southern Russia, in Denmark, England, France, Spain and Italy.
In 1857 there were three distinct periods of summer heat
1860 A.D. In India during the years 1860-61, there was a severe drought in parts of the Punjaub and northwest provinces
In England, the frost of December 1860 and January 1861 were remarkable. Christmas eve was extremely cold. In the valley of the Rea, the temperature dropped to -5.0° to -7.0° F (-20.6° to -21.7° C).70
In Buenos Aires, Argentina, a drought occurred in 1863 and 1864.
Winter of 1863 / 1864 A.D. The meteorological condition in the northern hemisphere during December 1863 and January 1864 were remarkable. A cold polar current flowed southward dramatically dropping temperatures in the middle of the United States (this was confined to a narrow band), and at the same time warm equatorial currents flowed northward over contiguous spaces, and thus restoring the general equilibrium of temperature and of pressure by opposite and parallel streams. At the same time an unbroken sheet of cold air, swept down through Eastern Europe, on the one side, to at least the Sandwich Islands on the other, flowed southward. Everywhere in this wide band severe temperatures were experienced
The United States experienced severe cold and extensive snowstorm in the end of December 1863 and beginning of January 1864
Winter of 1864 / 1865 A.D. The winter lasted from December to the end of March. The Seine River was frozen over at Paris, France
Winter of 1866 / 1867 A.D. The Baltic Sea froze
Winter of 1870 / 1871 A.D. The Baltic Sea froze
1876 – 1879 A.D. This period produced many great droughts covering the globe
Winter of 1876 / 1877 A.D. During the winter of 1876-77, the Baltic Sea was completely covered with ice.
=========================
even tho the record is incomplete, it should be possible to graph frozen rivers, maybe droughts/famine and flood events too.

Patrick Davis

“Sense Seeker says:
December 20, 2010 at 4:04 am
Also, since 1980 temperature has gone up by about 0.5 degrees Celsius, you’d need a very impressive lag effect to explain that, given flat solar activity.”
And since 1990, most rural stations have been pulled from the temperature record in favour of urban stations leading to “warming”. Funny that.
The UK Met, The Australian BoM and New Zealand’s NIWA all “adjusted” temperature data. I wonder why (On the back of unlimited and perpetual funding)?

Bryan Farmer

Baa, a lag effect of the oceans is not a very plausible explanation (not to say humbug). Solar activity has at best been essentially flat since at least 1980, so the oceans should have caught up by now. You can see that the ’1970s cooling period’ followed a period of low solar activity with a lag time of 10 years at the very most.
Also, since 1980 temperature has gone up by about 0.5 degrees Celsius, you’d need a very impressive lag effect to explain that, given flat solar activity.
There’s gotta be something else that explains this temperature pattern. (And the rest of the world knows what it is. You know it makes sense.)
Well you go ahead and keep racking your brain on what you and the world thinks it is and I’ll just patiently wait for the answer to come to me in 10 or so years.

crosspatch says:
December 20, 2010 at 12:16 am
“I predicted in a paper published in March 2006 that Solar Cycles 24 and 25 would repeat the experience of the Dalton Minimum.”
————————–
Why do you believe it will last two cycles or be limited to two cycles? What gives you the impression that it will mimic exactly the Dalton minimum?

Good question, so many getting on the band wagon right now but they do not have a plausible theory as to why. Mike Lockwood today predicted this minimum will last for 200-300 years!
The unnamed minimum we are in now will be weaker than the Dalton, but should last 2 solar cycles before recovering for a few decades and then falling back slightly before beginning an up ramp not unlike the period of the 1920-1960’s. The Dalton had a weak cycle 7 that continued the cold which we will not experience.
How do I know this? It’s a simple method of measuring the angular momentum of the Sun and what we are experiencing now was predicted exactly in 2008 as seen in my 200 year solar prediction, which at the time was shunned by Anthony…..but maybe times have changed?

Bill Jamison says:
December 20, 2010 at 12:54 am
> Well we’re having a cold FALL, winter is yet to be determined!
Meteorologists and climatologists consider the month Dec-Feb to be winter, at least north of the tropics. Astronomers consider winter to be from its solstice to vernal equinox. Insolation physicists likely call it the three months with the lowest solar declination. When you see winter in many of these discussions, just substitute “meteorological winter”. It would be nice if posts and comments would do the same, at least up to the solstice.

vukcevic says:
December 20, 2010 at 3:33 am
The opposition to your findings it is perfectly explained by Don Quixote: “Ladran, Sancho, segnal que cabalgamos.” “The dogs are barking, Sancho, it a sign that we are moving. “

Pops says:
December 20, 2010 at 12:43 am
The sun has probably been spotless on several occasions recently but those doing the counting have been using a large magnifying glass to count every pixel in a desperate attempt to pump-up the numbers.
On the contrary, the official count has been a bit too low. At any rate, cycle 24 is going to be low as predicted back in 2004 [by me] and 2003 [Schatten]. The cosmic ray count from Oulu is likely too high [it is difficult to maintain long-term stability]. Most other stations show that the current minimum has been on par with the minimum in 1965.

Owen

Two important indicators point to the fact that we should be cooling – a sun gone to sleep (since ca. 2005-06) and the deepest la nina since 1976. Global temps are still high by all five metrics (NOAA, UAH, RSS, GISS, and HADCRUT). Sea surface temps look like they have bottomed out and may be on the rise again – perhaps another el nino within a year? The head oceanographer of the Navy predicts loss of summer sea ice in the arctic by 2020 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339475/Global-warming-Sandal-wearers-wont-save-greed-US-Navy-will.html#ixzz18ZccQwjm ).
Will temps continue to rise and ice continue to melt? We’ll know within 5-10 years.

> We have to wait another eight months to find out how this winter went in terms of retained snow cover.
While I’m glad I’m not traveling through a UK airport, or not even my sister looking for a break in California weather, I know how long it will take my current New Hampshire snow cover to melt – no time at all because there’s no snow! Jus’ saying. Jus’ grousing, actually.
Joe D’Aleo was making some noise comparing this winter to 2007/2008, by far the snowiest I’ve seen (a photo of my driveway snow pile made Icecap). Three years ago today we had 18 inches on the ground, three years ago tomorrow we had 25″ (63 cm).
Look, snow gods, I didn’t want to buy that snowblower this year, the engine seized. (Long story). And it wasn’t that expensive! I think it’s about time for its snow protection effect to wear off. 🙂